Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Report this Comment
Use this form to report the selected comment to the moderators. Reporting should generally be used only if the comment breaks forum rules.

15. Re: More Big Picture Details Dec 20, 2012, 11:40 HorrorScope
Beamer wrote on Dec 20, 2012, 10:34:
Well, it all depends, right? You can build a time machine, go to 2027, bring back the fastest computer, and I can still write software today that it can't run at more than 30fps.

There is a trade-off between frames and graphics quality. Just because something runs at 30fps doesn't mean it's because the hardware is weak.

It's not about power, it's about how developers are prioritizing that power. If they're choosing high graphics fidelity and lots of crap going on it'll be 30fps. It isn't like there's some magic machine that can run anything you throw at it at 60fps. It's about developers deciding that they want to go at that frame rate and seeing how much crap it takes to get it pushed down there.

For certain. Face it there is a Jr. programmer out there that can make tic tac toe on a i7 struggle for 60 fps. What I find funny is "Caramack can virtually guarantee 30fs", others assume crap etc. It's one of those things we really don't need the answer for today and can just wait and see what we get, then make mention. They very well maybe low-balling the HW.

For the PC crowd if one really wants to feel superior here, the win we want is as much ram as possible so our level/map size isn't affected because it's a console port. So we want the ram, but then we don't want a massive cpu/gpu combo so we can feel superior with our much better HW. Win! Lol
Avatar 17232
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.


Blue's News logo