Quote:
Originally Posted by DrBrogbo 
You've brought that up in other threads as well, and it's still a ridiculous argument. 30FPS on computer is exactly the same as 30FPS on consoles. Games that run at 30FPS on consoles almost always run faster on gaming PCs (at similar resolution and graphics settings). Even really old ones. Games that DO choke PCs down to under 30fps will look orders of magnitude better than console games, in every single way. Besides, that is the most unfair comparison ever. A Geo Metro may beat a Lamborghini in a quarter-mile race, if you give the Metro a 10 second head start.
What game, when comparing identical resolutions and graphics settings, is EVER in the console's favor? Even against the Intel HD 4000.
Anyway, I don't think that was the point of the post you were quoting. It wasn't that 30Hz sucks. The point was that the jump from 720P/30 to 1080P/30 seems ridiculously underwhelming, after 7 years of technological advances.

Quote:
You've brought that up in other threads as well, and it's still a ridiculous argument. 30FPS on computer is exactly the same as 30FPS on consoles. Games that run at 30FPS on consoles almost always run faster on gaming PCs (at similar resolution and graphics settings). Even really old ones. Games that DO choke PCs down to under 30fps will look orders of magnitude better than console games, in every single way. Besides, that is the most unfair comparison ever. A Geo Metro may beat a Lamborghini in a quarter-mile race, if you give the Metro a 10 second head start.
What game, when comparing identical resolutions and graphics settings, is EVER in the console's favor? Even against the Intel HD 4000.
Anyway, I don't think that was the point of the post you were quoting. It wasn't that 30Hz sucks. The point was that the jump from 720P/30 to 1080P/30 seems ridiculously underwhelming, after 7 years of technological advances.
Yeah, but you forget, with that 1080p30FPS upgrade, more polygons are available and more features.











