PS4 vs PS4 Pro Versions?

[AydinDubstep]

Thanks gents. Will go forward and try to snag this deal in the bag. Only ever bought a PS4 for this game, this will be my third PS4 for EA UFC

First one HDMI slot broke, second one got a cheap second hand job off eBay and now the final transformation which might just be the right timing for this, potentially game changing game!

60fps + HDR + 4K, not sure if possible but those three together could be quite something! I have a Samsung HDR TV & a 980Ti 4770K gaming rig but have yet to actually hook up something decent on it in terms of HDR. None of the games keep my attention other than sports games these days (fight night champion).

If the devs have listened and give us 60 fps and a decent resolution bump for the Pro versoin, that would be quite splendid! Anything to reduce the input delay and motion is a huge bonus.

[Onzahh_]

Quote: Originally Posted by ragreynolds

They talked about this before they released UFC 2, and they said that they were already able to make the game 60FPS but they chose not to because it "didn't make a big difference".

Well to me. I play on 144hz and run 144+ Fps on games, I don't get where anyone thinks 30fps looks better than 60fps? For Honor as an example. On Console it runs 30 fps. When i play it on PC at 144+ it looks WAAAY better, and plays smoother.

[Kasel]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZombieRommel

60FPS is something I've wanted and have been asking for since UFC1. I am primarily a PC gamer and only play my PS4 for the exclusives. I run a GTX 1080 with an i7 7700k on my PC with a 144hz monitor, so 30FPS looks absolutely stone-age atrocious to me, and the motion blur is hideous, I don't care what anyone says. The motion blur garbles the scene and ALSO uses a moderate amount of GPU rendering power since it is a post-processing effect. It's basically a cover-up many devs use to mask how juttery naked 30FPS is. I can't give any info on whether or not this is coming, but I can tell you that every single dev I've talked to on the team knows that this is a big deal to me, and I also believe Kenetic and ZHunter are on board as well. While EA UFC is a sports game, it is also a 1v1 fighting game, and virtually all serious, competitive fighting games (Tekken, Street Fighter etc) run at 60hz - so in order to be taken seriously by that crowd, 60FPS is essential, and yeah 30FPS with motion blur feels juttery enough by itself, but when you play something at 60 - 144hz for a few hours and then go BACK to 30? Feels like you are gouging out your eyes with ice cream scoopers. I love this franchise, but its biggest weaknesses, in my opinion, are not related to gameplay. They are technical issues that completely kill my enjoyment, like juttery 30FPS, the hideous blur, and the insane lag you can sometimes encounter online. I come from the land of buttery smooth 144hz and dedicated servers, so this kind of performance (local and online) is pretty revolting to me and something I'm personally beating the drum very hard to get addressed

I'm glad there are people who still have the energy to speak this type of sense after years of no progress, because I got tired writing walls of text about this subject since the EA forums. If EA UFC 3 is locked to 30fps again, my mind will get blown once again, and my depression about EA buying the UFC license will get re-ignited like a pheonix

[Kasel]

Quote: Originally Posted by Onzahh_

Well to me. I play on 144hz and run 144+ Fps on games, I don't get where anyone thinks 30fps looks better than 60fps? For Honor as an example. On Console it runs 30 fps. When i play it on PC at 144+ it looks WAAAY better, and plays smoother.

No one thinks that. It's a classic lie for marketing purposes that's been going on since the rise of console gaming. The only ones who stick to it today are exclusive console devs who are okay with lying to their costumers and childish console fanboys who mindlessly defend their "team" aggressively like chimpanzees who don't actually believe it either.

Even if you look at the stats for how many choose 60fps over graphic fidelity for Nioh it's over 95%, and you can bet your *** that more than half these people have trolled online about fps being bs and 30fps "is more cinematic" or whatever excuses they make up today and still secretly choose the 60fps mode, and those who don't, definitely don't mind dying more from the delays as a result.

[fballturkey]

30fps might look better than 60 if they have to make concessions elsewhere to get 60, but nobody ever that I have seen has preferred 30 to 60 with all else being equal.

[ZombieRommel]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kasel

No one thinks that. It's a classic lie for marketing purposes that's been going on since the rise of console gaming. The only ones who stick to it today are exclusive console devs who are okay with lying to their costumers and childish console fanboys who mindlessly defend their "team" aggressively like chimpanzees who don't actually believe it either. Even if you look at the stats for how many choose 60fps over graphic fidelity for Nioh it's over 95%, and you can bet your *** that more than half these people have trolled online about fps being bs and 30fps "is more cinematic" or whatever excuses they make up today and still secretly choose the 60fps mode, and those who don't, definitely don't mind dying more from the delays as a result.

Just to play devil's advocate, I know people who either: A) cannot tell any difference between 30 & 60 FPS or B) just prefer 30FPS.

In other words, it's not a lie they tell themselves - I have no reason whatsoever to doubt them.

I think these people have vision that DID NOT EVOLVE to quickly process subtle differences in motion. I think this sort of general lack of caring about frame rate might also be peculiar to gamers who grew up in during the sixth generation of gaming (Playstation 2, original Xbox, Gamecube), because many of these titles were running at 30FPS.

I grew up on the NES and most of those games (Mario, Ninja Gaiden) were 60FPS. Reference:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUNzCeesfgw

So whenever we moved into the PS1 era and beyond, where many games were running at 30FPS, I felt jolted, even if I didn't have the technical knowledge back then to explain why everything felt so slow, choppy, and just "wrong."

Then I got into PC gaming. The first game I seriously took online was Quake 2, and, at the time, I was using my dad's Gateway 2000 PC to play, with all its crappy hardware -- and one Christmas I begged for a 3DFX Voodoo 2 graphics card, and my parents got it for me, and after I slapped that baby in, it was like I was a blind man who could see again. My putrid sub 20 framerate skyrocketed to a clean 60-75, and that's the moment that really solidified in my head just how important framerate was. I was getting WRECKED online until I got that graphics card, because turning my camera was so freaking jerky.

So... I think most of the people who dismiss the importance of frame rate are usually console-exclusive gamers who aren't old enough to have played lots of old NES / SNES / Genesis games that ran at native 60FPS.

Try going back and playing FZero or Sonic the Hedgehog, and one of the things that gives those games their incredible sense of fluidity and control is that they run at 60FPS. If you chopped their frame rate in half, they would feel like completely different games and your sense of fluidity and ability to react would be greatly compromised.

Just compare -
30FPS FZero:
https://youtu.be/BIe4AvKLSa4?t=1919

60FPS FZero:
https://youtu.be/i7dusgp9laU?t=10

And this is only visuals. Guaranteed playing the game in 30FPS would feel significantly worse.

Sidenote: I'm glad someone made this thread as I think a lot of console devs get the impression that console gamers "don't really care about frame rate" and the only way to really demonstrate otherwise is to make noise about it and actively ask for frame rate prioritization.

[SUGATA]

Quote: Originally Posted by Yaari

Sony wants console parity so the framerate won't change. I think Microsoft has a different vision on that but for the Playstation it should remain equal whichever console you play it on. That said it still remains to be seen if EA UFC will have a different framerate. With these new consoles out there I think it should be a higher priority to have a smooth running game, with the option for people to upgrade to a PS4Pro/XB1X if they desire better graphics. I'm not sure if it is mandatory but considering each of the EA Sports titles released this year has had excellent PS4 Pro support, I think this will be no different for EA UFC 3.

Guys, as i wrote before SONY's parity mandatory is NOT an issue!
Why? because it is possible to give players an OPTION to SELECT 4K/30fps or 1080p/60fps in game settings based on their will = parity regardless of the platform.


About the difference between 30fps VS 60 fps - 60 fps is CRUCIAL and the MOST IMPORTANT thing for fighting games even sport games!

Please check this tool to get the PRACTICAL difference between 30fps and 60 fps:

https://frames-per-second.appspot.com/

... and tell me what is the best for GAMEPLAY and especially which is much more important for CYBERSPORT, 30fps or 60fps in EA UFC (in checking initial moves, reading strikes, reacting by parries ans reversals , etc)?

[Balboa]

I have Ps Pro (with a 4k Asus MG28UQ monitor) i can say this the pspro does everything faster by far. Its graphics make the ps4 look like the ps3

It has extra feature in the menus the ps4 dont the WIFI card in the pro is AC 5ghz + 2.4ghz (dual band) theres no way id ever go back the the ps4. its truly night and day with the right equipment specifically monitor (or tv)
also the psPro plays at 60 FPS if you have a HDMI 2.2 port thus the monitor

its a no brainer