Anti-consumer, sure. But Nintendo has always been extremely price-conscious about their hardware and almost always (the SNES was slightly more expensive than the Genesis) cheaper than their competitors.
The Wii U actually came with a stand and a disk drive, for one thing.
Perhaps people heard about NetEase shutting down the studio so they said "well, fuck that game".
I won't talk about 4K because I only play at 1080p (I don't feel the need for a higher resolution although I play with an ultrawide monitor) and I prefer to have a better framerate. If you are used to 60fps and go to 120+ fps, you will notice the change, it won't be as huge as 30 to 60 but you will feel the motion of the camera to be more natural, less stuttering.
Yup, the requirement to be an "Enhanced" title is rather loose, as I mentioned earlier in the thread.
Imagine paying over 700 dollars just to play games in PowerPoint lmao.
Are developers still tying game logic to frame rate in 2024? I thought even the backward-ass Nips cut that shit out a decade ago.
Uh, based? A conservative hardware spec that developers can tailor their software to and be sold at a very competitive price is everything a console should aim to be.
Yes. Gearbox broke Risk of Rain 2 with the new DLC and tied the physics and other logic to the framerate when it previously didn't.
i agree with that and hopefully the switch2 will finally deliver the 1080p steady 60fps in 2025.
I would assume this is supposed to be some kind of own, but yes, a portable that can reliably do 1080p at 60 fps, have a library comparable to the Switch, and be reasonably priced would unironically be great. It'd be an infinitely better value proposition than a $700 mid-gen upgrade for a console that has no compelling games after four years.
Tom Warren is late. I called this within minutes of the presentation ending. Cerny said they were TARGETTING 60fps, making the PS5pro completely useless. A lot of customers will be having buyers remorse.
I agree. 1080p@60fps ultra settings should be the bottom standard, with a boost to 1440p@120fps/144hz the next step up. 4k should be shelved for 10 years.
If you play a lot of first-person games where the camera can move very suddenly, then yeah, I imagine 120+ FPS would be a lot more valuable than in something like a platformer. I like framerates beyond 60, it’s just more of an “oh neat” thing for me. That being said, if I have to choose between higher resolution or higher framerate, I’ll choose framerate.
Wait, NBA 2k25 is #2 on a Japanese chart? What the fuck?
100% guarantee that's an intentional shortage, like they've done with replacement parts for the Dualsense Edge. The push to get rid of discs is such a thing now.Prospective PS5 Pro Buyers Cause Disc Drives to Sell Out
This must be the first evidence of PS5 Pro failing spectacularly as many here have predicted yesterday
I have never really felt like I NEEDED 120 fps or anything above 60 really. 60 feels and looks great but anything above that and I just sort of fail to notice.
The biggest tragedy with modern gaming is that, with insanely powerful hardware we should be getting games with insanely impressive technological features like full-scale destruction, huge ambient crowds, dynamic AI opponents, etc;
Small sample size, and this is all 3 versions combined in a week where the only other notable releases are astro and the switch port of a touhou rhythm game spinoff.
Spoken like the console pleb you are. 60fps is hot garbage with kb/m if you get used to real refresh rates.
Battlefield Bad Company 2 launched 14 years ago.
