couple things:
thats like all games on consoles now. almost no one runs at 60.
well duh, its going to be downgraded for console no matter if its current or next gen. CP2077 being lightyears ahead of arkham will still only be talking about top ends. we dont know how low they're going to go for the low end, or how willing. you can make anything run on consoles, its just a matter of how much you're willing to concede.
or you could like, not play maxed out? that's also an option.
Every setting doesn't have to be maxed out for me, but I will definitely be targeting 4k / 60fps like I do in all games I play. Been playing in 4k for a few years now. Rolling backward would just be too big of a downgrade for me. I would be willing to make light concessions in areas like AF / AA / maybe water / shadows, but that's about it.
Eh, when moving to FP, framerate becomes more important - ie. you need better framerates to have a good gaming experience due to there being more precision needed - it's even harder for console gamers trying to play a FP game with a less precise controller.
i mean, then you kinda already know you need SLI anyways. Cant think of a game that does 4k/60 on a single gpu reliably right now.
personally i think framerate always matters, but still, 30 is fine (many tvs are still locked at 30 anyways). if its smooth it will be fine, and for consoles, its gonna feel like most other non CoD shooters, since they all lock to 30 fps anyways.
Interesting. It's nice to see the perspective from someone who is on the other side of the enthusiast spectrum. Whereas you care more for resolution and visuals, I'm more interested in FPS.
Can confirm, 1440p@144hz is the tits. It's awesome! That's what I'm gunning for for CP2077 and for that reason I'm seriously considering getting a 1180Ti (or an AMD one if AMD releases a better card in the same price range).
Yes, I had an AMD Athlon 64 CPU and Radeon GPU when Half Life 2 released. After that I upgraded to an Intel Core 2 Duo and Nvidia GTX 480. I've had Intel/NVIDIA combo ever since. At the moment I have 6700k and 1080ti in an mITX build. I might switch to Ryzen when they start supporting higher memory bandwidths. Unfortunately I don't think Radeon will ever compete in the enthusiast market again.
still they had a solid run for about 6 years. i've run intel/Nvidia too for a while but that's laregely because until recently, intel was far and away the best, and because i will only ever buy EVGA cards. The precludes me from buying AMD. EVGA has the best customer service, hands down.
+1
Ya, eventually I will probably check out the 144Hz monitors and see what they're like. For now, I can tolerate as low as 45fps but anything below that I find to be just straight up unplayable. I understand console folks are used to 30fps and below and can tolerate what I consider to be "bad performance" but it's certainly not something I have ever been able to get used to, hah.
Very much hoping you're right - I think as long as the game has SLI support all the varying fan bases will be quite pleased. Technology is coming along, so I do think within the next 3-5 years 4k / 144Hz monitors will start to become available as hardware standards continue to improve and I'll likely start looking into one of them.I'm with you, though, as far as low general FPS goes. Anything less than 120 FPS is very difficult for me to play. Going from 60 to 144 was like making the jump from 30 to 60. If you ever decide you can do without 4K visuals, I HIGHLY recommend trying 1080p/1440p on a 144hz monitor.
I recently snagged a PS4 to try some of the exclusives, and while I'm slowly getting used to it, boy is it hard to be locked at 30 FPS for such otherwise-gorgeous games. Everything feels so unbelievably sluggish.
I always find it amusing when other people try to tell me what FPS I should or shouldn't enjoy. "You can play 30 FPS just fine, stop whining." Well, I invested a lot of money into my hardware (by no means rich, it's just my only hobby), so yeah, I feel like I should be able to get decent mileage out of it.
Or the old classic... "The human eye can't see more than 30 FPS!"
I'm not worried with 2077, personally. TW3 was perfectly catered towards PC gamers (barring the controls and UI, but they were above-average so no major complaints) with the ability to really crank up the visuals through settings, gameworks/hairworks, achieve unlocked FPS, and download graphics-improving mods. No reason to think CDPR won't do the same here. They "get" it.
Thanks for the recommendation, it's good to chat with folks who are used to the 144Hz screens and see what their experiences are like.
Sorry, I clearly can't read, I read @ZenexURL 's post as being a baseline expectation for the next consoles, not the game requirements.
There is still a chance for it to be released sooner than that *fingers crossed*, but those job postings are a reasonable enough basis to assume it is further out. I don't know you so you might be jaded/cynical, but I think on this point you are just being pragmatic.
No hate. I was fine with 30 FPS for quite some time when I played on console. But it's a matter of your brain adapting to something new, and having a hard time going back to the old.
