I say this as someone who bought The Sexy Brutale on the Switch.

That's kinda my point though.
This year isn't especially bad, people are just noisier than ever about it.
This dips into sensationalism at times though, because content.

Minnesänger wrote:

Wookienopants wrote:

Oh yea, having experienced most running at 60fps and some at 120fps I agree that 30fps isn't really very good nowadays but in the grand scheme of things it's hardly the worst thing and doesn't make a game unplayable, just not as nice

Agreed and it depends on the game and genre. But there’s a difference between 30fps and whatever passes for a large number of Switch ports that run at “30” or Jedi Fallen Order on last gen base consoles.

Anyone going to war against the latter ones as unacceptable is not being clickbaity or courting outrage - they’re doing consumers a favour by not letting substandard products sell uncontested.

I don't know if I agree with you because I just can't stand the whole influencer/YouTuber/clickbaity shite that gets put out there nowadays but then that's because I'm becoming a grumpy old man who hates things for little reason.
I respect your opinion though and see your point

Standing up for consumers Vs sensationalism comes largely down to presentation and message I think.

Some people act like the Devs have killed somebody. I've seen more restrained reactions to terrorists attacks. When Devs start to get death threats because thickos have been whipped up into a frenzy by content creators that's beyond consumer rights.

Minnesänger wrote:

LivDiv wrote:

That's kinda my point though.
This year isn't especially bad, people are just noisier than ever about it.
This dips into sensationalism at times though, because content.

Well, I’d argue this noisiness is for 2 reasons:

1. 30 was standard for the most part last gen, whereas a lot of players (no idea if it’s the majority) now want 60 above all else, even with graphical cuts
2. More than once, companies have waited until close to launch to finally slip in stuff like “30 only”. It happened with Gotham Knights and it happened with Redfall and in both cases it was only revealed once people had hands on time for previews and it could no longer be hidden. That’s, er, real shitty.

Yea your second point is actually very spot on and that is genuinely unacceptable. It's a total failure to manage expectations until all the pre-orders are sold

Minnesänger wrote:

I say this as someone who bought The Sexy Brutale on the Switch.

LargeOOF.gif

It's fair to say that this is the first console gen where 60fps (and higher) were pushed as a standard/likely feature of the gen jump.  If anything 'it's only 30fps?!' strikes me as more valid than the 'it's only 1152x640?!' stuff in 2007.

That's like 3 quid an hour. Very happy with that ratio compared to the 'this game takes 300 hours to complete' hyperbole which entails of fetch quests and rummaging in 8000 draws for scrap.

Dark Soldier wrote:

That's like 3 quid an hour. Very happy with that ratio compared to the 'this game takes 300 hours to complete' hyperbole which entails of fetch quests and rummaging in 8000 draws for scrap.

I like rummaging in 8000 draws for scraps!

Blocks100 wrote:

Feck frame rates. The point I was making is that we've never been paying more for less content. 70 quid games like Redfall, Dead Island and Jedi have a single player campaign length of less than 20 hours each? We're being ripped off. Again

£70 for the guinea pig version of a game that'll be a) fixed and b) cheaper a few months later is the real problem imo.  20hrs is more than long enough for most games I'm interested in.  I'm looking forward to Callisto Protocol, for example, but I wouldn't go anywhere near it if the campaign was 20hrs long.

The AAA mainstream game is the Hollywood fodder equivalent of gaming.

I tapped out on that shit long ago. To be honest I never really bought into it.

Ive had loads of good AAA experiences.

In a shock to the internet I'm even really enjoying Jedi Survivor. Plenty seemed to like Callisto Protocol (also came out last year) too. Dead Island 2 looks basic but fun enough.
All three could be sat on to be cheaper and less buggy too.

Re: the AAA side of the industry, I think the popularity of the Switch covers a lot of the cracks because you've got Nintendo and their third parties able to pop out PS3-ish tier software on a regular basis while the rest of the industry grapples with PS5. I think it will be interesting to see what happens when Switch 2 comes out and the graphical standards start to raise to PS4-ish levels. It look ages for games to start coming through on PS4 and dev times started to raise to modern levels.

I reckon there are worse years for major games certainly ahead because eventually the sparse AAA release schedule is gonna cover the whole industry and not just the high-end devices.

I was quite surprised when Digital Foundry said Jedi Survivor had been done on Unreal 4. I guess it just slightly missed the boat on 5? But I wonder if the performance would have been any different if it had been developed for 5.

EvilRedEye wrote:

I was quite surprised when Digital Foundry said Jedi Survivor had been done on Unreal 4. I guess it just slightly missed the boat on 5? But I wonder if the performance would have been any different if it had been developed for 5.

So was I, literally just looked it up.
Unreal 5 only launched a year ago for production use so probably just too late to really benefit. If there is a third which seems likely I would have thought it would use Unreal 5.