As much as I want to believe... I know it wont

If it releases in 5 years, maybe it can get close to 144 fps.

I am not a clever man, but if I run Dwarf Fortress at 1000fps on 4k it isn't same as running some modern AAA game? So it doesn't say to much about new Xbox performance?

The PS4 can do that too. With a spinning cube.

Consoles can easily hit 4k and 240FPS just like they managed to support VR: with lowering detail. That's not a bad thing, but also not worth a headline.

Besides, nobody gives a shit about more than 60FPS on consoles. I would be happy already if all games managed to hit the performance that WipEout HD had on the PS3: stable 60 frames @ 1080p.

But of course that's not possible if large studios use fucking HTML+JS for game UIs and spend half the dev time mismanaging the project.

Just saying, I will be buying the new xbox as long as there is an emphasis on 60 FPS, don't give a fuck about 4K, dont give a fuck about HDR...

Just give me a 60 FPS option like most first party titles, a zen based CPU and vega based graphics... Fuck 4K

On Minecraft it will

The graphics of those games would be amazing but gameplay would mostly suck as always.

240FPS?
thats dope.
wait, what did you say? It just repeats the same frame 4times?

Step 1: capable hardware
Step 2: worthwhile games

...still waiting on step 2.

244 fps at 4k on pong!

Why 4K, why 240fps? Most screens can't even display 240 frames in a second (let alone 4K) it's just fucking pointless...

@jschmold however I'm pretty sure 180 Hertz is when the eye stops seeing frames and will see it as fluent motion so anything above is wasted essentially...

(I could be wrong about it being 180 but pretty sure)

@lxmcf it's a lot lower than 180Hz (or do you see a flicker on a 120Hz screen?)

For most people, it's around 30fps or 50-60Hz (obviously varies from person to person). Most gamers just want higher framerates, because of the reduced input lag that comes with it, though that's usually negligible too (just a few ms at most)

And here I used to get 27-34fps in Overwatch on potato settings on my old laptop and still played just fine...I think I'm just used to crappy fps now, I don't have any issues it with it.

@irene I feel the lag too but you just learn to ignore it I guess
Plus having done some animation work I'm pretty used to 24fps (standard for animation, though that's changing now to 30/60).

If it's a good game the immersion is generally enough to get you to forget it after a while. Immersion + desperation to game, lol

Having said that, I did upgrade to a desktop so eh.

@irene true, true.

@RememberMe @irene just jumping in because I'm a console gamer and have been for years, you do stop noticing the difference between 30 and 60 quote quickly

*scours thru comments while tipping my fedora and reaching out to my piss bottles while mom brings me my tendies*
fkin console peasants

@irene most of latest ps4 and Xbox games run 30fps

Yeah, I'm not a fan of games that I can't alt-tab and run windowed.

@irene a good example is that if you switch steam’s FPS on, rise of tomb raider shows only 30fps on pre-rendered scene no matter what

@irene Just popping up again here and would like to say as a game dev and console gamer, I would much prefer a locked 30 to a 30-60 FPS title, the consistent frame timing on a 60hz display with 30 FPS feels smoother than a fluctuating frame time.

If your game is jumping between like 45-60 FPS, just cap it at 30

@irene I found its very hard to aim with v sync on. And it feels worse when stuttered . I rather see some tears 🤣. Btw it’s NOT ok when lazy game company reuse low quality movies, when they could easily render it in 4K.