Support NeoGAF

[Dictator93]

I'm saying from what I've seen and others have seen it has a different feel to it, that is an absolute fact. Some people might not experience that, and some people might not prefer it, but it factually exists. I know 30FPS isn't filmic, but it's closer than 60. A lot of independent filmmakers used 30 since 23.976 wasn't available at a consumer level until fairly recently, and it was as close as they could get.

Multiple times people have explained why 60 fps (especially 60fps with a game style motionblur) is closer to 24 fps of film due to the amount of temporal information.

30 fps is just choppy and not filmic, even with motionblur wich many game's use.

The best approximation of 24 fps film in a video game would be an insanely high framerate (read hundreds of samples) that are used to blur things into a similar fashion as in film. With the current way games are rasterized... this is ridiculous.

If you were to ask an optician, someone who knows things about cameras in depth, or freaking john carmack, they would explain how 30fps in video games is not filmic. Not filmic at all.

It is a design choice so that X game has Y graphical features on system Z.

 

[msdstc]

Multiple times people have explained why 60 fps (especially 60fps with a game style motionblur) is closer to 24 fps of film due to the amount of temporal information.

30 fps is just choppy and not filmic, even with motionblur wich many game's use.

The best approximation of 24 fps film in a video game would be an insanely high framerate (read hundreds of samples) that are used to blur things into a similar fashion as in film. With the current way games are rasterized... this is ridiculous.

If you were to ask an optician, someone who knows things about cameras in depth, or freaking john carmack, they would explain how 30fps in video games is not filmic. Not filmic at all.

It is a design choice so that X game has Y graphical features on system Z.

That may be so as far as making it the most filmic, but 30 FPS definitely has a different feel to it, this is a fact. Some may prefer that feel over 60 for certain situations, but obviously I don't know that for sure.

 

[Thrakier]

We don't know that for sure, but I can get behind that. Besides some people want one thing from a game, others want something different. I like a little bit of both. I'll take forza at 60FPS, but I'll also take Driveclub with it's unbelievable visuals at 30FPS for 2 different experiences. This isn't my argument really that brings it back to what the reason the majority of developers go 30, is because they can achieve amazing visuals at lower framerates.

Well, yeah. Correct. That is what everyone is saying. If a dev chooses 30FPS over 60FPS, he is putting an emphasis von VIDEO over GAME. And a dev can do that quite easily, because most people are used to that anyway - they kinda get away with it. And they probably even have to, because marketing tells them great visuals are need to sell a game, because they lack the creativity to sell a game any other way, but that's a different story.

But I don't get why you are getting mad at me for stating that, in the case of TLOU, ND made a wrong decision when they chose a 17 to 26 framerate aka visual fidelty the system wasn't capable of, over playablitiy to make their nice core combat concept really shine. I mean, objectively, as a gamer, there is really no good reason to support such a framerate - where does that lead? If TLOU is GOTY, the next dev will go 15 to 24FPS for even better graphics and so on - ultimately, that would lead us to just watching YouTube Playthroughs of games, because the fun to be found in the cinematic presentation (like watching a movie) is way bigger than the fun to be found in actually interacting with the game. That would be completly true for TLOU at least for me. I would've been completly fine with just watching a walkthrough. Playing the game by myself just added maybe 20% to the experience. In a mario game it would be more like 90%.

 

[Skinpop]

That may be so as far as making it the most filmic, but 30 FPS definitely has a different feel to it, this is a fact. Some may prefer that feel over 60 for certain situations, but obviously I don't know that for sure.

the feel of latency and choppiness. btw who are the people who prefer 30fps over 60fps for video games all things else being equal?

 

[msdstc]

Well, yeah. Correct. That is what everyone is saying. If a dev chooses 30FPS over 60FPS, he is putting an emphasis von VIDEO over GAME. And a dev can do that quite easily, because most people are used to that anyway - they kinda get away with it. And they probably even have to, because marketing tells them great visuals are need to sell a game, because they lack the creativity to sell a game any other way, but that's a different story.

But I don't get why you are getting mad at me for stating that, in the case of TLOU, ND made a wrong decision when they chose a 17 to 26 framerate aka visual fidelty the system wasn't capable of, over playablitiy to make their nice core combat concept really shine. I mean, objectively, as a gamer, there is really no good reason to support such a framerate - where does that lead? If TLOU is GOTY, the next dev will go 15 to 24FPS for even better graphics and so on - ultimately, that would lead us to just watching YouTube Playthroughs of games, because the fun to be found in the cinematic presentation (like watching a movie) is way bigger than the fun to be found in actually interacting with the game. That would be completly true for TLOU at least for me. I would've been completly fine with just watching a walkthrough. Playing the game by myself just added maybe 20% to the experience. In a mario game it would be more like 90%.

Ok and that's your opinion. Interactive story games have been around since the beginning of games. Are turnbased RPGS not basically that? What about text based games or dragons lair? Watching a walkthrough isn't even remotely the same, that's ridiculous to say.

It's also particularly ridiculous for TLOU because most people enjoyed the game, not just the story. You are in the minority there, I loved the game, I loved the multiplayer. There were a ton of different approaches you could take, and it played great. Sorry if you didn't like it.

edit-

the feel of latency and choppiness. btw who are the people who prefer 30fps over 60fps for video games all things else being equal?

I've said it a thousand times, but it always comes back to this. I know the mainstream has no idea what any of it means when it comes to their purchasing decisions. I do know however that it could potentially be an artistic choice for a multitude of reasons, one of them being the way it looks vs. the buttery smooth 60fps

 

[Skinpop]

I've said it a thousand times, but it always comes back to this. I know the mainstream has no idea what any of it means when it comes to their purchasing decisions. I do know however that it could potentially be an artistic choice for a multitude of reasons, one of them being the way it looks vs. the buttery smooth 60fps

i ask because I've never heard anyone actually preferring 30 over 60fps. 30fps with better graphics over 60fps, sure sadly they exist in abundance but just flat out I'd rather have 30fps over 60fps is not something I've seen.

 

[Goddard]

That may be so as far as making it the most filmic, but 30 FPS definitely has a different feel to it, this is a fact. Some may prefer that feel over 60 for certain situations, but obviously I don't know that for sure.

First of all, OP, if you are going to play Sony's advocate (see what I did there,) you might want to change your profile picture to something that isn't an interactive story game with a huge emphasis on graphics and a 30fps cap on the frame rate.

Also, as someone above has mentioned, the "different" feel that 30fps has is that of lagginess and choppiness. You may be used to that because you are apparently an Uncharted fan, but it is not better in literally any way shape or form than 60fps gameplay.

 

[IncandescentPrecept]

60 fps only looks strange in movies because it is uncommon. That's literally it.

It is common... in soap operas.

 

[Goddard]

I've said it a thousand times, but it always comes back to this. I know the mainstream has no idea what any of it means when it comes to their purchasing decisions. I do know however that it could potentially be an artistic choice for a multitude of reasons, one of them being the way it looks vs. the buttery smooth 60fps

You are being mislead by either the developer, yourself, or movies, all of which are bullshit comparisons.

I will say this as clearly as I can: 30FPS IS NOT, AND WILL NEVER BE AN ARTISTIC CHOICE, IT IS A TRADEOFF! It is a sacrifice of framerate to allow more room for computations per frame. If you honestly think there is something about 30fps that is inherently superior over 60 you are brainwashed.

It is common... in soap operas.

No it isn't. Soap Opera's are shot at 30fps, HFR movies are shot at 48fps. If there is anything mainstream that is actually shot at 60fps neither of us have probably seen it.

 

[IncandescentPrecept]

In any case, 30fps or 60fps are equally good to me.

 

[msdstc]

i ask because I've never heard anyone actually preferring 30 over 60fps. 30fps with better graphics over 60fps, sure sadly they exist in abundance but just flat out I'd rather have 30fps over 60fps is not something I've seen.

No I can't prove that exists, but I'm saying it wouldn't BLOW MY MIND if somebody prefered the way certain things looked at 30FPS. I've thought this since before I even knew the reason why it looked strange switching between games with different framerates.

First of all, OP, if you are going to play Sony's advocate (see what I did there,) you might want to change your profile picture to something that isn't an interactive story game with a huge emphasis on graphics and a 30fps cap on the frame rate.

Also, as someone above has mentioned, the "different" feel that 30fps has is that of lagginess and choppiness. You may be used to that because you are apparently an Uncharted fan, but it is not better in literally any way shape or form than 60fps gameplay.

Lol that's hilarious! I don't really care, I openly admit I'm a sony fan, but I consider myself unbiased. I would make the same exact case for something like say Alan Wake. The order thread only sparked this because I've read this exact same debate a thousand times, and I think it's absurd the way people just write it off, when there is in fact a fair amount of people out there who agree it has a different feel. Sorry if you don't agree with this subjective opinion.

 

[Horp]

It is common... in soap operas.

Fun fact:
There are other things than framerate making soap operas looking different from hollywood blockbuster movies.

But the reason many people doesn't prefer The Hobbit in 48 fps over normal 24 fps movies is because they are not used to it.

 

[msdstc]

Fun fact:
There are other things than framerate making soap operas looking different from hollywood blockbuster movies.

But the reason many people doesn't prefer The Hobbit in 48 fps over normal 24 fps movies is because they are not used to it.

I just don't agree with this at this point. I can definitely seeing that be a reason, but there is absolutely no evidence to back this up.

 

[R0ckman]

It looks cheesy in movies honestly. It really only feels right in more animated games.

 

[IncandescentPrecept]

No it isn't. Soap Opera's are shot at 30fps, HFR movies are shot at 48fps. If there is anything mainstream that is actually shot at 60fps neither of us have probably seen it.

I can only judge based on what I experienced - 30fps or 48fps, The Hobbit felt the same as a soap opera to me. I still likef it though.

 

[plagiarize]

Film's look is as much about the camera gate as it is the framerate. I honestly wonder what work people have done in gaming if any to mimic it.

When people do motion blur do they base it on the camera gate being open half the time? 30 fps is only going to look like film if you've got motion blur based on the same principal, and I wonder if people do indeed do that.

Do they do a thirtieth of a seconds worth of blur, or a sixtieth (to best mimic how film is generally shot).

 

[Goddard]

Lol that's hilarious! I don't really care, I openly admit I'm a sony fan, but I consider myself unbiased. I would make the same exact case for something like say Alan Wake. The order thread only sparked this because I've read this exact same debate a thousand times, and I think it's absurd the way people just write it off, when there is in fact a fair amount of people out there who agree it has a different feel. Sorry if you don't agree with this subjective opinion.

It's a subjective opinion heavily influenced by what you think is objective fact, but which is in reality a very poor understanding of the relation of framerate in video games to the framerate in movies. People write off the argument as absurd because it is absurd. In a theoretical example where you took a new game that you haven't played before, played one version of it at max visual settings at 60fps, than another at exactly the same visual settings and locked it to 30fps, there would be literally no conceivable advantage whatsoever to the 30fps version. The reason you probably think there would be is probably because you play a lot of games at 30fps, and each and every single one of them is at 30fps simply because the console it is played on is not powerful enough to run the game at the same standard of visuals at a solid 60fps.

Fun fact:
There are other things than framerate making soap operas looking different from hollywood blockbuster movies.

But the reason many people doesn't prefer The Hobbit in 48 fps over normal 24 fps movies is because they are not used to it.

There is actually a lot more to it than simply not being used to it. There is a lot of psychology that plays into the uncanny valley that exists when filming and playing back of a video at a higher framerate than you are used to seeing people with the naked eye.

 

[Naminator]

You are being mislead by either the developer, yourself, or movies, all of which are bullshit comparisons.

I will say this as clearly as I can: 30FPS IS NOT, AND WILL NEVER BE AN ARTISTIC CHOICE, IT IS A TRADEOFF! It is a sacrifice of framerate to allow more room for computations per frame. If you honestly think there is something about 30fps that is inherently superior over 60 you are brainwashed.

^THIS!

I still can't believe that there are people in 2014 argue about how 30FPS is a choice or somehow, in some way better than 60FPS.

I'm willing to bet that not a single one of those people are PC gamers, and since they don't actually know, and have not experienced playing games at 30 and 60FPS, they easily believe the idiotic propaganda about how it was all a choice, because of art and cinematic experience and other such bullshit.

These things constantly remind me how I still up to this day can bump in to people on the internet who claim shit like TLoU or Killzone 2 looks better than Crysis 3 maxed out on a PC.

I don't think anyone can ever change the minds of these individuals, they have a console purchase to protect, so they will believe anything.

 

[msdstc]

It's a subjective opinion heavily influenced by what you think is objective fact, but which is in reality a very poor understanding of the relation of framerate in video games to the framerate in movies. People write off the argument as absurd because it is absurd. In a theoretical example where you took a new game that you haven't played before, played one version of it at max visual settings at 60fps, than another at exactly the same visual settings and locked it to 30fps, there would be literally no conceivable advantage whatsoever to the 30fps version. The reason you probably think there would be is probably because you play a lot of games at 30fps, and each and every single one of them is at 30fps simply because the console it is played on is not powerful enough to run the game at the same standard of visuals at a solid 60fps.

There is actually a lot more to it than simply not being used to it. There is a lot of psychology that plays into the uncanny valley that exists when filming and playing back of a video at a higher framerate than you are used to seeing people with the naked eye.

I've seen it personally and can attest that is simply not universally true.

 

[Goddard]

I can only judge based on what I experienced - 30fps or 48fps, The Hobbit felt the same as a soap opera to me. I still likef it though.

The Hobbit at 48 really did suffer from looking similar to a soap, but it is incredibly misleading to say that either one of them is 60, never mind both. The soap opera effect of things at high frame rate doesn't exist in video games.

 

[Horp]

I just don't agree with this at this point. I can definitely seeing that be a reason, but there is absolutely no evidence to back this up.

I agree, no evidence.
24 fps movies do look nice, and very fluid too.
30 fps games however, does not. I can't for my world understand how anyone could prefer 30 fps. In fact, I don't think anyone does. I think people prefer to live in denial, or just haven't looked at 60 fps enough. A lot of platform-of-choice defence force mentality going on too, of course. You know, like there are people that claim that game X looks better in 720 fps on their Xbone than it does on their friends PS4 in 1080p?

 

[Goddard]

I've seen it personally and can attest that is simply not universally true.

That is beside the point. A lot of people weren't weirded out by the Hobbit, but that is a side discussion, respond to the actual post.

 

[msdstc]

^THIS!

I still can't believe that there are people in 2014 argue about how 30FPS is a choice or somehow, in some way better than 60FPS.

I'm willing to bet that not a single one of those people are PC gamers, and since they don't actually know, and have not experienced playing games at 30 and 60FPS, they easily believe the idiotic propaganda about how it was all a choice, because of art and cinematic experience and other such bullshit.

These things constantly remind me how I still up to this day can bump in to people on the internet who claim shit like TLoU or Killzone 2 looks better than Crysis 3 maxed out on a PC.

I don't think anyone can ever change the minds of these individuals, they have a console purchase to protect, so they will believe anything.

Hopefully you wouldn't bet too much. I consider myself a PC gamer (also a console gamer), I definitely prefer 60FPS, but I can see why some would choose 30, if you can't understand that it's closeminded. Crysis 3 blows those 2 games out of the water.

 

[Goddard]

I agree, no evidence.
24 fps movies do look nice, and very fluid too.
30 fps games however, does not. I can't for my world understand how anyone could prefer 30 fps. In fact, I don't think anyone does. I think people prefer to live in denial, or just haven't looked at 60 fps enough. A lot of platform-of-choice defence force mentality going on too, of course. You know, like there are people that claim that game X looks better in 720 fps on their Xbone than it does on their friends PS4 in 1080p?

Seems legit.

 

[msdstc]

I agree, no evidence.
24 fps movies do look nice, and very fluid too.
30 fps games however, does not. I can't for my world understand how anyone could prefer 30 fps. In fact, I don't think anyone does. I think people prefer to live in denial, or just haven't looked at 60 fps enough. A lot of platform-of-choice defence force mentality going on too, of course. You know, like there are people that claim that game X looks better in 720 fps on their Xbone than it does on their friends PS4 in 1080p?

This is the most ridiculous and disgustingly close minded post. It's not offensive, because it's not something to get offended about, but it's so stupid to say that you don't believe someone could enjoy something, and you refuse to believe it. Did you know some people enjoy pain? Some people live for that shit.

edit- Another thing is a lot of "hivemind" mentality being tossed around in here, which is actually offensive. "he likes sony franchises and has an uncharted avatar, he thinks 30 FPS is better because sony, and he hates pc gaming! LOL he thinks killzone 2 looks better than crysis 3 on max settings" I'm the exact opposite, cut the hivemind bullshit out maybe read my post history ass.

That is beside the point. A lot of people weren't weirded out by the Hobbit, but that is a side discussion, respond to the actual post.

I wasn't refering to the hobbit, I've seen games at 60FPS and 30FPS side by side. It has a different feel. It doesn't feel like you're watching a movie anymore during cutscenes, at least in my honest opinion. I'm sorry if you think that is objectively wrong, that is how I and others feel though. It does in fact exist, and there is in fact POTENTIAL for it to be an artistic choice. Has it ever been? Maybe, maybe not, but I'm saying it's not as absurd or laughable as some treat it.

 

[Goddard]

Hopefully you wouldn't bet too much. I consider myself a PC gamer (also a console gamer), I definitely prefer 60FPS, but I can see why some would choose 30, if you can't understand that it's closeminded. Crysis 3 blows those 2 games out of the water.

The thing is the way you worded the argument implied that you were arguing that in a theoretical scenario were graphical fidelity was simply out of the question, there would be at least one perk to 30 fps as opposed to 60, which is false. Console is not this scenario, on console, devs choose 30 fps sometimes because they prioritize graphics over pretty much everything else (which is bat shit crazy in my opinion,) on console, there is an objective benefit to capping a game at 30fps, and that is the potential for higher visual fidelity, and although I personally think that it is a dumb tradeoff that is irresponsible, that benefit is still there, however it is not a benefit the low framerate, is a benefit of not having to compute as much. There is nothing, not one thing, inherently beneficial about 30fps in a perfect comparison.

 

[msdstc]

The thing is the way you worded the argument implied that you were arguing that in a theoretical scenario were graphical fidelity was simply out of the question, there would be at least one perk to 30 fps as opposed to 60, which is false. Console is not this scenario, on console, devs choose 30 fps sometimes because they prioritize graphics over pretty much everything else (which is bat shit crazy in my opinion,) on console, there is an objective benefit to capping a game at 30fps, and that is the potential for higher visual fidelity, and although I personally think that it is a dumb tradeoff that is irresponsible, that benefit is still there, however it is not a benefit the low framerate, is a benefit of not having to compute as much. There is nothing, not one thing, inherently beneficial about 30fps in a perfect comparison.

yeah, well, that's just like... your opinion man.

 

[Goddard]

This is the most ridiculous and disgustingly close minded post. It's not offensive, because it's not something to get offended about, but it's so stupid to say that you don't believe someone could enjoy something, and you refuse to believe it. Did you know some people enjoy pain? Some people live for that shit.

The point he was trying to make was that from a perspective that encompasses playing games at many different framerates, both at high settings, something you don't get to choose on consoles, there is no logical reason to prefer 30fps, and the only solution is masochism or people that are in denial. The idea itself has a lot of merit to it from a psychological perspective. There is no way to call everyone who shares a certain opinion liars without pissing a lot of people off, but there are a massive amount of console fanboys, and many of the motivations that back a lot of their opinions stem directly from something said by their platform holder, for example, while not directly accusing, merely presenting the idea, the line of thought that 30fps is better than 60.

Another thing is a lot of "hivemind" mentality being tossed around in here, which is actually offensive. "he likes sony franchises and has an uncharted avatar, he thinks 30 FPS is better because sony, and he hates pc gaming! LOL he thinks killzone 2 looks better than crysis 3 on max settings" I'm the exact opposite, cut the hivemind bullshit out maybe read my post history ass.

You are defending one side of an issue that exists primarily in the realm of console gaming, standing on the side of the console, using seemingly completely illogical arguments, and your profile picture just happens to be of Nathan Drake, you are asking for the hivemind accusations.

I wasn't refering to the hobbit, I've seen games at 60FPS and 30FPS side by side. It has a different feel. It doesn't feel like you're watching a movie anymore during cutscenes, at least in my honest opinion. I'm sorry if you think that is objectively wrong, that is how I and others feel though. It does in fact exist, and there is in fact POTENTIAL for it to be an artistic choice. Has it ever been? Maybe, maybe not, but I'm saying it's not as absurd or laughable as some treat it.

Again, cutscenes are generally pre-rendered, so they can pack a shit load more visual effects inside of them than they can normally get away with, which, if one of those effects happens to be motion blur, will definitely give a filmic impression, however because, as a few people in this thread have pointed out, there are many, many, massive fundamental differences between film and video games that prevent them from being compared properly, and since cutscenes aren't actually games, they are simply videos present within games, they should be completely and utterly left out from the discussion if you want to actually make a point and not just defend the indefensible.

EDIT:

yeah, well, that's just like... your opinion man.

I try to avoid responding to Lebowski quotes seriously because it's a comedy movie, but that is actually not my opinion, there is literally no objective benefit to 30fps as opposed to 60fps in a perfect comparison. That's not an opinion.

 

[msdstc]

The point he was trying to make was that from a perspective that encompasses playing games at many different framerates, both at high settings, something you don't get to choose on consoles, there is no logical reason to prefer 30fps, and the only solution is masochism or people that are in denial. The idea itself has a lot of merit to it from a psychological perspective. There is no way to call everyone who shares a certain opinion liars without pissing a lot of people off, but there are a massive amount of console fanboys, and many of the motivations that back a lot of their opinions stem directly from something said by their platform holder, for example, while not directly accusing, merely presenting the idea, the line of thought that 30fps is better than 60.



You are defending one side of an issue that exists primarily in the realm of console gaming, standing on the side of the console, using seemingly completely illogical arguments, and your profile picture just happens to be of Nathan Drake, you are asking for the hivemind accusations.



Again, cutscenes are generally pre-rendered, so they can pack a shit load more visual effects inside of them than they can normally get away with, which, if one of those effects happens to be motion blur, will definitely give a filmic impression, however because, as a few people in this thread have pointed out, there are many, many, massive fundamental differences between film and video games that prevent them from being compared properly, and since cutscenes aren't actually games, they are simply videos present within games, they should be completely and utterly left out from the discussion if you want to actually make a point and not just defend the indefensible.

I don't give a shit if I'm "asking" for accusations, that's not how it works, if you think that way it only further proves my point that you're close minded.

 

[epmode]

This thread is off the rails, man.

 

[Horp]

Seems legit.

lal sorry. I meant 1024x768Mhz ofc.

 

[Goddard]

I don't give a shit if I'm "asking" for accusations, that's not how it works, if you think that way it only further proves my point that you're close minded.

You are behaving in such a way as to bait people into accusing you of being a console fanboy, then yelling at them and bitching them out for being closed minded. Not sure what you mean by "that's not how it works," that's exactly how it works.

If you present all the common traits of a member of a console defense force, and then try (and fail,) to prove your point that is clearly influenced by your attachment to a platform, you are for all intents and purposes someone with a heavy bias toward that platform. If your only defense of your argument is that you play PC too, at that point you already lost the argument, pack it in man.

 

[Goddard]

lal sorry. I meant 1024x768Mhz ofc.

MEGAHERTZ???!?!?!?!?!

I want to play a game at 720 million fps

 

[Kagutaba]

I don't give a shit if I'm "asking" for accusations, that's not how it works, if you think that way it only further proves my point that you're close minded.

He's not close minded you are, your original argument has been ground down and refuted repeatedly, into practically nothingness. Instead of letting it go, which would be the mature thing to do, you are starting to go into ad-hominem territory.

 

[Dennis]

24 fps - like watching a movie

http://a.pomf.se/gexciv.webm

 

[msdstc]

24 fps - like watching a movie

http://a.pomf.se/gexciv.webm

TBH I think that looks fine.

He's not close minded you are, your original argument has been grounded down and refuted repeatedly, into practically nothingness. Instead of letting it go, which would be the mature thing to do, you are starting to go into ad-hominem territory.

Letting it go? I haven't seen one thing that disproves the concept of a different feel at different framerates. It's an opinion, and the mindset does exist. It's funny to see people squirm at the concept of it actually existing. There is nothing objective about it.

You are behaving in such a way as to bait people into accusing you of being a console fanboy, then yelling at them and bitching them out for being closed minded. Not sure what you mean by "that's not how it works," that's exactly how it works.

If you present all the common traits of a member of a console defense force, and then try (and fail,) to prove your point that is clearly influenced by your attachment to a platform, you are for all intents and purposes someone with a heavy bias toward that platform. If your only defense of your argument is that you play PC too, at that point you already lost the argument, pack it in man.

How is the 30FPS thing IN ANYWAY related to sony defense? Last I checked XBONE plays games at 30fps as well. The only thing sony related is that the order is the latest game in a long list of games that used such an excuse. Now I'm not saying their reasoning is 100% honest, I believe I've made this perfectly clear, and I'm not saying I prefer one thing over the other, in fact I prefer games to be 60FPS (i'm praying that TLOU has 60FPS multiplayer and they focused more at expanding game modes, fleshing it out, etc.), all I'm saying is, from what I've seen 30fps looks and feels different, that adds a certain atmosphere and feeling to game vs. a 60fps buttery smooth one. You mention cut scenes, which funnily enough are often cut down in framerate, even back with CGI ones, but now cutscenes blend right back into gameplay. I was going to point out the footage we saw of the order blending seemlessly, but to avoid fanboy accusations I will use Quantum Break. If the cutscenes were 24p or 30fps, and then blended into 60FPS that would be beyond jarring. That game appears to be going for a complete control the movie and watch at the same time type of experience a la Beyond, or LA Noire.

 

[Naminator]

Hopefully you wouldn't bet too much. I consider myself a PC gamer (also a console gamer), I definitely prefer 60FPS, but I can see why some would choose 30, if you can't understand that it's closeminded. Crysis 3 blows those 2 games out of the water.

I'm not close minded, in fact I personally would CHOSE 30FPS, in a scenario where a game was slow paced and my PC couldn't handle running the game at 60FPS.

It's called choosing graphics over framerate, and developers do it all the time, and that is exactly what they did with The Order 1886.

To pretend that there is any other reason for it(like dat cinematic feel) is absolutely absurd!

 

[Dennis]

More 24 fps movie magic.

http://a.pomf.se/gtfttm.webm

 

[Thrakier]

I just don't agree with this at this point. I can definitely seeing that be a reason, but there is absolutely no evidence to back this up.

There is evidence otherwise as well. So what's the point of this thread you made?

 

[plagiarize]

More 24 fps movie magic.

http://a.pomf.se/gtfttm.webm

what's that weird stuff flying through the air in front of some of the buildings? an OT question I know.

naturally it doesn't link remotely filmic running at 24 fps on a 60 hz display without any motion blur.

 

[Goddard]

Letting it go? I haven't seen one thing that disproves the concept of a different feel at different framerates. It's an opinion, and the mindset does exist. It's funny to see people squirm at the concept of it actually existing. There is nothing objective about it.

Nobody has disagreed that it feels different, 30fps feels different than 60fps, because it is choppier and laggier, two things that make it objectively far worse, it is not an alternative but rather a few steps down. Nobody is squirming, you already lost the argument.

How is the 30FPS thing IN ANYWAY related to sony defense? Last I checked XBONE plays games at 30fps as well. The only thing sony related is that the order is the latest game in a long list of games that used such an excuse.

Because this is an issue only on consoles, it does not exist in the realm of PC. In your case, it happens to be specifically Sony consoles because your profile picture, presumably one of your favourie games, is of a Sony exclusive game.

all I'm saying is, from what I've seen 30fps looks and feels different, that adds a certain atmosphere and feeling to game vs. a 60fps buttery smooth one.

The thread is called "In defense of the filmic look" That is clearly not all you're saying.

You mention cut scenes, which funnily enough are often cut down in framerate, even back with CGI ones, but now cutscenes blend right back into gameplay. I was going to point out the footage we saw of the order blending seemlessly, but to avoid fanboy accusations I will use Quantum Break. If the cutscenes were 24p or 30fps, and then blended into 60FPS that would be beyond jarring. That game appears to be going for a complete control the movie and watch at the same time type of experience a la Beyond, or LA Noire.

I mentioned that cutscenese aren't actually part of the discussion because cutscenes aren't games. They are a stop, they are a movie taking place inside of a game, and therefore are completely irrelevant.

 

[Kagutaba]

Letting it go? I haven't seen one thing that disproves the concept of a different feel at different framerates. It's an opinion, and the mindset does exist. It's funny to see people squirm at the concept of it actually existing. There is nothing objective about it.

Your original argument was that 30 fps was more "Filmic", which was proven wrong with actual facts not just personal feelings. Your current position is nothing, no arguments no facts just hot air.

 

[Goddard]

There is evidence otherwise as well. So what's the point of this thread you made?

The point seems to be an attempt at proving the destructive tradeoffs on consoles are objectively superior, perhaps motivated by having a personal attachment to a piece of electronics.

 

[eso76]

You are being mislead by either the developer, yourself, or movies, all of which are bullshit comparisons.

I will say this as clearly as I can: 30FPS IS NOT, AND WILL NEVER BE AN ARTISTIC CHOICE, IT IS A TRADEOFF! It is a sacrifice of framerate to allow more room for computations per frame. If you honestly think there is something about 30fps that is inherently superior over 60 you are brainwashed

You are wrong.

 

[Duji]

I guess they could have the game render internally at 60fps but output at 24hz, using the 36 discarded frames for motion blur purposes.

This sounds interesting. Does anyone know whether or not this is practical?

Doesn't this prove that 24fps, provided hardware is powerful enough, ironically, would be ideal from a presentation standpoint? As someone who's a staunch supporter of more 60fps games, I can't deny that looks way more impressive than a game running at 60fps. This looks like evidence in support of 24fps, not against it.

What if 60 fps had the same motion blur? Have you thought about that?

 

[msdstc]

The point seems to be an attempt at proving the destructive tradeoffs on consoles are objectively superior, perhaps motivated by having a personal attachment to a piece of electronics.

here you go again. Im a pc gamer as well, how have you not got this has nothing to do with any specific hardware?

Your original argument was that 30 fps was more "Filmic", which was proven wrong with actual facts not just personal feelings. Your current position is nothing, no arguments no facts just hot air.

What? i never said objectively its more filmic... i used that word because it's something you hear often from game developers, the latest being rad.

Nobody has disagreed that it feels different, 30fps feels different than 60fps, because it is choppier and laggier, two things that make it objectively far worse, it is not an alternative but rather a few steps down. Nobody is squirming, you already lost the argument.



Because this is an issue only on consoles, it does not exist in the realm of PC. In your case, it happens to be specifically Sony consoles because your profile picture, presumably one of your favourie games, is of a Sony exclusive game.



The thread is called "In defense of the filmic look" That is clearly not all you're saying.



I mentioned that cutscenese aren't actually part of the discussion because cutscenes aren't games. They are a stop, they are a movie taking place inside of a game, and therefore are completely irrelevant.

No theyre not irrelevant, developers have been attempting to blur the lives between game and cutscene for years. the in defense title comes from me arguing why it could potentially apply as an argument. not saying i agree with it.

 

[Kagutaba]

What? i never said objectively its more filmic... i used that word because it's something you hear often from game developers, the latest being rad.

In defense of the "filmic" look.

I played that with friends for a little bit, then went back to resistance, and it was incredibly jarring, however I noticed that when playing single player, it had more of a "film" feel to it.

The notion of someone trying to achieve 30FPS or 24FPS is laughed at on this forum. I'm sure a lot of people understand that's due to input, but I wonder how many of these people realize that 24P is a premium feature on cameras, and is one of the major components of the "film look"

So in the eyes of a good chunk of people including developers, 30fps would have a more cinematic feel. It's a simple concept to understand, I don't see why it's so laughable at all.

Keep moving that goalpost.

 

[eso76]

This sounds interesting. Does anyone know whether or not this is practical?

That was me wondering aloud, but thinking about it, while doable, i guess, you'd need a lot more frames for a convincing effect.
72fps would give you 2 unused frames per frame, which is far too few, i think. My guess is you'd probably need at least 96 to start getting somewhere and ideally something like 192.
Then, you'd have to combine those frames.

Nope, not a practical way at all. Motion samples are still the best bet and its what after effects and 3d rendering softwares do.

 

[msdstc]

Keep moving that goalpost.

That's subjective, as in how I feel. I never said it's guaranteed to make people feel that way, but the perception does in fact exist.

 

[kiaaa]

That's subjective, as in how I feel. I never said it's guaranteed to make people feel that way, but the perception does in fact exist.

Why are you still trying to argue against facts with your opinion?