Support NeoGAF

[I Stalk Alone]

I don't get this argument, do they want us to actually play their games or just watch them as movies? Games should mostly be interactive and not cinematic. The smooth feel when playing in 120fps feels so much more "real" than anything a 30fps control scheme will give you. It's like these folks make their game and hope everyone just watches a twitch stream or something.

 

[Cubed]

Fuck. off. There isnt a game that exists that doesn't look better at 60FPS.

Being only able to hit 30fps is fine and playable, but dont make it out like it is a design decision.

Even worse that less than 4 months ago, this game was targetting 60FPS. Cut the bullshit.

Pretty much.

This may be the first time I'm out and openly hoping a game fails miserably. It's like Ubisoft is blatantly admitting they weren't striving to make a good game with the news that's come out this week.

 

[Carlisle]

There was a thread a while back about FPS and a lot of people were arguing that 60 FPS is a design decision. This article sounds like it goes right along with that. What's with all the hate now?

 

[nailbombxx]

My jaw dropped when i read that thread title.

All of these just sound like really poor excuses not to max out the potential of hardware, which they already acknowledge would take too much work. Bravo, Ubisoft.

 

[Messofanego]

I don't get this argument, do they want us to actually play their games or just watch them as movies? Games should mostly be interactive and not cinematic. The smooth feel when playing in 120fps feels so much more "real" than anything a 30fps control scheme will give you. It's like these folks make their game and hope everyone just watches a twitch stream or something.

Considering how little agency is given to the player in Ubisoft open world games, especially with scripted missions that don't take advantage of the open world ("leaving mission area"), you might as well. Not much of your experience will change.

 

[rjc571]

South Park: Stick of Truth would not look better at 60fps. It would look worse.

Err no, it would look much better. The show would look better if it was 60 fps as well.

 

[simplythebest]

STOP TALKING UBIOSOFT PLEASE!!!

 

[That1BlackGuy]

I want to join Ubisoft's PR staff just so I can get paid to troll because no matter what they say, Assassin's Creed still sells like hotcakes. I mean is honestly just not trendy anymore? Yeah you're going to piss people off anyway but still.

 

[Kocolino67]

Finally...this explains why TLoUR felt less cinematic and more unreal than the PS3 version.

 

[Muppet of a Man]

Haha. What a bunch of disingenuous twits. I can't believe they are parroting this stuff to gamers.

 

[JohnGrimm]

I feel bad for the PR people that will have to clean up this mess.

 

[Dictator93]

In RAD's case they also said that 30fps allowed them to add a lot of effects and push visuals, so they were at least honest.

I swear there was something about the game being more cinematic at a lower framerate from the RAD dudes... maybe I am making tha tup though.

 

[CambriaRising]

I swear there was something about the game being more cinematic at a lower framerate from the RAD dudes... maybe I am making tha tup though.

There was, but the real reason was to make it prettier.

 

[aspiegamer]

Is there a specific reason they've decided to deviate from the generally-standard-and-expected corporate line of "it's where we ended up after meeting our other targets"? Sure, it's just code for "we promised too much so we're cutting back" but we're all used to it and it means you tried.

Seriously, is saying "we tried, sorry" really so hard? So hard that "we're lazy bastards" is somehow preferable, apparently?

No, we don't need 60fps to enjoy ourselves but we sure as hell deserve it by default. Don't tell us we're idiots.

 

[j3ff3]

That's sweet, but no.


Never been more appropriate.

except we aren't PR people.

It's their job to know their market. Literally nothing else. All this shows us is that they clearly don't. In fact they've gone so far as to recycle an old blunder. So it isn't like they don't know the score, they're just choosing to ignore it. Probably because its still press.

so i don't have any sympathy. It is just a case of terrible project management, because PR should be within this domain. This isn't a lowly indie dev making a basic mistake in a market that dwarfs them. Its a massive publisher thats completely out of touch with their market. Which, when you get to the PR dept, is an issue, and not a case of internet over-reaction. Its a public relations department that hasn't worked out that the public they're targeting who actually care will be insulted by this, and those that they're targeting who don't won't flinch regardless. Which will be most people.

 

[RE_Player]

This is how much devs and publishers respect their audience now. Telling people 30fps is better than 60. It's actually insulting how dumb they think their consumers are.

 

[Sol_Goodguy]

Between this and the parity thing, Ubisoft has done a pretty good job putting its foot in its mouth lately. Whatever happened to competent PR teams?

After playing The Last of Us Remastered I can't say I agree with any of Ubisoft's claims. I'm thoroughly convinced that 60fps not only plays better than 30fps but it looks significantly better as well. And 30fps being more cinematic is just straight up silliness.

 

[martino]

There was, but the real reason was to make it prettier.

Are you assuming unity at 30 fps isn't prettier than it would be at 60 fps ?

 

[MattKeil]

Err no, it would look much better. The show would look better if it was 60 fps as well.

The show would look ridiculous at 60 fps. It wouldn't add anything, and would only make it look strange. You don't gain anything from it. The game is trying to exactly duplicate the show, so running it at a higher framerate than the show is also counterproductive.

 

[Doctoglethorpe]

"it doesn't look real"

Wrong. It looks too real. Its unusual, we've gotten used to 24/30fps but really thats whats unreal. Usual, but unreal.

Once you get used to it, 60fps looks real and it is 30fps that looks unreal, laggy.

Movies also face an additional problem games do not, so bringing up the Hobbit is not fair. In animation and CG we already understand on an inner level that it is not real, there is no true illusion there, only imitation. Movies on the other hand, at least live action ones, are an attempt to create an illusion within reality. With the added information 48/60fps provides, that illusion is easier to see through to the human eye. We see the fakeness that was already always there that the lack of information 24fps creates was able to artificially hide. The solution then is not to stick to the old way, to continue using laggy low-information display to hide the seems in the illusion, but to get used to the new increased perception and work to simply make a stronger illusion that can withstand it.

60fps is only the start too. In another decade it will be 60fps vs 120 fps. The more frames per second, the more visual information, the more real the virtual becomes, and that is the path we are on.

 

[MEsoJD]

bullshit!

 

[LastNac]

It's a good things games aren't movies so we don't have to worry about making them adhere to some set of "rules" from another form of media.

That's like saying "Games aren't books so there shouldn't be any dialogue."

When something is intentionally trying to emulate a certain aesthetic than it shouldn't be a problem. It's not a question of "rules", it's a matter of standards. They both are visual mediums.

 

[LastNac]

I'm talking mostly about the fucking framerate, this is what this thread is all about. Are you trying to say below 30FPS is acceptable? have ever seen a game that runs at 20-25FPS?

Also, lol @ people saying Unity has better animations than MGSV. I completely disagree.

Best running animation ever.

Reminds me of my one complaint in regards to TLoU:R and 60FPS still being cinematic. TLoU:R seemed to either lack or have less emphasis on motion blur, which in my opinion made it a little less cinematic in my eyes.

Great to see motion blur can still be implemented with 60FPS though, MGS5 is a testament to that.

 

[jett]

I don't see a problem with this.

I do agree that 30fps feels more cinematic than 60fps. Main reason why movies lock their frame rate below 30 and soap operas stay at 60 for 60hz, 50 for 50hz.

This generation of gamers act too much like spoiled brats who want everything their own way and not the director's way in which the game is intended to be played and seen.

wat

24fps "feels cinematic" because that's what movies have looked like for 90 years. And it was set to that framerate due to technical issues relating to sound. That's right, the "cinematic" standard is nearly a century old and has nothing to do with how a movie looks.

Movies are 24fps for two reasons these days: it's what people and filmmakers are used to, and because that's what the vast majority of theaters worldwide support.

 

[stryke]

Movies are 24fps for two reasons these days: it's what people and filmmakers are used to, and because that's what the vast majority of theaters worldwide support.

Also, I think it's the minimum framerate where an average person thinks they're seeing a moving picture rather than a series of still images.

 

[Scrabble]

If 30 frames allows a developer to increase graphical fidelity, increase npc counts, scale of the world, etc. Than doesn't that make the game more cinematic than it otherwise would have been if they were targeting 60fps, and forced to make compromises to achieve 60fps? Or is the dev making the argument, "all things equal, 30fps is more cinematic than 60fps"?