Would you favor next gen consoles having image settings?

[futurefields]

So for example you could tailor the game to fit your TV resolution, and the developer would build in a 1080p mode that runs at 30 frames per second or a 720p mode that runs at 60 frames per second.

 

[zerocool84]

No, keep it the same across the board. Plus I bet the average person wouldn't even know which resolution their panel is and would override the automatic settings the console would detect and would complain about the image not being right.

 

[Reliant]

If you get them any sort of non-standard config they have to have a lower quality base instead of a full optimized config. I'd rather have no options and have the dev give me highest fidelity than any sort of choice.

 

[Drako]

How about 1080p at 60Hz?

 

[cmdrdredd]

I have a PC for that. Seriously though, this would just muddle things. Consoles are unified in that every PS3 is just the same as another. There's no need for settings.

 

[Tweak155]

I do not support.

 

[mmntech]

I would have said yes a number of years ago when all I had for my PS3 was a 16:10, 1440x900 monitor to play on. Now everything's standardized and it will just confuse the masses.

 

[crisium]

Sort of off topic, but what's the deal with 30 or 60fps and nothing else? Surely we have all played a PC game that averaged around 40-50fps and noticed that it's simultaneously smoother than 30fps but choppier than 60. I would love to see a console game do 45fps cap, and balance higher image quality with smoother play rather than going to one extreme. Since most TVs run at 60fps, is it some kind of issue when not doing something divisible into 60?

 

[smackababy]

Sort of off topic, but what's the deal with 30 or 60fps and nothing else? Surely we have all played a PC game that averaged around 40-50fps and noticed that it's simultaneously smoother than 30fps but choppier than 60. I would love to see a console game do 45fps cap, and balance higher image quality with smoother play rather than going to one extreme. Since most TVs run at 60fps, is it some kind of issue when not doing something divisible into 60?

I think it isn't so much as about those specific numbers, but when a game bounces around instead of being steady, the framerate tends to be much more noticeable. I'd take a stready 30FPS over a variable 35-50 range depending on what is going on. Take Dark Souls for instance. It looks just fine until you get areas that slow you down and then it is super noticeable. Games like CoD and Street Fighter have to run at 60FPS because of the nature of games, so the resolution is lower than 720p and upscaled by the console, at least in the case of CoD.

 

[tipoo]

So for example you could tailor the game to fit your TV resolution, and the developer would build in a 1080p mode that runs at 30 frames per second or a 720p mode that runs at 60 frames per second.

That would kind of be nice, I still only have a 720P HDTV and it would feel like a waste if most games ran in 1080 and I had to turn them down and that power went wasted. It would be nice if at least something extra was thrown to the 720p crowd, like at least higher AA/AF.

 

[debian0001]

no

 

[futurefields]

well guys what made me think of this is battlefield 4 is only gonna be 720p @ 60fps on the next gen consoles and I was thinking it would be nice if they simply built in a 1080p @ 30fps mode for those with 1080p tv's who want to be able to play the game without looking at an upscaled garbage that makes you want to turn the tv off after 10 minutes.

 

[futurefields]

i'd take medium settings native 1080p over high settings 720p upscaled. if i had the choice.

 

[Bateluer]

Not a good idea on the console, IMO. Their main strength is uniformity.