• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

My new MS conspiracy theory

TheDuce22 said:
Sorry but no they cant. And the devs do have a perfectly valid excuse because of it. Pretty graphics and effects that EVERYONE will notice or 60 frames per second to impress a couple of people on a message board. Tough decision. How many games do you see advertising 60 frames per second on the back, how many reviews mention it. As long as its stable its not even an issue.

It is alot of people, the number that must have that framerate is less though. Alot of reviews and previews do bring up if a game is 60fps too because there are those people that do care about it.

I guess next gen will have less 60fps games than last gen because now you have developers who aren't even going to try to get the framrate there like the GoW developers. Although I think we'll still have alot mainly due to Japanese developers.
 
The vast majority of people dont care, it doesnt take a supergenius to see that. The GoW developers are absoutely right in their decision as long as the framerate is stable.
 
TheDuce22 said:
And the devs do have a perfectly valid excuse because of it. Pretty graphics and effects that EVERYONE will notice or 60 frames per second to impress a couple of people on a message board. Tough decision. How many games do you see advertising 60 frames per second on the back, how many reviews mention it. As long as its stable its not even an issue.

TheDuce22 said:
The vast majority of people dont care, it doesnt take a supergenius to see that. The GoW developers are absoutely right in their decision as long as the framerate is stable.


So true.
 
TheDuce22 said:
...how many reviews mention it.

Most reviews by legit reviewers do mention when the framerate is 60fps. If the game is 30fps and stable they'll just say, "The framerate is stable" whereas if it's 60fps they'll say something like, "The game runs at a gorgeous 60fps".

And I think the 480p ->720p comparison is valid. Many people won't notice the difference between the resolutions just like they won't notice the difference between the framerates. So does that mean we shouldn't care about getting higher resolutions? No, 480p is unacceptable next-gen just like 30fps should be unacceptable.

And it's incredibly biggity but I personally consider anyone who defends 30fps because they "can't tell the difference anyways" or "don't think it's important" to be in the same level as rednecks who refuse to believe in Evolution or Nintendo fans who defend Revolution not doing 720p because "They don't have an HDTV" and "It's not important to most people"; these various groups tend to fall into my ignore category because their opinion is worthless IMO..

TheDuce22 said:
The vast majority of people dont care, it doesnt take a supergenius to see that. The GoW developers are absoutely right in their decision as long as the framerate is stable.

...so appeasing the lowest denominator should be all that we aim for with the progress of technology?
 
TheDuce22 said:
The vast majority of people dont care, it doesnt take a supergenius to see that. The GoW developers are absoutely right in their decision as long as the framerate is stable.

The vast majority will never be able to notice those little details they're adding either, but they're still doing it. Why? For the hardcore, as in the people that do notice and care about 60fps.
 
When a game is 720p its freaking obvious. I wish I could find a way to quiz some of you guys on what games youve played that are 60 vs 30, I bet you miss some of them. You have to go out of your way to notice it, its not something that jumps out.
 
Nah people who think smooth non stuttering 30fps is a deal breaker are by far much more pathetic. I wont touch PGR3 because it is 30fps nonsense etc...
 
Of course it's obvious...some examples:

Blatant 30fps:

Forza
Resident Evil 4
MGS: Twin Snakes

Blatant 60fps:

GT4
Super Monkey Ball
F Zero GX

Now are you honestly saying that there isn't a difference between 30 and 60? :lol
 
TheDuce22 said:
When a game is 720p its freaking obvious. I wish I could find a way to quiz some of you guys on what games youve played that are 60 vs 30, I bet you miss some of them. You have to go out of your way to notice it, its not something that jumps out.

I notice 60 vs 30 within 5 secs of playing any game. By the first steps a character takes I notice the framerate.

Back when MGS3 was first shown playable at E3 '04 I wrote on GAF from my few mins with the demo that I was disappointed that MGS3 was 30fps compared to the 60fps of MGS2. I think I was one of the only people who mentioned this and most people didn't believe me at the time. People like dark10x and me know our framerates and 30fps is huge disappointment everytime it appears in games.

Thank god most games this gen were 60fps (unless you were only sticking to a certain system that had 30fps in the majority).
 
123rl said:
Of course it's obvious...some examples:

Blatant 30fps:

Forza
Resident Evil 4
MGS: Twin Snakes

Blatant 60fps:

GT4
Super Monkey Ball
F Zero GX

Now are you honestly saying that there isn't a difference between 30 and 60? :lol


Err I dont think you understand what we are discussing here. Not being a difference, and not noticing it or not caring about it is not the same thing. Most people do not notice it or dont give a damn as long as it doesnt stutter, period...
 
Bebpo said:
I think I was one of the only people who mentioned this and most people didn't believe me at the time. People like dark10x and me know our framerates and 30fps is huge disappointment everytime it appears in games.

Let me write Epic. No way they want to miss out on the two person demographic!
 
Shompola said:
Nah people who think smooth non stuttering 30fps is a deal breaker are by far much more pathetic. I wont touch PGR3 because it is 30fps nonsense etc...
I agree wholeheartedly!
SolidSnakex said:
The vast majority will never be able to notice those little details they're adding either, but they're still doing it. Why? For the hardcore, as in the people that do notice and care about 60fps.
You're generalizing. So just because someone doesn't care it a game is 30/60fps they aren't "hardcore"?

In any case, the vast amount of people in either division hardcore or mainstream don't care as long as it's stable. If they did, then 30fps games would be unheard of even last generation.
Bebpo said:
People like dark10x and me know our framerates and 30fps is huge disappointment everytime it appears in games.
You two should probably stay away from games, and threads about them, that don't have confirmed 60fps. That way someone wouldn't bring it up constantly... For the good of the forum and all that.. :p
 
And where did anyone ever say that playing a 30fps game was bad?

I play tons of 30fps games and love them :)

I think it's fine for people to like 30fps games, what's not fine is to defend the choice of 30fps and try to say "ok, we're satisfied keep it coming at 30fps".

Play 30fps games and enjoy them and then next time when the developer starts on a new game DEMAND 60fps because that's how all games should be eventually.
 
raYne said:
I
You're generalizing. So just because someone doesn't care it a game is 30/60fps they aren't "hardcore"?

Did I say that? No. But people are arguing that it shouldn't matter if its not 60fps because most don't notice. But most aren't going to notice all the little fancy effects they're adding either. They're doing it for the hardcore. That's the group of gamers that do notice the framerate, not all of them care if its 60fps, but there are alot of them that do.
 
I find it a bit odd that most of my causally gaming friends find 60fps an important, instantly recognizable feature, yet few of my friends working in the gaming press can see it even if they try. Everyone I know in the development camp have a good eye for it, luckily.
 
VNZ said:
I find it a bit odd that most of my causally gaming friends find 60fps an important, instantly recognizable feature, yet few of my friends working in the gaming press can see it even if they try. Everyone I know in the development camp have a good eye for it, luckily.

you know a lot of people :D
 
casual gamers would not know the difference. Or if they did, they wouldnt care about it.

If they are defining their purchases by 30 vs 60 FPS, then i got news for ya: they aint casuals.
 
SolidSnakex said:
Did I say that? No. But people are arguing that it shouldn't matter if its not 60fps because most don't notice. But most aren't going to notice all the little fancy effects they're adding either. They're doing it for the hardcore. That's the group of gamers that do notice the framerate, not all of them care if its 60fps, but there are alot of them that do.
Err.. yes, you did:
The vast majority will never be able to notice those little details they're adding either, but they're still doing it. Why? For the hardcore, as in the people that do notice and care about 60fps.
If you want to make that point clearer then you'd have to say something about "hardcore fans who care about the fps difference", not just "for the hardcore" without the rest because that implies "hardcore gamers" in general. But that'd just further fragment the population...

The argument, well mine, is about those that care and those that don't about actual framerate numbers at all as long as it's stable.

As for the effects. Most people won't know what they are but they'll certainly notice DoF, lighting, shadowing and the like WAY before they notice the fps difference. Especially if the majority don't care as long as it's stable in the first place
 
bitwise said:
If they are defining their purchases by 30 vs 60 FPS, then i got news for ya: they aint casuals.

I don't think even the hardcore gamers define their purchases by if a game is 30 vs 60fps.

Yet at the same time I don't think they define their purchases by if a game has an additional special effect or not either.
 
raYne said:
Err.. yes, you did:

I was simply saying when you get to hardcore gamers they're ones that can notice framerate much better than casuals do. So its not like the GoW team is just doing this because casuals can notice some effect. They're doing it for the same group of gamers that can notice what 30fps and 60fps look like. Now will all of that group care? Nope, but there will be alot that do.
 
Bebpo said:
I don't think even the hardcore gamers define their purchases by if a game is 30 vs 60fps.

Yet at the same time I don't think they define their purchases by if a game has an additional special effect or not either.

Exactly. I'll still argue a more graphically impressive game at 30fps is going to be more attractive to the non-hardcore gamer than a 60fps title. And many of the hardcore gamers do not give a shit as long as the frame rate is a stable 30fps and it plays well. So why would developers want to please a few forum goers over the majority?
 
SolidSnakex said:
I was simply saying when you get to hardcore gamers they're ones that can notice framerate much better than casuals do. So its not like the GoW team is just doing this because casuals can notice some effect. They're doing it for the same group of gamers that can notice what 30fps and 60fps look like. Now will all of that group care? Nope, but there will be alot that do.

Maybe a lot more don't? Is anyone that is interested in GoW seriously not going to buy it if it isn't 60fps? Pathetic if so. Why should Epic go for 60fps at the expense of the graphics again? 30fps is fine as long as it is stable. If it isn't for you... Take the time you would have spent on GoW and go outside or something.
 
SolidSnakex said:
I was simply saying when you get to hardcore gamers they're ones that can notice framerate much better than casuals do. So its not like the GoW team is just doing this because casuals can notice some effect. They're doing it for the same group of gamers that can notice what 30fps and 60fps look like. Now will all of that group care? Nope, but there will be alot that do.
I already understood your point. But there are "hardcore" gamers who can tell, but it doesn't matter to them one way of the other, that's my point.

I'd argue that the "alot that do" care isn't anywhere near the majority, but I'l pass on that.... ;)
Cerebral Palsy said:
Is anyone that is interested in GoW seriously not going to buy it if it isn't 60fps? Pathetic if so.
On this forum? I wouldn't be surprised. The same goes for >insert game< as well..
 
Bebpo said:
I personally consider anyone who defends 30fps because they "can't tell the difference anyways" or "don't think it's important" to be in the same level as rednecks who refuse to believe in Evolution or Nintendo fans who defend Revolution not doing 720p because "They don't have an HDTV" and "It's not important to most people"; these various groups tend to fall into my ignore category because their opinion is worthless IMO..

seriously, we're all game fans here...but you definitely need to get out more.
 
I hate 30fps games too, but only because they use to have frame rate drops and I think the worst thing for a game is to become choppy just when real action takes place. Imagine PDZ @ 30 fps: first of all you cannot aim with the same precision of a 60 frame FPS, even a soft touch to the analog stick can let you loose your aim (above all when using a sniper rifle), a very difficult thing to happen when you are playing @ 60. TTP that is a friend of mine who attended the X05 crap convention, told me about PGR3 frame rate BIG problems expecially when there were too cars and in certain parts of the race (not to mention textures details late update problem a la HALO2). He was also very disappointed about the graphics of PDZ with lot of 3d elements with a low polygon count or with poor textures. Should I mention we are 1 month ahead of the US launch? I think Allard and friends have rushed games too much and that this launch will be another wasted opportunity. Obviously as a gamer I hope to be wrong and I hope to be forced to buy both X360 and Ps3, but honestly if they should have launched together in the same time I would have no doubt about my choice.

anyway IMO 60 frames are the european and japanese favorite frame rate. I really do not understand why the majority of US gamers do not need a smoother experience!
 
arrarro said:
I hate 30fps games too, but only because they use to have frame rate drops and I think the worst thing for a game is to become choppy just when real action takes place. Imagine PDZ @ 30 fps: first of all you cannot aim with the same precision of a 60 frame FPS, even a soft touch to the analog stick can let you loose your aim (above all when using a sniper rifle), a very difficult thing to happen when you are playing @ 60. TTP that is a friend of mine who attended the X05 crap convention, told me about PGR3 frame rate BIG problems expecially when there were too cars and in certain parts of the race (not to mention textures details late update problem a la HALO2). He was also very disappointed about the graphics of PDZ with lot of 3d elements with a low polygon count or with poor textures. Should I mention we are 1 month ahead of the US launch? I think Allard and friends have rushed games too much and that this launch will be another wasted opportunity. Obviously as a gamer I hope to be wrong and I hope to be forced to buy both X360 and Ps3, but honestly if they should have launched together in the same time I would have no doubt about my choice.

anyway IMO 60 frames are the european and japanese favorite frame rate. I really do not understand why the majority of US gamers do not need a smoother experience!

WHAT?
 
Musashi Wins! said:
seriously, we're all game fans here...but you definitely need to get out more.

Yea I went a little overboard. Been having a bad day and the 30/60 debate is something that really bugs me since I have damn good eyes.
 
And it's incredibly biggity but I personally consider anyone who defends 30fps because they "can't tell the difference anyways" or "don't think it's important" to be in the same level as rednecks who refuse to believe in Evolution or Nintendo fans who defend Revolution not doing 720p because "They don't have an HDTV" and "It's not important to most people"; these various groups tend to fall into my ignore category because their opinion is worthless IMO..


Wow, you seem like a prick.

EDIT: Well we all have bad days. No need to take it out on others.
 
Bebpo said:
Yea I went a little overboard. Been having a bad day and the 30/60 debate is something that really bugs me since I have damn good eyes.



May I suggest buying more Western games to appreciate the other qualities in those titles?

I've made it a point to try more Japanese games, since I've played so few this generation.
 
Bebpo said:
Yea I went a little overboard. Been having a bad day and the 30/60 debate is something that really bugs me since I have damn good eyes.


I certainly share your preference for 60fps. And I think most people can notice it if they play two games of differing frame rates in close proximity.

All the same, I think it's a dumb reductionist argument, because though it's a relevant factor that more developers should strive for...it's hardly the only determinant about whether a game is quality or not. So much not so, that arguing about it only makes people seem petty.

It really doesn't matter about genre either. Two things....I remember playing a lot of Rallisport 2, probably the best looking car game this gen, and going back to PGR2 and finding it painful to play. You couldn't help but notice the frame rate and it essentially killed my enjoyment of the game....also, I bought GT4 and Forza on the first day of release being a fan of sim racers. Forza wasn't only more critically acclaimed, it was simply more fun because the developer added a lot more to the genre than image quality. GT had the framerate and a photo mode coupled with a lot of missing improvements that made it feel archaic and lackluster in comparison. The game suffered because the developer had tunnel vision about their game...not that the general public cares, because hardcore bullshit aside, people buy marketing and style over substance for the most part.

Radiata Stories is a beautiful 60 fps. It's also inane. It's not close to being better than most of the 30fps rpgs released this year. RE4 might be the best game of the year and one of the most graphically impressive...and it's not 30fps.

My only point is this....everyone likes 60fps (I think) when it's available. But it's not close to being the end all of good game design. People who say it's meaningless might sound insincere, but no less crazy than those who try to make it into more than it is. I think a lot of both sides here are simply extending their console war attitudes about it...which is pretty obvious when you get the people involved who are involved here again.
 
Musashi Wins! said:
I certainly share your preference for 60fps. And I think most people can notice it if they play two games of differing frame rates in close proximity.

All the same, I think it's a dumb reductionist argument, because though it's a relevant factor that more developers should strive for...it's hardly the only determinant about whether a game is quality or not. So much not so, that arguing about it only makes people seem petty.

It really doesn't matter about genre either. Two things....I remember playing a lot of Rallisport 2, probably the best looking car game this gen, and going back to PGR2 and finding it painful to play. You couldn't help but notice the frame rate and it essentially killed my enjoyment of the game....also, I bought GT4 and Forza on the first day of release being a fan of sim racers. Forza wasn't only more critically acclaimed, it was simply more fun because the developer added a lot more to the genre than image quality. GT had the framerate and a photo mode coupled with a lot of missing improvements that made it feel archaic and lackluster in comparison. The game suffered because the developer had tunnel vision about their game...not that the general public cares, because hardcore bullshit aside, people buy marketing and style over substance for the most part.

Radiata Stories is a beautiful 60 fps. It's also inane. It's not close to being better than most of the 30fps rpgs released this year. RE4 might be the best game of the year and one of the most graphically impressive...and it's not 30fps.

My only point is this....everyone likes 60fps (I think) when it's available. But it's not close to being the end all of good game design. People who say it's meaningless might sound insincere, but no less crazy than those who try to make it into more than it is. I think a lot of both sides here are simply extending their console war attitudes about it...which is pretty obvious when you get the people involved who are involved here again.

I agree with you entirely that what makes a game good or bad is the gameplay, not the framerate. The majority of games in my top 10 each year are 30fps or less.

The issue being presented in this thread was kinda a wierd one though. It was less about "oh no we can't make 60fps, should this be taken as a bad thing" and more "well we can get 60fps but we don't want it so were going to add more shadows to get it back down to 30fps". It's almost as if people don't like 60fps. If Gears of War is a good game I'll buy it regardless of if the framerate is 60,30, or even 20fps. But the ideology of "we've finished a game and it runs well, so lets go back and knock the framerate down" just seems like the wrong way for people to be thinking. RE4 is the best looking GC game and probably the best looking game this year even if it's 30fps, and the mass amount of enemies is probably what keeps it from achieving 60fps.

If they were talking about gameplay additions such as adding more enemies or more objects to interact with and saying that would bring down the framerate I'd have no problem. Gameplay should always be prioritized over graphics. But if they want to drop it from 60-30fps just to make the explosions look better than it's kinda pointless.

So yeah, I have no problem if a team tries their best and struggles to finally get to 30fps with their game before releasing it. I'll buy their game ASAP as long as it's good. I just don't want to see developers who are getting 60fps talk about dropping framerates becaus they feel it's not needed.

Speevy said:
May I suggest buying more Western games to appreciate the other qualities in those titles?

Do you mean graphical qualities since the 30/60 debate has nothing to do with gameplay :P

I surprisingly do play a lot of Western and European games but I tend to play them on my PC where I put my 3d card to good use so I can get ~60fps on most :P Although I play the Bioware stuff on Xbox and enjoy them at the 15fps or so they run at :P I'm really looking forward to Oblivion (60fps) and PGR3 (which I at least know they are trying for 60fps) on the X360 as well. There actually aren't that many 30fps games even out recently that are highly rated and console-exclusive, so it's tough for me to find something 30fps that shows how a stable 30fps is good enough for most games.
 
Wait.. wait. Did Bebop just equate people who don't care about whether a video game runs at 30 frames per seconds or 60 frames per second to Evolutionists?
 
Bebpo said:
I think he means MGS4.

Which was just a trailer, far from a game.

I think it really comes down to the developer, if they want to sacrifice frame rate for visual goodness then its their call. Its their baby right ?

People have the right to prefer what they want to, i have no issues there.
 
Why is MGS4 the bench mark for EVERY single PS3 games?

Lets just hold on here - we haven't actually had a TRUE hands on with ANY PS3 games yet.
"If most multiplatform titles are 30fps on X360, then I get the feeling they will look identical on PS3 yet run 60fps. It'd be much easier to use the extra power to bump the framerate then spend time making new visual effects."

what what what what what what what what what what what what and what?

....

I wonder if the PS3 dev kit has a "DOUBLEANATE!" button ?
 
I can poop at 60fps, does that make my poop more dericious?!~



I can cook a dericious gourmet Chinese-Japanese meal at 30fps, but I can poop at 60fps!! How many of you would like to eat my poop instead of the dericious meal?!
 
YellowAce said:
I can poop at 60fps, does that make my poop more dericious?!~



I can cook a dericious gourmet Chinese-Japanese meal at 30fps, but I can poop at 60fps!! How many of you would like to eat my poop instead of the dericious meal?!

dericious ? :lol
 
DCharlie said:
Why is MGS4 the bench mark for EVERY single PS3 games?

Lets just hold on here - we haven't actually had a TRUE hands on with ANY PS3 games yet.


what what what what what what what what what what what what and what?

....

I wonder if the PS3 dev kit has a "DOUBLEANATE!" button ?

I dunno, there were plenty of 30fps PS2 games that ran 60fps on Xbox/GC like Beyond Good & Evil. You don't think the reverse could happen this time?
 
Bebpo said:
I dunno, there were plenty of 30fps PS2 games that ran 60fps on Xbox/GC like Beyond Good & Evil. You don't think the reverse could happen this time?

hold on to that thought, I got to go take a (60fps) poop. BRB
 
"I dunno, there were plenty of 30fps PS2 games that ran 60fps on Xbox/GC like Beyond Good & Evil. You don't think the reverse could happen this time?"

Plenty of games?

How many examples can you think of where the frame rate doubled between Xbox and PS2?

I couldn't think of a single one although i don't particularly keep the tabs on what the PS2 version/xbox version do in comparison - the only game concerning frame rate that came to mind was MGS2 - and the fact that it ran worse on the Xbox than it did on the PS2.

It'll come down to a number of factors- for instance : if a game is built specifically round the strengths of one machine or the other, then it's unlikely it's going to suddenly run at twice the frame rate.

Ah, actually - i thought of one game! Double Steal on PS2 ran at 60fps whilst the Xbox version ran at 30fps. But the two games were pretty different looking.
 
Top Bottom