The Order: 1886 is 30fps because 24fps doesn't "feel good", 60fps "changes aesthetic"
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
You disagree with him? You think that it is not possible to have amazing graphics unless it is 60 fps?
What is this. I don't even.
crazygambit
Member
But it is? They're choosing to have better graphics over higher frame rate.
I think 30fps is totally playable, and if you want to aim for 30 because you feel other aspects of your game are more important than hitting 60, that's cool.
The rationalizations are really dumb though. You're not going to convince me that you aimed for 30 because it's actually better than 60 during gameplay.
The rationalizations are really dumb though. You're not going to convince me that you aimed for 30 because it's actually better than 60 during gameplay.
zeopower6
Member
Paracelsus
Member
To this day, I have yet to find a game that feels better at 30fps. RE4 wasn't even conceived for 60fps and I was nearly moved by how great it feels at that speed.
NoMoreTrolls
Banned
I wish they'd just say "we can make the visuals a lot more kickass at 30fps than 60. Booyah bitches, peace."
I'm totally down with that. I think 30fps plays just fine, and I'm not convinced that the gameplay benefits of 60fps (which are real, and in some cases game changing) outweigh the benefits of CG-esque visuals for a game that's focused on presenting a gripping story. In other words... In this case, I agree with their decision to eke as much visual quality out of the PS4 that they can rather than prioritizing frame rate.
I'm totally down with that. I think 30fps plays just fine, and I'm not convinced that the gameplay benefits of 60fps (which are real, and in some cases game changing) outweigh the benefits of CG-esque visuals for a game that's focused on presenting a gripping story. In other words... In this case, I agree with their decision to eke as much visual quality out of the PS4 that they can rather than prioritizing frame rate.
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
well played, I laughed
velociraptor
Junior Member
I know there are a lot of unhappy folk in this thread but it makes me wonder how any of you survived the past decade.
This guy here knows the truth on eye candy fps and the great sacrifice. I saw some of them watchdog pictures.
Dev says 60fps is really responsive and then goes on to say they chose 30fps because of the aesthetic. Please save the mock confusion for something else.
That's less owed to artistic vision and more to platform constraints. Were they releasing this on PC, it would be silly to cap FPS at 30.
I don't disagree with him, I said "I don't even..." as in "I don't get what this dude is even trying to suggest/explain". 60FPS enhances gameplay, not graphics. 90% of players who want 60FPS want it because it makes the gameplay snappier and the world more believable/immersive, because you don't have the feeling you are communicating through some sort of...lag fog. 30FPS feel like they are somewhat distant when you are used to 60FPS, it's hard to describe.
Kssio_Aug
Member
Well, probably 99% of console gamers are completely fine with 30fps tbh. I am, and I prefer a better IQ at 30 then a downgraded visual at 60fps depending on the game, and The Order is definitely one of them (I wouldnt sacrifice that amazing visual for 60fps).
I'm perfectly fine with 30 fps here. Worst case is I don't have to play it. I'm just fed up with the cinematic bullshit-excuse. They have no fucking what they are talking about and hurting both media.
I can't believe so many people are bothered by 30fps...I can see the difference between 30 and 60 but its just not a big deal. The game will look awesome and im sure it'll play awesome. If they want the cinematic look it was a good choice since 60 gives that soap opera effect.
supernormal
Member
It has been in many framerates and many aspect ratios as well, but if you look at the industry as a whole you can conclude that 24fps is one of it's characteristic features throughout time, for whatever reasons. You're acting like I'm saying 24fps is superior, I'm not. I'm tying it to the description of cinematic which can be used to refer to other prominent characteristics of the medium, like grain, motion blur, super wide aspect ratio, etc. Are all films 24fps in cinemascope? No. But if you're trying to emulate "cinema" you'd mimic it's most characteristic features, and 24fps is one of those even if it's a flaw.
For example the developers of Kane and Lynch 2 set out to recreate the visual style of crappy videocams for some reason. So their game featured, chromatic aberration, compression artifacts, low light noise, crushed blacks, vertical lens flares, and screen tearing. Are these features better for the game? Not necessarily, but they fulfilled their goal of making it look like it was recorded on a crappy videocam.
So RAD wants a cinematic look, the result of that is a grainy image, with tons of motion blur delivered in cinemascope ascpect ratio at the closest they could get to 24fps without hurting the gameplay too much.
But I go back and forth all the time so what up with that?
Games don't suffer from the soap opera effect partially because the smoother motion is being applied to animation, which looks better the more frames you add, as it give the eye more data, presenting a smoother motion. Soap Opera effect has more to do with our eyes being trained to read 24 as more prestigious than 30 and 60 in live action due to years of 24 as the standard (which was created to save film stock, remember that!). (Disclaimer, I am a proponent for HFR cinema, but also understand the benefits of maintaining the 24 fps workflow and prefer the aesthetics of 24 to 30fps)
A strong supporting example of this is television animation vs theatrical animation (in the US; different regions use different frame rates due to television technology differences and budgetary constraints). Theatrical animation is drawn at 24, and television at 12; theatrical animation looks smoother and therefore more "alive". It's for this same reason that Anime has been called cheap over the years, as many shows were done at 8 frames per second (!), resulting in a choppier image if there is too much going on in the frame.
With that in mind, games are interactive animations. Once you throw in the response time effect, where an increased framerate should (in theory) give the player more chances to modify their input and make the controls more responsive, increasing the "immersion factor". This is the real reason for players to demand 60fps, as it directly affects gameplay. Any additional eye candy from the fluidity of motion is an added benefit. It's also the same reason that The Order would not work at 24fps.
You say that now but Rivals was lock at 30 FPS.... them devs stupid some days.
This is the perfect post for this thread. Really any frame rate thread.
Basically it comes down to.. "if they could they would".
I've been going back and forth for several years, so this is bullocks.
eso76
Member
Aesthetic.
It's certainly true. If you're going for filmic look, then 60fps will go against that.
And gameplay won't suffer from that, it doesn't look fast paced enough for 30 fps to get in the way of anything
EatinOlives
Member
That's not an artistic choice, that's a technical one.
The Order's setting, time period, color palette, character animations, the way the models are constructed visually, those are all artistic choices. The refresh rate isn't.
EDIT: Let me put it another way. Had RAD achieved these identical graphical specifications on the PS4, I guarantee you they wouldn't have artificially capped the game at 30 FPS "as an artistic choice". Similarly, if the game were out on the PC, they certainly wouldn't cap it there either.
How many console players play COD? Try to feed them a 30FPS COD and then we'll talk again. People are fine with what they are used to, most of them don't even know what framerate means. How can these people be the measure of quality for an industry? It's the few people who drive the industry who need to make the right decisions. Currently we are in a situation where decision makers are not bold, but slaves to marketing, publishers and sales. They only make decision which lead to, so they believe at least, better sales.
Don't get me wrong, that is legit. But let's not behave like that is a good thing for the medium per se. The only saving grace here will be VR if it takes off, otherwise this industry will just flat out run against the next wall, because it's driven by people who don't know about games, but sales.
Shin
Banned
The game runs smoother, removing that slowmo cinematic effect.
It's like watching those series/movies on HDTV with w/e techniques enabled, it makes everything run faster and unnatural.
Forgot the wording for it, but you guys might know what I mean.
I suppose that's what they are trying to say.
I guess Full HD or even 2K-4k also go against filmic look, even though it is a filmic look.
I wouldn't go that far, but that IS kind of a key point; it's really down to what you are used to. 60 fps may feel odd because you mainly played games at 30 fps, but if you stick with it then 30 fps will be the one to feel odd and clunky when you go back, and likewise these guys are so all over films that they probably are building the whole thing around "so what will make this look like a movie?" and when they get hit by 60 fps it's probably like going to see the Hobbit at 48 fps for them, even if it's intended to be that way and is smoother it just doesn't look right to them.
Well, there's always exceptions, but on PC it better be for engine issues or something like South Park where you don't need it and does get in the way of looking like the actual show. Hell, the latter's a very special case you'll rarely ever see as most other games will look off anyway, while the former is ideally avoided altogether in the first place.
Those techniques look the way they do because they're interpolation, filling in the gaps between frames with an algorithm that tries to "guess" how things should look. Content that's naively shot at a higher framerate does not typically look like that.
Booty Patrol
Banned
Oh dear...
Humpernator
Banned
When I started playing Dark Souls 2 on PC from PS3, I was blown away. The 60fps is by far more important than the resolution if you ask me. However, it doesn't make or break a game for me. I just want
GOOD GAMES!
I felt the same way about Mass Effect. I played the trilogy at 60, then at 120FPS when I got my new monitor. Then my buddy showed it to me on his 360, and I wanted to barf. Everything looked and felt so wrong. If that's "cinematic" then I'll take "soap opera" any day.
You get used to 60+ FPS just like you get used to 30.
copelandmaster
Member
Here's a 30fps and 60fps example with motion blur. It's up to the viewers discretion as to what they prefer visually, but there is no denying that the 60fps version would play much better.
Regardless, motion blur should not be used as a band aid to cover up a
console
Sure it is. Are you denying that frame rates doesn't impact the aesthetics of media? The lower frame rate of film has become so much a part of our culture that it's become part of our visual vocabulary. Just as much as when you see something in black & white.
Schweinehund
Member
par for the course, didn't expect too many AAA games to run above 30 fps when they reach above 900p. Still dislike how the devs value gameplay over story.
A like minded person about motion blur.... I am NOT ALONE!!!!
Please stop with this summation. Graphics also improve gameplay. If something looks more realistic, or a weapons effects are more satisfying, animations are better implemented, level design is more elaborate, the physics are more comprehensive, lighting allows for creepier segments and so on, these things also improve gameplay.
The better graphics and effects wil certainly make the gameplay and combat more atmospheric and immersive for me personally, more so than if they had gone 60fps and had to cut much of that away, or gone for stripped down graphics and tech to pave the way for smoother gameplay.
supernormal
Member
This is what I'm trying to say. Even if it's a "worse" solution 24fps is part of what it means to be cinematic. I'm glad you bring up the black & white example because it's a really good analogy for this issue.
GoofsterStud
Member
No, I'm saying it would be in there best interest to just shut up. Rather then remind us what we don't like and try to justify it.
Hoho for breakfast
Member
I thought this was bullshit? I mean I know what he means when it comes to actual TV shows/movies, but I thought this wasn't true for video games? Is that incorrect? To me when watching an actual movie it does look weird at 60fps sometimes, like it's a "cheap" home video cam or a soap opera or a documentary and it does look odd, but I don't think I've ever seen this effect in a 60 fps video game.
I'm not saying anything from a superior view if anything it dealt with frequency and choice of those in film on what to use in regards to a very specific game.
I've already said their hyporcrisy on 24fps if they were going for total accuracy make the game 24fps, but for obvious response/feel reasons they chose 30fps. This is where the door is opened in the argument cause some including myself are really wondering why they are making essentially a dumb choice to me. You like the devs can't have your cake and eat it too especially with the argument they theymselves are making. I've already mentioned FOV as a reason not only why 60fps with such a desire would be problematic but making it stay there.
The otherside of my complaint is how well does it do those things. Yet for all purposes until 2015 when it's released most of people are talking about cannot be verified or debunked.
LunaticHigh
Member
I believe the primary point he's trying to make is that the game would have to look noticeably worse at 60fps than 30fps. It just doesn't match their vision of what they wish to give the games audience.
Lets use one simple example. Going to 60 fps might mean that they couldn't render the shadows or fog as detailed, which might lead to them providing a far less atmospheric game play experience. Sure, it would play better, but it doesn't need to play any better than 30fps as long as it's single player.
If it's rock solid 30,and they provide amazing visuals, that's fine. It's not a twitch shooter, and it looks leaps and bounds above anything else we've seen so far.
Lets use one simple example. Going to 60 fps might mean that they couldn't render the shadows or fog as detailed, which might lead to them providing a far less atmospheric game play experience. Sure, it would play better, but it doesn't need to play any better than 30fps as long as it's single player.
If it's rock solid 30,and they provide amazing visuals, that's fine. It's not a twitch shooter, and it looks leaps and bounds above anything else we've seen so far.
Uno Venova
Banned
I know this isn't really a problem to most gamers so the neogaf outrage doesn't mean much, and I'm glad that both console makers have a mass market price that still gives resolution improvements over last gen, even if the better looking games are still 30FPS, didn't have a problem with that last gen, and I don't know.