Support NeoGAF

[Thrakier]

You are talking drivel. I think that's the problem.

But hey, you've reviewed the playability by watching videos (Something that seems to be a growing trend amongst the hype-baby crowd) so I suppose all the people who have played the game and who are telling you it is very playable should shut up. Because you know better.

I'm playing videogames for more than 20 years. Do you really think I need to lay hands on a game controller to know how a game with such performance looks, feels and plays? Really?

But as I see it, the apologists take over the thread. 30FPS was a low standard once. Now the standard is even lower. Let's see if you guys will bring it down to 24FPS and less, as long as it's "playable". Which always occured to me as a strange word, because I can play a game which runs at 15FPS as well. I just would never enjoy it. But if that's your understanding of gameplay quality that something is "playable" like in "i push the stick and something happens", if that's your true understanding of interactive quality, well, this discussion was already lost before it started.

I thought we'll see things getting better with the new gen and maybe gamers being a bit more sensitive to technology and more understanding what makes a videogame a great videogame. The truth is: It got worse.

 

[23qwerty]

holy s**t, that isn't edited? its a raw from the game? sweet jesus that is insane.

I can't imagine that's actually a raw from the game... it looks nothing like that when you actually play it

 

[DirgeExtinction]

This sentence alone makes me shudder. It makes no sense at all. How can a framerate be "pretty reasonable" (whatever that means!) and at the same time it has frame pacing issues? Can you not see your own double standards? It's fine to like a game and all, but why not be upfront of the issues it has? The framrate is shit. It would be a significant better game at stable 30FPS and a much better game at 60FPS. Just name it, it doesn't feel bad.

Why do you care so much if you're never going to play on consoles again? None of this affects you whatsoever. You're still as annoying as ever.

...and more understanding what makes a videogame a great videogame.

You mean story, fun, art direction, sound design, characters, etc? A great game is so much more than its frame rate.

 

[Primethius]

nope.
had that too.
several time.
foggate of the forbiggen woods boss and during levels too a couple of times.



not technical.
technical it is the worst "souls" game yet.

No way and I haven't experience any of the issues you've mentioned (texture pop in or 1 FPS).

Dark Souls 1 is the worst Souls game on consoles, technically.

BB is besides Demon Souls in technical competence.

 

[>-Baron-Spamedi-<]

This sentence alone makes me shudder. It makes no sense at all. How can a framerate be "pretty reasonable" (whatever that means!) and at the same time it has frame pacing issues? Can you not see your own double standards? It's fine to like a game and all, but why not be upfront of the issues it has? The framrate is shit. It would be a significant better game at stable 30FPS and a much better game at 60FPS. Just name it, it doesn't feel bad.

Er, the frame rate is generally good enough that the game plays well.
The frame pacing problem is there but is no where near as affecting as you are making out.

I know this (as do all the other people rolling their eyes at you) because I have actually played it.

Other developers have patched similar problems so hopefully they can patch most of the issues out.
The loading time is far more affecting than the single player frame rate or frame pacing. And even that isn't worth shitting your pants over.

 

[HoodWinked]

I can't imagine that's actually a raw from the game... it looks nothing like that when you actually play it

holy s**t, that isn't edited? its a raw from the game? sweet jesus that is insane.

these are directly captured from the output of the console. its why the HUD is pristine.

 

[>-Baron-Spamedi-<]

I'm playing videogames for more than 20 years. Do you really think I need to lay hands on a game controller to know how a game with such performance looks, feels and plays? Really?

Good for you.
I've been playing video games since the very first arcades sprung up.
I still have a working Vectrex, Spectrum, SNES etc.

So I know best. Get over yourself.

 

[Dio]

not technical.
technical it is the worst "souls" game yet.

I don't agree with this at all. The only glitches I ever had in my playthrough were the disappearing pig and that audio glitch with the weird frame pacing in Old Yharnam. Everything else was either a regular-ass small framerate drop or stutter.

It ran at a solid 30 most of the time, much more than Demon's Souls and never as bad as Dark Souls.

 

[Thrakier]

Why do you care so much if you're never going to play on consoles again? None of this affects you whatsoever. You're still as annoying as ever.

I care about the medium itself. And I would play on consoles again, if developers would get their priorities straigt, meaning: Playability over eye candy. Great interactive experience over cinematic slideshows.

It's not about the platform, it's about the experience. And I'd love to play content like we got it in Bloodborne, Infamous, the upcoming Uncharted and many more. At that low level of craftsmanship however, constantly compromising what makes games games, the concession seems too big.

That doesn't mean I'm not interested in how everything develops. And I'm quite positive: Since I'm a strong believer that VR technology will be the upcoming way we experience games, framerate issues will be a thing of the past. Because something like Bloodborne in a HMD will make everyone puke, not just me. Even the most cinematic and "I can't see a difference" gamers will then want to see their games running at at least 60FPS. Morpheus even is ready for 120FPS games. Great, just the PS4 is lacking horsepower, but PS5 won't.

 

[the-pi-guy]

i actually like CA but this looks horrendous.

I have noticed the CA, but that image looks worse than anything I've seen in my hours of playing.
In my experience, it's mostly been great, adding to the atmosphere.

 

[3rdamention]

We are not talking about a game not achieving 60FPS. We are talking about a game not achieving 30FPS with a pretty horrible image output leading to almost consistent motion judder.

It's hard to believe how many apologists there are for a game with a shit framerate. It's almost as you guys WANT these games to perform bad because you are just so used to it that everything else when a stuttery souls games is actually offending you.

I was just asking, and you quoted me but never answered. Why do you have so much to say about a game that you never played considering you do not own a PS4? That is all I had to say. I just find that funny that you are ripping this game up and down, but you have never played it.


How do you know about the framerate and image quality, etc. etc.? Are you just watching it on Youtube?

 

[Primethius]

I care about the medium itself. And I would play on consoles again, if developers would get their priorities straigt, meaning: Playability over eye candy. Great interactive experience over cinematic slideshows.

It's not about the platform, it's about the experience. And I'd love to play content like we got it in Bloodborne, Infamous, the upcoming Uncharted and many more. At that low level of craftsmanship however, constantly compromising what makes games games, the concession seems too big.

That doesn't mean I'm not interested in how everything develops. And I'm quite positive: Since I'm a strong believer that VR technology will be the upcoming way we experience games, framerate issues will be a thing of the past. Because something like Bloodborne in a HMD will make everyone puke, not just me. Even the most cinematic and "I can't see a difference" gamers will then want to see their games running at at least 60FPS. Morpheus even is ready for 120FPS games. Great, just the PS4 is lacking horsepower, but PS5 won't.

Holy shit, can you get any more annoying?

Guess what. 30FPS is playable. You know what else is suprising? I'm a PC gamer primarily. I play League of Legends with uncapped FPS that hovers around 250-300. I can see the FPS issues, the frame pacing issues.

Why is it so hard for some stuck up idiots to understand that it doesn't bother some people?

I'm glad I don't have the eyes of some posters on GAF who are so appalled by certain visual effects and FPS that they are unable or unwilling to play games.

 

[the-pi-guy]

But as I see it, the apologists take over the thread. 30FPS was a low standard once. Now the standard is even lower. Let's see if you guys will bring it down to 24FPS and less, as long as it's "playable". Which always occured to me as a strange word, because I can play a game which runs at 15FPS as well. I just would never enjoy it. But if that's your understanding of gameplay quality that something is "playable" like in "i push the stick and something happens", if that's your true understanding of interactive quality, well, this discussion was already lost before it started.

I thought we'll see things getting better with the new gen and maybe gamers being a bit more sensitive to technology and more understanding what makes a videogame a great videogame. The truth is: It got worse.

There have been lower frame rate games, and I'm usually happy with 20FPS if the game is slower paced, if it's faster, then of course much faster is needed. The game is mostly 30 FPS though.

 

[DirgeExtinction]

I care about the medium itself. And I would play on consoles again, if developers would get their priorities straigt, meaning: Playability over eye candy. Great interactive experience over cinematic slideshows.

It's not about the platform, it's about the experience. And I'd love to play content like we got it in Bloodborne, Infamous, the upcoming Uncharted and many more. At that low level of craftsmanship however, constantly compromising what makes games games, the concession seems too big.

That doesn't mean I'm not interested in how everything develops. And I'm quite positive: Since I'm a strong believer that VR technology will be the upcoming way we experience games, framerate issues will be a thing of the past. Because something like Bloodborne in a HMD will make everyone puke, not just me. Even the most cinematic and "I can't see a difference" gamers will then want to see their games running at at least 60FPS. Morpheus even is ready for 120FPS games. Great, just the PS4 is lacking horsepower, but PS5 won't.

What "makes games games"? And don't say a stanel frame rate because even the most stable performing game can be shit.

Just because VR can be a mainstream hit doesn't mean everyone will want 60+fps all of a sudden. There will ALWAYS be 30fps games, like it or not. The average consumer wants eye candy, otherwise how else will they justify their console purchases if new games don't look better graphically than the older generation?

In case you haven't realized, PS4 is also ready for 120fps gaming(VR). Just don't expect The Order 1886 visuals.

I was just asking, and you quoted me but never answered. Why do you have so much to say about a game that you never played considering you do not own a PS4? That is all I had to say. I just find that funny that you are ripping this game up and down, but you have never played it.


How do you know about the framerate and image quality, etc. etc.? Are you just watching it on Youtube?

Don't you understand? He's looking out for consumers. He wants to save people from playing slideshows and vomit-inducing VR experiences.

Spoiler

/s

Also, yes. Apparently he knows all about how this game plays and looks from watching it on YouTube, since you know, that's the "IT" thing to do nowadays so you can criticize a game.

 

[Thrakier]

I was just asking, and you quoted me but never answered. Why do you have so much to say about a game that you never played considering you do not own a PS4? That is all I had to say. I just find that funny that you are ripping this game up and down, but you have never played it.


How do you know about the framerate and image quality, etc. etc.? Are you just watching it on Youtube?

See my post above. I watched half the game on YouTube and read and watched some performance analysis. More than enough to judge a games framerate if you are halfway experienced.

How many 60FPS games did you play last year, may I ask? And I'm not about these 45FPS average pseudo 60FPS games.

 

[hawk2025]

I think you are all missing the picture here:


You are trying to reach a productive middle ground in the discussion with a guy that has been fighting this battle for at least 2 years. You're not going to get there.

 

[Mr Moose]

these are directly captured from the output of the console. its why the HUD is pristine.

I'm glad mine doesn't look like that, is it because of all the fire?

 

[shadowsdarknes]

The next 30 fps game that stays locked 99.9 percent of the time except for the rare dip to 28 fps, I'm coming into the DF thread and I'm going to call the game shit. I'm going to insult the developer, call it unacceptable, and say everyone's standards are shit.

I won't play the game either.
But I'll sure to project my superior higher standards onto everyone else and be extra condescending towards those who find the game to play just fine.

 

[yatesl]

i actually like CA but this looks horrendous.

I don't notice it in motion, but looking at that screenshot I feel like I need 3D glasses.

 

[Kayant]

I think you are all missing the picture here:


You are trying to reach a productive middle ground in the discussion with a guy that has been fighting this battle for at least 2 years. You're not going to get there.

He's been doing this for that long? Loool. Surprised he doesn't have a "60fps or bust" tag or something by now.

 

[Thrakier]

What "makes games games"? And don't say a stanel frame rate because even the most stable performing game can be shit.

Just because VR can be a mainstream hit doesn't mean everyone will want 60+fps all of a sudden. There will ALWAYS be 30fps games, like it or not. The average consumer wants eye candy, otherwise how else will they justify their console purchases if new games don't look better graphically than the older generation?

In case you haven't realized, PS4 is also ready for 120fps gaming(VR). Just don't expect The Order 1886 visuals.

There won't be VR experiences running at 30FPS or worse, even lower. People would get sick.

@hawk

How is there a productive middle ground if people happily accept sub 30FPS games now without even acknowleding that it's an issue. How should that productive middle ground look? 28FPS is still a-ok?

 

[DirgeExtinction]

There won't be VR experiences running at 30FPS or worse, even lower. People would get sick.

@hawk

How is there a productive middle ground if people happily accept sub 30FPS games now without even acknowleding that it's an issue. How should that productive middle ground look? 28FPS is still a-ok?

I never said there will be 30fps VR games. Just that there will always be 30fps games.

 

[3rdamention]

I'm playing videogames for more than 20 years. Do you really think I need to lay hands on a game controller to know how a game with such performance looks, feels and plays? Really?

But as I see it, the apologists take over the thread. 30FPS was a low standard once. Now the standard is even lower. Let's see if you guys will bring it down to 24FPS and less, as long as it's "playable". Which always occured to me as a strange word, because I can play a game which runs at 15FPS as well. I just would never enjoy it. But if that's your understanding of gameplay quality that something is "playable" like in "i push the stick and something happens", if that's your true understanding of interactive quality, well, this discussion was already lost before it started.

I thought we'll see things getting better with the new gen and maybe gamers being a bit more sensitive to technology and more understanding what makes a videogame a great videogame. The truth is: It got worse.

Nobody is being an apologist about 30fps, people are simply enjoying the game despite the framerate. I dont know why that is so hard for your to accept. Framerate and frame pacing aren't perfect. I have played several games on PS4 that run much better, but I am not going to cry about it and try to change people's opinions about this game because of how it runs.

But you know that nobody is going to take you seriously by watching this game on Youtube, since you have admittedly not even played the game.


I have honestly never seen someone get so defensive, so aggressive, over a game they haven't played, on a system they do not own. Your posts in here are crazy considering you have zero experience with this game whatsoever. I honestly do not even know why you really care so much about it.

See my post above. I watched half the game on YouTube and read and watched some performance analysis. More than enough to judge a games framerate if you are halfway experienced.

How many 60FPS games did you play last year, may I ask? And I'm not about these 45FPS average pseudo 60FPS games.

So how are you able to make your comments on Image Quality when you watch it on Youtube?

 

[shadowsdarknes]

Seems about right. Even if Nintendo games typically have great frame rates.

 

[FrankWza]

.

 

[the-pi-guy]

There won't be VR experiences running at 30FPS or worse, even lower. People would get sick.

@hawk

How is there a productive middle ground if people happily accept sub 30FPS games now without even acknowleding that it's an issue. How should that productive middle ground look? 28FPS is still a-ok?

-He never said that VR games will be running at 30 FPS or worse.
-Other games will probably run at 30 FPS.
-VR games can and already are running at 120 FPS on PS4.

-People have been accepting sub 30 FPS for a very long time.
-It's not an issue.
-People have different tastes, different thresh-holds for what's okay and what's not okay.
-Following up on that, "let's try arguing that everyone needs to have the same favorite color too. What is this lime green? It's supposed to be green. How are we supposed to accept this?"

 

[>-Baron-Spamedi-<]

I think you are all missing the picture here:


You are trying to reach a productive middle ground in the discussion with a guy that has been fighting this battle for at least 2 years. You're not going to get there.

Now this I agree with.

 

[CouchMaster]

The next 30 fps game that stays locked 99.9 percent of the time except for the rare dip to 28 fps, I'm coming into the DF thread and I'm going to call the game shit. I'm going to insult the developer, call it unacceptable, and say everyone's standards are shit.

I won't play the game either.
But I'll sure to project my superior higher standards onto everyone else and be extra condescending towards those who find the game to play just fine.

Make sure you have decades of gaming experience and have watched enough playthrough on youtube, otherwise your opinion won't be held above people who actually played and enjoyed the game.

 

[Thrakier]

So how are you able to make your comments on Image Quality when you watch it on Youtube?

When did I comment on image quality? I care about playability, not about graphical fidelity. The motion judder is bad enough to throw you off even in youtube videos. Why should I invest in a game which I know beforehand I wouldn't enjoy because of severe frame pacing issues? Videos are good enough to form an opinion about that.

Also, it's not a discussion solely about Bloodborne. You need a more general approach. It's about the way this industry is heading, it's about craftsmanship and the collective failure of the entire media when it comes to technology questions, explaining their impact on interaction and gameplay. Bloodborne is just another example for a general trend and the trend is what I mostly care about.

 

[ScottSullivan]

25% loading decrease with an SSD sounds really nice. Might need to upgrade. is there such a thing as an external SSD, or would I need to switch the original out? Sorry, not that tech-savvy!

That;s really worth a several hundred dollar upgrade to you?

 

[hawk2025]

There won't be VR experiences running at 30FPS or worse, even lower. People would get sick.

@hawk

How is there a productive middle ground if people happily accept sub 30FPS games now without even acknowleding that it's an issue. How should that productive middle ground look? 28FPS is still a-ok?

You dig your heels in the sand and absolutely refuse to engage on the actual discussion of the nuances of how and why people deal with 30fps and sub-30fps games for the purpose of the experience.

You are aggressive, condescending, and dismissive of what other people say time and again in every framerate thread.

For reference, you should know that this is coming from someone that rebought both Dark Souls games on PC with the strict objective of playing them at a higher framerate. I understand your battle, at a very distant level -- your approach, however, is pig-headed and loses people time and time again.

We absolutely should be using these threads for a productive, healthy discussion on the effects of framerate on playability. But you expect to dig your heels in and drag everyone else kicking and screaming to your side of the argument. Instead, other people do the same and we get, well, this thread. The very first step is to understand and internalize the fact that people simply have a completely different set of priorities than you.

 

[Primethius]

When did I comment on image quality? I care about playability, not about graphical fidelity. The motion judder is bad enough to throw you off even in youtube videos. Why should I invest in a game which I know beforehand I wouldn't enjoy because of severe frame pacing issues? Videos are good enough to form an opinion about that.

Also, it's not a discussion solely about Bloodborne. You need a more general approach. It's about the way this industry is heading, it's about craftsmanship and the collective failure of the entire media when it comes to technology questions, explaining their impact on interaction and gameplay. Bloodborne is just another example for a general trend and the trend is what I mostly care about.

You'll just have to accept the fact that you aren't as good as someone like me, you know? I can play games at 300 FPS and 30 FPS just fine without issue.

Maybe one day you'll be as good as me. But until then, keep up the good fight.

 

[Thrakier]

-He never said that VR games will be running at 30 FPS or worse.
-Other games will probably run at 30 FPS.
-VR games can and already are running at 120 FPS on PS4.

-People have been accepting sub 30 FPS for a very long time.
-It's not an issue.
-People have different tastes, different thresh-holds for what's okay and what's not okay.
-Following up on that, "let's try arguing that everyone needs to have the same favorite color too. What is this lime green? It's supposed to be green. How are we supposed to accept this?"

Arguing about the relevance of framerate towards gameplay isn't like arguing about your favorite color. There are certain boundaries and standards for every medium, no matter if movies, books, writing in general, heck, even smartphone apps. Not everything is a matter of taste and framerate certainly isn't. There is a reason there is a gold standard and there is clear, factual evidence how it makes games better.

Now, of course, what you PERSONALLY accept, that's is just your thing. But that is something I don't care about and I would never try to discuss. That's the issue here - whilst I talk about framerate and technology in general, people just talk about their personal experience and feel offended by my opinion because they are willing to accept something that I'd consider less than ideal. But that's not my fault.

 

[>-Baron-Spamedi-<]

I have honestly never seen someone get so defensive, so aggressive, over a game they haven't played, on a system they do not own. Your posts in here are crazy considering you have zero experience with this game whatsoever. I honestly do not even know why you really care so much about it.

So how are you able to make your comments on Image Quality when you watch it on Youtube?

Well It could be because he's just trying to save the medium from low standards and save us all from having 'shit' taste and enjoying 'shit' games like Bloodborne.

Or it could be cos he's really pissed off cos it's not coming to PC so he's trying to maximise any negative points no matter how minor they are to others (who have, you know, actually played the game) whilst minimising all the good stuff.

 

[hawk2025]

Arguing about the relevance of framerate towards gameplay isn't like arguing about your favorite color. Where are certain boundaries and standards for every medium, no matter if movies, books, writing in general, heck, even smartphone apps. Not everything is a matter of taste and framerate certainly isn't. There is a reason there is a gold standard and there is clear, factual evidence how it makes games better.

Now, of course, what you PERSONALLY accept, that's is just your thing. But that is something I don't care about and I would never try to discuss. That's the issue here - whilst I talk about framerate and technology in general, people just talk about their personal experience and feel offended by my opinion because they are willing to accept something that I'd consider less than ideal. But that's not my fault.

If you take anything out of my brief interaction with you, know this:


It is your fault.

Your approach to the debate is broken, and you are doing more harm than good to your cause.


Go back to your post history, and read just the last, say, 10 or so debates you engaged in, and try to introspect on how exactly this is looking to outside observers. We can have a healthy, productive, forward-thinking and perhaps even influential discussion on framerates in videogames in these boards if we try to. But you will NEVER get there with this approach.

 

[Thrakier]

Well It could be because he's just trying to save the medium from low standards and save us all from having 'shit' taste and enjoying 'shit' games like Bloodborne.

Or it could be cos he's really pissed off ccs it's not coming to PC so he's trying to maximise any negative points no matter how minor they are to others whilst minimising all the good stuff.

It's a thread about technology, not content. I am not interested in Bloodbornes content as long as the tech isn't there. So lets keep the discussion focused on technology and let the console wars shit to the kiddies, ok?

Also, I'm not appealed to save anyone from anything except myself. I don't care about your tastes and you can happily enjoy 10FPS games as long as it doesn't affect me. The problem is, that it does affect me, since it shows in sales and sales affect what is produced next. And how developers set their priorities.

 

[RoboPlato]

When did I comment on image quality? I care about playability, not about graphical fidelity. The motion judder is bad enough to throw you off even in youtube videos. Why should I invest in a game which I know beforehand I wouldn't enjoy because of severe frame pacing issues? Videos are good enough to form an opinion about that.

Also, it's not a discussion solely about Bloodborne. You need a more general approach. It's about the way this industry is heading, it's about craftsmanship and the collective failure of the entire media when it comes to technology questions, explaining their impact on interaction and gameplay. Bloodborne is just another example for a general trend and the trend is what I mostly care about.

This whole craftsmanship and devs not understanding their medium argument you constantly use is one of the most condescending arguments I see on GAF and it seems so odd that you target a game that shows improvement in the actual framerate from that developer's previous games to act like devs are regressing. We've seen more games trying to hit higher framerates this gen to various success as well. It's a situation that is improving and games that don't hit a minimim of what's expected get roasted like ACU did. I just don't understand your targets for this argument.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

Thrakier is like some of the hardcore feminists that continues to set the movement back.
Loud, obnoxious, aggressive, unwilling to listen, condescending.

You might have some good points. Important points. But you've lost people because you're a dick and you're a terrible spokesperson for your cause.

 

[Ty4on]

The next 30 fps game that stays locked 99.9 percent of the time except for the rare dip to 28 fps, I'm coming into the DF thread and I'm going to call the game shit. I'm going to insult the developer, call it unacceptable, and say everyone's standards are shit.

I won't play the game either.
But I'll sure to project my superior higher standards onto everyone else and be extra condescending towards those who find the game to play just fine.

Let's call it what it is first. 50ms frametimes are equal to 20 FPS. Due to the mix of fast frames when it dips the dip is much more severe than the FPS would say. Similar issue to dual GPU 'microstutter' where the indicated FPS has little to do with the smoothness.

 

[the-pi-guy]

Now, of course, what you PERSONALLY accept, that's is just your thing. But that is something I don't care about and I would never try to discuss. That's the issue here - whilst I talk about framerate and technology in general, people just talk about their personal experience and feel offended by my opinion because they are willing to accept something that I'd consider less than ideal. But that's not my fault.

So you'd rather discuss what you'd personally accept, over others, because you're the only one that matters?
It's fine if you think 60FPS is minimum, it's fine if you think 120 FPS is minimum, but you need to understand that not everyone has had enough experience to be able to tell the difference. I've played games where I can't tell the difference between 20 and 60 FPS, particularly because the games were very slow paced.

And lastly, you need to recognize that people aren't playing this game and defending less than 30 FPS, they are playing and enjoying despite the drops. The drops can get fixed.

I myself have noticed drops from 30 FPS, where as with The Order, I haven't. Does that mean that The Order is more fun? No. If the frame rate dropped below 20 regularly, that'd be a problem, but as it stands it is usually 30 FPS.

And lastly I've had more fun with Bloodborne at 30 FPS, than Far Cry 4, Crysis 3 @ 60 FPS.

 

[Daingurse]

Was watching my brother play this morning, that multi-player framerate is fucking rough.

 

[Thrakier]

Thrakier is like some of the hardcore feminists that continues to set the movement back.
Loud, obnoxious, aggressive, unwilling to listen, condescending.

You might have some good points. Important points. But you've lost people because you're a dick and you're a terrible spokesperson for your cause.

That is easy to explain.

1. English is not my mother-tongue. That shows.

2. I'm constantly attacked by a ton of people at the same time.

3. Most of people engaging in a discussion like that don't know what they are talking about. May sound arrogant but it isn't meant to be. There are things you need to experience and learn. Just being told about them doesn't help.

Also, I think there is no movement or things getting better. The opposite is true, the more games are going towards mainstream, the more craftsmanship does suffer. There is nothing you can do about it. VR will stop this trend or it'll get worse. And I see no real difference in selling a sub 30FPS game with frame pacing issues as 30FPS game or seeling a 45FPS game as 60FPS game. Both is bad.

 

[>-Baron-Spamedi-<]

When did I comment on image quality? I care about playability, not about graphical fidelity. The motion judder is bad enough to throw you off even in youtube videos. Why should I invest in a game which I know beforehand I wouldn't enjoy because of severe frame pacing issues? Videos are good enough to form an opinion about that.

Obviously. That's why you played it before making your mind up. Oh wait , , ,

The motion judder affected the playability of the YouTube videoes?!?
Where can I get the version of YouTube that lets you play games? It sounds awesome.

If the motion judder makes playability so shit then why do you think the vast majority of people are telling you it doesn't?

 

[GnawtyDog]

It's not about the platform, it's about the experience. And I'd love to play content like we got it in Bloodborne, Infamous, the upcoming Uncharted and many more. At that low level of craftsmanship however, constantly compromising what makes games games, the concession seems too big.

Your loss brother. Stand strong for another 5 more years. The 99% is just too weak.

 

[>-Baron-Spamedi-<]

It's a thread about technology, not content. I am not interested in Bloodbornes content as long as the tech isn't there. So lets keep the discussion focused on technology and let the console wars shit to the kiddies?

Dude, you're the one claiming Bloodborne has shit playability (Despite having absolutely no experience of it)
Is playability solely measured in technological terms now?

 

[Moral Panic]

Can someone do a framerate analysis of Old Yharnam. I highly doubt that place only drops as low as 24 fps.

 

[Thrakier]

Obviously. That's why you played it before making your mind up. Oh wait , , ,

The motion judder affected the playability of the YouTube videoes?!?
Where can I get the version of YouTube that lets you play games? It sounds awesome.

If the motion judder makes playability so shit then why do you think the vast majority of people are telling you it doesn't?

You really shouldn't get so thrilled about that youtube thing. It just shows that you lack the experience, sorry. Everyone who invested some time in framerate stuff can tell you from a video how a game will feel, more or less. It's basically the same for every game with framerate issues, there isn't much difference. Every 10 years or so there is 30FPS game which doesn't feel like 30FPS but that is rare and with all that stutter going on in Bloodborne, it's certainly not the one.

And yes, playability is measured in game technology terms, such as latency, frame pacing and smoothness of motions. Everything else is gameplay concept. That is not what we are discussing in this thread.

 

[hawk2025]

Can someone do a framerate analysis of Old Yharnam. I highly doubt that place only drops as low as 24 fps.

I would also like to see this. I would also like to understand the "mini-freeze" that happens in one particular spot of Old Yharnam.

 

[>-Baron-Spamedi-<]

You really shouldn't get so thrilled about that youtube thing. It just shows that you lack the experience, sorry. Everyone who invested some time in framerate stuff can tell you from a video how a game will feel, more or less. It's basically the same for every game with framerate issues, there isn't much difference. Every 10 years or so there is 30FPS game which doesn't feel like 30FPS but that is rare and with all that stutter going on in Bloodborne, it's certainly not the one.

And yes, playability is measured in game technology terms, such as latency, frame pacing and smoothness of motions. Everything else is gameplay concept. That is not what we are discussing in this thread.

Lol. Lack experience? I've been playing games since, like, 1980.
I used to work in games development. I've probably forgot more about games than you've ever learnt.
Your entire argument (war?) on Bloodborne is being waged from a position of ignorance. Kinda undermines everything you're saying.
But carry on. if nothing else you are unintentionally hilarious.

 

[Thrakier]

Lol. Lack experience? I've been playing games since, like, 1980.
I used to work in games development. I've probably forgot more about games than you've ever learnt.
Your entire argument (war?) on Bloodborne is being waged from a position of ignorance. Kinda undermines everything you're saying.
But carry on. if nothing else you are unintentionally hilarious.

So, as someone playing games for 35 years AND developing games by yourself you can't tell how a sub 30FPS games feels?

Ok.