They still never fixed Control's textures turning into mud if you play for over 30 minutes... Never buying another Remedy game until they bother to fix that one.
There other things on AW2 which deserve a turn first, if you’re playing on console you know that. And yes, apart from that 30 fps is horrible and atrocious.
Wow what a treat to listen to a calm collected discussion about games and their problems, without having wide eyed ranting, shouting, and hand waving, rage induced people, demanding that things be done the way they want them done.
40fps should be the absolute bare minimum all games on console should be targeting because 30fps is horrible. While 40fps is still low it makes such an enormous difference to the smoothness of the frame rate.
Well, when majority of consumer TVs are still 60hz (and no VRR) and can't display 40 fps properly they're going to keep prioritizing 30fps and maybe a 60 fps performance mode. For now, this kind of thing seems to be an extra effort, but maybe in the near future it becomes the new minimum.
@@uncleurda8101 Sure, but 120hz will only get more common. It'll just make the games age better in let's say, 10 years. As a 120hz panel user, I really enjoy having a 40hz mode in games.
As much as I like 40fps and I own an LG C2, I'm aware that we are a minority with 120hz TV's. It's just not mainstream enough for these developers to make these modes. I wished it was though...
Nice now I think I will give this game a try on the Ps5. 40fps looks really good for me on a vrr display and I mostly choose it over the 60fps performance option because the image looks mostly much better on a big screen.
Agreed. This is me too for my PS5. Love it whn Sony devs offers it too. I just love my Quality mode a lot since I'm running on a 55 inch LG C1 Oled so as much best quality is preferred for a visual feast 😍😆😆
@@azzimazthe motion at 30hz is awful though and 40hz is still "bad". Doesn't the fact it shakes back and forth everytime you move your camera bug you? I have a 65inch C1. I use performance mode for games and then use the C1 to add more detail and sharpness back into it.🤷♂️
I have been impressed with 40 fps modes as well. I wasn't expecting it to be much better than 30 fps, but I definitely feel the improved responsiveness over 30 even if it doesn't look quite as smooth as I'd like. I don't even consider 30 fps, but depending on the game I have a tough time between 40 fps and 60 fps modes.
60hz looks and feels significantly smoother for me. 30hz is awful, 40hz is still "bad" on my 65inch OLED 50 and 60hz feels close to one another. When I get frame drops no lower than 50 they aren't obvious with vrr.
Yes, targeting 40 FPS is better for all consumers, even people with 60hz displays. Why? Because when you target your visuals to achieve 40 FPS, you can have 100% stable locked 30 FPS cap on 60hz displays. And obviously everyone with 120hz screens will benefit from that 40 FPS being displayed 3 times. If you target 30 FPS, you might be tempted to push visuals hard enough that you have too many drops below that.
Avatar on PS5 Pro is just huge!! You have to talk about it DF. I know the game is not advertised as PS5 Pro optimized but the dynamic resolution works wonders on 40fps.
Especially for great single player campaigns; buying a game at launch means paying the highest price for the worst experience. Waiting a year means you get a feature complete, fixed product when you boot it up. Ironically, new games may cost upwards of $70, but games in a finished state cost $40.
recently grabbed a new ps5 copy for USD$30, was thinking of PC steam but too pricey ($USD 42 on sale and $70 normally!), glad theres a 40fps mode will play through those settings. :) might get the pc one once it gets a deep ubi discount to 10-20 as a next gen tech demo.
Rebirth mainly needs HD textures for a lot of objects. The distant rocks in Nibel are insane. And fix pop-in. I hope we get to see this on PS5 Pro. An artistically beautiful game that is quite limited by these.
Just tried the 40fps mode on my XBOX as I’m currently playing through the game. It’s a solid option but I’m still sticking with 60fps. I just raised the sharpness value on my TV a bit and everything looks great while at the higher framerate.
This is the way to go IMO. I have an OLED which does a really bad job with low frame rate content due to the pixel response time being so fast. I use the TV to bring back detail and sharpness, while it looks better in motion and feels better too, pretty significantly. It's not a small change subjectively.
I have approx 40 games in the queue for me, so Cyberpunk will be still fresh for me, approx in 2025 :D I have so many games to play, but limited time for this hobby.. So goes without saying I am never buying a game above 19 EUR :D
I am also this who always prefer and played 60FPS on PC, but this 40fps new mode in PS5 feels really great. Difference is huge. Just +10fps and it feels smooth. 30fps is always feels choppy a little bit and unpleasant. Also controls and responsive is much better with 40fps mode. I can't understand how -8ms delay could make such a big difference in terms of responsiveness.
I much prefer to have 30FPS and much higher quality than 60FPS etc. my TV have variable refresh rate so I can unlock higher frame rates. The drop in quality in game for me is way too great for me to care about the FPS. People used to moan about PC gamers now console gamers have had it a couple of years they’re unbearable with it TBH. Play as you like. You get the choice. Stop going on about it! 😂
People who haven't used 40 fps mode with VRR display (freesync on pc), they are delusional. It's pretty much the quality mode with uncapped frame rate. I played A Plague Tale Requiem in the 40 fps mode and I was WOW. I kept checking whether I was playing in performance mode or not, because it was so good.
I've bought the game this week and the graphical cuts from 30 to 40 FPS seem to be extremely minor. Definitely the way I'm gonna play through the game. It's gorgeous.
I'm Xbox series x I've been playing on performance I love this game , I think I'm going to switch to quality this next time I have a little play time I want to see the difference ,
I'm loving this focus on 40 FPS modes. If your game can't quite reach 60, then a good 40 mode (perhaps even unlocked with VRR and LFC, like Insomniac do it!) are absolutely the way to go. 30 FPS modes need to be the fallback modes and should get phased out. Also loving that they are offering controls for per-object/camera motion blur with intensity sliders. So many games just have motion blur on, which blurs EVERYTHING to an insane degree if you so much as touch the controls or motion blur off which completely kills it for everything.
I wonder if it possible for youtube users to be able to experiance what 40fps in games feels like if the DF team uploads the video sped up and asking us to play it at slowed down.
I want to play this game so bad but im afraid to pull the trigger because I've read alot of crashing on series x which I have. So does it still have crashing issues on series x has a patch fixed it yet?
I still can't do 40fps, I'm very fps sensitive though and for me around 50fps is my hard minimum on a VRR display. I stop seeing a framerate increase at about 70-80fps+ but I can definitely see a difference between 60 and 70.
Oh, trust me, waiting is no problem - especially with new games coming in at 80€. Games are getting longer and longer, and the market is flooded with competing games. So yeah, I cherry pick my games, and stuff like no performance mode is a deal breaker for me - stopped me from getting a Series X for Starfield. Also, still waiting for a true fix to FF7 Rebirth's performance mode. On PC, I regret my Early Access for Baldur's Gate, because despite my feedback Larian to this day hasn't included UI scaling for Mouse and Keyboard users, and I doubt my current hardware will even be capable of running Act 3 for how poorly optimized that seems to be.
Issue I have with this game is lighting flickering all over the place after 30 mins to 1 hour play reason I stopped playing months ago hoping it would be fixed by now but no... only game that does this for me on the series x
@@gavinderulo12 When I started it I really wanted to get into the story - I very quickly gave up on that and just enjoyed the open world, which is INCREDIBLE. Once you learn the stealth mechanics IMHO they are some of the best around, being VERY low ranked and taking out level 15+ bases with just a bow is a TON of fun as it's challenging but possible. I say give it another try, once you make it to the plains (say 5-6 hours in) it gets even better looking.
@@ross-carlson fair enough. For me story and dialogue in games are really important. If not that then exploration, which so far hasn't really been that good in the game since everything looks the same (besides obviously a difference in biomes).
@@gavinderulo12the game looks great visually, but I would imagine it still feels like a Ubisoft game at the end of the day, which is something many people are tired of
I just realized that Frame-Gen could work absolutely fine on 60hz displays with an unlocked framerate mode. A mode that doesn’t require 120hz display or VRR, sure it might get some screen tearing here and there, but It would be way better then forcing people to buy a 120hz display and locking there fps to 40fps. Rainbow Six Siege runs at an unlocked frame rate at around 148fps average on PS5, on 60hz displays. This should be a toggle for more games in my opinion. Frame-Gen could work ”fine” in these situations ”sometimes maybe not”. Most games with a stable 55-60fps would probably be key here for a non v-synced (unlocked framerate). Unleash 60hz Monitors once again, what would this help? Well it could and will decrease latency alot, and could help with motion fluidity. I hope they configure this as a test on the Immortals of Aveum game soon, and I really hope its not just a 120hz VRR mode locked variant.
Bought the game on the summer sale and once again shows how critical 40fps is in this current generation of gaming. This game would have been completely unplayable for someone like me before the 40 fps version. The game at 30fps is unplayable in first person outside of walking and the game at 60fps looks last generation in resolution and some visuals. Truly the only option to play this game is at 40fps.
Soo Ubi/Massive just made Avatar 50% faster. I can't believe people still shit on Ubi. But Ubi should not lie so often in the past. But we need to get over it.
The steam deck works well for this because you can lock its screen at 45hz. You unfortunately, can't do that on non-vrr TV's, so for broadest compatibility with all 120hz screens, even those without VRR, 40fps is the target for consoles.
Bought this tonight on PS5 and went straight in with the 40fps mode. The amount of shimmering and image breakup when panning the camera is god-awful. Fantastic lighting, geometry, and density, but terrible IQ in many instances. Such a disappointment. Still, it's great fun to run around the world.
pretty sure when games run at 30fps in reality are running between 30 and 40+ fps so this means that in order to have a stady 40fps mode you need to achieve 50+ so almost a 60fps game...
@@stevesmith1764 interesting then. There is an option in PS5 setting to try supported modes on attached TV. Maybe try it first. On series X 120hz works with 4K or 1440p mode?
That'll be rough to play on Portal, but honestly, I'm still going to take it. 40fps modes should honestly be standard, not going to miss out on it just to have remote play optimal.
Is there a real reason why 40fps works better on ps5 over series X? I have both systems and was thinking about getting this game on series X because it’s open world. I’ll get the ps5 for better 40fps. I noticed games like Fallout 4 does better on ps5 than series X at 40 fps. Avatar now. Even horizon and ratchet and clank ran better in 40fps on ps5 over the series X where it couldn’t even run it, running at 0fps (just kidding)
How do you get your appointment about 40 FPS being much smoother because sometime on certain games 60fps or above to seems wrong for example I'll go back to a basics Fallout 3 I used to play that game on the PS3 it was horrible but it was good then I had it on the steam deck and was able to run it at 60 FPS but the problem with that was it was too unstable for me to enjoy the game way to smooth and it just didn't sit right with me so I changed it to 40 FPS and it was perfect 30 FPS was still choppy 40 FPS gave me the Best of Both Worlds it wasn't too choppy and it wasn't too smooth I did try to do 45 but obviously it didn't work well so I have stopped 40 yes we all know that 1080p 60 show me the minimum but due to the quantity and quality of used generation and game developer games need more power consoles are becoming outdated like yesterday a great on one side but bad for other reasons I feel like PlayStation and Sony are becoming Nintendo mean the games that come out I just technically for Casuals I don't mean the games I mean the consoles itself now there's a bigger gap between consoles and PC once again we are behind more behind than we Once Was there was a time where concert was above PC there was a time where Qantas and PC were on the both same playing labour field and now it's like we moved backwards so what's the plan how are we going to fix this
You have massively overcomplicated this. It sounds like one an issue with the game engine or you didn't lock your refresh rate correctly. A locked 40 FPS is objectively better than a locked 30 FPS. A locked 40 fps with very occasional drops is objectively better than a locked 30 FPS. PCs will always pull ahead of consoles. You can't just magically have 60 FPS forever on a fixed platform, something has to give eventually. Sometimes, the resolution deficit to achieve higher FPS is either too great of a hit to image quality or depending on where the bottleneck is isn't able to resolve the issue.
Never could quite get into 40 fps modes - still looks too juddery when compared to 60. If it was the only option, it’s better than nothing- but 60 is still miles better.
@@stevesmith1764what's your tv? On my lg cx oled it looks fantastic and hdr works properly. There shouldn't be any impact to brightness or colors unless there is an issue with your setup.
@gavinderulo12 lg nano with all the bells and whistles as soon as I use 120hz on a game that supports it the picture goes dark and dull looked on Google and others say the same with different tvs
Hey people. To me 60fps should be the minimum since most people already own a 60hz TV. Not 30 not 40, 60fps should be the standard nowadays 🙄, but something tells me that they're doing this because Sony is about to announce the pro version of the ps5 so they also need a reason to make people go and buy the damn pro. Sneaky, Greedy Greedy Sony. They always have a plan that benefits only them. Our consoles are fine, it's them who don't want to let us truly enjoy our setups. All it takes is a nice update focused on performance management and everything will be fine, but they're saving it for the pro version 😉.
@@MerryBlind that’s a lie I have Ryzen 9 6900HX which is little better than Ryzen 7 3700X which is similar to what is in the PS5. I run FSR3 no problem.
@@SiqFix lol what are you even saying? No it’s not a lie… and I didn’t say using FSR would cause any problem. Also I was talking broadly, not specifically about this game. If what you tried to say is that this game runs at 60fps with FSR on your PC, then either your PC is not fully comparable to consoles, or your 60fps isn’t as stable as you think it is.
No game that has fast movement should never be under a 100 fps. EVER. The bare minimum should be 60. If we're still seeing games that run at 30-40fps then we have a major problem.
@@blazoblaze Yes, 40 fps is the middle between 30 and 60 in a 120 Hz container when it comes to frame-times, which is the most important thing, not frame-rate. 30 fps is 33.3ms, 60fps is 16.7ms, 40fps is 25ms which is exactly in the middle. It's the perfect middle ground between 30 and 40 when it comes to smoothness on a 120hz display. On a 60Hz panel there would be horrible judder, that's why they don't do it. You can check out DF video about Ratchet & Clank that was the first game that had a 40fps/120hz mode. You can see examples and detailed explanation why 40 fps slots exactly in the middle of 30 and 60 fps.
@@blazoblaze it is in terms of frametime. 30 fps is 33.33 ms and 60 is 16.77 ms and 40 fps is 25 ms which is exactly halfway. They clearly specify they are talking about frametime. I think its just you confusing the society
On console I prefer a 40fps quality Mode over 60fps performance mode in most games. And that's coming from someone who usually plays on a highend pc at 165fps.
@RyneLanders they arent though the xbox is suppose to be %40 stronger than the ps5. Imagine buying an xbox SX and never seeing it fully utilized then watching the weaker console run games better than it over and ovee again. Then watching your former console exclusive games running better. Then coming to the comment section to poke fun at people who point that out.😂
it's all very subjective and depends on lots of factors: screen size, panel type, camera speed when camera pans (gamepad vs mouse), game's visual style, etc. For some people even 48 fps is fluid enough, for some 60 is still choppy, there is no difference between 75 and 90 fps for others, some clearly see 120 fps benefit in shooters and top down games.
Nice to hear about superficial and/or not very rational opinions, after the absurd intro on the frame time which at 40fps would be somewhere in between, even connecting fluidity to it. The frame time is where it belongs, at 45fps it will be lower, and making that partial calculation is intellectually dishonest, as well as absolutely absurd technically. Stop amplifying every feature on console, it's stressful having to shut the mouths of children who take you as law.
@@gavinderulo12 Exactly, there is an improvement of 33%, however in the video it is said that the truth is that by magic the 40fps goes between 30 and 60. This follows the famous article on R%C where the same thing was basically said. That method just means playing with the numbers trying to amplify the increase. From 40fps to 60fps there will be the same increase, but this increase will start from 40fps, so there is no middle ground. It's ridiculous to mess around like that even with arithmetic, it means no longer knowing where and how to pump the consoles.
I love 40fps modes it’s the perfect medium on console . I hope more games follow this route
Alan Wake 2, it's your turn now.
It barely gets 30
They still never fixed Control's textures turning into mud if you play for over 30 minutes...
Never buying another Remedy game until they bother to fix that one.
@@ardasevmis7583 Bro, it has a 60fps mode, so 40fps must be viable.
There other things on AW2 which deserve a turn first, if you’re playing on console you know that. And yes, apart from that 30 fps is horrible and atrocious.
Wow what a treat to listen to a calm collected discussion about games and their problems, without having wide eyed ranting, shouting, and hand waving, rage induced people, demanding that things be done the way they want them done.
40fps should be the absolute bare minimum all games on console should be targeting because 30fps is horrible. While 40fps is still low it makes such an enormous difference to the smoothness of the frame rate.
Well, when majority of consumer TVs are still 60hz (and no VRR) and can't display 40 fps properly they're going to keep prioritizing 30fps and maybe a 60 fps performance mode. For now, this kind of thing seems to be an extra effort, but maybe in the near future it becomes the new minimum.
@@uncleurda8101 Sure, but 120hz will only get more common. It'll just make the games age better in let's say, 10 years.
As a 120hz panel user, I really enjoy having a 40hz mode in games.
What about 45FPS ?
As much as I like 40fps and I own an LG C2, I'm aware that we are a minority with 120hz TV's. It's just not mainstream enough for these developers to make these modes. I wished it was though...
nah normal people dont have the monitors necessary for it
Nice now I think I will give this game a try on the Ps5. 40fps looks really good for me on a vrr display and I mostly choose it over the 60fps performance option because the image looks mostly much better on a big screen.
40fps dogshit
Agreed. This is me too for my PS5. Love it whn Sony devs offers it too. I just love my Quality mode a lot since I'm running on a 55 inch LG C1 Oled so as much best quality is preferred for a visual feast 😍😆😆
@@azzimazthe motion at 30hz is awful though and 40hz is still "bad".
Doesn't the fact it shakes back and forth everytime you move your camera bug you? I have a 65inch C1.
I use performance mode for games and then use the C1 to add more detail and sharpness back into it.🤷♂️
I have been impressed with 40 fps modes as well. I wasn't expecting it to be much better than 30 fps, but I definitely feel the improved responsiveness over 30 even if it doesn't look quite as smooth as I'd like. I don't even consider 30 fps, but depending on the game I have a tough time between 40 fps and 60 fps modes.
60hz looks and feels significantly smoother for me. 30hz is awful, 40hz is still "bad" on my 65inch OLED
50 and 60hz feels close to one another. When I get frame drops no lower than 50 they aren't obvious with vrr.
40fps should be the minimum for quality presets. 30fps is a slideshow in 2024
Yes, targeting 40 FPS is better for all consumers, even people with 60hz displays. Why? Because when you target your visuals to achieve 40 FPS, you can have 100% stable locked 30 FPS cap on 60hz displays. And obviously everyone with 120hz screens will benefit from that 40 FPS being displayed 3 times. If you target 30 FPS, you might be tempted to push visuals hard enough that you have too many drops below that.
@@richardfranklin6003 both 30fps and 40fps are slide shows
60fps should be the standard
wrong 30fps and 40fps both choppy
60fps>30fps-40fps
30fps to 40fps not a big difference
But to 30 to 60fps is it
@@raven679-m3iIf your on a $400 console with 5 year old technology beggars can’t be choosers.
@@ZackSNetwork ps5 is very powerful all games should 60fps even if is 1080p
We need more games with 40fps/120Hz
Avatar on PS5 Pro is just huge!! You have to talk about it DF.
I know the game is not advertised as PS5 Pro optimized but the dynamic resolution works wonders on 40fps.
Especially for great single player campaigns; buying a game at launch means paying the highest price for the worst experience. Waiting a year means you get a feature complete, fixed product when you boot it up. Ironically, new games may cost upwards of $70, but games in a finished state cost $40.
I’d like an update for Outcast…
recently grabbed a new ps5 copy for USD$30, was thinking of PC steam but too pricey ($USD 42 on sale and $70 normally!), glad theres a 40fps mode will play through those settings. :) might get the pc one once it gets a deep ubi discount to 10-20 as a next gen tech demo.
5:23 can someone confirm that they actually did fix that FSR bug on the Series X?
From what I understand, they fixed it. Or not?
Rebirth mainly needs HD textures for a lot of objects. The distant rocks in Nibel are insane. And fix pop-in. I hope we get to see this on PS5 Pro. An artistically beautiful game that is quite limited by these.
Oh well I'll miss out this one as I don't have a 120hz tv.
Just tried the 40fps mode on my XBOX as I’m currently playing through the game. It’s a solid option but I’m still sticking with 60fps. I just raised the sharpness value on my TV a bit and everything looks great while at the higher framerate.
This is the way to go IMO. I have an OLED which does a really bad job with low frame rate content due to the pixel response time being so fast.
I use the TV to bring back detail and sharpness, while it looks better in motion and feels better too, pretty significantly. It's not a small change subjectively.
How does Ubisoft release Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora, then a bit LATER release Skull and Bones? (I know different developers but still.)
Because Ubisoft's MO is usually the latter. I was honestly floored that Avatar managed to be a good, if not great, game since it was coming from them.
Skull and Bones has been in development for... god knows how many years. It's probably running much older tech and just got super duper delayed.
“But still” the hallmark of an intelligent sentence
I have approx 40 games in the queue for me, so Cyberpunk will be still fresh for me, approx in 2025 :D I have so many games to play, but limited time for this hobby.. So goes without saying I am never buying a game above 19 EUR :D
I tried 40fps on Fallout 4 and was very surpised how smooth it was. But I still prefer to play at 60fps .
Great visuals. Dish-water plot and writing.
I am also this who always prefer and played 60FPS on PC, but this 40fps new mode in PS5 feels really great. Difference is huge. Just +10fps and it feels smooth. 30fps is always feels choppy a little bit and unpleasant. Also controls and responsive is much better with 40fps mode. I can't understand how -8ms delay could make such a big difference in terms of responsiveness.
do we all want games on consoles in 1080/60+ textures, shadows, aaa, all on ultra??
i think yes?!
I much prefer to have 30FPS and much higher quality than 60FPS etc. my TV have variable refresh rate so I can unlock higher frame rates. The drop in quality in game for me is way too great for me to care about the FPS.
People used to moan about PC gamers now console gamers have had it a couple of years they’re unbearable with it TBH. Play as you like. You get the choice. Stop going on about it! 😂
People who haven't used 40 fps mode with VRR display (freesync on pc), they are delusional. It's pretty much the quality mode with uncapped frame rate. I played A Plague Tale Requiem in the 40 fps mode and I was WOW. I kept checking whether I was playing in performance mode or not, because it was so good.
Does this mode offer identical image quality as the 30fps mode?
I guess no. They are cutting 60 FPS mode to 40 and something improve. It will be as well as 60
I've bought the game this week and the graphical cuts from 30 to 40 FPS seem to be extremely minor. Definitely the way I'm gonna play through the game. It's gorgeous.
No, there are noticable difference between both modes.
Do you guys think PSSR with the Pro will make it better?
Did they fix the black level raise?
I'm Xbox series x I've been playing on performance I love this game , I think I'm going to switch to quality this next time I have a little play time I want to see the difference ,
I'm loving this focus on 40 FPS modes. If your game can't quite reach 60, then a good 40 mode (perhaps even unlocked with VRR and LFC, like Insomniac do it!) are absolutely the way to go.
30 FPS modes need to be the fallback modes and should get phased out.
Also loving that they are offering controls for per-object/camera motion blur with intensity sliders. So many games just have motion blur on, which blurs EVERYTHING to an insane degree if you so much as touch the controls or motion blur off which completely kills it for everything.
I wonder if it possible for youtube users to be able to experiance what 40fps in games feels like if the DF team uploads the video sped up and asking us to play it at slowed down.
No
I want to play this game so bad but im afraid to pull the trigger because I've read alot of crashing on series x which I have. So does it still have crashing issues on series x has a patch fixed it yet?
I still can't do 40fps, I'm very fps sensitive though and for me around 50fps is my hard minimum on a VRR display. I stop seeing a framerate increase at about 70-80fps+ but I can definitely see a difference between 60 and 70.
Oh, trust me, waiting is no problem - especially with new games coming in at 80€. Games are getting longer and longer, and the market is flooded with competing games. So yeah, I cherry pick my games, and stuff like no performance mode is a deal breaker for me - stopped me from getting a Series X for Starfield. Also, still waiting for a true fix to FF7 Rebirth's performance mode. On PC, I regret my Early Access for Baldur's Gate, because despite my feedback Larian to this day hasn't included UI scaling for Mouse and Keyboard users, and I doubt my current hardware will even be capable of running Act 3 for how poorly optimized that seems to be.
Issue I have with this game is lighting flickering all over the place after 30 mins to 1 hour play reason I stopped playing months ago hoping it would be fixed by now but no... only game that does this for me on the series x
Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora is a stella experience. It's a masterpiece for those who appreciate spirit, essence, nature.
It's certainly a much better game by Ubisoft standards.
I couldn't really get into it. The dialogue is just so bland and boring. It looks great though.
@@gavinderulo12 When I started it I really wanted to get into the story - I very quickly gave up on that and just enjoyed the open world, which is INCREDIBLE. Once you learn the stealth mechanics IMHO they are some of the best around, being VERY low ranked and taking out level 15+ bases with just a bow is a TON of fun as it's challenging but possible. I say give it another try, once you make it to the plains (say 5-6 hours in) it gets even better looking.
@@ross-carlson fair enough. For me story and dialogue in games are really important. If not that then exploration, which so far hasn't really been that good in the game since everything looks the same (besides obviously a difference in biomes).
@@gavinderulo12the game looks great visually, but I would imagine it still feels like a Ubisoft game at the end of the day, which is something many people are tired of
I just realized that Frame-Gen could work absolutely fine on 60hz displays with an unlocked framerate mode. A mode that doesn’t require 120hz display or VRR, sure it might get some screen tearing here and there, but It would be way better then forcing people to buy a 120hz display and locking there fps to 40fps. Rainbow Six Siege runs at an unlocked frame rate at around 148fps average on PS5, on 60hz displays. This should be a toggle for more games in my opinion. Frame-Gen could work ”fine” in these situations ”sometimes maybe not”. Most games with a stable 55-60fps would probably be key here for a non v-synced (unlocked framerate).
Unleash 60hz Monitors once again, what would this help?
Well it could and will decrease latency alot, and could help with motion fluidity. I hope they configure this as a test on the Immortals of Aveum game soon, and I really hope its not just a 120hz VRR mode locked variant.
Bought the game on the summer sale and once again shows how critical 40fps is in this current generation of gaming. This game would have been completely unplayable for someone like me before the 40 fps version. The game at 30fps is unplayable in first person outside of walking and the game at 60fps looks last generation in resolution and some visuals. Truly the only option to play this game is at 40fps.
Been waiting for 9 years. At last I got 60fps on Fallout 4. 😂
13:10 weren’t games 15fps? So technically they were broken, I mean by you guys standard.
I dont have the option on my series X what am I
missing ?
Likely a tv that has VRR support.
I wish more games did this instead of pushing the PS5 Pro :(
5:28 I would play it but I am a broke as hell.
Ues we need 40fps for Rebirth! Especially ps5 pro!
No queremos ver caras, queremos ver el juego.
I still dont know which version to get. PS5 or Xbox Series X 😵💫
If you like the dualsense the game has good haptic feedback
Soo Ubi/Massive just made Avatar 50% faster. I can't believe people still shit on Ubi. But Ubi should not lie so often in the past. But we need to get over it.
Yeah on the Steam Deck, I run more intensive games at 45 FPS and it's fairly fluid.
The steam deck works well for this because you can lock its screen at 45hz. You unfortunately, can't do that on non-vrr TV's, so for broadest compatibility with all 120hz screens, even those without VRR, 40fps is the target for consoles.
At 720p max I suppose
Bought this tonight on PS5 and went straight in with the 40fps mode. The amount of shimmering and image breakup when panning the camera is god-awful. Fantastic lighting, geometry, and density, but terrible IQ in many instances. Such a disappointment. Still, it's great fun to run around the world.
pretty sure when games run at 30fps in reality are running between 30 and 40+ fps so this means that in order to have a stady 40fps mode you need to achieve 50+ so almost a 60fps game...
120hz on my ps5 puts it in 1080p is that normal
It’s your tv partially support hdmi 2.1.
@@apTimON works fine with series x
@@stevesmith1764 interesting then. There is an option in PS5 setting to try supported modes on attached TV. Maybe try it first.
On series X 120hz works with 4K or 1440p mode?
@@apTimON tbh I never use 120hz anyway
Nothing comes close to horizon forbidden west performance mode still it looks insane still
Now all they need to add is “fun” to the game.
PS5 is a beast!
ps5 is a bust. no vrr under 60fps! lame
@@1997Ghost False. VRR from 48 to 120
Wrong. Only for games supporting it on Playstation. On XBox every single game can run at up to 120Hz supporting LFC. So try again 😉
is that a new guy on the bottom right? looks unfamiliar
Nope, he has been here for years…
It's Tom. He's been around for a long time.
That'll be rough to play on Portal, but honestly, I'm still going to take it. 40fps modes should honestly be standard, not going to miss out on it just to have remote play optimal.
FINALLY
30 fps is just unusable
In 99% first person games for sure.
I stopped buying on release as tired of seeing huge additions months after release and usually when i have or nearly finished.
Is there a real reason why 40fps works better on ps5 over series X? I have both systems and was thinking about getting this game on series X because it’s open world. I’ll get the ps5 for better 40fps. I noticed games like Fallout 4 does better on ps5 than series X at 40 fps. Avatar now. Even horizon and ratchet and clank ran better in 40fps on ps5 over the series X where it couldn’t even run it, running at 0fps (just kidding)
VRR runs better on my series X. With an LG C2
How do you get your appointment about 40 FPS being much smoother because sometime on certain games 60fps or above to seems wrong for example I'll go back to a basics Fallout 3 I used to play that game on the PS3 it was horrible but it was good then I had it on the steam deck and was able to run it at 60 FPS but the problem with that was it was too unstable for me to enjoy the game way to smooth and it just didn't sit right with me so I changed it to 40 FPS and it was perfect 30 FPS was still choppy 40 FPS gave me the Best of Both Worlds it wasn't too choppy and it wasn't too smooth I did try to do 45 but obviously it didn't work well so I have stopped 40 yes we all know that 1080p 60 show me the minimum but due to the quantity and quality of used generation and game developer games need more power consoles are becoming outdated like yesterday a great on one side but bad for other reasons I feel like PlayStation and Sony are becoming Nintendo mean the games that come out I just technically for Casuals I don't mean the games I mean the consoles itself now there's a bigger gap between consoles and PC once again we are behind more behind than we Once Was there was a time where concert was above PC there was a time where Qantas and PC were on the both same playing labour field and now it's like we moved backwards so what's the plan how are we going to fix this
You have massively overcomplicated this. It sounds like one an issue with the game engine or you didn't lock your refresh rate correctly. A locked 40 FPS is objectively better than a locked 30 FPS. A locked 40 fps with very occasional drops is objectively better than a locked 30 FPS. PCs will always pull ahead of consoles. You can't just magically have 60 FPS forever on a fixed platform, something has to give eventually. Sometimes, the resolution deficit to achieve higher FPS is either too great of a hit to image quality or depending on where the bottleneck is isn't able to resolve the issue.
ironic about stellar blade since the first update made it worse
I have a 120 display 😁
Is it HDMI 2.1 with VRR support though? If your TV/monitor doesn't support both HDMI 2.1 AND VRR, then it won't work.
Shame about the game part of it.
Never could quite get into 40 fps modes - still looks too juddery when compared to 60. If it was the only option, it’s better than nothing- but 60 is still miles better.
Not at 720p lol
Wrong
Omg this just a meme now glitches on the xbox version is the cause of lower framerates😂
Don't like using 120hz or 40 frame mode the picture always looks dark and dull
That is a your tv issue.
@richardfranklin6003 shouldn't be it not works fine with all other modes just when 120hz is on it looks dark and dull
@richardfranklin6003 and looking on Google I'm not the only one who says it
@@stevesmith1764what's your tv? On my lg cx oled it looks fantastic and hdr works properly. There shouldn't be any impact to brightness or colors unless there is an issue with your setup.
@gavinderulo12 lg nano with all the bells and whistles as soon as I use 120hz on a game that supports it the picture goes dark and dull looked on Google and others say the same with different tvs
Its 2024 and we are celebrating 40fps to be great, what an amazing time we live in!
PC is where the cutting edge happens, consoles is for reliability at a good price.
Having to read dumb comments from desperate people begging for meaningless attention from strangers. You're right, what a time we live in
Hey people. To me 60fps should be the minimum since most people already own a 60hz TV. Not 30 not 40, 60fps should be the standard nowadays 🙄, but something tells me that they're doing this because Sony is about to announce the pro version of the ps5 so they also need a reason to make people go and buy the damn pro. Sneaky, Greedy Greedy Sony. They always have a plan that benefits only them. Our consoles are fine, it's them who don't want to let us truly enjoy our setups. All it takes is a nice update focused on performance management and everything will be fine, but they're saving it for the pro version 😉.
40 fps is the only way forward for console gaming.
So people with 60hz displays can fuck right off?
Still a blur when actually playing the game, 60 FPS bare minimum.
No amount of word salad changes this.
But people can’t see more than 20 frame anyway. This is why the Sega 32X was the greatest console ever.
So
@@ottomaticallyawesome The main reason I don't care about frame rate
No excuses the devs can implement FSR2 or FSR3 into their game to achieve 60fps they are just lazy
If a game is CPU-bound then FSR won’t be enough as that only helps reduce the GPU load.
They already have FSR2 in the game 🤦♂️🤡
@@RyneLanders FSR3 and FG pretty sure you know nothing about computers as well
@@MerryBlind that’s a lie I have Ryzen 9 6900HX which is little better than Ryzen 7 3700X which is similar to what is in the PS5. I run FSR3 no problem.
@@SiqFix lol what are you even saying? No it’s not a lie… and I didn’t say using FSR would cause any problem. Also I was talking broadly, not specifically about this game.
If what you tried to say is that this game runs at 60fps with FSR on your PC, then either your PC is not fully comparable to consoles, or your 60fps isn’t as stable as you think it is.
No game that has fast movement should never be under a 100 fps. EVER. The bare minimum should be 60. If we're still seeing games that run at 30-40fps then we have a major problem.
It's 2024 and we're calling 40fps great. TF kind of tech dystopia am I living in???
Society is highly confused. Just like they think 40 is the middle between 30 and 60. Sad but so true and pathetic
Its the developers choice stop being dramatic
@@blazoblaze Yes, 40 fps is the middle between 30 and 60 in a 120 Hz container when it comes to frame-times, which is the most important thing, not frame-rate. 30 fps is 33.3ms, 60fps is 16.7ms, 40fps is 25ms which is exactly in the middle. It's the perfect middle ground between 30 and 40 when it comes to smoothness on a 120hz display. On a 60Hz panel there would be horrible judder, that's why they don't do it. You can check out DF video about Ratchet & Clank that was the first game that had a 40fps/120hz mode. You can see examples and detailed explanation why 40 fps slots exactly in the middle of 30 and 60 fps.
@@blazoblaze it is in terms of frametime. 30 fps is 33.33 ms and 60 is 16.77 ms and 40 fps is 25 ms which is exactly halfway. They clearly specify they are talking about frametime. I think its just you confusing the society
On console I prefer a 40fps quality Mode over 60fps performance mode in most games. And that's coming from someone who usually plays on a highend pc at 165fps.
Looks great on my 4090 😅
Watch out for burning smell after 1 year+
And this is why the PS5 is 10 times better than the Xbox ❤
Only console with stable 40 fps mode is PS5 1:23
Imagine having basically equivalent hardware, a library 90% cross platform, and then arguing over which one is better 😂
@@RyneLanders It's just ironic that 12 tflops beast is actually slower than PS5. False marketing for sure
@RyneLanders they arent though the xbox is suppose to be %40 stronger than the ps5. Imagine buying an xbox SX and never seeing it fully utilized then watching the weaker console run games better than it over and ovee again. Then watching your former console exclusive games running better. Then coming to the comment section to poke fun at people who point that out.😂
Because PS5 Checkerboarding upscales from a lower min/max resolution.
Console gamers are used to low fps and blurry image, small improvements impress the unter menschen.
Smh
Anything below 90 fps is not good. How can you accept it and call it great?
it's all very subjective and depends on lots of factors: screen size, panel type, camera speed when camera pans (gamepad vs mouse), game's visual style, etc. For some people even 48 fps is fluid enough, for some 60 is still choppy, there is no difference between 75 and 90 fps for others, some clearly see 120 fps benefit in shooters and top down games.
I'm starting to see a trend that I dont like with 40fps.
No one care.
Consoles suck!
Enough said.
I run through the woods at close to 80 fps.
With peaks of 125 fps.
With 720p.
Nice to hear about superficial and/or not very rational opinions, after the absurd intro on the frame time which at 40fps would be somewhere in between, even connecting fluidity to it.
The frame time is where it belongs, at 45fps it will be lower, and making that partial calculation is intellectually dishonest, as well as absolutely absurd technically.
Stop amplifying every feature on console, it's stressful having to shut the mouths of children who take you as law.
What? He's not wrong about the frametimes and 40fps over 30fps is a massive boost to fluidity. It's a 33% boost to fluidity.
@@gavinderulo12
Exactly, there is an improvement of 33%, however in the video it is said that the truth is that by magic the 40fps goes between 30 and 60.
This follows the famous article on R%C where the same thing was basically said. That method just means playing with the numbers trying to amplify the increase.
From 40fps to 60fps there will be the same increase, but this increase will start from 40fps, so there is no middle ground.
It's ridiculous to mess around like that even with arithmetic, it means no longer knowing where and how to pump the consoles.
If you have a 120 hz tv you'll LOVE 40fps. 👍🤡🤡🤡
These consoles launched with underpowered hardware when they released in 2020. You act surprised.
My guy 120hz TVs are cheap lol
TrashBox less stable? Don't remind me...
1080p60fps should be bare minimum already. Wtf is wrong with the devs?!
1440p60
@@rocstarang5747Exactly.
In this case it's ray tracing