Forums / Community / General Discussion

Scorpio. Halo. 120fps @ 1080P?

OP Black96z

Is it possible? I know that the Scorpio's main purpose is 4K. But 4K hasnt been utilized in most homes. I dont have any plans on purchasing a 4K for a very long time. I am happy with my 55 inch Samsung. Could developers code their games to run at 120fps @ 1080P on the Scorpio?
In theory it's possible. I can't imagine it'd be a worthwhile improvement that's supported, but yeah it could be done.
I bet that Xbox Scorpio can do 4k 60fps no problem for Halo 5 Guardian and Halo MCC. As for 1080p for Halo 5 and Halo MCC hitting 120fps is very possible.
In theory it's possible. I can't imagine it'd be a worthwhile improvement that's supported, but yeah it could be done.
Why wouldnt it? At 120fps wpuldnt the image be clearer?
Black96z wrote:
In theory it's possible. I can't imagine it'd be a worthwhile improvement that's supported, but yeah it could be done.
Why wouldnt it? At 120fps wpuldnt the image be clearer?
Frame rate has nothing to do with image clarity
Bensolo31 wrote:
Black96z wrote:
In theory it's possible. I can't imagine it'd be a worthwhile improvement that's supported, but yeah it could be done.
Why wouldnt it? At 120fps wpuldnt the image be clearer?
Frame rate has nothing to do with image clarity
Maybe smoother motion would have been a better way of putting it.
Black96z wrote:
Bensolo31 wrote:
Black96z wrote:
In theory it's possible. I can't imagine it'd be a worthwhile improvement that's supported, but yeah it could be done.
Why wouldnt it? At 120fps wpuldnt the image be clearer?
Frame rate has nothing to do with image clarity
Maybe smoother motion would have been a better way of putting it.
Still, smoother motion doesn't make the graphics any better. I'd prefer way better graphics at 60fps over somewhat better graphics at 120fps any day.
Nioh has something like this. In graphics mode it displays higher resolution but is locked at 30fps. In game mode it has a lower resolution but runs at 60fps. I would absolutely love if every developer implemented this into their games because once I get a Scorpio I'd much rather opt for high frame rate than 4k if I can't have both.
Just putting this out there, many TVs and Monitors can't display above 60fps.
JOLTLORD wrote:
Just putting this out there, many TVs and Monitors can't display above 60fps.
Most people dont have 4K tv's. But as time goes by more and more people are buying them. As time goes by more and more tv's and monitors will be capable of above 60fps.
Black96z wrote:
JOLTLORD wrote:
Just putting this out there, many TVs and Monitors can't display above 60fps.
Most people dont have 4K tv's. But as time goes by more and more people are buying them. As time goes by more and more tv's and monitors will be capable of above 60fps.
I'm skeptical about the last point. High refresh rates are a much older thing than 4K, yet true high refresh rate TVs aren't really much of a thing, which is both due to, and reflected in, the fact that there is no high refresh rate content available for the living room. The only significant market for high refresh rate displays has for years been competitive PC gaming. So, unless something drastically changes in the coming years, high refresh rates will remain the niche market they are.

Contrast that to 4K, which only in 2012 cost you an arm and a leg, but now you can buy yourself a 4K TV for few hunderd bucks. Netflix offers 4K streams, some TV networks have plans to begin 4K broadcasting in the near future, 4K Blu-Rays of latest films are already available, console manufacturers are already using 4K as a selling point. 4K has already surpassed high refresh ratesin interest, and even though I don't have the data, I'd be willing to bet that 4K has also surpassed high refresh rates in market share.

High refresh rates aren't a thing in the living room like 4K is, and never will be unless something changes drastically. For that reason there isn't much of an incentive for developers to enable higher refresh rates, and it ultimately comes down to their graciousness.
Honestly watching TV at that high a refresh rate would be just as jarring (if not worse) than going from 30 FPS to 60 in video games. I may be in the minority but , Halo 5 running at 60 is very smooth ; it is also disconcerting (for me at least) to play at that frame rate. It doesn't "feel natural" after having played 6 Halo games at 30 FPS.
tsassi wrote:
Black96z wrote:
JOLTLORD wrote:
The only significant market for high refresh rate displays has for years been competitive PC gaming. So, unless something drastically changes in the coming years, high refresh rates will remain the niche market they are.
Isnt that what Halo is doing is becoming competitive gaming??? Consoles are becoming more like pc's every generation.
Sunsdune wrote:
Honestly watching TV at that high a refresh rate would be just as jarring (if not worse) than going from 30 FPS to 60 in video games. I may be in the minority but , Halo 5 running at 60 is very smooth ; it is also disconcerting (for me at least) to play at that frame rate. It doesn't "feel natural" after having played 6 Halo games at 30 FPS.
I loved how H5 played because of how smooth it is. After playing H5 i went back to older Halos and I felt it was hard to play at the lower frames.
Black96z wrote:
tsassi wrote:
Black96z wrote:
JOLTLORD wrote:
The only significant market for high refresh rate displays has for years been competitive PC gaming. So, unless something drastically changes in the coming years, high refresh rates will remain the niche market they are.
Isnt that what Halo is doing is becoming competitive gaming??? Consoles are becoming more like pc's every generation.
Yes , competitive console gaming is becoming a larger market. This is why Microsoft made a monitor vga cord for the 360 that didn't sell well. (I used a monitor in my 360 days is the only reason I know it existed). Whether they have or are considering the same for the Xone or Scorpio , I can't say. But , with HDMI becoming more and more the accepted connection for TV and monitor input , you could probably get a monitor to play at these refresh rates , instead of trying to influence a medium (TV) that has no other use for such an advancement. There are no shows or movies being produced at that frame rate , and as such the innovation would be mostly wasted on the average consumer.
Black96z wrote:
Sunsdune wrote:
Honestly watching TV at that high a refresh rate would be just as jarring (if not worse) than going from 30 FPS to 60 in video games. I may be in the minority but , Halo 5 running at 60 is very smooth ; it is also disconcerting (for me at least) to play at that frame rate. It doesn't "feel natural" after having played 6 Halo games at 30 FPS.
I loved how H5 played because of how smooth it is. After playing H5 i went back to older Halos and I felt it was hard to play at the lower frames.
Awesome , I am seriously happy that you are enjoying the experience. ( I haven't enjoyed Halo multi player for a long time [traditionalist]) After playing it for a while the first few weeks some of the issues I had were resolved , I just couldn't ever get the hang of it.
Black96z wrote:
tsassi wrote:
The only significant market for high refresh rate displays has for years been competitive PC gaming. So, unless something drastically changes in the coming years, high refresh rates will remain the niche market they are.
Isnt that what Halo is doing is becoming competitive gaming??? Consoles are becoming more like pc's every generation.
Yes, 343i is trying to support their own vision of competitive Halo. And yes, modern consoles are not much more than really locked down computers. All I was saying is that the intersection of console gamers and people who have a high refresh rate display isn't awfully large, and so developers don't have much of an incentive.

I'd love it if every console game with any sort of competitive element came with a set of options that let the player choose between target frame rate and graphical fidelity. But that's just not a thing, and I can't really see it becoming any more of a thing over time.

Sunsdune wrote:
Honestly watching TV at that high a refresh rate would be just as jarring (if not worse) than going from 30 FPS to 60 in video games. I may be in the minority but , Halo 5 running at 60 is very smooth ; it is also disconcerting (for me at least) to play at that frame rate. It doesn't "feel natural" after having played 6 Halo games at 30 FPS.
That's interesting. I had the complete opposite experience when I played classic CE a while ago. For a moment I genuinely thought the game was having some unexplainable performance issues. Then I realized it's the frame rate. If there is one thing I like about the gameplay in Halo 5, it's the frame rate, and I'm glad 343i realized to go for what should be the minimum acceptable frame rate in any reasonably fast paced game.
tsassi wrote:
Black96z wrote:
tsassi wrote:
The only significant market for high refresh rate displays has for years been competitive PC gaming. So, unless something drastically changes in the coming years, high refresh rates will remain the niche market they are.
Isnt that what Halo is doing is becoming competitive gaming??? Consoles are becoming more like pc's every generation.
Yes, 343i is trying to support their own vision of competitive Halo. And yes, modern consoles are not much more than really locked down computers. All I was saying is that the intersection of console gamers and people who have a high refresh rate display isn't awfully large, and so developers don't have much of an incentive.

I'd love it if every console game with any sort of competitive element came with a set of options that let the player choose between target frame rate and graphical fidelity. But that's just not a thing, and I can't really see it becoming any more of a thing over time.

Sunsdune wrote:
Honestly watching TV at that high a refresh rate would be just as jarring (if not worse) than going from 30 FPS to 60 in video games. I may be in the minority but , Halo 5 running at 60 is very smooth ; it is also disconcerting (for me at least) to play at that frame rate. It doesn't "feel natural" after having played 6 Halo games at 30 FPS.
That's interesting. I had the complete opposite experience when I played classic CE a while ago. For a moment I genuinely thought the game was having some unexplainable performance issues. Then I realized it's the frame rate. If there is one thing I like about the gameplay in Halo 5, it's the frame rate, and I'm glad 343i realized to go for what should be the minimum acceptable frame rate in any reasonably fast paced game.
I don't disagree , as I said Halo 5 is smoother than it has ever been , it just doesn't work for me (I know this is personal preference , and I hold no grudge for those that truly enjoy the game). It is entirely possible that I am just to old to appreciate it (I am 38 , and my Mother still plays NES games because she doesn't like all the complication of "Modern" systems and game mechanics).
Honestly , it may be a combination of movement mechanics and frame rate that mess with me , never was much of a twitch gamer and with the speed of Halo 5 and the faster frame rate , I tend to have a hard time keeping up with the action. I had WTF moments in all Halo games , but they seemed far to frequent in the time I spent playing Halo 5.
Bensolo31 wrote:
Black96z wrote:
Bensolo31 wrote:
Black96z wrote:
In theory it's possible. I can't imagine it'd be a worthwhile improvement that's supported, but yeah it could be done.
Why wouldnt it? At 120fps wpuldnt the image be clearer?
Frame rate has nothing to do with image clarity
Maybe smoother motion would have been a better way of putting it.
Still, smoother motion doesn't make the graphics any better. I'd prefer way better graphics at 60fps over somewhat better graphics at 120fps any day.
It's not a matter or image quality, it is a matter of refresh for enhanced response time, which is key to competitive.