Does the resolution and framerate matter to you as a gamer?

[Lovecrafts Sunny Day]

While it clearly depends on the pacing of the games you play, both factors will affect your immersion.

For me this is important. Lower resolutions will obviously affect static assets, introduce lower textures and reveal jagged edges (not the same as in RL, "hey, the closer I get to this wall, the less detailed it is!!?! WTF?")

Frame rate will have an impact on your apparent reaction to ingame events, I agree with some of the above posts, if its inconsistent, it will bring you out of the experience. 60 or 30, either way, it needs to be steady.

It's largely down to the type of game to an extent, high paced racing titles or single player FPS, you need high framerate, and this is usually achievable given the controlled aspect of how you're channeled in order to experience the game. With open world games, I appreciate it's much harder.

Personally I like games where I'm alone in a darkened room holding a shotgun, while being aware there's probably something nasty just over yonder, who may want to eat me

For this to truly immerse me, I need both factors.

 

[Zakarath]

Resolution: I can make do with a low resolution, especially in older games, but higher is definitely better.

Framerate absolutely matters, higher just feels better & smoother, and I feel like if I play something at a low framerate for a while, I'm rather more likely to get a headache than if I play something at a higher one.

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

Consoles are find for less involved gamers whom just want to run a game, regardless of the technical quality of the game.


It's a connoisseur vs consumer argument.

"Less involved" gamers? And "consumer" not "connoisseur"? I'm not sure if that's misfiring parody of PC Master System Race elitism or not...

As for the topic? Being on console I don't have a choice, so I suppose my default response is ultimately: nope, not really. Both would be nice, but it's never impaired my enjoyment of any game or any system in any gen. Smack on the wrists all around for however the hell we ended up with stuff like Blighttown (and some of New Londo) in Dark Souls, though.

I do think it's slightly pathetic the 'new' gen of consoles seem impressed with 1080 and 60fps, though. Those should be baseline numbers, not something to aim for.

 

[Strelok]

Yes it matters, this is a new console, $500 or more for some people, and out of the box can't do 1080p and 60 FPS? It's 2014, not 2004, that's disgraceful, and makes me think cash grab. Build it as low spec as possible sell for a huge profit, before the entire console market takes its final spin around the bowl. To those unable or unwilling to see the signs this is one of the console end times, their relevance is long over, but like the Windows XP fans of the PC, some will cling to this relic of an idea, all the while screaming "Everything is fine!!!! Can't you elitists all see?!?!!?" while the ship goes down.

 

[Weaver]

Yes, they matter to me.

Look, the NES drew most games at 60fps interlaced (due to CRT televisions). The fucking original gameboy had a 60fps hardware lock. Now, both these systems would sprite tear if they couldn't draw fast enough, fine. And sure, the gameboy had 2-bit monochrome color palette.


Let's not forget PC monitors have been at 60 - 90hz since even early CRT days and PC gaming, after the DOS era, was almost always running in these ranges.

All in all, we've been gaming at 60FPS for a long time. I can easily feel the difference, even on a windows desktop just jiggling the mouse, between 30 and 60. And now that I have a 120hz monitor, I can tell the difference between 60 and 120 as well.

Now, FPS isn't going to make or break a game. I loved the N64 and I sear some games on there ran at like fucking 15 FPS the whole way though. But, I really don't feel there is a ever a detriment to running a game at a high framerate.

 

[Xdeser2]

I can play perfectly fine at 30 FPS. It's my minimum for good play, but yes I prefer higher, why wouldn't you? It just makes the game look better, play smoother and run better.

Resolution, eh whatever

 

[TheWiseScarecrow]

Doesn't matter to me. I've never had a pc that could run anything on high settings. Never stopped me from enjoying a game even if it looked a mess.
I think resolution and framerate is a matter of first impressions for me - I'll be exited if a game looks great but stop paying attention to the scenery quickly.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Yes, to the extent that it looks decent and runs smoothly. I don't think the graphics upgrades so far have been for nought. But diminishing returns being what they are, pouring money into graphics now is a huge drain on resources in many cases.

 

[seaweed]

Absolutely. Resolution to me isn't as much of an issue but framerate definitely is. I still like games like EDF, Majora's Mask and Dark Souls despite having awful framerates but I would be lying if I said they wouldn't be better at a solid 30 or 60 frames.

Every game should be pulling 1080 and 60 FPS with no problems on current hardware, it's unacceptable that they aren't. My PC with the exact same GPU and less RAM than the PS4 has been doing it for years and the OS it's running is probably a much heavier load on its performance than the Xbone's or PS4's. If they're having trouble doing it now, where are we going to be at in a few years when the games are even more demanding? Are we going to be back at sub-720p and 25 FPS like a lot of the games this gen were?

 

[1Life0Continues]

It matters, but I could give two shits.

I personally don't have a problem with 30FPS (because I have to run that, my hardware is low-middle end.

Resolution wise, well, the higher the better, but again, I'm used to running at less than 720p so it makes no difference if I play a game that way.

I'm not someone that is "60FPS 1080P or die" because I don't care that much, so long as *I* can play it comfortably.

So I guess, bottom line for me is "I don't care."

But if you do, so what? Leave *ME* alone.

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

Not as much as something like "is the game good" but yes to some extent it definitely matters

 

[erbkaiser]

Far more important to me than 30/60 FPS is that it is constant. I'd rather play a game that runs a solid 30FPS than one that swings widely from 60 to 20.

As for resolution, obviously 1080p is preferred. I own HD consoles and an HD TV, so I want to use it as well.

Also re: resolution on PC... there I want the game to either support proper custom resolutions, or at least being able to run in 1080p windowed. It is incredibly annoying if a game launches full screen across my 3 monitors when the game is obviously not designed for ultra-wide.

 

[Zykmiester]

Resolution is not really important for me and as long as the framerate is constant and at least 30fps I really couldn't care less. Aesthetics is more important than graphics, I would rather play a game with a better story and glameplay that ran at 720p and 30fps than a game with bland gameplay at 1080p and 60fps.

I also want to know if people can actually tell the difference between 720p & 1080p or 30fps & 60fps, because most people know what the resolutions and framerates of games are before they even see them in action so it's not a controlled test. We were told that the PS4 would be 1080p at 60fps and that the XBONE would be 720p at 60fps before we really even saw a game running on either of them. It makes me think that our eyes really can't tell the difference and it's our subconscious telling us that one looks better than the other because of our beforehand knowledge.

 

[Hateren47]

Quite a bit. I believe both are important for a good gaming experience for modern games with modern graphics. Which is also why I just bought 3 1080p monitors for Eyefinity. And I will play as many games as I can in 5760 x 1080p on them. Hoping to get the monitors and the mounts next week. Not every game needs that high a resolution though and I will still play the Binding of Isaac in a shitty little Flash window and be happy about it.

I also want to know if people can actually tell the difference between 720p & 1080p or 30fps & 60fps...

You'll have to take my word for it on the resolution question. But I (believe I) can see the difference between 720p and a resolution four times as high. It's just much more detailed and less pixelated with four times as many pixels. 720p on a computer monitor is unbearable if your monitor is larger than 15 inches. IMO.

For FPS, you can see for yourself here if you can see the difference between 60(64)fps, 30(32)fps and 16 fps here http://www.testufo.com/#test=framerates&count=3&background=none&pps=120
I think it's quite obvious.

You can also fiddle with the settings on top to add more UFO's, background and speed. It is of course a simulation, since it actually runs as fast as your monitor will let it, but still.

 

[Evonisia]

As a PC gamer it matters to me, of course. I think PC gaming is the format for people whom care about that kind of thing.

Consoles are find for less involved gamers whom just want to run a game, regardless of the technical quality of the game.


It's a connoisseur vs consumer argument.

I'll agree with this, speaking as a primarily console gamer. I really couldn't care as I'm used to 30 fps (though above it is nice and appreciated). As long as said fps is consistent, and I struggle to really care about resolution.

Of course both matter to some degree, you can't have a game without either, obviously.

 

[CloudAtlas]

I wouldn't want to go below 1080p anymore. I'm used to playing on a notebook, with a pretty small screen, but even that had a larger resolution than 720p.

I also want to know if people can actually tell the difference between 720p & 1080p or 30fps & 60fps, because most people know what the resolutions and framerates of games are before they even see them in action so it's not a controlled test. We were told that the PS4 would be 1080p at 60fps and that the XBONE would be 720p at 60fps before we really even saw a game running on either of them. It makes me think that our eyes really can't tell the difference and it's our subconscious telling us that one looks better than the other because of our beforehand knowledge.

Do round edges look not quite perfectly smooth to you on 720p? Can you notice anti-aliasing at work when you pay attention on 720p? Do hi res texture packs improve the look of a game considerably for you (on PC)? If you can answer just one of these questions with yes, then 720p or 1080p makes a difference to you.

Now I'm a PC player myself, and I still find the anti-aliasing pretty noticeable (although admittedly my computer is not powerful enough to use the best techniques) even on 1080p, so even 1080p and 4K would make a difference to me. Which matches the reports from people who were able to already experience 4K first hand.

 

[Alfador_VII]

I have a 1080p monitor, I refuse to run games at less than that as nothing ever looks right on an LCD not running at native resolution.

As for frame rate, I prefer 60, and I do notice when it's lower.

However I'm more interested in a steady smooth frame rate. I'd (reluctantly) take a constant 30fps over 60fps which often dropped to 40 or lower.

 

[Hateren47]

Not really. I am physically incapable of seeing the difference with anything beyond ~40FPS. Everything looks the same to me at that point.

Even if we speed it up a bit?

http://www.testufo.com/#test=framerates&count=2&background=none&pps=720

At this speed it's very clear to me that the 32fps UFO (which is not far from being 40-ish) is only updating it's position on the screen half as often as the other one. It's also blurry and stretched.

But if you are a console gamer (and I assume you are because you linked your Xbox account in your profile)it's gonna be less noticeable when you play, any way. You'll be further from the screen, playing on a display build to display moving images well. Compared to a PC monitor that is right in your face and fundamentally build to display text well.

 

[Fijiman]

So long as the game doesn't look like complete ass and isn't constantly dropping frames I don't really care. Then again I'm still playing games on an old SDTV so what do I know?

 

[Itdoesthatsometimes]

These both matter, to me as a gamer and to the game industry as a whole.

Let me frame it this way. The color printing capabilities and texture of paper, do not make older comics' story less enjoyable. However they do effect the overall enjoyment. Imagine if the industry did not recognize that vibrant colors and paper's texture improved the fan's enjoyment. These things were not all that comics were, but they were improvements.

It all really does come down to what you can afford that gives you the most of what you want. The same to be said for the industry. Everything has a trade off. A bigger map is more of a load on a graphics card. That has it's cost.

The more FPS, higher resolution the better, always. But this must be tempered with it's cost. It's cost to the card, on both your end and the developer's end. And the cost of the card you can afford, be it high-end, low-end, or console.

Acceptance of this cost has it's cost as well, in not striving for more.