Louis Cyphre
Banned
How many PC games are locked at 30?
The Order: 1886 is 30fps because 24fps doesn't "feel good", 60fps "changes aesthetic"
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
How many PC games are locked at 30?
Principate
Saint Titanfall
It's developer making a PS4 exclusive. They ain't gonna say shit. Not while the PS4 is still new.
I don't know about you, but I thought Ryse was pretty unanimously praised for it's graphics and tech. I think the complaint was that it routinely dropped below 30fps, even though it ran 900p, was a very linear game, and didn't exactly have the largest areas or levels.
I think if The order 1886 doesn't hold a rock solid 30fps, it's going to also get some serious lambasting for it.
Louis Cyphre
Banned
They are saying shit, it's why this topic exists.
How many PC games look better than The Order 1886 even though I bought a graphics card that is much stronger than the PS4 in 2012?
Only clean faces. The mods I'm looking for unfortunately do not exist. But you can always humor me and list a few PC games that look better than the Order.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
I meant in the context PS4 can't handle this game at 60fps. There's difference that and "it's a design decision 60 fps makes things look weird"
Clearly you haven't played the right mods.
jacksepticeye
Member
RAD really are saying a lot of weird stuff lately
60 fps is better for gameplay, though.
30 fps gives them more per frame processing time which can improve their visuals. This is literally a case of putting visuals ahead of gameplay.
Not sure if that was your point.
Louis Cyphre
Banned
The irony of your statement is that if this game were on the PC it would likely be playable at 60fps (and beyond) and we would be comparing the different platforms. By having this exclusive to the PS4 the developers can say whatever they want as to why they chose 30fps. The Witcher 3 looks amazing and won't be as linear as this game. So it all about artistic choices and we will see games on the PC that will be comparable to this and also surpass it but at the same token they will not have to explain to us why they chose to lock it at 30fps because it's unlikely they will be.
This doesn't make any sense. There isn't some arbitrary cut-off point where visuals become "great", developers and fans are satisfied and they can lock it at 60fps and have the best of both worlds. There are always limits, no matter how good your hardware is, and developers need to decide whether they want to pursue image quality or frame rate, and will have to sacrifice one for the other.
Most developers choose image quality over frame rate, because the difference is more noticeable to their fans. They don't finish the game, try flip on the 60fps switch, and then the PS4 says "sry I can't handle. flip back to 30 pls!" They have targets, and they develop around those targets.
Hardware is getting better but it still doesn't allow both great visuals and 60fps at the same time. It's either great visuals@30fps or ok visuals@60fps, just like last generation.
I'd say '60fps changes the aesthetic' is the most polite way of saying you don't want to significantly downgrade your game because the hardware doesn't allow both.
cobragt4001
Banned
I agree there's no game right now that beats the order but I question how open the game is. Every time we see the order there's a cutscene playing. The devs keep going on about this stupid filmic look for a game, I just question the scale of this game. Will the order have the scale of Gears of War or will it be another Beyond Two Souls? Graphically speaking, the order spanks everything out and a lot of games coming except Star Citizen, but how big are the order's environments? Like I mentioned every time the order is shown there's a cutscene playing abd if that's what the game is about then I'm not impressed.
Is the order more of a movie than it is a videogame?
KratosEnergyDrink
Member
This must be some kind of parody, right?
I mean this sounds really, really dumb. A lame excuse. Hopefully this guy is not involved in creating the story of this game.
Another developer that puts visuals above gameplay.
I mean this sounds really, really dumb. A lame excuse. Hopefully this guy is not involved in creating the story of this game.
Another developer that puts visuals above gameplay.
figadapaura
Member
Fine with me as long as it runs smoothly.
I don't understand it.
The game is created and targeted at 30 fps on a PS4.
A game created and targeted at 30 fps on a different platform would end up with different visuals.
You seem to have disputed this and the reason any game is 30 FPS is because they are on the PS4 and it's too weak and if only it had a few more teraflops everything would always be 60 FPS or something. As I said, I'm confused by the whole thing.
Louis Cyphre
Banned
Agreed, no argument here.
M°°nblade;113740711 said:
Correct!
Let me explain it to you in the simplest way possible then. The Last of Us will be coming to the PS4 and they are targeting it at 60fps.
The solution is obvious. Hook some tubes up to you and siphon all the jiggaflops. It'll be like Sony's answer to the cloud.
That sentences offers no insight into your argument unless your argument is that a platform with more power ran run games better than a platform with less power.
Which is not the argument you made before.
But if that is your argument then yes, you are right. Very insightful.
All the 30fps drama Queens.
60 fps is better, but its not like 30fps is unplayable.
If so this must be your first gen gaming.
Imagine people stressing in de atari days or snes days about fps.
That saying i notice the difference as i am a console and PC gamer.
But i can still play 30fps games and i rather have 30fps and great visuals.
With locked hardware you have to give up something simpel as that.
60 fps is better, but its not like 30fps is unplayable.
If so this must be your first gen gaming.
Imagine people stressing in de atari days or snes days about fps.
That saying i notice the difference as i am a console and PC gamer.
But i can still play 30fps games and i rather have 30fps and great visuals.
With locked hardware you have to give up something simpel as that.
The quote doesn't read like a win-win.
Louis Cyphre
Banned
My argument is the same throughout, the hardware's limitations is why the game is being locked at 30fps and there is no reason for developers to have to explain why they chose 30 and not 60 unless it's to reaffirm that's why.
Erm….What is that supposed to prove?
That the PS4 can run PS3 games better than the PS3 can? You really think Uncharted 4 or Last of Us 2 are going to be 60fps? I somehow doubt it.
That's not really true, never has been and most probably never will be. Even with the PS5, devs will still likely choose 30fps over 60fps for better visuals, unless of course screen technology changes by then and new standards are accepted.
The unstated assumption here is that they wouldn't aim at 30 FPS with better visuals if they had a more powerful target platform.
test_account
XP-39C²
Just wondering, why is that worrying at this point in time? Its been like that for many, many years now. Graphic fidelity do add to the feel of the game, so whats "playing at it's best" is actually a bit subjective.
Louis Cyphre
Banned
We're going in circles now. If those games are indeed 30fps then they have chosen visuals over gameplay. Nothing wrong with that but do we really need developers having to come up with excuses and trying to explain their position or console owners trying to dismiss why 60fps is preferred by some?
The Last of Us, Halo, Metal Gear. All 60 fps. Non-filmic confirmed
Stop using words you don't understand.
He doesn't say that.
He actually admits that 60fp is responsive and cool. And he does talk about a compromise.
The funny part is that he doesn't speak of the framerate compromise (60fps -> 30 fps) but compromising the graphics because of going from 24fps to 30fps in order to make the game playable.
If that's the way you feel then I assume you only game on a CRT monitor?
Now THAT is just snobbery! ;-)
Mithos
Member
Madworld, Schindler's List, Sin City all products with BS excuses for why they do not use colors then I guess because "artistic choice" is a BS excuse.
Yes, HD-CRT >> LCD/Plasma.
Louis Cyphre
Banned
I'm sure when The Order comes out remastered on the PS5 and is available at 60fps we are all going to turn our PS4's back on, sit in that Directors chair and say out loud "this is far more artistic."
All right, we hit the bottom. Did you just lump color choices and decisions based on hardware limitations together?
But they don't say 30 fps is a more artistic framerate than 60 fps.
They say it allows them to have better aesthetics, which is correct.
Mithos
Member
Who would "chose" to make black and white (30fps) over color (60fps), It has to be a bullshit excuse based on hardware limitations.
My point is despite me hating black and white movies and games (colors are superior), I doubt that adding colors would enhance the movies or game (MadWorld, Schindler's List, Sin City), in fact I'd say adding colors would most likely ruin the aesthetic vision the people creating them had when choosing to not have colors, and this despite the fact that there was/wasn't hardware limitations for not doing colors.
So just because 60fps makes a game more fluent, doesn't mean that it can't or won't totally change the aesthetic vision of a game compared to what it would have been if running in 30fps, hardware limitation or not.
Damn that is one terrible personal problem I hope I never get. That level of annoyance must make a person not want to play a lot of really awesome games.
BigJoeGrizzly
Neo Member
I'm growing quite tired of devs making "story" and "film-like experiences" the primary focus of games nowadays. I don't play games to watch films, I WATCH FILMS TO WATCH FILMS. In most cases (really, in ALL) the best story I've seen in a game would usually equate to one of the WORST films of the same time period. If devs spent less time focusing on making the perfect, most captivating story, and more time making the gameplay the most fun and addicting of its genre, we'd have more high quality games. There's a reason those 1st party Nintendo games, with their more basic stories and plots (compared to other console offerings), score consistently higher among the gaming community.
It's not 30 FPS because a lower framerate fits their artistic vision, it's 30 FPS because technical limitations force them to choose between pwetty gwafix and 60 FPS.
If you think otherwise, please tell me what artistic advantages the 30 FPS framerate (not the other things compromised by higher framerate like graphics) brings to the Order. it's not looking more "filmic"; as said before, there is much more to the movie look than 24 frames per second.
Yup. Sounds like bullshit to me.
Oh come on. Brush off framerate problems and technical issues just because you like a game.
All I'm saying is I'd rather the performance of a game isn't hindered by preferring graphics over gameplay. I'm not saying graphics aren't important or that they shouldn't be a focus, but if the game could run or perform better at the concession of lesser graphical fidelity, I'd be fine with it.
Ignorance is bliss I guess.
ResidentDante
Member
Nope. Probably end up being a thread here on Gaf: "New Order screens, downgrade confirmed". Followed by all the loyal fanboys saying "I actually prefer my game downgraded, feels more game-atic"
I don't know why everyone here has to assume it means they can't do 60fps because they chose not to. It's not just like "let's choose good quality instead of best".
It seems like people really don't understand the difference in framerate. Do you recognize the difference between 24frame film and 30frame video? It's similar in the jump from 30 to 60. It makes things look smoother, but less cinematic. It does have a different aesthetic.
Anyone who has a 120hz tv, turn on the motion interpolation feature like True Motion Plus or Auto Motion and notice the soap-opera effect. Movies look like cheap TV shows with it on. This is a somewhat similar difference, and the developers think it looks more cinematic at 30.
I'm not saying they could achieve 60fps, maybe they couldn't, but either way, I don't think it negates their reasoning.
It seems like people really don't understand the difference in framerate. Do you recognize the difference between 24frame film and 30frame video? It's similar in the jump from 30 to 60. It makes things look smoother, but less cinematic. It does have a different aesthetic.
Anyone who has a 120hz tv, turn on the motion interpolation feature like True Motion Plus or Auto Motion and notice the soap-opera effect. Movies look like cheap TV shows with it on. This is a somewhat similar difference, and the developers think it looks more cinematic at 30.
I'm not saying they could achieve 60fps, maybe they couldn't, but either way, I don't think it negates their reasoning.
This comment literally makes zero sense because PC gamers are given options to tune down graphical effects to bring the FPS to whatever their PC is capable of... so uh what exactly did you mean?
This post kind of nailed it, I don't why there's multiple pages in this thread...
They said it changes aesthetics... Looking at a dictionary which apparently some people here haven't in a while, aesthetics is defined as "pleasing in appearance", ie graphics.
Do you actually believe what you are saying?
First: Stop throwing games and films together. Their limitations have different causes.
Madworld: Wii is capable to display colour. Madworld proves that quite wonderful with amounts of red blood. What Wii wasn't capable of was displaying that mayhem with a stable 60 framerate. It was way below. The colour have been a artistic choice, the framerate not.
Schindlers List: In the time it was released, every filmprojector was perfectly capable of displaying colours. Schindler's List perfectly shows that with the colour scenes. The choice to choose black and white for the main part, was because cameras back in the day haven't been capable to "capture" colours. Not a artistic choice.
Sin City: Sin City is based on a comic. Due to that, they chosed limited colours, mainly black/white, red and yellow.
All these movies, have common that they are hold back by movie projectors. If movie-theater companies would invest in better technology, every movie would be in 4k and filmed on 70 mm. Atleast, most movies are filmed at atleast 2k. The Order, willing to provide a cinematic experience, isn't capable of that. That is not a choice. 30 fps wasn't a choice. It was a limitation.
Film experiences, atleast the better ones, are driven by visions. The vision to provide the best picture. Trumbull is one, Cameron another. The vision to aim higher. Sub- HD, 30 fps is not aiming higher. Its not filmic. Its videogame-standard. And they are sugarcoating it. And it seems like you are buying it.
TheChewyWaffles
Member
What a load of shit. No game ever felt worse for having a higher framerate.