Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 43
  1. #1
    Network Hub
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    468

  2. #2
    Network Hub
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    239
    Some developers will adopt any position, however nonsensical, to promote the game they're working on. I don't know if he's been coached by PR to espouse such notions, but I don't believe for a second he believes what he's saying.

    See also: Matt Findley of InXile (and formerly of Interplay) saying CRPGs were a 30 year detour on the path to action-RPGs when he was working on Hunted: The Demon's Forge. Funny we didn't hear any of that when InXile was asking for money for Wasteland 2 and Torment.

  3. #3
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus squirrel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,789
    "30 was our goal, it feels more cinematic. 60 is really good for a shooter, action adventure not so much. It actually feels better for people when it's at that 30fps. It also lets us push the limits of everything to the maximum."
    I've played games in 60FPS, so this is complete BS.

    The insanity is someone try to persuade us that 30FPS should be preferred to 60FPS.

    If you are incapable of putting up 60FPS, just admit the fact and nothing shameful. Why make such stupid comment?!

    But this seems to affect only console players. If you play on consoles, you have to realize that to enjoy top graphics, you need to pay up.

  4. #4
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Lukasz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,783
    current generation consoles cant push 60 with graphics which is better looking than xbox 360 or ps3 games. so either they keep the graphics tech the same or they make it more 'advance' and lower the fps.

    this guy is full of PR bullcrap. the fact is that players are more concered with how awesome the game looks on screenshot comparison than about smoothness and fidelity of the game.

    30 is the min an eye can handle without blur and even then many people are having issues with jerkiness. we will probably be stuck with 30 fps for very long time till the end of current gen life.

  5. #5
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Heliocentric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    10,471
    "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

    Once corporations learn that everything is consigned to record forever they will just hire spin doctors. The vampire of shareholders demands short term profits, and if you are a small business the threat of foreclosure on your home can make people just as short sighted. Just expect all previews and pre order commentary is actually a lie.

    I stopped buying print media because of 10 page advert/previews on games that were instantly forgotten after release. The trick is websites are 'free', well, mostly meaning that clicks are Gods. And hype gets more eyeballs than reviews because you can string out prerelease content forever. On fact the media and the developers share an interest, they want you thinking about games for ages, it creates more early purchases more clicks and is in both mediums interest.

    It's not in your interest as a gamer though, so I suggest avoiding pre release coverage when you can.
    I'm failing to writing a blog, specifically about playing games the wrong way
    http://playingitwrong.wordpress.com/

  6. #6
    Network Hub Skyturnedred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    353
    TB is gonna have a field day with this one.

  7. #7
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Wenz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Gorizia, Italy
    Posts
    1,639
    I'm surprised some pr gets all the attention
    post in progress

  8. #8
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,034
    They can stop making games at 60FPS, because these make all others looks bad.

    30FPS or 60FPS are good enough, if you don't mix. Once you are accustomed to 60FPS, 30FPS looks unplayable and weird.

    They may have to invest money into creating new engines optimized for x86 architecture. And I think this is the real problem: they are making games for the new consoles using the engines optimized for the old consoles, using the build of the engine originally made for PC, that was shit.

    Karma is a bitch


    IF they would have made the PC version of the engine optimized, they would not have this problems now.


    I lol at PR dev guy going "Its working as intended".


    (Image is not related)
    Last edited by Tei; 09-10-2014 at 09:40 AM.
    Abandoned PC gaming for good. Now rest in a better place. psn:Teikman

  9. #9
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Drake Sigar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Jolly Ole England
    Posts
    3,384
    I only play games on my 12 inch 1950s black and white TV, it's more cinematic.

  10. #10
    Lesser Hivemind Node
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    997
    Quote Originally Posted by Heliocentric View Post
    "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

    <snip>
    I hate to be a bubble burster, but...that's not the definition of Insanity, and Einstein likely never claimed as much.

    On the other hand, I AM pretty certain the definition of insanity - or one of them, in the modern context - is claiming that people prefer games at 30fps, as opposed to 60fps. So close enough!

  11. #11
    Network Hub
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackcompany View Post
    On the other hand, I AM pretty certain the definition of insanity - or one of them, in the modern context - is claiming that people prefer games at 30fps, as opposed to 60fps. So close enough!
    I'm pretty sure it's not, given that most people won't even know what the sentence means.

    In fact, I'm not 100% myself, but I don't have anything like the disposable income to buy a PC that would even bring me near this discussion.

  12. #12
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Zephro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Lukasz View Post
    current generation consoles cant push 60 with graphics which is better looking than xbox 360 or ps3 games. so either they keep the graphics tech the same or they make it more 'advance' and lower the fps.

    this guy is full of PR bullcrap. the fact is that players are more concered with how awesome the game looks on screenshot comparison than about smoothness and fidelity of the game.

    30 is the min an eye can handle without blur and even then many people are having issues with jerkiness. we will probably be stuck with 30 fps for very long time till the end of current gen life.
    This is mostly the reason. But it's not "insanity" which is just hyperbole.

    They're deciding to prioritise effects and development time over 60fps on consoles as that's what they think will get them the most money. E.g. people complaining about 60fps will still buy it, or the amount that care are vastly out weighed by the amount of people who don't give a shit.

  13. #13
    Activated Node
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Wednesday View Post
    I'm pretty sure it's not, given that most people won't even know what the sentence means.

    In fact, I'm not 100% myself, but I don't have anything like the disposable income to buy a PC that would even bring me near this discussion.
    Why do you think that?

    The chances are, whilst you may not know it, many of your PC games are running waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay about 30fps much of the time, and many of them are probably running at 60fps.

    I mean, I have a PC from 7 years ago, which was 800 then (so would be worth less than 100 today, performance-wise), with a low-mid-range graphics card from 4 years ago (worth about 0 today), and I see 60fps in a lot of games, at 1920x1080. So what exactly do you think is required to see 60fps? Some sort of 1500 gaming beast? Unless you're running at a resolution above 1920x1080 and have the graphics really maxed out on a pretty modern game, you don't need that.

    The dev is talking rubbish because he's specifically claiming people PREFER 30fps, not that they don't care or can't tell or whatever, but that they PREFER it. You claim people don't know about it. I don't buy that. Even the most casual game-buyers I know are aware of frame-rates. They might not know numbers, but I can tell you for free, I've never seen people go "Wow, this game looks so great and cinematic!" when a game is running at 30fps. That is what the dev is claiming they do.

    On the contrary, when people see games running at 60fps, that's when I hear stuff like "Wow, it look so real!" or "That's so smooth!" and similar amazed comments.

    The dev seems to be basing his line of BS on comments from some people involved with movies that suggest CINEMA audiences prefer old-skool 24fps to the new 48fps and 60fps displays, but that's completely bollocks comparison, because cinema and games are two entirely different things. Even he kind of acknowledges this with his "shooters need 60fps" comment. The fact is, if a game demands that you react fast and precisely, you are going to notice the difference between 60fps and 30fps.

    On top of all this is the elephant in the room - if a game is aiming at 30fps as the "target" framerate, the developers are not going to put as much effort into pushing it's performance as 60fps. Many games that run "at 60fps" (i.e. most of the time) frequently have times where they drop to lower, but still playable framerates. If you run at 30fps, though, and you have a framerate drop, you're likely to be going down to semi-playable or unplayable speeds, like 20, 15 or even 10fps. He sort of acknowledges this by claiming 60fps is "twice as hard" (which is nonsense but that's another thread), but really, to have a "cinematic" effect, you would need a game that:

    A) Didn't require much in the way of really fast reflexes/precision.

    and

    B) NEVER EVER dropped below it's target framerate.

    Getting B) is going to be very close to as hard as getting 60fps most of the time, I'd suggest.

    The 900p thing is a more complex issue.

    TLDR: He is indeed insane, because he is not claiming people can't tell, like you, but claiming people ACTIVELY PREFER 30fps.

  14. #14
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus somini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NEuro Troika Franchulate #3
    Posts
    4,001
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackcompany View Post
    I hate to be a bubble burster, but...that's not the definition of Insanity, and Einstein likely never claimed as much.
    "It was a joke/reference to the Far Cry 3 trailer" - somini

    As for the thread topic, I don't have a console, so FPS numbers are meaningless to me. If my computer is better you get more frames rendered per second, so all this talk just baffles me.
    Steam(shots), Imgur, Flickr, Bak'laag, why do you forsake me?

  15. #15
    Obscure Node
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Rotterdam, NL
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by somini View Post
    "It was a joke/reference to the Far Cry 3 trailer" - somini

    As for the thread topic, I don't have a console, so FPS numbers are meaningless to me. If my computer is better you get more frames rendered per second, so all this talk just baffles me.
    I dont know what the deal is with consoles and their resolution/fps war, it seems like a lot of hot air on both sides without much substance. On my PC I get full HD and well over 60 fps all the time, if I dont anymore I upgrade.
    Maybe what they are saying is true (on consoles) and maybe if you're using average tv's then 30 fps is just fine, I honestly dont know.

  16. #16
    Activated Node
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    61
    Why is always 30 or 60 FPS when it comes to console releases? Like, if a game can't get a reliable 60FPS but can manage, say, 45 FPS 95% of the time, why not cap it at that?

  17. #17
    Network Hub
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    149
    Quote Originally Posted by LexW View Post
    The 900p thing is a more complex issue.
    The 900p thing is important because it shows the decision wasn't really about the game looking "cinematic". They chose 30fps because they figured that they couldn't manage 60fps, and in the end they couldn't even manage 30fps at 1080p. Everything else is just an attempt to cast that inability as if it were some kind of positive.

    He probably is right about the industry giving up on 60fps because it is hard to obtain, though. With every increase in system power, developers find other areas to sink that power, and system complexity can encourage waste as well. Framerate has long taken a back seat to bells and whistles. You can't show framerate in still shots. And even if you make your game hit a certain frame rate in some sections, it still might tank in others, and a varying frame rate can be worse than running constantly at a stable lower rate.

  18. #18
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus rockman29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,112
    We should run all games at 24 fps from now on. That way we can be properly cinematic.

    Or maybe 15 fps like cartoons. We can all pretend we're in the most realistic Dragonball experience ever!
    Quote Originally Posted by Junkenstein View Post
    Why is always 30 or 60 FPS when it comes to console releases? Like, if a game can't get a reliable 60FPS but can manage, say, 45 FPS 95% of the time, why not cap it at that?
    They are realizing this. I think it is an architecture thing now. Developers seem more comfortable giving the option now.

    Infamous SS runs at ~45 fps unlocked. There is an option to cap it at 30 fps though, because it will be more in sync with the refresh rates of the monitor/TV, so some people feel it responds to inputs better.

    TLOU HD has an option to run at 30 fps or 60 fps. They say the 30 fps has sharper shadows but I honestly did not notice any difference except on a few rare occasions.

    IMO at this level of technology.... 30 FPS should be the minimum acceptable.

    If it's appropriate for this game on a console, sure, go for 30 fps. But I don't think it's the most ideal framerate. But if it's their design choice, that's what it is.
    Last edited by rockman29; 09-10-2014 at 02:31 PM.

  19. #19
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus groovychainsaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    East Herts., UK
    Posts
    1,156
    I like high fps mostly for control reasons. I know some games (reference?) have their engines running faster than their (30fps) graphics so the controls are as smooth as possible but the graphics are locked to 30fps). That's why racing games are often pushed towards 60fps. Personally I'd rather have a capped 30 than variable 50-ish for most things if forced though, consistency of controls is key, action games feel wrong/are harder with variable frame rates.

    NB. (games get capped at 30 or 60 as most LCD TVs (and most monitors) refresh at 60hz, so it's 1-to-1 or 2-to-1 with the screen refresh. 45fps tends to look more juddery than 30fps because each frame is duplicated at 30, whereas every other frame would be duplicated at 45. 45 would feel like it had smoother controls though, weirdly. Higher than 60 FPS can only really affect the controls, unless you have a >60Hz monitor). I fully expect an electrical engineer to correct me on some or all of this ;-)

  20. #20
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Zephro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Junkenstein View Post
    Why is always 30 or 60 FPS when it comes to console releases? Like, if a game can't get a reliable 60FPS but can manage, say, 45 FPS 95% of the time, why not cap it at that?
    It's partly historic. It used to be the case that consoles were essentially v-sync locked to the 50/60hz refresh rate of the TV. So doing 2 duplicate frames at 30hz was smoother and more sensible than unlocked.

    However as modern LCD TVs have actually replaced CRT just about by now (it took longer than you'd expect) that issue has largely gone away as a modern TV can respond like a computer monitor. But people are sort of locked into the idea that screen tear is terrible as is variable frame rates, so doing multiples of 60 (double or half say) just works better for smoothness. Especially with control responses.

    Also there is a lot of legacy code around with locked timing for screen draws.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •