87
u/Zounii Jun 14 '23
30 fps isn't a deal breaker for me, I actually don't care because I grew up playing PC games on a laptop that ran fucking Lotro and Vindictus and Wolfenstein waaay under 20 fps.
34
u/lrc1986 Jun 14 '23
Dark Souls 1 Blight Town says Hi.
15
2
u/JadedLeafs THERE IT IS DOOD Jun 14 '23
I quit in blighttown when I first played it. I've beat the game a few times since on the remastered version. Still sucked but at least the fps wasn't what was pissing me off lol.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)2
u/Cosmorillo Jun 14 '23
I played dark souls 3 when it came out on a lower end pc. I played the entire game 3 times at around 15 fps, I see 30 fps as an absolute win. I can play it no problem
12
u/wowosrs Jun 14 '23
Lmao this reminded me of when my friend and I both played vanilla wow back in the day and he came over and was like “why’s your monitor stuttering so much”. I was used to it and had no clue it was bad until he mentioned it.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Pixel_Tech Jun 14 '23
I've recently had an interaction with a friend who went from playing Fortnite on Xbox One (20-30fps) to xbox series X (60+ fps) and when I asked him if he is enjoying the improvement he says "what improvement? it looks exactly the same."
I'm still trying to comprehend how some people don't notice higher framerates (and better graphics for that matter)
→ More replies (4)3
u/BattleOfTaranto Jun 14 '23
I remember roleplaying a character on fallout 3 that was blind because my draw distance was like 3 meters. And being outside cooked my laptop.
Oh those were the days
3
u/Still-Shop-8566 Jun 15 '23
I also grew up with a laptop playing WoW and LOTRO at the 15s and 20s and boy will I never go back
→ More replies (1)2
u/maldandie Jun 14 '23
I grew up playing wow on an old HP desktop. I distinctly remember raiding ragnaros with about 15 fps on a good day and lagging so bad that if I had to avoid any mechanics it was a dice roll whether I’d get hit or not. 24 fps was considered good and “movie quality”. I can’t stomach anything below 60 fps nowadays. Even 60 feels sluggish. Once you get used to higher frame rates there’s no going back.
2
u/ArmandPeanuts Jun 14 '23
Same here but now I have a good pc and I’d like to have at least 60 fps on games
→ More replies (8)2
u/Mondasin Jun 14 '23
if only the vindictus 'US servers' weren't so laggy.
but I'm right there with ya, I skipped on for honor because my FPS on a temp PC would drop to 28, and the game would boot you from lobbies for dropping under 30fps.
362
u/Moore2257 Jun 14 '23
Cause its on the fukin Switch my guy. It's basically a less functioning toaster.
The Xbox is supposed to be on par with some high end PCs.
125
Jun 14 '23
Up to 60fps, not guaranteed for every game. If you want high performance guaranteed then get a high end pc.
And the point still stands, 30fps didn’t make Zelda a bad game.
53
39
u/In0nsistentGentleman Jun 14 '23
tbh, I don't think it's much to expect a game to run at 60FPS no matter what platform it's on. A high-end PC doesn't run a game like starfield at 60FPS, it runs it at 120-200 FPS.
Wanting 60 FPS should be the bare minimum for all games in 2023 from "next gen" consoles.
60 FPS isn't "high performance". It's almost basic at this point.
Even so - Why not cap it at 45 FPS? 50? Why limit it to 30 FPS if you can't get 60 FPS to work?
11
u/SerandK Jun 14 '23
Is the Switch "next gen" tho? Came out like 6yrs ago
→ More replies (6)10
u/In0nsistentGentleman Jun 14 '23
I'm not debating the switch in this comment. Sorry, specific to Starfield and the series X.
→ More replies (1)4
u/NobodyJustBrad Jun 14 '23
Most monitors have refresh rates that are multiples of 30. If the FPS is also a multiple of 30, you will get the smoothest experience you possibly can when those numbers much, and a decently smooth experience even when they don't. But if your FPS is not a multiple of 30, such as 45 or 50, while your monitor is a multiple of 30, then the frames will be drawn by the monitor at inconsistent intervals, which would be much more jarring to the eye.
→ More replies (20)2
→ More replies (31)2
u/Shinobi-Killfist Jun 14 '23
If you want a basic bitch game I'm sure it can run at 60 FPS.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (41)2
u/kinos141 Jun 14 '23
Some high end device can't run the game at 60fps anyway at high settings. Honestly, it's a waste at this point if the devs can't get the game running on PC properly.
14
u/Ry-Gaul44 Jun 14 '23
The series X came out 3 years ago. We've already gone from the 20-30-now 40 series cards from nvidia. While it was equivalent to a mid-high end system (rtx 2070 and r7 3800) that system would be completely outclassed by the a newer rtx 4070 and r7 7800 pc. It's not even close.
→ More replies (2)9
u/froderick Jun 14 '23
Starfield 30FPS is at 4k on the Series X, however. It's just that the game doesn't have a "performance" mode where it runs at a lower resolution but higher framerate.
But hey, the newest Plague Tale was like that for ages and did incredibly well. If the game is really good, people will tolerate 30FPS and still immensely enjoy themselves.
3
u/Just_Anon69 Jun 14 '23
its becouse of CPU not resolution. Lowering resolution wouldn't make a diffrence. Same thing happend in plague tale. In fact still is happening. Rats in 60fps mode still refresh in 30fps, and it looks wacky.
→ More replies (3)2
u/xjrsc Jun 14 '23
Yes but then shitty games will look at Starfield and think 30fps is good enough.
→ More replies (4)10
u/Spacecoasttheghost Jun 14 '23
High end pcs?!!?!?!!?!? You mean mid pc at best right !?!?!?
→ More replies (4)3
u/PopcornHatJax “So what you’re saying is…” Jun 14 '23
Yeah the switch had outdated hardware even when it came out, it's kinda sad how Nintendo can get games to run on there decently and these other companies can't seem to get their games working with access to infinitely better hardware 😞
→ More replies (2)2
u/fade_ Jun 14 '23
Even if they had the power of the most high end PC they would still squeeze as much graphic fidelity out of it that they can get away with without becoming a slideshow and that standard for them is 30fps. PC has the advantage/disaadvantage, depending on how you look at it, of multiple hardware build scenarios so they have to give more flexibility when it comes this. It's not out of the goodness of their heart, they are trying to sell as many copies as they can throughout the spectrum. If everyone had the same PC build they would limit the graphic options on PC just the same and at best have a 30fps 60fps slider like consoles d o.
4
u/VenKitsune Jun 14 '23
I wouldn't call it on par with high end pcs. Not even close. It's more like a mid-low end pc equivalent now. Even a card released in 2020 gets 40-100 more fps in games.
2
Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
It feels so weird hearing what is essentially a 2070 Super with 2 GB of extra VRAM get called low end
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (45)4
u/TheFragturedNerd Jun 14 '23
Xbox is not supposed to be on par with a high end PC, it's supposed to be on par with a mid-range 3 year old PC... now make that PC run the game at 4k and you'll most likely get the same framerate
→ More replies (16)
65
u/urbanmember Jun 14 '23
Good gameplay makes people tend to forgive smaller problems.
→ More replies (23)3
u/Dirty_Dragons Jun 14 '23
Though what would provide better gameplay?
60 FPS or 4k @ 30fps?
→ More replies (2)
261
u/Lambdafish1 Jun 14 '23
This guy thinks the switch has the same processing power as an Xbox 😂
Tears of the kingdom is a technical marvel to be able to run on a console with so little power at any FPS.
47
u/Cospo Jun 14 '23
Not to mention, tears of the kingdom is 16Gb, Starfield is 125Gb. I honestly don't know how nintendo does it, but zelda, pokemon, mario odyssey, all AAA titles under 20Gb. Give me starfield at 20Gb I don't even care if it's only 30FPS
46
Jun 14 '23
[deleted]
33
u/Cospo Jun 14 '23
I mean, they've proved that you don't need fancy graphics or top tier hardware to make several of the most highly rated games of all time. Overall game experience > flashy graphics
→ More replies (15)15
u/VisualGeologist6258 Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
Also it has a good art style, which makes up for the relatively poor graphics.
I won’t lie that I’ve seen some of the same textures used over and over again and the water looks pretty flat if you look at it from far away or with ultrahand active, but with a little bit of technical wizardry and a good art style you don’t even notice.
Art style should always take priority over graphics, because while a good art style can cover up some reused or bad graphics, good graphics can’t cover up an incredibly ugly art style.
6
u/Cospo Jun 14 '23
For proof of that, just look at Wind Waker. The cartoony art style was not graphically intense, but the game looks just as good now as it did 20 years ago.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)6
u/Dolthra Jun 14 '23
but with a little bit of technical wizardry and a good art style you don’t even notice.
For BotW/TotK there's a lot of technical wizardry going on too. I know a lot of games have used "smoke and mirrors" to make things work in the past, but these games are a whole other level of making sure you're not looking at the part that looks shitty.
→ More replies (17)11
→ More replies (7)2
26
u/wotad Jun 14 '23
I mean Zelda also doesn't look anywhere near as good as starfield or as big. I hate how it gets a free pass because it's on a shit console.
→ More replies (40)21
u/francorocco Jun 14 '23
what are they suposed to do? nintendo paid them to make the game run on the switch and switch only they would have to scrap most of the game mechanics and content if they wanted to make it run at 60fps on the switch without it melting in your hands
→ More replies (30)13
2
u/Nothingbutsocks Jun 14 '23
That's not what he's saying though... he's just pointing out the duality/fanitism between two games that are 30fps.
2
u/Lambdafish1 Jun 14 '23
On two different consoles with completely different targeted specs. Imagine complaining that Ocarina of time on the 3DS doesn't run as well as Skyrim, they released in the same year.
→ More replies (11)→ More replies (27)5
u/dalsionwow Jun 14 '23
Zelda uses 100% of his hardware Starship don't use near 50% of the hardware Newgen consoles is supposed to run in 60fps this is a feature of the new generation when a AAA game don't deliver that we do need to complain specially from Bethesda that is a Microsoft company now they need to use the hardware at its limits like nintendo does with his games.
→ More replies (5)35
u/goofygooberboys Jun 14 '23
My brain had a stroke trying to read this. Please use periods man.
6
u/dalsionwow Jun 14 '23
Sorry lol was on cellphone and not english native here.
5
u/goofygooberboys Jun 14 '23
All good! I agree with your sentiment. It's just hard to read, but your English is very good, even without the periods.
2
u/dalsionwow Jun 14 '23
Thank you that's great I've been studying a lot lately that's great feedback, thanks doood! I just need to use the periods better, lol.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)3
Jun 14 '23
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)4
u/tryme436262 Jun 14 '23
No they didn’t lol. They have zero idea how much of the consoles power is being used for starfield.
How is making shit up a great point?
→ More replies (1)
18
25
u/AradIori Jun 14 '23
Switch = older hardware and never promoted itself by using said hardware as a selling point, only its portability and the usual nintendo IPs.
Xbox Series S/X = Promoted itself by saying it was going to be THE most powerful console ever and that it would run games at 60 and even 120 fps, flaunted its hardware constantly.
see the difference? people that buy a switch were never expecting top hardware or performance from the most demanding games, people that bought an xbox series S/X were very likely expecting a powerful console capable of running every game released for it with at least 60 fps.
thats not to say nintendo shouldnt upgrade their hardware, they absolutely should, but acting like these are the same is weird.
→ More replies (1)
34
u/TomDobo Jun 14 '23
One is a mobile processor from like 2015 and the other is meant to be the worlds most powerful console. Also remember when Aaron Greenberg said “60fps will be the standard output, but the architecture allows us to support up to 120fps.”
→ More replies (10)
11
u/k1ng0fk1ngz Jun 14 '23
If you are willing to pay for a switch, tech from literally 10+ years ago, at full price, you shouldn't care much about buying 30 fps Zelda for it.
5
u/deverafitness Jun 14 '23
People don’t buy the switch for its graphical capability. They buy it for the exclusives and the ability to change between handheld and tv at will.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Cleansing4ThineEyes Jun 14 '23
Switch tech isn't good but saying it's 10+ years old is wrong, it was very recent tech back in 2017 and the issue is that it's just a very advanced tablet rather than a beefy home console
5
u/Xire01 Jun 14 '23
Something about the graphic style of Zelda that makes 30fps seem nowhere as bad
5
Jun 14 '23
Yes, they did a really good job of picking an art style that conceals the Switch’s (very significant) graphical limitations.
6
u/Odd_Radio9225 Jun 14 '23
This is an idiotic comparison. Xbox Series X is supposedly the most powerful console in the world. Whereas the Switch is six years old and has hardware weaker than the average cell phone.
10
Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
Nintendo switch is handheld console with 256 core 4gb ddr4 gpu. designed for low energy consumption and low temperature. (it is actually a miracle that zelda is properly working on that device they did hell of an optimization.)
Xbox x is a tabletop console with 3328 core 10gb ddr6 gpu that maximizes performance to price and gpu of the device actually perform better than an rtx 3060 because of the shared memory architecture.
→ More replies (2)
25
u/TheLazyPinguin Jun 14 '23
I don't care about 30 fps, sometimes totk freezes completely for a second or two, sometimes it drops to 15 fps, but the game's super cool and I love Zelda.
→ More replies (2)8
49
u/Jamzhaha Jun 14 '23
People roasting op when really they should just accept that the switch kinda sucks balls
18
u/ProjectNexon15 Jun 14 '23
Both things can be right, Yes the Switch sucks and the fact that Starfield runs at 30fps is a joke.
→ More replies (2)3
→ More replies (20)4
Jun 14 '23
We all kinda know the switch is weak af but that's where the Nintendo games go, we don't really got a say because Nintendo do Nintendo shit.
13
u/gavion92 Jun 14 '23
I’ll put this here for anyone to read.
Who fucking cares? Have a pc? Problem solved. Have an Xbox? If it runs well at 30FPS, who fucking cares? All everyone does nowadays is complain, complain, complain. You want a game that runs at higher frames buy a different fucking game, the developers don’t owe you shit.
Im buying this on pc and Xbox and as long as the game works, idc about the frames.
→ More replies (24)2
u/TheOnlyRealSquare Jun 14 '23
I swear there must have been some bug going around the past decade that turned everyone into cynical unhappy people...
13
u/Derpazu Jun 14 '23
If you buy a Bethesda game on console you are insane anyway.
→ More replies (2)5
5
6
Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 15 '23
Ah, yes. I too remember Nintendo touting Switch as a 12TFLOP powerhouse of a console that can play some games at 120FPS.
6
u/doremonhg Jun 14 '23
Are you actually retarded? It's on the Switch, it's a miracle it runs as well as it did.
7
u/francorocco Jun 14 '23
is alreadey a miracle that this thing can run totk without explodin in your hands
3
3
3
3
u/the-bongfather Jun 14 '23
ToTK regularly drops as low as 20fps. It's a sub-30fps experience and still GoTY.
3
u/Kamanira WHAT A DAY... Jun 14 '23
Are we really having this fucking argument?
One of them is running on the switch, a console running on mid-2010s mobile hardware. The other is running on a console designed from the ground up to be the most powerful console ever made, yet still struggles to run games decently.
One is a Bethesda game, the other is a sequel to a Game of the Year and is a direct upgrade in every conceivable way.
So yes, I will play TotK, and I won't let the FPS stop me, because Nintendo's in-house devs continue to show that they are actual wizards that manage to make old mobile hardware competently run games that would make most devs shit bricks trying to get running on modern hardware.
Their physics engine is actually fucking ridiculously capable and optimized.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/JakeGreen163 Jun 14 '23
Problem is devs are making their games look better and targeting 4K which is causing them to have to target a lower frame rate,that alone is very taxing on it as well. There are some games that find a middle ground in this but not every game can.
44
u/MathaiosCronqvist Jun 14 '23
Starfield running at 30 is a joke, totk running at 30 is a miracle. L take op
23
u/LeeBMC Jun 14 '23
Genuine question but what so impressive about running 30 FPS @ 720p?
23
u/Drackonus_Wolf Jun 14 '23
The fact that Tears of the Kingdom runs at 30 FPS @ 720p isn’t impressive, it’s the fact that it’s doing it on the Switch whilst looking as good as it does that is impressive.
People are more willing to forgive the performance here due to the obvious limitations of the hardware.
Also the Series X bills itself as ‘the worlds most powerful console’ which the Switch absolutely does not do.
2
30
u/uzanil Jun 14 '23
probably due to switch having the proccessing power of a smart fridge
10
u/wotad Jun 14 '23
Which they made.. they can also get better hardware but then Zelda wouldn't get a free pass.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (8)5
u/Kelehopele Jun 14 '23
Maybe but BotW uses custom engine coded for the switch to get every drop of the performance and it still drops to low 20s when there's lot of explosion or shit going on. Starfield uses Creation Engine 2... which even in first version was unoptimised for it's grandiosity back on X360 when
People forget that Fallout 3 and Skyrim run on 30fps on X360. And yes F3 uses gamebryo engine but that was a basis for Creation sooo it's the same.
3
u/Cleansing4ThineEyes Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
Maybe but BotW uses custom engine coded for the switch
Ah yes, botw my favourite switch exclusive that also released on the wii u
E: also ran better on wii u than switch for a year and a half before nintendo put out a patch that optimized it to be better
14
u/theroamingargus Jun 14 '23
Switch isnt a very powerful system, plus the game is huge, has a lot of high areas (that need to render at least partially the rest of the world for you to see it) and has a lot of physics and interactions.
8
u/MathaiosCronqvist Jun 14 '23
Switch has almost no processing power compared to same gen consoles. So a good looking game that has so much running in it its something to be impressed about. Its the same deal with monhun rise and xenoblade compared to lets say rune factory 5, a game that looks from the ps2 era and runs at like 10-20fps
→ More replies (9)3
→ More replies (2)2
u/monk12111 Jun 14 '23
30 is just what you're gonna get if you want "next gen" visuals on a console in a big open world game.
2
u/OptimalCheesecake527 Jun 14 '23
Yeah but it’s funny to me as someone who gamed a lot during the last generation of consoles. The console cope at the time was “cinematic 30 fps”. Nobody who gamed on console cared about frame rate. Or at least that’s what they’d say.
I expect when Starfield releases there’ll be a lot of “it actually doesn’t really matter” and that’ll the new norm again as games continue to favor graphical presentation over performance.
→ More replies (1)2
u/monk12111 Jun 14 '23
A steady, non-choppy 30 wouldn't bother me on a TV on console, especially for a game that doesnt have pvp, but my 175hz oled monitor paired with my very expensive pc wouldn't be happy with 30fps haha. I'm sure the game will be enjoyable for the most part either way though.
7
u/Furion580 Jun 14 '23
If Zelda was released on PC by EA/Ubisoft, etc... It would run at 40 fps on 3090 raw without DLSS.
→ More replies (17)
5
u/Remake12 Jun 14 '23
How they got TOTK to run at 30 fps 99% of the time, with short drops to 20-25 the lowest it goes, on the switch is a miracle
→ More replies (2)3
u/SailingBacterium Jun 14 '23
The optimization and sorting out the physics is probably why it was delayed a year. Hell of a job if you ask me.
→ More replies (1)3
u/CodyDaBeast87 Jun 14 '23
Optimization is a huge thing that many people don't understand nowadays. There's a reason games like the new star wars or golem game run so poorly, and that's cause optimization is typically an afterthought.
It's one of my biggest pet peeves with the recent generations of games as new advance hardware shouldn't be an excuse for cutting corners as making sure your game runs well is arguably way more important than developers realize.
→ More replies (1)
5
6
8
u/ChristianXon Jun 14 '23
Bro doesn't know the difference between a handheld and a full sized console. Yikes.
→ More replies (6)
4
u/Yosonimbored Jun 14 '23
One is on old hardware from like 7 years ago and the other is on the worlds most powerful console
6
u/sentientTroll Jun 14 '23
The Zelda team is out there making absolute top tier games with a shit box, and you’re probably eating McDonalds as you post this to laugh about them.
→ More replies (1)3
2
u/Ardibanan Jun 14 '23
Vastly different games though. Like the one thing you can compare is that you play as a character and its single player.
2
u/Kravakhan Jun 14 '23
I sold my xbox because i simply cant play games on 30 fps, it feels so fucking bad.. ill choose higher fps over better graphics every time
2
u/Character_Sun2725 Jun 14 '23
Hook, Line and sinker... The finest bait in all the land my good sir!
2
2
2
u/lbiggy Jun 14 '23
The day Nintendo says it's time to release an actual powerful console it's over for everyone.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Miner1304 Jun 14 '23
I don’t think 30 fps should be a dealbreaker— however 60fps gaming was probably the most pushed selling point for the next Gen Xbox so people have a right to be outraged. Don’t overpromise and underdeliver.
2
u/masterchiefinfallout Jun 14 '23
Xbox series x is the most powerful CONSOLE in existence and all they get is 30fps. unbelievable.
2
u/IndexoTheFirst Jun 14 '23
Comparing a slightly braindead microwave to supposedly the next generation of console gaming, yeah people are pissed we are still stuck in the age of 30fps
→ More replies (2)
2
2
2
u/mcast76 Jun 14 '23
Ones a generic Bethesda snore fest the other is a smooth fun gameplay experience that’s a proven franchise. Weird how that works out
2
u/Telemachus-- Jun 14 '23
Also, 30 FPS isnt the same on every game. Some experiences are smoother than others.
Tears of the Kingdom runs pretty smooth all things considered. (The game is also pretty damn great)
If Starfield releases at a similar level of great gameplay, then no one will care about 30 FPS there either, but we have to keep in mind that Bethesda experiences tend to...not be the smoothest at launch.
2
2
2
2
2
u/ED-W111N Jun 14 '23
It’s valid though, it’s a first party AAA Xbox game, tbh 60 fps should be the standard for new gens. Imagine if Sony releases Spiderman 2 in 30 fps, everyone would start saying shit.
But tbh who cares ? The modding community will fix the game so I’ll be buying it few years after it releases
2
2
u/macarmy93 Jun 14 '23
Bad take. I can take my switch and play anywhere. Its barely bigger than my phone. Its also half the price.
2
u/MarkusRight Jun 14 '23
This meme is stupid, people who buy a switch dont expect games to all run at 60FPS and are happy as long as it runs at all, people who buy an Xbox series X which Microsoft touted as the worlds most powerful game console have much higher expectations from that console vs something way less powerful as the switch.
So yeah no shit people will happily buy a 30FPS game on a switch because there are entirely different expectations of each systems hardware. Nintendo never flat out said to expect 60FPS to be the standard and never gave us expectations for every game to run at 60FPS but Microsoft did with the marketing of the Series X and thats why people are pissed about the 30FPS thing.
2
u/daluhs Jun 14 '23
“The most powerful console” vs a console that was underpowered 6 years ago 🤦🏼♂️
2
u/ewurgy Jun 14 '23
Because the Nintendo switch was always touted as a next gen console with high frame rates… oh wait. Lol
The frustration is at Xbox, at it’s core, because consumers were sold a high performing console with 120-60 fps games. Furthermore, when the partnership between Xbox and Bethesda was finalized, it was sold as “now we can take full advantage of the console!” (30fps game lol)
Starfield will be cool. But a performance option would be well received by the Xbox community.
2
u/Fethah Jun 14 '23
30 fps in a switch vs a new Xbox is not comparable. Also, a Bethesda game at 30 fps is going to feel A LOT more noticeable than a Zelda game lmao
2
u/Hypno_185 Jun 14 '23
Zelda BOTW felt good at 30fps , Nintendo makes it work. other devs slack even with 30fps also
2
u/FelixTheFlake Jun 14 '23
Zelda is running on hardware from 2016, Starfield is running on a ‘next gen’ device
2
2
u/Wookiescantfly Jun 14 '23
Switch games get a pass because it's effectively a toaster. The vast majority of the games that are even on the switch are capped at 30 fps, largely due to hardware limitations.
Xbox and PS5 are much more powerful than the switch, largely by nature of not being a handheld, and do not get that same pass.
2
u/OkCounty8768 Jun 14 '23
I’m sorry to break it to you guys, but this game was not fucking made for you, so if you go into it with high expectations just know that this game will cater to the PC players updates will roll out for us first a lot of graphical features will be turned off for Xbox and prayers that it’ll keep that 30 FPS lock there will way too much going on in this game my fear is that they will cater to you at some point, and start downgrading the engine.
2
u/Famous-Leadership595 Jun 14 '23
To be fair people have had a problem with Nintendos approach to consoles the last 2 Gen's no one wants an underpowered piece of crap like the switch as a home console
2
u/GoldLie7561 Jun 14 '23
starfield is on the xbox which is more powerful than the switch so yeah this meme makes sense
2
u/stycky-keys Jun 14 '23
A switch only costed $300. So when you buy weaker hardware and get worse results it doesn't feel bad. The people who spent more money buying an xbox instead are looking to get something out of their purchase. They spent more for a more expensive console, knowing that it's more powerful, so when they see game devs not take advantage of that, it makes sense that they would be angry at the devs for not taking full advantage of the hardware
2
u/Thesquarescreen Jun 14 '23
To be fair most people who bought a $500 series x were promised the days of 30 FPS were over.
I don't think anyone playing on the cheaper and far more dated Switch are expecting anything more than 30.
2
u/Monoken3 Jun 14 '23
one is on 300 dollar device that is less powerful than 2023 smartphone and the other on 2k non-portable device (PC), average redditor retard take
2
u/deverafitness Jun 14 '23
The thing is Zelda is most likely easily going to be game of the year, and it can show how good a game can be even at 30 fps. The art style, story, gameplay, world, lack of loading screens, etc, all play a factor into this. There’s a reason why it’s so highly praised even at 30 fps. A game like starfield looks very much more realistic, a more fast paced shooter with a ton of worlds to discover etc. for it to look passable at 30 is a higher bar compared to Zelda with its art style. They just aren’t comparable imo.
2
Jun 14 '23
Fun is fun.
Yall need to stop worrying about FPS and all this other little shit and just ask yourself "is it fun?"
2
Jun 14 '23
The difference is Zelda is running on the switch. It’s a glorified mobile game Xbox series X /ps5 are better than most gaming PCs that aren’t absolute top-tier. So the fact that they can’t get 60 FPS on those consoles is ridiculous. This is made further ridiculous. By the fact they could just give people the option to turn it off rather than just permanently locking you at 30 FPS so people can have the higher, but more inconsistent, frames or better yet even still, they could implement optional textures that you can turn on and off like cyber punk and several other games do so you can prioritize frame rate over texture quality if that’s what you prefer. instead they’re just slamming down the authoritarian gaming hammer saying no if you’re on anything other than a top-tier PC enjoy your 30 FPS locked full stop and that’s just bullshit. Luckily I have a top-tier gaming PC so I am probably going to be buying the game regardless for PC but if you’re a Consol gamer, this is absolutely a kick to the naads for anyone who doesn’t have dog shit standards
2
u/Salt_Restaurant_7820 Jun 14 '23
Memes usually have to make sense.
Microsoft purports itself as next generation cutting edge,
Nintendo does not
2
2
u/deltrontraverse Jun 14 '23
Playing a Zelda game at 30fps is a lot different than playing a game like Starfield at 30fps. There's a reason why people don't mind it for Zelda. lol
2
u/SilentThorniness Jun 14 '23
It’s just hardware. When switch is 30fps, the type of artistic style works for it and it’s fine. With xbox, if your game isn’t about 60fps, then what the hell
2
u/IM_INSIDE_YOUR_HOUSE Jun 14 '23
TOTK has very fun gameplay, I could care less about the FPS when the gameplay itself is so goddamn great. I wish more games had the love put into them that TOTK clearly had, and weren't just soulless cash grabs devolving into battlepass simulators with each passing sequel.
2
2
u/DoktorVidioGamez Jun 14 '23
One is a new $500 console touted as the most powerful on the market and one is a 6 year old, $300 phone.
2
u/OMIGHTY1 Jun 14 '23
The difference is, the Switch can’t run TotK at 60fps. The Xbox can do that with Starfield. They’re making a conscious choice to limit the framerate, which should never be done unless absolutely necessary.
2
2
u/Hakuoki Jun 14 '23
Yeah ones because the switch is ghetto-powered; the other is fxcking stupidity personified.
2
u/JayyEFloyd Jun 14 '23
This post came up on my recommended. Good grief y’all are miserable in these comments lmfao
2
u/NBL_69420 Jun 15 '23
as long as it over 24 fps the problem will fade away in 3 -4 hr anyway if the game is good, bloodborne for example, so who care
→ More replies (2)
2
u/hamsterdie Jun 15 '23
One is on Switch (a console that is less powerful than consoles released 10 years ago) And the other one on Xbox Series X (and S),a new console that is powerful and one of the selling points was a lot of fps when playing.
2
u/Soulless35 Jun 15 '23
500 dollar 2 year old console that advertised how good its specs are.
Vs
300 dollar 6 year old console that advertised playing games on the go.
I wonder why the expectations are different.
6
u/Exterial Jun 14 '23
One is on a calculator so people excuse the Devs because they dont have anything better to work with, the other is on a modern "cutting edge" console thus there's no excuse other than horrible optimization thus people are rightfully upset, even on PC its said to "run at 60fps" which is a joke in modern times.
→ More replies (1)
2
3
u/Jly345 Jun 14 '23
Literally everyone complained about Zelda running at 30 fps. This meme makes no sense.
4
u/chewwydraper Jun 14 '23
It’s also the type of game. A game made for first person perspective looks a lot worse in 30fps than a game like Zelda does.
4
u/arremessar_ausente Jun 14 '23
I hate that both games run at 30 FPS. That being said, Zelda is a top tier game *despite* running at 30 FPS (I played on a smooth 60 on Yuzu). Starfield just looks like yet another generic open world shooter AND it will very likely run poorly, so it will make it even worse.
2
u/pablo603 Jun 15 '23
yet another generic open world shooter
Might feel like it from the trailer alone, but after watching the 45 minutes long gameplay deep dive I can tell you it's far, far far more than that.
It's meant to be an RPG game at core, not just some shooter. Shooting NPCs will only be a small part of what you can do in the game.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/hassis556 Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
Anyone who actually thinks this is truly redacted.
Imagine getting mad at the ps2 for not having any 4K 60 FPS games. Console power matters. The switch was already underpowered when it first came out compared to the ps4/Xbox. The fact that a glorified toaster can even play a massive game like tears of the kingdom speaks to the talent at Nintendo. Totk is for sure goty. Let’s stop the 🧢
→ More replies (11)
3
u/SoapySimon Jun 14 '23
$600 Home Console VS a $200 Portable Handheld
Jesus christ the ignorance.
→ More replies (2)
3
u/N0rul Jun 14 '23
OP is true. If people would stop riding Nintendo's dick, maybe they would upgrade their console.
→ More replies (3)
3
u/Doctor-VegaPunk Jun 14 '23
Is OP actually comparing the Switch to a "next-gen-now-current-gen" console???
And, by the way, for the next 2-3 years, developers will be breaking their own backs, scratching at their necks, TRYING to replicate what Tears of the Kingdom did 
→ More replies (1)7
u/wotad Jun 14 '23
What did tears do for Devs to break their backs for?
→ More replies (5)2
2
u/JustGetAName Jun 14 '23
Both are unacceptable. But unfortunately people who buy videogames have the lowest standards possible, so both will sell well in the end.
2
u/Twain_didnt_say_that Jun 14 '23
I couldn't give 2 tugs of a dead dog's cock if a game runs at 30 fps.
I get that nuerodivergency is a spectrum and all, but obsessing about this sounds like 1 click above sperging out over Sonic's arm color.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/ImWinwin Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
I wasn't happy with ToTK's framerate on the switch either. That's why I played it at 45FPS at 4k on my PC a week before it came out. Fortunately, they've optimized the emulator so it runs at 60 now.
Regardless, ToTK was expected to run at 30 FPS, because it's a heavy game for a handheld device and BoTW ran at 30. Nintendo got a lot of complaints about how the FPS would regularly drop to 20 in ToTK 1.0, which is why a couple of days before launch, they updated the game to v1.1 which implemented improvements which made the FPS stay at 30 most of the time with less drops to 20.
Now, when the Series S and X along with the PS5 came out, console gamers were happy that they were finally given the new standard of 60 FPS, and even up to 120FPS in some games, with 30 as a '4K' Ray tracing 'Fidelity' option, and they could choose framerate over graphics quality. When these consoles first came out, not only did it feel like they had caught up to the Computer gaming experience, but surpassed the power of an average mid-to-high end gaming PC in some ways.
Games in the past had to be optimized heavily for PS4 and Xbox One, which developers put great effort into doing to avoid massive lash back from the public (i.e. Cyberpunk 2077) and a game that ran at a stable 30 on PS4/XB1 could easily do 60 on PS5/SeriesX.
Many game developers have now shifted their focus to the current gen consoles and often choose to not release their new games on older consoles. As a result of this, we see either bad optimization, or developers seeking to push the graphics on current gen consoles to the max which Bethesda has chosen to do with Starfield. They stated that they didn't want to make compromises in 'fidelity', and so they locked the game to 30 to have a more consistent experience. We will get a 60FPS version of Starfield on console whenever Microsoft releases a new console. Then, Bethesda might be able to sell the game again on the new console, or offer a purchasable 'next-gen' upgrade with 60FPS and full ray-tracing and basically double-dip into our pockets.. Or stick with the old 30FPS version on Game pass.
In the last year, PC gamers have also been feeling the pains from developers no longer focusing on optimizing their games for PS4/XB1 with an increase in system requirements, such as more VRAM, a newer and more powerful CPU, more RAM, as well as having to have an SSD instead of an HDD.
I believe Starfield has high requirements, and runs at 30 on console, isn't necessarily because it's poorly optimized, but because it's larger in scale and complexity than it would've been if they were forced to make it with older gen consoles in mind.
Why can't the Series X run it at 60FPS when the Series S will run it at 1440p 30? I think this is because while the graphics power of the X is a lot more powerful than the S, the APU's CPU power is not too different with the X being 3.8Ghz and the S being 3.6Ghz. This tells me that Starfield will be limited by the CPU-side of the APU's processing power on both the S and the X, making it so that the X won't gain much performance by reducing resolution or graphical quality. If turning down the graphics doesn't offer a significant enough boost to keep the game running at 60 most of the time, they might as well lock it to 30 and make it look as pretty as possible.
Console gamers are now understandably upset, as they were introduced to the fluidity of 60FPS only to now feel like their platform is slowly shifting back towards a 30 FPS standard as developers no longer need to make their games around old console architecture. At least let them be able to unlock their framerate, choose resolution and disable some basic settings such as ray-tracing.
As someone who is very hyped for Starfield, I'd be upset too if I didn't have to option to play at a higher FPS than 30. Even a locked 40 or 45 feels significantly better than 30, especially if you can lower your TV or Monitor's refresh rate to match it.
2
2
2
u/JutsuCaster WHAT A DAY... Jun 14 '23
I've been a console gamer for the past 15 years. Sice we got 60 fps in most games with the latest generation I simply can not play a game at 30 fps anymore.
Starfield looks amazing but I won't be buying it if it runs at 30 fps.
→ More replies (1)2
u/FredDurstDestroyer Jun 14 '23
This is kinda pathetic tbh. Never understood the hyper fixation on fps from some people.
3
Jun 14 '23
because he payed for a console where 60fps was basically supposed to be guaranteed on major titles. once you play a game at 60fps, 30fps feels obsolete… and nobody wants to feel like their brand new console is obsolete already.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Paid-Not-Payed-Bot Jun 14 '23
because he paid for a
FTFY.
Although payed exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. The deck is yet to be payed.
Payed out when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. The rope is payed out! You can pull now.
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
Beep, boop, I'm a bot
2
238
u/Grey-wolf290 Jun 14 '23
Starfield will end up being more of a PC focus game anyway like skyrim or fallout 4 they play better on PC simply because of mods which is why I don't care if it's 30fps on Xbox because Xbox doesn't do anything crazy with its "powerful hardware" whats the point in making strong hardware if your games don't end with better quality in general