Support NeoGAF

[Vigilant Walrus]

So much anger in this thread.


I think that he is wrong, and that he is right. Things are being mixed up here.


"Cinematic" as in the sense that it's in the style of cinema film which has operated on 24 fps since the dawn of cinema. Yes, in this sense people feel that the pictures move to fast, or it looks like cam, or gopro footage. We're conditioned to watch movies in 24fps, so for a lot of people watching a movie like the Hobbit in 48 is an anti-climatic experience.
For a lot of people it's also off putting when buying TVs that are great for sports and video games thanks to high refresh rates, but most TVs have an option to disable this for those types of content.



I can totally see what the Ubi guy is saying, but here is the thing - You make the cut scenes run at 30 fps, and the gameplay at 60 fps. When the game is being absolutely hectic with so many NPCs you want the smoother frames so it's easier for your eyes. This is function above form, but even more so, the form is also helped during the gameplay.



So yes, by all means 30 fps in cinematic cut scenes, but 60 fps in gameplay, because it's an action game with insane amount of characters on screen.

 

[fedexpeon]

I really need to get a nice pc. not that the ac ports are amazing. it'll just prevent at least some disappointment with some games.

If they are allowing you to do 60fps on PC, then they are lying about 60 doesn't fit for action adventure game nor looking unrealistic.
Their principle and integrity will be on the line.
My prediction, no 60fps on PC to be consistent with their words....then again, Ubisoft lied to us about WD.

 

[Keby]

"At Ubisoft for a long time we wanted to push 60 fps. I don't think it was a good idea because you don't gain that much from 60 fps and it doesn't look like the real thing."

Does this mean Rainbow Six Siege will also be 30fps for that cinematic flair?

If so, I just...

 

[the_batman]

I imagine he's talking to people who only buy one or two games every year, people who don't know the difference between gameplay and graphics.

how did AssCreed get into that group of games, the ones that reach the casual and dedicated. games like COD, GTA, etc.

 

[Braag]

Ubisoft says the darndest things

 

[liquidtmd]

At this rate: Ubisoft tomorrow --

"Oh Hai. For Unity we're gonna need all console and PC users to be online connected for the single player. It's a sensible choice to ensure consistency through the experience. It's not DRM, we prefer the term RDM"

 

[travisbickle]

"At Ubisoft for a long time we wanted to push 60 fps. I don't think it was a good idea because you don't gain that much from 60 fps and it doesn't look like the real thing. It's a bit like The Hobbit movie, it looked really weird.

"And in other games it's the same - like the Rachet and Clank series [where it was dropped]. So I think collectively in the video game industry we're dropping that standard because it's hard to achieve, it's twice as hard as 30fps, and its not really that great in terms of rendering quality of the picture and the image."

wtf! The guy sounds like a forum poster, he doesn't make sense?

 

[TheForceWithin]

Why stop at 30fps? Why not target dat 15fps for an extra special cinematic experience? Who needs those extra frames anyway... Less frames the better amirite?

As a PC gamer I don't understand why devs have to continuously lie. Why not be honest and just come out to say you want a higher graphic fidelity on the consoles and are willing to sacrifice fps to achieve it?

 

[thewhitehawk]

It actually feels like right now they're going out of their way to ensure I don't purchase the game. Well if that's the way they want to kill the franchise that's their own prerogative, shame that something with good potential has to go down like this.

 

[jpax]

AC is the last game you need 60fps for.

and here we have one of the examples why gaming is going downhill...

 

[Steel]

Isn't Ubisoft just lovely?


But fuck, I can't think of one AAA publisher that doesn't have a sucky public image at this point.

 

[eot]

Tell that to VR.

Less real, ugh.

 

[Arxisz]

What a fucking disgrace.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

I really need to get a nice pc. not that the ac ports are amazing. it'll just prevent at least some disappointment with some games.

Ubisoft games on PC come with their own unique set of problems, ranging from dogshit optimization to the uPlay client.

 

[R_Deckard]

The PR team after there well earned week off...unbeknownst to what is happening back at Ubisoft HQ!

 

[hurricanes]

Do they actually expect people to buy this nonsense?

 

[Camp Freddie]

UBISOFT: Stop letting your artists make statements about technical issues.

Or maybe, UBISOFT: Stop trolling us, not all publicity is good pubicity.

For what it's worth, I don't care if it's 900p30, if that's what's needed to provide the best game with the available hardware.

It seems like the two sets of Ubisoft comments are mixed up. The CPU bottleneck justifies 30FPS, while overall image quality might justify 900p.
How about this for a sane explanation:

"Unity has massive advances in rendering large crowds of NPCs, which costs a lot of computing resource. We found CPU resources limits us to 30FPS and that moving to 60FPS would result in a much 'emptier' game"
"Unity has incredibly lush Parisian landscapes buzzing with the activity of an urban metropolis. We found that by using 900p, we could use advanced lighting techniques to really bring the city to life. We did some experimental builds using 1080p, but it required too many compromises in other image quality options. As a stealth game, we felt that better lighting and shadowing was a higher priority than raw pixel count."

 

[Slowdive]

The feel of 30fps.

Ubisoft on a roll lately.

 

[KKRT00]

Omg, next ones after Ready of Dawn.
Didnt they see how stupid this was the first we heard this and how we reacted?

 

[Bl@de]

Alex Amancio, the game's Creative Director, reiterated this point: "30 was our goal, it feels more cinematic. 60 is really good for a shooter, action adventure not so much. It actually feels better for people when it's at that 30fps. It also lets us push the limits of everything to the maximum.
"It's like when people start asking about resolution. Is it the number of the quality of the pixels that you want? If the game looks gorgeous, who cares about the number?"

I better don't say anything. I just became a member. Don't want to get banned. Ubisoft is on my shitlist anyway but woah they really aim for the topspot this year.

 

[fedexpeon]

how did AssCreed get into that group of games, the ones that reach the casual and dedicated. games like COD, GTA, etc.

From my perspective, AC main audience is people without disposable income eg: kids and teenagers or parent who doesn't want to keep wasting 60.00 on a game.

Open world game with "100hrs+" gameplay gives the bang for their money mentality to these people.
They know they can "play" for hours by wandering around, and collecting floating orbs.
So they will keep buying AC year after year because they believe they are playing something that can be considered a game.

 

[Canis lupus]

So wrong. It would be a much smoother experience.

I dunno AC is a game that almost plays itself, you don't need to be fast or anything.

and here we have one of the examples why gaming is going downhill...

Because gaming has been going downhill in the last 20 years...

 

[lightchris]

What he thinks the Hobbit movie didnt look good?

Man is creature of habit. It's hard to adjust to something new and unaccustomed (even if it's better from an objective viewpoint). So some like it, others don't.
And I dare say this might be true for fps in games too. If a game director really wants his game to feel like a classic movie, or thinks that this movie feeling is more important than the other aspects that come with lower fps, it can be a comprehensible decision. Even if I don't like it. One problem though is that this "cinematic experience" requires movie quality motion blur too. And games are still quite far from that as it is really expensive (more so than 60 fps actually).

 

[Paasei]

These worthless excuses are starting to annoy me very badly.

 

[Moral Panic]

"Cinematic" as in the sense that it's in the style of cinema film which has operated on 24 fps since the dawn of cinema. Yes, in this sense people feel that the pictures move to fast, or it looks like cam, or gopro footage. We're conditioned to watch movies in 24fps, so for a lot of people watching a movie like the Hobbit in 48 is an anti-climatic experience.
For a lot of people it's also off putting when buying TVs that are great for sports and video games thanks to high refresh rates, but most TVs have an option to disable this for those types of content.

30fps VG != 30FPS cinema. With cinema at HFR the camera gets less exposure and therefore looks vastly different. With VG this problem simply does not exist. I've played Dark Souls with a button to switch between 60 and 30 fps. There is simply no competition. Anyone who says 30FPS = More cinematic is selling uninformed bullshit.

 

[Kintaro]

What he thinks the Hobbit movie didnt look good?

The HFR version is the best version and it´s something I hope every movie will adopt

Truth be told, The Hobbit looks like shit no matter the framerate.

 

[jpax]

Because gaming has been going downhill in the last 20 years...

The acceptance of this kind of crap has definitely risen to a new high, thanks to people like you, who spread this nonsense!

 

[Mononoke]

So much anger in this thread.


I think that he is wrong, and that he is right. Things are being mixed up here.


"Cinematic" as in the sense that it's in the style of cinema film which has operated on 24 fps since the dawn of cinema. Yes, in this sense people feel that the pictures move to fast, or it looks like cam, or gopro footage. We're conditioned to watch movies in 24fps, so for a lot of people watching a movie like the Hobbit in 48 is an anti-climatic experience.
For a lot of people it's also off putting when buying TVs that are great for sports and video games thanks to high refresh rates, but most TVs have an option to disable this for those types of content.



I can totally see what the Ubi guy is saying, but here is the thing - You make the cut scenes run at 30 fps, and the gameplay at 60 fps. When the game is being absolutely hectic with so many NPCs you want the smoother frames so it's easier for your eyes. This is function above form, but even more so, the form is also helped during the gameplay.



So yes, by all means 30 fps in cinematic cut scenes, but 60 fps in gameplay, because it's an action game with insane amount of characters on screen.

Sure. But as you point out yourself everything negates his points as he's talking about the overall game (which isn't passive and is interactive with camera control and reaction). So while he's technically right about passive film using 30 FPS it's a pretty lazy argument to try to apply it to the rest of the game and then say it's a better experience.

No wonder people are angry. They must think their audience is stupid with that kind of PR spin.

 

[Canis lupus]

These worthless excuses are starting to annoy me very badly.

I wish someone collected all the dumb excuses they come up with. (avoiding the debates, they don't speak french becuz of the Animus, cinematic experience etc)

The acceptance of this kind of crap has definitely risen to a new high, thanks to people like you, who spread this nonsense!

Untrue and nonsense until you can prove we've gradually seen less 60fps in favor of 30fps games since the PS1 era.

 

[MCee]

Ubisoft needs to stop talking already.

Can this be said enough? Haha. It's fun to see this unravel

 

[RedAssedApe]

im impressed they can say these things with a straight face

 

[CaptainGyro]

I'm throwing up at the fact that a reputable developer has assumedly convinced himself of these things.

I genuinely felt like throwing up too. WTF is wrong with these people

 

[muteant]

 

[mrlion]

I wish someone collected all the dumb excuses they come up with. (avoiding the debates, they don't speak french becuz of the Animus, cinematic experience etc)

lol I find that "no french" statement ironic...you would think that a french developer would give at least french accents to a game that takes place in France. Not Ubisoft though.

 

[Mask]

What the?

These aren't Movies, they're Games!

I don't play them because I want a cinematic experience, I play them because I want to play a fucking Video Game. I can easily go the damn cinema if I want to watch a film.

30fps doesn't remind me of a film in the slightest, it's just a more jerky game with more input lag. Hell, Last of Us is 60fps on PS4 now, and that hasn't lost any of the movie feel it had when it was 30fps!

30fps doesn't make your game feel like a movie, just tell the truth and say you couldn't get your game to 60fps.

 

[Bricky]

So wrong. It would be a much smoother experience.

I've recently upgraded my GPU from a GTX 560 Ti to a GTX 970, which made the performance of Black Flag on my PC jump from 30FPS to 60FPS, and honestly I don't even really mind the former in the case of AC. Sure, of course I prefer the 60FPS experience and of course it is a smoother experience, but for something with relatively slow action and camera movement like Assassins Creed 30FPS is absolutely fine.

It's just Ubisoft PR Antoinette saying 'Let them eat 30FPS' in such a shitty, completely ridiculous manner that should piss people off. If you can make your game 60FPS, go for it, if you can't without significant comprise to everything else that makes the game look good then don't make up some bullshit excuse for it.

 

[Ladekabel]

Whenever I read a dev saying "30FPS is better because dat cinematic feel. 60 FPS is for genre X" I wonder, if these devs even play (their own) games.

 

[Ade]

"we added females, they are harder to render, so it's 30fps"

 

[Bl@de]

So much anger in this thread.


I think that he is wrong, and that he is right. Things are being mixed up here.


"Cinematic" as in the sense that it's in the style of cinema film which has operated on 24 fps since the dawn of cinema. Yes, in this sense people feel that the pictures move to fast, or it looks like cam, or gopro footage. We're conditioned to watch movies in 24fps, so for a lot of people watching a movie like the Hobbit in 48 is an anti-climatic experience.
For a lot of people it's also off putting when buying TVs that are great for sports and video games thanks to high refresh rates, but most TVs have an option to disable this for those types of content.



I can totally see what the Ubi guy is saying, but here is the thing - You make the cut scenes run at 30 fps, and the gameplay at 60 fps. When the game is being absolutely hectic with so many NPCs you want the smoother frames so it's easier for your eyes. This is function above form, but even more so, the form is also helped during the gameplay.



So yes, by all means 30 fps in cinematic cut scenes, but 60 fps in gameplay, because it's an action game with insane amount of characters on screen.

Hell no. That stupid cinematic look we are all used to only exists because film was very expensive at the beginning of the 20th Century. 100 years ago! Thats why you took 24fps. Because it's the number where it at least doesn't look like stop motion.

But we live in a digital age and cinema has nothing to do with video games that you have to control. Hell for me the future is 144fps and more. The more the better.

I hate this cinematic debate only because people don't like new stuff. Then let them ride horses and burn witches ffs. Those people better not travel by boat. Could fall down the end of the world.

 

[DaSorcerer7]

I for one hope that Ubisoft continues making statements, just for the lulz.

 

[Hastati]

I'm off videogames for awhile, but is the UPlay client still a thing that actually exists?

If so, is it as terribly terrible as it was when they first started using it? I honestly don't understand why these companies insist on launching their own distribution platforms, since none of them seem to know what the fuck they are doing with design/implementation/customer support/platormception of having to open them up inside of each other.

 

[Staf]

Hey Ubisoft, if all these articles and interviews are done to try and convince me to buy your game you are failing! I want to buy your game, honestly i do, but you are making it very difficult!

 

[jpax]

Untrue and nonsense until you can prove we've gradually seen less 60fps in favor of 30fps games since the PS1 era.

Ok. Now I know you must be joking got me.

 

[Liljagare]

Who needs 30 fps? Why, a good solid 10 fps can look good!!!!!!

 

[iNvid02]

i have to disagree with that, 30fps has become tolerable but its far from ideal for me

 

[demolitio]

Kind of ironic for someone at Ubisoft to say they're going for parity to avoid discussions while talking about how a framerate allows them to push everything to the maximum. Having them talk about the image in particular after that parity debacle makes everything so much funnier on top of their absurd reasons for preferring 30 FPS.

 

[Beefy]

I wonder what Ubi will say next?

 

[Beefy]

Who needs 30 fps? Why, a good solid 10 fps can look good!!!!!!

Why not 1 fps to give that old cinema feel?

 

[Corpekata]

I'm off videogames for awhile, but is the UPlay client still a thing that actually exists?

If so, is it as terribly terrible as it was when they first started using it? I honestly don't understand why these companies insist on launching their own distribution platforms, since none of them seem to know what the fuck they are doing with design/implementation/customer support/platormception of having to open them up inside of each other.

It's not as bad but it still hasn't really done anything noteworthy. At least EA appear to be trying with Origin.

 

[Kezen]

Communication is certainly not Ubisoft's strong suit I see.