Forgetting "filmic" for a minute, like abolish that idea from your brain altogether. You're not realistically going to get a game that "looks" this good with 60fps on consoles, at least as far as i see in the future. So why don't you just sell your consoles and not bother?
The Order: 1886 is 30fps because 24fps doesn't "feel good", 60fps "changes aesthetic"
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
Forgetting "filmic" for a minute, like abolish that idea from your brain altogether. You're not realistically going to get a game that "looks" this good with 60fps on consoles, at least as far as i see in the future. So why don't you just sell your consoles and not bother?
Yaphett Kotto
Member
Is that from motion interpolation or native? This actually seems like a scene that works well for something like motion interpolation, a lot of my problem with them using it is that you can notice the seams as it were because some scenes they CAN'T fake the extra frames, but it is nice how it's smooth. I'd like to see the Hobbit or some movie in native 48/60fps to see when it's like when working as intended.
Yeah, there's a lot of obvious and not-so-obvious things to compromise in order to get 60 fps, and you'd have to rule out some ambitious gameplay in addition to just pretty looking games in order to reliably hit it all the time. And not all programmers can be like John Carmack, something like Rage looked amazing but that was the exception and you don't see that very often.
There might actually be an issue with CGI admittedly, but that depends on how quickly they can get each frame done these days. I knew it took forever when Toy Story came out, so the idea of that needing double the time is kind of crazy. If it's not like THAT though then it'd probably be easy to do CGI movies at higher framerates. I have to imagine, on the other hand, it absolutely IS an issue for hand drawn stuff, but that's basically gone outside of Japan and even there CGI seems to be catching on at an alarming rate.
DemurOnion
Banned
I still think games are the perfect medium to try and perfect the filmic look at 60FPS. They just need to try harder in that respect though I think I agree that possibly 30FPS could work here. I need to see the product though. I hope this game turns out to be quality very badly.
cobragt4001
Banned
I got a gaming PC ;P
Haha you picked a horrible example, that looks fantastic.
cobragt4001
Banned
Well, that's to be expected. Of course any game on PC can be muscled to 60+ so long as there aren't any restrictions in place.
Going for more realistic film like graphics sounds good to me. If 60fps has to be sacrificed to achieve that level of detail so be it.
I recently read in the Mario kart thread about that split screen trick where they are updating each players frame at 30 but process input and world simulation at 60fps. So I'm wondering why not more games try a similar trick to improve responsiveness. Why not poll inputs and simulate world at 60fps and render frames at 30fps? That at least sounds like a good tradeoff to me. Are there any obvious reasons why that would not work that I'm missing?
I recently read in the Mario kart thread about that split screen trick where they are updating each players frame at 30 but process input and world simulation at 60fps. So I'm wondering why not more games try a similar trick to improve responsiveness. Why not poll inputs and simulate world at 60fps and render frames at 30fps? That at least sounds like a good tradeoff to me. Are there any obvious reasons why that would not work that I'm missing?
Maybe for Mario Kart it updates one side then the other, somewhat similar to interlaced?
Actually that may be a good reason to see 60 fps more often at least in games that have MP modes: so they actually have the resources left to do multiplayer on the same console. Being able to run at 60 fps stable also means you have a buffer to do more, literally double, and so we can get split screen MP again.
Actually that may be a good reason to see 60 fps more often at least in games that have MP modes: so they actually have the resources left to do multiplayer on the same console. Being able to run at 60 fps stable also means you have a buffer to do more, literally double, and so we can get split screen MP again.
cobragt4001
Banned
DarkoMaledictus
Tier Whore
Pretty sure movies would not be 30 fps if you could to play them 
. PR gonna pr...
. PR gonna pr...BloodMoney
Banned
People do realize we played sub 30 average framerate games last gen... Right? And we enjoyed them... (For example, GTA5)
And yet the most graphically impressive game this gen is getting shit all over for 30 locked.
And yet the most graphically impressive game this gen is getting shit all over for 30 locked.
GTAV got away with it to an extent due to being a massive open world game (EXACTLY what I'm talking about with gameplay scope) and I'm fine as long as a game IS large or otherwise doing something extraordinary in scope, but it was starting to really fucking frustrate me how often games would just "aim for 30" rather than being a locked 30 while just being prettier than what came before rather than something like Shadow of the Colossus. Yes, we may've enjoyed the game, but we don't get more advanced fucking hardware to have games run like they're N64 titles.
BloodMoney
Banned
You either enjoy a game or you don't. Open world, or not. Considering GTAV was sporting sub 20 frames on a regular basis, yet was critically acclaimed, and made metric fuck-tons of money... Leads me to believe that developers who sell stellar games at locked 30, are gonna do just fine despite all the hee-hawing on the internet pre-release.
Hand animated films will never ever be over 24, it is extremely expensive. The japanese signature of animation is that they do sub 24fps. Disney gets accolades for their 24fps hand animations. It's just way too much money.
CGI animated films as well would take a long time to render, but again it's really about the money they want to throw at it.
I just don't understand why people bother talking about "films and filmic" i think it was a seriously stupid thing for RAD to even mention. No amount of time or money will make a console do more than it possibly can in real time.
The Order: 1886 is highly filmic.
That doesn't mean you should necessarily accept shitty frame rates because "well fuck it you people will eat it up anyway." That really isn't relevant to THIS specifically (hopefully not anyway by the time we get the end product, though the "it has to feel good" is reassuring), and as I said Grand Theft Auto V was a large open world game so there was a strong gameplay tradeoff made but I really don't fucking like it when we get games like Crysis 2 that decide it's acceptable to be frequently below 30 to push some graphical eye candy. Just being a locked 30 makes a remarkable difference in how good gameplay feels, if it's sacrificed it better be for a good reason.
It would be interesting to see a 60 fps animated short, but that could only be like a few minutes anyway, not two hours, an hour, or even half an hour.
... and yeah, I stated it before and in another thread but it almost seems as if RAD said the right things to really rile people up online. I don't think people would care half as much if it was like with Driveclub and just "we really want it to look good" (and while that DID get a backlash a huge difference is that for a lot of people 60 fps matters even more in a racing game) or saying story is a high priority rather than their weird stuff about it being the top of the pyramid and gameplay sounding more like an obligation they have to fulfill.
It makes sense. Fuck it, I don't care.
I was playing BF4 recently and it felt less responsive to play it at 30 fps but I immediately thought it looked more realistic because some of the "game-ness" of the animations was hidden by the lower framerate. So, just like a low resolution can hide problems with a game's visuals, the same is true with a low framerate (combined with motion blur of course).
That said, this looks beautiful because the animation is so good and it's already a cartoony art style so there's not much risk of uncanny valley:
I was playing BF4 recently and it felt less responsive to play it at 30 fps but I immediately thought it looked more realistic because some of the "game-ness" of the animations was hidden by the lower framerate. So, just like a low resolution can hide problems with a game's visuals, the same is true with a low framerate (combined with motion blur of course).
That said, this looks beautiful because the animation is so good and it's already a cartoony art style so there's not much risk of uncanny valley:
BloodMoney
Banned
So, at the end of the day, it would seem you feel an open world is an acceptable tradeoff for sub 30 performance, and I feel jaw dropping graphics are an acceptable reason for locked 30 performance.
If it was simply a choice of 30 vs 60, I'd choose 60 all day... But it's not. 60 comes at a price on a $400 console (be it graphics, physics, A.I, etc). I'd prefer to get as much as I can at 30, then less at 6o.
Edit: do you really think companies like RAD aren't trying to give us their best product. I mean, was there some meeting at their office where they decided to sacrifice the quality of their game just to troll everyone? If 30 wasn't good enough, they wouldn't be going that route.
Argh, I should've been clear enough that as goofy as RAD's statement was here I'm not opposed to a locked 30 fps in most cases, but rather when they fail to hit 30 reliably in a game with a limited gameplay scope. There's always exceptions to everything (TLoU never bugged me for some reason but seemingly set off a lot of people) but you brought up that people were OK with GTAV dipping to 20 (well, technically lower but Digital Foundry only reported as low as 20) and I wanted to argue against that point specifically. I even said that being a locked 30 makes a remarkable difference versus going under, even a mostly locked 30 is generally ok if it's during some crazy hectic moment it plummets.
And seriously, RAD's statement IS goofy. They even brought up toying with 24 fps before ruling it out, I'm guessing if they didn't have to worry about gameplay feeling good they'd have seriously considered running with it.
Wolfgang Jr
Banned
Wow; people are actually buying this crock of shit statement?
What's next? We chose 792p because it's more rustic?
What's next? We chose 792p because it's more rustic?
Night Angel
Member
So good the fourth time. Keep going!
@Wolfgang: what's next, learning how to read and understand context?
You keep saying that over and over in every The Order thread. Keep it up.
Funnily enough locking at 30 fps probably does give them the free processing power to put in more effects that make it look better and give it a more "filmic" look, more than just lowering the fps in and of itself ever could.
Obviously arbitrarily locking a game that COULD run at 60 fps at 30 "to look filmic" would be absolute bullshit, and at the least in scenarios like that I'd hope they'd give an option so that those who really do like that look can indulge themselves while those that think it's a bunch of crap play at 60.
I think when a game hits 60fps it looks incredibly "game-y". Not to say that it's a bad thing by any stretch of the imagination. But maybe that's just me.
For 30fps I definitely can understand what they mean by it being a better approach for the filmic look they are trying to accomplish.
For 30fps I definitely can understand what they mean by it being a better approach for the filmic look they are trying to accomplish.
What exactly does this mean? A game "looks weird" so the performance should be worse so it doesn't look "weird" anymore?
Louis Cyphre
Banned
Lol, maybe EA's new golf game will have golf courses in 792p to re-create vintage courses.
Am I the only one who doesn't see anything groundbreaking about The Order's graphics? As a pc gamer... I really don't understand all the hype.
Some of the textures look soft, blurry and washed out, especially in the gameplay demo. Not to mention that the color palette of this game is mostly shades of brown... I'm more excited to see Naughty Dog's Uncharted 4.
The Order looks good, but not that good as some people are making it out to be. Still, I can't wait until Digital Foundry gets their hands on it.
Some of the textures look soft, blurry and washed out, especially in the gameplay demo. Not to mention that the color palette of this game is mostly shades of brown... I'm more excited to see Naughty Dog's Uncharted 4.
The Order looks good, but not that good as some people are making it out to be. Still, I can't wait until Digital Foundry gets their hands on it.
OsirisBlack
Banned
Yes its only you I am a pc gamer as well and the Order still looks amazing when compared to anything.
Stillmatic
Member
HORRORSHØW
Member
^ lol goddamn.
Joeki11a. you can shut the fuck up with that now.
Joeki11a. you can shut the fuck up with that now.
Haint
Member
Holy Fucking Shit. The quality of the physics and animation looks 10 generations more advanced than what you see at 24p. I had no idea it was that true to life, they are butchering those CG movies cutting them to 24p.
I'm pretty sick of "dat responsive 60fps" too.
Difference is minimal, and won't make any difference for most games in terms of input lag. 60 fps is about fluidity first and foremost.
The only joke in this thread is the number of armchair-designers pretending that experience playing games gives them unique insight into the decision-making processes in a real games studio full of real professional designers.
Everything about The Order is geared towards a look that mimics film. The wider aspect ratio, the film grain, the chromatic aberration and yes, the lower framerate. As they said, 24fps was too low; it reached a point where gameplay was suffering. 30fps as a well-tested alternative was an ideal substitute.
I'd have thought it goes without saying that 30fps obviously enables them to push more eyecandy per frame, which would've been a factor equally as critical in their decision-making process.
Finally, let's get one thing totally straight here: in terms of framerate, 30fps IS more filmic than 60fps. That's not up for debate. 30fps is closer to 24fps than 60fps is, and film is typically 24fps. Therefore, 30fps is more filmic than 60fps. If you don't like that, you'd best start finding some new words to use, because that's what "filmic" and "cinematic" are referring to here; the look and feel of film.
supernormal
Member
This. Either way, I wish you good luck buddy. I was saying the same thing a couple pages back and got slaughtered for it.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
That's not 100% true, although gamepads hide input lag better than mice. An extra 30ms can be pretty noticeable when you add display and network lag on top of it.
Thanks for the support. I've accepted that I'm already dead.
It's been filmy for a very long time. It's only been video-gamey for a year or two.
Damn, I wonder what his obsession with it is? Never seen anyone try so hard to get people to think one largely well received and highly promising looking game is similar in quality to another unrelated largely very poorly received one.
Canis lupus
Member
It means exactly what it means: weird, like the soap opera effect if you ever witnessed it.
How many 60 fps games you played had a soap opera look?