gundamkyoukai
Member
That is true but it's also not a deal break to them like some people that call 30fps games unplayable.
I mean the best selling last gen HD game was 30fps with good amount of frame drops and remaster is still 30fps .
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Naughty Dog won't push Uncharted 4 to 60fps if it compromises player experience
- Thread starter Slowdive
- Start date
That is true but it's also not a deal break to them like some people that call 30fps games unplayable.
I mean the best selling last gen HD game was 30fps with good amount of frame drops and remaster is still 30fps .
But the average player also appreciates some eye candy.
loaf of bread
Member
Some of you guys are embarrassing yourselves. Theres nothing wrong with 30fps. ND never promised it to you, all they did was aim for it ( which every dev making a new game should start out doing and then decide to drop and lock or push for it.)
I think that getting mad at ND is incredibly counter productive for us.
They said they vastly prefer 60 and were aiming for that, now they said that if they have to sacrifice it to make the game they want to make, they will. Those two things can complement each other, they're not necessarily opposites, you can read it as "we'll do as much as we can to get it at 60, as long as we don't have to remove anything important from the game in order to do so. The demo you saw was at ~37fps"
Being angry at them for this pretty much confirms some publisher's/dev's belief that being transparent leads to nothing good, just lie and say some nice things that are not necessarily true so people will be happy. They're honest and open about their development, that's a great thing. They didn't promise The Last of Us was a solid 60fps game because they weren't sure and they knew people's standards vary. For me it is definitely a solid 60fps game, even if it has some dips here and there, but at the time a lot of people assumed they were just dodging the question to defend themselves when the game ran like shit.
Take what they say at face value, they're pretty transparent, you don't have to read between the lines. If they said that they're aiming for 60, that they prefer 60 and that they will sacrifice 60 before sacrificing the game design they have in mind, then that's exactly what they meant.
They're not saying 30 is more cinematic or some bullshit like that, they probably still vastly prefer 60 and would love the game to be 60.
boredandlazy
Member
I'd be interested to see how many of the concerned people were planning on buying it even if it was 60...(which it might still be).
I wouldn't go that far haha. it is a bit disappointing though, that's all. I do think they tried to catch some of that "next gen" hype at E3 with the 1080p/60fps claim, though, and perhaps they shouldn't have spoken so soon.
Jacksinthe
Banned
I'll keep saying this until it sticks:
Time To Frame is more important at locked 30 than 60fps with the occasional dropped frames.
That's it. I'll take a legit locked 30 with spot on TTF over 60 that has the chance to dip to high 40s or low 50s from time to time.
Time To Frame is more important at locked 30 than 60fps with the occasional dropped frames.
That's it. I'll take a legit locked 30 with spot on TTF over 60 that has the chance to dip to high 40s or low 50s from time to time.
Uncharted is a franchise partly built upon eye candy and spectacle. Just think of the insane set pieces they could pull off at 30fps.
Cave Johnson
Member
Doesn't change the fact they used that to mislead consumers into that kind of expectation.
Simply creating goalposts is not addressing what they've announced. We're in the consumer-awareness period right from the moment MS announced their X1 to be online-only. This means a lot of consumers such as here in NeoGAF are creating a defensive structure for any and all kinds of PR from Ubisoft's "30fps feels better" to this. Holding developers accountable seems to be the default state right now which is why your appeal is going to be dissolved in the thread regardless of your attempt.
Also, that "trailer" is confirmed to be real-time as there is no space in the blu-ray to save pre-rendered cutscenes (something they have a massive issue with porting TLOU: R), which makes this scenario even worse because it's not just a simple "cutscene" any longer - it's wholly representative of the visual output you see in gameplay.
PC gamer first and foremost here, but I own almost every modern console except for Xbox One/Wii(U) currently and I'll try to provide my thoughts on this debate.
30 fps is definitely playable, but people that are more used to 60 fps are more likely to notice the difference and it might feel sluggish for some games. I don't think the majority of console gamers really thinks about it too much despite others saying it'll be a slideshow. (that is really an overstatement, unless we're talking Blighttown in Dark Souls on PS3.)
60 fps is more fluid and I'd personally like to see more action or fast-paced games targeting it in the future, but if they(developers) have to compromise by removing features/visual effects that may impact the cinematic quality or style they are aspiring to achieve in their game then I can see why they will go for 30 fps over 60. I don't really expect that they will ever come out and say that they "couldn't" get it to run at a stable 60 for that matter either.
Example:
Would you trust the guy selling you his game if you ask him if they got the latest addition to the super-awesome franchise "Batshit Crazy" in 1080p resolution and he replies "Nah, we couldn't do it. So it's 720p."
Even if he means well, and there's a lot of other perfectly logical development reasons that led to the decision -- that simple statement would simply echo in some people's heads as "lol, incompetence. gtfo."
I'm in a position where I can affect how people see my corporation based upon what I say internally and public. Let's say I told a customer that we "can't" or "couldn't" fulfill their most valued request of a million dollar project...then yeah..I'd have to go look for another job. It doesn't matter whether it's the truth or not -- if you got investors and a brand/reputation to look after, then you better make sure you mind what you say.
Bottomline/TL;DR:
I'm not claiming that ND might not make 60fps for Uncharted 4 because they "can't", but ultimately you have to remember that it is up to them. This debate or any similar future debates of other games will most likely do nothing to change the fact that the decision always rest with the developer/publisher.
I'm in the 60 fps crowd and will always prefer 60 over 30, but if a game I'm interested in runs in 30 and isn't on PC, then yeah, I'll still play it. If Uncharted 4 is 30 fps and you don't like it I recommend that you don't buy it, it's as simple as that.
30 fps is definitely playable, but people that are more used to 60 fps are more likely to notice the difference and it might feel sluggish for some games. I don't think the majority of console gamers really thinks about it too much despite others saying it'll be a slideshow. (that is really an overstatement, unless we're talking Blighttown in Dark Souls on PS3.)
60 fps is more fluid and I'd personally like to see more action or fast-paced games targeting it in the future, but if they(developers) have to compromise by removing features/visual effects that may impact the cinematic quality or style they are aspiring to achieve in their game then I can see why they will go for 30 fps over 60. I don't really expect that they will ever come out and say that they "couldn't" get it to run at a stable 60 for that matter either.
Example:
Would you trust the guy selling you his game if you ask him if they got the latest addition to the super-awesome franchise "Batshit Crazy" in 1080p resolution and he replies "Nah, we couldn't do it. So it's 720p."
Even if he means well, and there's a lot of other perfectly logical development reasons that led to the decision -- that simple statement would simply echo in some people's heads as "lol, incompetence. gtfo."
I'm in a position where I can affect how people see my corporation based upon what I say internally and public. Let's say I told a customer that we "can't" or "couldn't" fulfill their most valued request of a million dollar project...then yeah..I'd have to go look for another job. It doesn't matter whether it's the truth or not -- if you got investors and a brand/reputation to look after, then you better make sure you mind what you say.
Bottomline/TL;DR:
I'm not claiming that ND might not make 60fps for Uncharted 4 because they "can't", but ultimately you have to remember that it is up to them. This debate or any similar future debates of other games will most likely do nothing to change the fact that the decision always rest with the developer/publisher.
I'm in the 60 fps crowd and will always prefer 60 over 30, but if a game I'm interested in runs in 30 and isn't on PC, then yeah, I'll still play it. If Uncharted 4 is 30 fps and you don't like it I recommend that you don't buy it, it's as simple as that.
Never thought UC4 was going to be 60fps. I love 60fps to death but for this game I didn't expect it. Even TLoU Remastered I guess was 60fps but didn't feel like it to me. I'd take double the visuals over watering down everything to hit 60, especially if it feels like TLoU did at 60.
computers putin'
Member
Honestly, not hitting 60 would make me a lot less interested in buying the game when it finally does come out. I would appreciate the option to chose between 30/60fps at least if Naughty Dog decides to push fidelity instead, but I won't hold my breath.
aiming is fine. When you are publicly talking about 'aiming for 60', thats a bit different from having that in your internal pitch meetings.
IAmRandom31
Banned
except it doesn't control better if the game is built to control at 30fps.
easiest example is Driveclub. Tight / precise controls in a racer with the best sense of speed I've had in a racer in a very long time. Including 60fps racers.
" Feels " like 60fps.
a game built with an unlocked framerate like a PC game or something running at 30fps will feel like ass compared to 60fps sure, because 30 is not optimized.
Uncharted will be a visual benchmark for the next 4 years or so. Thinking it would be 60fps was just silly.
Uncharted 5 though? Or the next project of the same type of scale as Uncharted 4? Very well could be 60fps when they have even more time to tweak and optimize the engine. But first run through, nah.
fingers crossed
I don't feel mislead. I feel like they showed me where the game was at that point in time. At no point did they ever give me the impression that was the final game. It seems rather ludicrous that any thoughtful person could think that was the final game, what with it being 1.5 years away.
I don't like making generalizations, but gamers are the most sensitive, fragile little cupcakes sometimes.
It's literally not different at all.
And once again, this is why you should not talk up 60fps before you can absolutely confirm its in the game.
Even ND seems to be really having a problem with keeping on message. If you cant confirm the game at 60, don't say things like "we cant go back" at the time of TLOU, or act like your designing your game concept around 60fps.
You should have said what your saying now, and said the truth. You pushed TLOU up to 60 cause you had the leeway hardware wise, since it was a 7th gen game. Now you don't cause your fully pushing the unit.
Even ND seems to be really having a problem with keeping on message. If you cant confirm the game at 60, don't say things like "we cant go back" at the time of TLOU, or act like your designing your game concept around 60fps.
You should have said what your saying now, and said the truth. You pushed TLOU up to 60 cause you had the leeway hardware wise, since it was a 7th gen game. Now you don't cause your fully pushing the unit.
loaf of bread
Member
Not really. Its pretty transparent really. They were aiming for 60, they still are. If it compromises the game in other areas they don't want compromised they'll lock it at 30. Simple really.
All this over promising and under delivering is frustrating. I know its not as simple with designs changing but there's been a trend as of late with Sony. Do what you say.
Yeah well said.
Yeah well said.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Kinda my point, i'd very much prefer the higher framerate over prettier graphics, especially since the game looks fantastic already.
Lock it at 40fps and call it a day. This 60fps elitism sucks.
Visual fidelity sells, number of fps doesn't. Just look at GTA V, ran like shit on the 360/PS3. Nobody cared, it looked great and most importantly, was fun.
Also, people need to get in their minds that the PS4/XboxOne are nowhere near powerful enough to do 1080p@60fps. It's been a year already.
Visual fidelity sells, number of fps doesn't. Just look at GTA V, ran like shit on the 360/PS3. Nobody cared, it looked great and most importantly, was fun.
Also, people need to get in their minds that the PS4/XboxOne are nowhere near powerful enough to do 1080p@60fps. It's been a year already.
Promising?
To each their own, but I'll take graphics nearly every time.
MR ARCADE FOREVER
Member
Whoever is expecting 1080p 60 fps on consoles nowadays will be very disappointed
Miles Quaritch
Member
I didn't actually say they shouldn't aim for 60fps, I said they shouldn't have announced they were aiming for it until they had a much better idea of if they'd be able to pull it off.
Cave Johnson
Member
Then you must not be following the hype thread. Here is a re-cap to see why this is such as big deal:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=835985
Incorrect, they are FULLY capable of doing so. The real question is, however, where they dedicate their resources to. And please don't ignore COD: AW/Ghosts/SoM; these are 3 AAA titles that hit that target on the PS4.
Why? What does it matter?
All I see are people saying that it would not be possible. Seems no one was mislead.
There are apparently benifits to aiming for 60fps. For example, I know a lot of people were a little miffed at Driveclub missing it's target and going 30fps instead (unsurprindingly those people are mostly no where to be seen now), but on the plus side, Driveclub's frame rate never misses a beat. Not a single frame drop even with a whole pack of cars on screen, crazy weather effects and all the rest. Which is pretty surprising, and probably means the actual frame rate is hovering well above 30fps. Maybe Uncharted 4 will benefit from a similar thing? Not that I think it matters, rare frame drops in extreme circumstances are not the end of the world (imo).
gundamkyoukai
Member
ND did not promise anything .
It's okay! Those players simply don't matter to Naughty Dog.
Future PhaZe
Member
locked 30 is fine
but TLoU ps3 framerate isn't acceptable to me, they can't do that with UC4
but TLoU ps3 framerate isn't acceptable to me, they can't do that with UC4
Crimsonclaw111
Member
So... Can they not just offer shittier shadows as an options as in TLOU and allow us an option for 60fps?
I knew this wasn't going to hit 60fps but was hoping it would.
I knew this wasn't going to hit 60fps but was hoping it would.
Maybe, but I'm guessing that since it was still so early in the dev process and the quick success they had with TLoU, they thought they could hit it reasonably.
Please show me where they announced the game would definitely run at 60fps. I don't see how we could hold someone accountable for the word "targeting" when consumers should know that doesn't necessarily mean we would hit it. That comes from building up substantial hype over small morsels of information, something the gaming community at large has massive issues with.
As for the bolded, I know and am well aware of that fact. If you look at any of the rendered cut scenes from any of the Uncharted games or TLoU, you will notice they run at a steady 30/60fps and have a higher IQ over gameplay. Rendered cut scenes and actual gameplay will not look 1:1.
Portugeezer
Member
If it's 30fps then I expect better graphics from ND.
Shai-Tan
Banned
I think some comparisons about 30fps vs 60fps confuse 60 vs sub 30fps. I play a lot of games on PC downsampled and they feel perfectly fine at a locked 30 i.e. vsync. G-sync would obviously be better but my monitor doesn't support it. Unlocked 30-50 is also ok if you don't mind tearing (it's less obvious in some games). I remember God of War 3 on PS3 was like ~40fps and it seemed fine. It matters in some games but games like Uncharted have animation time that doesn't need 60fps response.
Well it was a false and disparaging expression.
Every developer targets more than is possible to achieve. Every single one (well, all artistically credible ones). It's in the nature of an artist to do. "The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark."
Solid Samus
Banned
Thank you sir. Most reasonable post I've read in some days. Some anger have disappeared.
capitalCORN
Member
Keep up the total retcon job guys! Wooo!
Exactly! 15 fps is more than capable of providing a passable gaming experience, as evidenced by Star Fox on the SNES. And just think how much better the graphics can look! And the physics and the weather effects! I'm getting sick of the 30 fps cult saying that 15 fps isn't good enough.
megabytecr
Member
Cannot get more subjective than that, well seems like 30 it is then. I enjoyed the PS3 trilogy, with the Super Mario Galaxy games they were my highlight for last gen.
I wished devs would just stay quit on the framerate until the game is gold, then we would not have expectations.
I wished devs would just stay quit on the framerate until the game is gold, then we would not have expectations.
You can't even lock at 40. 30, 60, 120. Some TVs 24. Was cool that Tomb Raider let you lock at 24 on PC.