AC: Unity's devs: 60FPS doesn't look real and is less cinematic, 30FPS feels better
- Thread starter Sendou
- Start date
Uh, how is AC: Unity?
I've seen plenty of people wish for "arrogant Nintendo" to go away. One of the beauties of GAF is the breadth of wacky people who call for the deaths of various corporations, like repeating "Bloody Mary" in the mirror hoping that something will happen.
BakkaGames
Member
HAHAHAHAHA. Ubisoft is fucking pathetic. I played AC: Unity yesterday at Brasil Game Show and it had bad textures and was running sub-25 fps on the Xbox One.
No, they're literally trying to convince people that know better that 30fps > 60fps. Whether or not the consoles can handle 60fps for this game is irrelevant.
That's not even remotely what the thread is about.
The game isn't out yet.
Given how basically everyone seem to have been rumored to be "targeting 1080p/60fps", only to then reveal they're actually going for that cinematic goodness of 900p/30fps, i'd be careful to set my hopes high.
InB4 "Naughty Gods are different!".
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=907946&highlight=smash+3ds+sells
I have a copy with me. Do you know the frame rate for that one Ubisoft??
OH!! but i know... its a shame that nintendo doesnt form part of the video game industry...
Was it any fun?
OpusEponymous
Neo Member
I see where they're coming from I just think they explain what they mean poorly.
The issue as I see it relates to the impact of frame rate on the perception of psuedo-realistic character animations. When they say 30fps does not look real they mean specifically for games like Assassins Creed, 3rd person action/adventure games featuring a large amount of "realistic" human character models and animations. With such games higher frame rates can bring us towards an uncanny valley effect as the increased motion detail reveals the subtle inadequacies of current real time character animation. A lower frame rate much as happens with film will abstract the motion and allow us to perceive it as sufficiently distinct from what our minds expect
No sane person would argue that a game is not more responsive at higher frame rates but there can be a trade off between gameplay quality and visual appeal in games such as this. The "feel" of a game is a combination of visual perception and responsiveness.
Shooters, racers, fighters, plane combat games, almost all 3D Nintendo games etc... do not feature "realistic" character animation and so should always strive for higher frame rates as it benefits both game-play and visuals in them. But to say 60 should be a blanket rule is to me a bit limiting.
Note: Obviously this doesn't apply to PCs because of the variable level of hardware capability is generally advisable to give them options
The issue as I see it relates to the impact of frame rate on the perception of psuedo-realistic character animations. When they say 30fps does not look real they mean specifically for games like Assassins Creed, 3rd person action/adventure games featuring a large amount of "realistic" human character models and animations. With such games higher frame rates can bring us towards an uncanny valley effect as the increased motion detail reveals the subtle inadequacies of current real time character animation. A lower frame rate much as happens with film will abstract the motion and allow us to perceive it as sufficiently distinct from what our minds expect
No sane person would argue that a game is not more responsive at higher frame rates but there can be a trade off between gameplay quality and visual appeal in games such as this. The "feel" of a game is a combination of visual perception and responsiveness.
Shooters, racers, fighters, plane combat games, almost all 3D Nintendo games etc... do not feature "realistic" character animation and so should always strive for higher frame rates as it benefits both game-play and visuals in them. But to say 60 should be a blanket rule is to me a bit limiting.
Note: Obviously this doesn't apply to PCs because of the variable level of hardware capability is generally advisable to give them options
Some people try to pass the "30vs60" debate as something that merely affects the looks of a game, while that couldn't be further away from the truth. Framerate directly affects performance and playability.
Those who say that 60 FPS feel "off" probably haven't played many 60 FPS games. If you're used to playing at 30 FPS, of course 60 FPS will feel "off". Everything feels "off" after spending years with a different standard: driving manual and switching to automatic; driking Coke and changing it for Pepsi; getting a new pair of headphones of a different brand than your previous one, etc. But that doesn't mean that a higher framerate is bad. Get used to it and you'll soon see that you can't go back to 30.
Bony Manifesto
Member
To be fair, Naughty Dog can take as long as they want, only have to make their game for a single platform, and no doubt have a remit from Sony to make the best-looking game they possibly can.
The Assassin's Creed developers are on a tight timescale, have to make their game for multiple platforms, and no doubt are only expected to make a game that's "good enough". They must know as well as anyone that their engine is full of shit, but they can't really afford to go rooting around in there trying to fix and optimise it.
That doesn't excuse the bullshit reasoning they've come up with for their game's deficiencies, but I do sympathise with them.
Zombie James
Banned
So it's even more cinematic?
Loool, whats up with my post history? Its funny, I'm totally hopping into every framerate thread I can find - except this is the first time I'm in one -
If you'd look at my post history you'd actually see that I very much appreciate 60fps over 30.. (FFXIII on PC being 60fps, TEW having the option to unlock to 60fps) - all stuff I'm quite happy about. Hey - I even wrote negative posts when they announced TEW would be locked to 30 :O
So I dont know what you guys smoked, maybe it was the wrong users post history lol Even in here I'm not defending the 30fps. I'm merely saying that all those shitstorms are ridiculous, and that the fact that 30fps is more cinematic is true. It is. If thats good or bad - thats a whole different story.
Oh, is it because I said MGSV visuals look rough? They do. You havent watched the TGS gameplay and looked at the TGS shots I guess - if you think otherwise.
BakkaGames
Member
Not that much. I liked the freedom they give you (I had to infiltrate the Notre Dame Cathedral in the demo and I had many ways to do this), but the combat was terrible since the game was running at a super low fps.
Except 60fps feels and looks better even then. There's really no debate to be had. Trying to squeeze juice out of a granite rock isn't going to work.
I find it hard to sympathize with a company that has one of the biggest content pipelines in the business. How many Ubisoft studio franchises are we up to now?
Of course they're Mansplaining it poorly. They're talking to their customers as if they're idiots because they don't think highly of them.
That's what this sort of bad marketing and PR are. An assumption your customers are fools and can be influenced with lies.
KeanuReeves
Banned
I think that its all a matter of perception on wether or not 30fps is better for games. I dont think 30fps is that big a problem (i am loving driveclub right now) and 30fps may be the only solution if you want to push other things to the limit. For example i forgive The Order 1886 for using the extra cycles to up the graphics rendering to give it a more cinematic feel (not to mention that 30fps is closer to the cinematic look) but i think that 60fps is still better.
tl;dr 30fps is fine if it makes sense. 60fps is better.
Ps: I am so surprised people are only looking at the discussion of "HD female characters double the production cost" "parity resolution because debate over it is unacceptable" "30fps feels better than 60fps" What about the "If we only focused on graphics we could have 100fps but we wanted AI" I mean seriously thats stupid. What changes are going to be made for the AI that affects gameplay? also... 100fps? That would mean they would be able to do 1080p 60fps ffs instead of 900p 30fps..
tl;dr 30fps is fine if it makes sense. 60fps is better.
Ps: I am so surprised people are only looking at the discussion of "HD female characters double the production cost" "parity resolution because debate over it is unacceptable" "30fps feels better than 60fps" What about the "If we only focused on graphics we could have 100fps but we wanted AI" I mean seriously thats stupid. What changes are going to be made for the AI that affects gameplay? also... 100fps? That would mean they would be able to do 1080p 60fps ffs instead of 900p 30fps..
Watch_Dogs was a big hit so that should tell you a lot.
Glass Shark
Banned
As if I needed any more reasons to not buy the new Assassin's Creed game.
SolidSnakex
Member
Yes. Choosing 30fps isn't a big deal, many games run at that framerate, but it becomes a big deal when you say you're doing it for cinematic purposes.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=907946&highlight=smash+3ds+sells
I have a copy with me. Do you know the frame rate for that one Ubisoft??
OH!! but i know... its a shame that nintendo doesnt form part of the video game industry...
well the 3DS is nothing short of a powerhouse....
funkystudent
Member
Suddenly it makes sense how Marcus Beer was once PR at Ubisoft.
They clearly hire any nutter to do the job
They clearly hire any nutter to do the job
Everyone's an idiot except me!
Bl@de
Member
You forgot to post some cutscene footage from the mission where the women
storm the bastille:
Chozo_Lord
Member
Playing TLOU:R in 60 fps finally cemented how important it is and that 60 always feels/looks better in video games than 30. Like okay I get it, your new AC engine might not be able to run at 60 fps on the consoles, but trying to convince people 30 is better is a complete joke. They need to run this stuff through a smart honest PR person.
Nope. I bought it too so I wore the dunce cap as well.
Doh!
I know what the thread is about. I'm just curious because I haven't seen this much venom for games that have came out and said that they were targeting 30fps. What feels better is subjective to the actual game and the person playing it.
I'm more worried about whether Unity will actually be good or not.
So where's the pitchforks for the games that chose 30fps for just that reason?
It's been echoed enough, but that was one of the worst PR statements I've read in a long time. Completely terrible justification. Also incredibly presumptuous speaking for the industry. If anything, people's eyes are being opened to the difference after years of settling for a sub-par standard, especially with games like TLoU Remastered proving Ubisoft's comments baseless. If that's their company stance, I'm happy to not purchase any of their products. But that's not primary thing that's troublesome about these statements, it's that they are insulting their customers' intelligence here.
Yes, absolutely. It's easy to see through this sort of PR defense statements. Just be honest and state they're choosing to focus on visual effect enhancements at the expense of frame rate as a tradeoff. That kind of talk is nonsense.
Yes, absolutely. It's easy to see through this sort of PR defense statements. Just be honest and state they're choosing to focus on visual effect enhancements at the expense of frame rate as a tradeoff. That kind of talk is nonsense.
SuperSonic1305
Member
Keep digging that hole Ubisoft
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
My thoughts exactly TLoU PROVED that 60fps can still have a cinematic feel. I was actually one of those people who initially thought that 60fps in the cutscenes might cause a loss of cinematic feel and that there should be an option for 30 fps for the cutscenes too.
I was immediately proven wrong when I started playing the game.
There's treasure in the hole. If Ubisoft's history on this any indication, AC: Unity will make bank regardless of abysmal PR, poor optimization, etc.
There's a lot of misinformation out there, and every scientist seems to have a different number.
USAF testing has shown that pilots can see an image that was flashed at 1/220 of a second. While they probably wouldn't be considered 'average' I'd say that the normal figure is higher than the 70fps you mention.
http://amo.net/NT/02-21-01FPS.html
Haha, so where is that Crossing Eden guy now who said it's just the youtube compression? :lol
I think that its all a matter of perception on wether or not 30fps is better for games. I dont think 30fps is that big a problem (i am loving driveclub right now) and 30fps may be the only solution if you want to push other things to the limit. For example i forgive The Order 1886 for using the extra cycles to up the graphics rendering to give it a more cinematic feel (not to mention that 30fps is closer to the cinematic look) but i think that 60fps is still better.
tl;dr 30fps is fine if it makes sense. 60fps is better.
Ps: I am so surprised people are only looking at the discussion of "HD female characters double the production cost" "parity resolution because debate over it is unacceptable" "30fps feels better than 60fps" What about the "If we only focused on graphics we could have 100fps but we wanted AI" I mean seriously thats stupid. What changes are going to be made for the AI that affects gameplay? also... 100fps? That would mean they would be able to do 1080p 60fps ffs instead of 900p 30fps..
The issue here isn't 30FPS. "We went for 30FPS target to push GI, visual quality, and get 5k NPCs on screen" is a perfectly acceptable answer. Some might not like 30, but they're saying the real reason.
The issue here is Ubi lying about 60FPS, insulting their customers intelligence, and trying to wrap up what they apparently think is a turd into a diamond.
They're trying to have their cake and eat it too, while insulting us.
Bony Manifesto
Member
I sympathise with the individuals making the game rather than Ubisoft as a company.
Handy Fake
Member
I think you'll find there was quite a lot of pitchforking at games for that reason. If technical limitations are the reason, fair enough. Just don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.
There's nothing subjective about 60fps feeling and looking better, unless you require glasses due to vision problems.
The thread is not about venom vs. 30fps, so you did also get that wrong. It's about them straight up bullshitting gamers thinking they're fucking stupid by making factually incorrect claims about 30fps feeling 'more real' and 'cinematic.'
It's the BULLSHIT that has got everyone mad, not the 30fps. We've known Unity was gonna be 30fps for ages.
Because those company don't come out and say 30fps- cinematic feel ? And don't say 30fps better for action game ?
Their PR is shit, but the game looks like it's going to be pretty good, in my opinion.
Hopefully a decent PC port too (after a couple of patches and driver updates).
I sympathize with them too as the AC factory bosses are probably cracking the whip to get these games out on time.
I don't honestly care if AC Unity was the game of the generation. I'm never touching another AC game in my life. These guys are pathetic and don't deserve my money.