Wow Lair frame rate is all over the place - Page 12

cgcg · 04:17 PM

Quote:

looks like it?

Hope that's not a reply to my post because the 720P video is in 480x272 res and so is the 575P video.

Quote:

Blue Dragon is the one miss that comes to mind (that framerate is often *EXTREMELY* low - lower than AC4 even).

Yea that was pretty funny. I remember he accused the other guy of agenda because he said it has framerate problems. Heh.

methane47 · (08-03-2007, 04:21 PM)

Originally Posted by DCharlie:

hasn`t ttp pointed out that it wasn`t supposed to show the frame rate?

I thought the whole point of the comparison was to show the difference in framerate between the two resolutions.

TTP said that the lower resolution was alot smoother than 720p and he posted those two vids as an example.

Now after seeing those I realize that he really is a big framerate whore... And I'm not going to bash his head in like some others just because he has a different opinion.. I just know now to take any of his framerate comments about any future games with a huge chunk of salt... But I still value his opinion.. he seems like a cool cat.

DuckRacer · (08-03-2007, 04:30 PM)

Originally Posted by thelurkinghorror:

Sorry guys but I repeat myself... I played ten stages and I think the frame rate actually is not an issue, yeah, better have a game run smoothly, but Lair still playable. I remember a lot of good game with this fault!

The main issue, in my opinion, is the confusion on the screen. I never feel part of the action.

Ah! After ten stages I don't think this is a short game, but respawn points are very close each other. Need to finish the game and restart with harder difficulty.

So in terms of gameplay, is it better or worse than SW Rogue Leader?

WhiteAce · (08-03-2007, 05:17 PM)

Quote:

As a framerate whore myself, TTP is one of the few people around here that I would trust with making such judgements and I believe a lot of people feel the same way.

calling out was perhaps slightly the wrong phrase, but yeah

Quote:

Heh, you're not bad yourself. I remember the Armored Core complaints and they were spot on.

I`m not massively upset by badframe rates, but it really does depend on the game - if something is 30fps, i`ll moan but as long as the frame rate is steady (for action games) then i can live with it i guess. I can`t believe 60fps still isn`t standard :(

Quote:

Blue Dragon is the one miss that comes to mind (that framerate is often *EXTREMELY* low - lower than AC4 even).

this is still a weird one for me - i see the odd glitch in battles, but we are talking a split second slowdown. I haven`t seen anything like what Bebpo said he saw (yes, cgcg, i disagreed with Bebpo because he said that the slow down was so bad that it was making the battles take 3-4 minutes long - which was completely counter to what i saw).

Also - I called bebpo out on AC4 on PS3 - i`m pretty sure i was right on that too!

Quote:

Yea that was pretty funny. I remember he accused the other guy of agenda because he said it has framerate problems. Heh.

I didn`t call him out because he has an agenda, i called him out because he has shite taste in games... which may change hour to hour for the first 25 hours play of a game! ;)

<3 bebpo though.

DenogginizerOS · (08-03-2007, 05:54 PM)

What I am most interested in at this point is how much effect the control and framerate issues had on EGM's review versus the gameplay/design issues that are reminiscent of the Rogue Squadron games. If the score is mostly about framerate and control, then I am a bit more optimistic. However, if they are more critical of the gameplay/design issues then I am less optimistic. From Julien's comments, it sounded like EGM was really put off by the control issues.

dark10x · (08-03-2007, 06:21 PM)

Quote:

this is still a weird one for me - i see the odd glitch in battles, but we are talking a split second slowdown. I haven`t seen anything like what Bebpo said he saw (yes, cgcg, i disagreed with Bebpo because he said that the slow down was so bad that it was making the battles take 3-4 minutes long - which was completely counter to what i saw).

I don't know if it would extend battle length but I do feel that it damages the timing element (with turns). The framerate is generally sub-30 fps (with tearing) throughout battle with pits in the teens becoming rather common. Fortunately, the game isn't exactly hyper interactive as it is an RPG so it really doesn't ruin anything. It's just frustrating as the visuals are so incredibly good otherwise.

Takuhi · (08-03-2007, 07:07 PM)

Originally Posted by DCharlie:

(disko!!!)

so which version were Play playing???
this seems like a tacit admission that the game was fundamentally hosed, yet play reviewed it first.... and gave it a 9! or did they get the real version from the future that had the problem solved or something?

weird that they didn`t mention the problems - weirder still that TTP is being called on bullshit by people yet even F5 seem to be admitting a problem.
funny that.

We (Play) received the same review copy that I assume all the other mags did, which had optimized frame rates in the earlier missions, but poor frame rates in the last few missions and several bugs. We contacted Factor 5 and asked for all known issues and Julian himself replied with a detailed list, promising that the later levels were being optimized for frame rates, the bugs were being fixed, and that one aspect of the control would be improved. They said they would have a gold master candidate ready by our ship date, so I wrote the review on the assumptions that their promises would be kept, got the gold master candidate right before we went to press, and played that version for a few hours to confirm that they had addressed the issues. That gold master candidate was dated roughly a month ago, and as far as I know represents the game's final optimization.

I'm not sure what version the OP played—ours were never labeled "Preview Code", but a print mag's Review Code is sometimes a web site's Preview Code. Our last-received version of the game does not run at a rock-solid 30 fps, but I did not consider the frame rate problems to be an issue at all. I don't mind a few frame rate dips into the 20's here and there, if it's for the purpose of making an otherwise amazing looking game. I'm certainly not as sensitive to frame rate issues as the OP, but I don't think the average game enthusiast is either.

Just something to point out to the people who want to hate on Lair here—Sony and Factor 5 went all out to make sure the print mags got review copies as early as possible and frequent updates so that they could have reviews out before the game's release (which was at that point supposed to be August 8th, I think). Companies do NOT do that when they don't have a lot of faith in their games, so clearly both Factor 5 and Sony thought they had a critical hit on their hands, and any suggestion that they're trying to bury it or "send it out to die" is absurd. And having written the 9 review, I (obviously) agree.

cicatriz · 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by Takuhi:

We (Play) received the same review copy that I assume all the other mags did, which had optimized frame rates in the earlier missions, but poor frame rates in the last few missions and several bugs. We contacted Factor 5 and asked for all known issues and Julian himself replied with a detailed list, promising that the later levels were being optimized for frame rates, the bugs were being fixed, and that one aspect of the control would be improved. They said they would have a gold master candidate ready by our ship date, so I wrote the review on the assumptions that their promises would be kept, got the gold master candidate right before we went to press, and played that version for a few hours to confirm that they had addressed the issues. That gold master candidate was dated roughly a month ago, and as far as I know represents the game's final optimization.

I'm not sure what version the OP played—ours were never labeled "Preview Code", but a print mag's Review Code is sometimes a web site's Preview Code. Our last-received version of the game does not run at a rock-solid 30 fps, but I did not consider the frame rate problems to be an issue at all. I don't mind a few frame rate dips into the 20's here and there, if it's for the purpose of making an otherwise amazing looking game. I'm certainly not as sensitive to frame rate issues as the OP, but I don't think the average game enthusiast is either.

Just something to point out to the people who want to hate on Lair here—Sony and Factor 5 went all out to make sure the print mags got review copies as early as possible and frequent updates so that they could have reviews out before the game's release (which was at that point supposed to be August 8th, I think). Companies do NOT do that when they don't have a lot of faith in their games, so clearly both Factor 5 and Sony thought they had a critical hit on their hands, and any suggestion that they're trying to bury it or "send it out to die" is absurd. And having written the 9 review, I (obviously) agree.

Megaton

Reilly · (08-03-2007, 07:15 PM)

Originally Posted by Takuhi:

We (Play) received the same review copy that I assume all the other mags did, which had optimized frame rates in the earlier missions, but poor frame rates in the last few missions and several bugs. We contacted Factor 5 and asked for all known issues and Julian himself replied with a detailed list, promising that the later levels were being optimized for frame rates, the bugs were being fixed, and that one aspect of the control would be improved. They said they would have a gold master candidate ready by our ship date, so I wrote the review on the assumptions that their promises would be kept, got the gold master candidate right before we went to press, and played that version for a few hours to confirm that they had addressed the issues. That gold master candidate was dated roughly a month ago, and as far as I know represents the game's final optimization.

I'm not sure what version the OP played—ours were never labeled "Preview Code", but a print mag's Review Code is sometimes a web site's Preview Code. Our last-received version of the game does not run at a rock-solid 30 fps, but I did not consider the frame rate problems to be an issue at all. I don't mind a few frame rate dips into the 20's here and there, if it's for the purpose of making an otherwise amazing looking game. I'm certainly not as sensitive to frame rate issues as the OP, but I don't think the average game enthusiast is either.

Just something to point out to the people who want to hate on Lair here—Sony and Factor 5 went all out to make sure the print mags got review copies as early as possible and frequent updates so that they could have reviews out before the game's release (which was at that point supposed to be August 8th, I think). Companies do NOT do that when they don't have a lot of faith in their games, so clearly both Factor 5 and Sony thought they had a critical hit on their hands, and any suggestion that they're trying to bury it or "send it out to die" is absurd. And having written the 9 review, I (obviously) agree.

Dennis Dyack was right.

methane47 · (08-03-2007, 07:15 PM)

Originally Posted by Takuhi:

We (Play) received the same review copy that I assume all the other mags did, which had optimized frame rates in the earlier missions, but poor frame rates in the last few missions and several bugs. We contacted Factor 5 and asked for all known issues and Julian himself replied with a detailed list, promising that the later levels were being optimized for frame rates, the bugs were being fixed, and that one aspect of the control would be improved. They said they would have a gold master candidate ready by our ship date, so I wrote the review on the assumptions that their promises would be kept, got the gold master candidate right before we went to press, and played that version for a few hours to confirm that they had addressed the issues. That gold master candidate was dated roughly a month ago, and as far as I know represents the game's final optimization.

I'm not sure what version the OP played—ours were never labeled "Preview Code", but a print mag's Review Code is sometimes a web site's Preview Code. Our last-received version of the game does not run at a rock-solid 30 fps, but I did not consider the frame rate problems to be an issue at all. I don't mind a few frame rate dips into the 20's here and there, if it's for the purpose of making an otherwise amazing looking game. I'm certainly not as sensitive to frame rate issues as the OP, but I don't think the average game enthusiast is either.

Just something to point out to the people who want to hate on Lair here—Sony and Factor 5 went all out to make sure the print mags got review copies as early as possible and frequent updates so that they could have reviews out before the game's release (which was at that point supposed to be August 8th, I think). Companies do NOT do that when they don't have a lot of faith in their games, so clearly both Factor 5 and Sony thought they had a critical hit on their hands, and any suggestion that they're trying to bury it or "send it out to die" is absurd. And having written the 9 review, I (obviously) agree.

HYPE RISING

cicatriz · (08-03-2007, 07:28 PM)

Thread title change please.

I vote for "The Official Anti-Lair Speculative Fiction Thread".

VNZ · (08-03-2007, 07:31 PM)

I did some reviewing a couple of years ago and it's exactly this kind of situation that I disliked most about it. For me, the kind of polish solid framerate, nice menues etc bring to a title is what makes a decent game good and a great game a classic -- and I can't take the developers word for it when they say "all that is taken care of in the retail copy". More often than not those promises turned out to be somewhere between vast exaggerations and blatant lies.

Sadly one of those games were Ratchet & Clank: Going Commando. The review copy was essentially broken and I refused to extrapolate what the finished products' quality might turn out like based on that.

TONX · (08-03-2007, 07:34 PM)

My love for Lair is like a roller coaster. This thread is better than most TV dramas.

kaching · (08-03-2007, 07:35 PM)

Originally Posted by Takuhi:

That gold master candidate was dated roughly a month ago, and as far as I know represents the game's final optimization.

Julian just mentioned on the Insomniac podcast that they went through multiple gold master candidates, right up until the last minute. Doesn't sound like you received the final optimization.

Pristine_Condition · (08-03-2007, 07:39 PM)

Originally Posted by Takuhi:

We (Play) received the same review copy that I assume all the other mags did, which had optimized frame rates in the earlier missions, but poor frame rates in the last few missions and several bugs. We contacted Factor 5 and asked for all known issues and Julian himself replied with a detailed list, promising that the later levels were being optimized for frame rates, the bugs were being fixed, and that one aspect of the control would be improved. They said they would have a gold master candidate ready by our ship date, so I wrote the review on the assumptions that their promises would be kept, got the gold master candidate right before we went to press, and played that version for a few hours to confirm that they had addressed the issues. That gold master candidate was dated roughly a month ago, and as far as I know represents the game's final optimization.

I'm not sure what version the OP played—ours were never labeled "Preview Code", but a print mag's Review Code is sometimes a web site's Preview Code. Our last-received version of the game does not run at a rock-solid 30 fps, but I did not consider the frame rate problems to be an issue at all. I don't mind a few frame rate dips into the 20's here and there, if it's for the purpose of making an otherwise amazing looking game. I'm certainly not as sensitive to frame rate issues as the OP, but I don't think the average game enthusiast is either.

Just something to point out to the people who want to hate on Lair here—Sony and Factor 5 went all out to make sure the print mags got review copies as early as possible and frequent updates so that they could have reviews out before the game's release (which was at that point supposed to be August 8th, I think). Companies do NOT do that when they don't have a lot of faith in their games, so clearly both Factor 5 and Sony thought they had a critical hit on their hands, and any suggestion that they're trying to bury it or "send it out to die" is absurd. And having written the 9 review, I (obviously) agree.

The in-depth interview with Julian from Factor 5 on Insomniac's Full Moon Show would seem to back this up. They also back up TTP's experiences with the preview build.

Julian states very clearly that ALL the "Preview" versions of the game that were sent out to the media had major framerate issues and that fixing those issues came at the very last minute.

The interview is pretty great as Julian is very forthcoming about pretty much everything, including the way he handled the questions about the EGM review

EDIT: Beaten.

Dante · (08-03-2007, 07:42 PM)

Lair back on the map for me :)

mr_nothin · (08-03-2007, 07:43 PM)

Originally Posted by kaching:

Julian just mentioned on the Insomniac podcast that they went through multiple gold master candidates, right up until the last minute. Doesn't sound like you received the final optimization.

:O MEGATON

jstevenson · (08-03-2007, 07:49 PM)

After playing a lot more last night --- I don't care about the framerate issues - there are some incredibly cool missions.

Very light spoilers - more generic but don't want anyone to be caught off guard:

Mission in a dark canyon with dozens of spotlights... just wow... so intense. And then the following bombing mission... incredible scoring, feels sooo cinematic.

Whatever you do, don't write Lair off yet, it's a real spectacle of a game.

Tideas · 07:56 PM

Originally Posted by jstevenson:

After playing a lot more last night --- I don't care about the framerate issues - there are some incredibly cool missions.

Very light spoilers - more generic but don't want anyone to be caught off guard:

Mission in a dark canyon with dozens of spotlights... just wow... so intense. And then the following bombing mission... incredible scoring, feels sooo cinematic.

Whatever you do, don't write Lair off yet, it's a real spectacle of a game.

Want to send me that disc after you're doing with it? Pleaseeeeeeeeeeee?

dark10x · (08-03-2007, 07:52 PM)

Originally Posted by jstevenson:

After playing a lot more last night --- I don't care about the framerate issues - there are some incredibly cool missions.

Very light spoilers - more generic but don't want anyone to be caught off guard:

Mission in a dark canyon with dozens of spotlights... just wow... so intense. And then the following bombing mission... incredible scoring, feels sooo cinematic.

Whatever you do, don't write Lair off yet, it's a real spectacle of a game.

That's good to hear.

Though, regarding framerate, it was suggested yesterday on the podcast that Ratchet and Clank Future is actually running at 60 fps (Julian basically stated that when talking about his playtime with the game). Is that actually the case?!

mr_nothin · (08-03-2007, 07:52 PM)

Originally Posted by jstevenson:

After playing a lot more last night --- I don't care about the framerate issues - there are some incredibly cool missions.

Very light spoilers - more generic but don't want anyone to be caught off guard:

Mission in a dark canyon with dozens of spotlights... just wow... so intense. And then the following bombing mission... incredible scoring, feels sooo cinematic.

Whatever you do, don't write Lair off yet, it's a real spectacle of a game.

:O MEGATON

Send to me too!

EverSoTrendy · (08-03-2007, 07:52 PM)

Looks like I'll be renting this instead, I was going to get this over HS, but things change.

spwolf · (08-03-2007, 08:07 PM)

Originally Posted by jstevenson:

After playing a lot more last night --- I don't care about the framerate issues - there are some incredibly cool missions.

Very light spoilers - more generic but don't want anyone to be caught off guard:

Mission in a dark canyon with dozens of spotlights... just wow... so intense. And then the following bombing mission... incredible scoring, feels sooo cinematic.

Whatever you do, don't write Lair off yet, it's a real spectacle of a game.

so you like it? cool... Are you going to be like TTP and give it 5/10 because you like it?

Takuhi · (08-03-2007, 08:09 PM)

Originally Posted by VNZ:

I did some reviewing a couple of years ago and it's exactly this kind of situation that I disliked most about it. For me, the kind of polish solid framerate, nice menues etc bring to a title is what makes a decent game good and a great game a classic -- and I can't take the developers word for it when they say "all that is taken care of in the retail copy". More often than not those promises turned out to be somewhere between vast exaggerations and blatant lies.

Sadly one of those games were Ratchet & Clank: Going Commando. The review copy was essentially broken and I refused to extrapolate what the finished products' quality might turn out like based on that.

That's certainly true—and I think writers have been burned enough that no one trusts developers anymore, which is why we made sure to verify everything before going to print.

Oni Jazar · 08:17 PM

I guess I'll be keeping my $40 preorder then. I really enjoyed Rogue Leader and I even liked the flying portions of the second Rogue game. It's a shame that Factor 5 didn't stray too far from those games with Lair however with the mission structure.

What pisses me off is not only the delay, but that it delayed Heavenly Sword as well! >:/

angelcage87 · (08-03-2007, 08:22 PM)

I'm really indecise about buying Lair....i know this game,despite all the critics,will be awesome wowsome...fact is that i'm actually playing on a 20'' sd tv,so considering the monocromatic colour palette,probably i won't see shit(i had the same problem with Motorstorm)...

dark10x · (08-03-2007, 08:26 PM)

Originally Posted by angelcage87:

I'm really indecise about buying Lair....i know this game,despite all the critics,will be awesome wowsome...fact is that i'm actually playing on a 20'' sd tv,so considering the monocromatic colour palette,probably i won't see shit(i had the same problem with Motorstorm)...

Yikes, if you had a problem with Motorstorm I can't imagine Lair...

steve · (08-03-2007, 08:58 PM)

Originally Posted by angelcage87:

I'm really indecise about buying Lair....i know this game,despite all the critics,will be awesome wowsome...fact is that i'm actually playing on a 20'' sd tv,so considering the monocromatic colour palette,probably i won't see shit(i had the same problem with Motorstorm)...

Save the money you would have spent on videogames this year and buy yourself a new TV. The upgrade is so ridiculously worth it, I can't even begin to explain it.

And the best part is by the time you pick your shiny new HDTV, all the games you would've played anyways will be discounted and ready for you to pick up on da cheap!

Lord Error · (08-03-2007, 09:01 PM)

Originally Posted by Oni Jazar:

What pisses me off is not only the delay, but that it delayed Heavenly Sword as well! >:/

I'm not sure it really did. It was pegged at 12th at official Playstation site, it still is, and I think retailer have it at that date now as well.

jjasper · (08-03-2007, 09:04 PM)

Originally Posted by Oni Jazar:

I guess I'll be keeping my $40 preorder then. I really enjoyed Rogue Leader and I even liked the flying portions of the second Rogue game. It's a shame that Factor 5 didn't stray too far from those games with Lair however with the mission structure.

What pisses me off is not only the delay, but that it delayed Heavenly Sword as well! >:/

Yeah I would have probably kept mine but I can't buy everything and with it so close to Heavenly Sword I have to chose one and since I played the demo and I know I will really like Heavenly Sword I gotta go with it. Still going to rent LAIR though

joesmokey · (08-03-2007, 09:24 PM)

Originally Posted by Takuhi:

We (Play) received the same review copy
*snip*

Thanks for the detailed explanation, definitely helps restore the hype.

Thunderbear · (08-03-2007, 09:31 PM)

Thanks Takuhi and jstevenson, my hope for this title is rising again. Appreciate your write-ups.

Evazan · (08-03-2007, 10:15 PM)

ugh...this is so irritating....they need to just release the demo before it comes out...hopefully they will since it was delayed....right....RiGhT!?

devilscallmedad · (08-03-2007, 10:31 PM)

Originally Posted by Takuhi:

We (Play) received the same review copy that I assume all the other mags did, which had optimized frame rates in the earlier missions, but poor frame rates in the last few missions and several bugs. We contacted Factor 5 and asked for all known issues and Julian himself replied with a detailed list, promising that the later levels were being optimized for frame rates, the bugs were being fixed, and that one aspect of the control would be improved. They said they would have a gold master candidate ready by our ship date, so I wrote the review on the assumptions that their promises would be kept, got the gold master candidate right before we went to press, and played that version for a few hours to confirm that they had addressed the issues. That gold master candidate was dated roughly a month ago, and as far as I know represents the game's final optimization.

I'm not sure what version the OP played—ours were never labeled "Preview Code", but a print mag's Review Code is sometimes a web site's Preview Code. Our last-received version of the game does not run at a rock-solid 30 fps, but I did not consider the frame rate problems to be an issue at all. I don't mind a few frame rate dips into the 20's here and there, if it's for the purpose of making an otherwise amazing looking game. I'm certainly not as sensitive to frame rate issues as the OP, but I don't think the average game enthusiast is either.

Just something to point out to the people who want to hate on Lair here—Sony and Factor 5 went all out to make sure the print mags got review copies as early as possible and frequent updates so that they could have reviews out before the game's release (which was at that point supposed to be August 8th, I think). Companies do NOT do that when they don't have a lot of faith in their games, so clearly both Factor 5 and Sony thought they had a critical hit on their hands, and any suggestion that they're trying to bury it or "send it out to die" is absurd. And having written the 9 review, I (obviously) agree.

The real question is did you guys really give sonic a 9 or is that just a urban myth?

angelcage87 · (08-03-2007, 10:47 PM)

Originally Posted by steve:

Save the money you would have spent on videogames this year and buy yourself a new TV. The upgrade is so ridiculously worth it, I can't even begin to explain it.

And the best part is by the time you pick your shiny new HDTV, all the games you would've played anyways will be discounted and ready for you to pick up on da cheap!

That's probably what i'm going to do...i think this is the biggest problem with this gen,it almost force you to switch to Hd if you want to have fun with your games,ihmo that's the key of the success of the Wii:cheap,"easy" and gives you lots of fun.

/Totally unrelated

GAZERK · (08-03-2007, 10:52 PM)

Originally Posted by jstevenson:

After playing a lot more last night --- I don't care about the framerate issues - there are some incredibly cool missions.

Very light spoilers - more generic but don't want anyone to be caught off guard:

Mission in a dark canyon with dozens of spotlights... just wow... so intense. And then the following bombing mission... incredible scoring, feels sooo cinematic.

Whatever you do, don't write Lair off yet, it's a real spectacle of a game.

As you wish sir. I mean, you did help make Resistance, so why shouldn't I listen to you?

I still have hope for this game. Believeeeee.

karasu · (08-03-2007, 10:56 PM)

Originally Posted by devilscallmedad:

The real question is did you guys really give sonic a 9 or is that just a urban myth?

Why do people hold every reviewer at the magazine accountable for that?

methane47 · (08-03-2007, 10:56 PM)

Originally Posted by jstevenson:

After playing a lot more last night --- I don't care about the framerate issues - there are some incredibly cool missions.

Very light spoilers - more generic but don't want anyone to be caught off guard:

Mission in a dark canyon with dozens of spotlights... just wow... so intense. And then the following bombing mission... incredible scoring, feels sooo cinematic.

Whatever you do, don't write Lair off yet, it's a real spectacle of a game.

HYPE RISING

P209 · (08-03-2007, 11:42 PM)

Originally Posted by Takuhi:

We (Play) received the same review copy that I assume all the other mags did, which had optimized frame rates in the earlier missions, but poor frame rates in the last few missions and several bugs. We contacted Factor 5 and asked for all known issues and Julian himself replied with a detailed list, promising that the later levels were being optimized for frame rates, the bugs were being fixed, and that one aspect of the control would be improved. They said they would have a gold master candidate ready by our ship date, so I wrote the review on the assumptions that their promises would be kept, got the gold master candidate right before we went to press, and played that version for a few hours to confirm that they had addressed the issues. That gold master candidate was dated roughly a month ago, and as far as I know represents the game's final optimization.

I'm not sure what version the OP played—ours were never labeled "Preview Code", but a print mag's Review Code is sometimes a web site's Preview Code. Our last-received version of the game does not run at a rock-solid 30 fps, but I did not consider the frame rate problems to be an issue at all. I don't mind a few frame rate dips into the 20's here and there, if it's for the purpose of making an otherwise amazing looking game. I'm certainly not as sensitive to frame rate issues as the OP, but I don't think the average game enthusiast is either.

Just something to point out to the people who want to hate on Lair here—Sony and Factor 5 went all out to make sure the print mags got review copies as early as possible and frequent updates so that they could have reviews out before the game's release (which was at that point supposed to be August 8th, I think). Companies do NOT do that when they don't have a lot of faith in their games, so clearly both Factor 5 and Sony thought they had a critical hit on their hands, and any suggestion that they're trying to bury it or "send it out to die" is absurd. And having written the 9 review, I (obviously) agree.

Faith restored!!!

*Powering up the HypeTrain*

WhiteAce · (08-03-2007, 11:44 PM)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takuhi:
We (Play) received the same review copy

thanks for the response Takuhi , appreciated.

devilscallmedad · (08-03-2007, 11:47 PM)

Originally Posted by karasu:

Why do people hold every reviewer at the magazine accountable for that?

duh, its the same magazine.

polyh3dron · (08-03-2007, 11:48 PM)

Originally Posted by dark10x:

That's good to hear.

Though, regarding framerate, it was suggested yesterday on the podcast that Ratchet and Clank Future is actually running at 60 fps (Julian basically stated that when talking about his playtime with the game). Is that actually the case?!

The R&C PSN trailer runs @ 60 so I'd be pissed if the final game didn't. This happened with PGR3 where the early videos of it ran at 60 and I was so disappointed. Also, the initial MGS4 videos which were said to be real time also ran @ 60. Not the case with the latest footage.

MappyMousePD · (08-05-2007, 03:32 PM)

Originally Posted by devilscallmedad:

The real question is did you guys really give sonic a 9 or is that just a urban myth?

That's untrue. They gave it a 9.5.

They later lowered it to 8.5, because of the load times (otherwise, the game was perfect, I suspect).

deejay8595 · (08-05-2007, 03:58 PM)

Originally Posted by Takuhi:

We (Play) received the same review copy that I assume all the other mags did, which had optimized frame rates in the earlier missions, but poor frame rates in the last few missions and several bugs. We contacted Factor 5 and asked for all known issues and Julian himself replied with a detailed list, promising that the later levels were being optimized for frame rates, the bugs were being fixed, and that one aspect of the control would be improved. They said they would have a gold master candidate ready by our ship date, so I wrote the review on the assumptions that their promises would be kept, got the gold master candidate right before we went to press, and played that version for a few hours to confirm that they had addressed the issues. That gold master candidate was dated roughly a month ago, and as far as I know represents the game's final optimization.

I'm not sure what version the OP played—ours were never labeled "Preview Code", but a print mag's Review Code is sometimes a web site's Preview Code. Our last-received version of the game does not run at a rock-solid 30 fps, but I did not consider the frame rate problems to be an issue at all. I don't mind a few frame rate dips into the 20's here and there, if it's for the purpose of making an otherwise amazing looking game. I'm certainly not as sensitive to frame rate issues as the OP, but I don't think the average game enthusiast is either.

Just something to point out to the people who want to hate on Lair here—Sony and Factor 5 went all out to make sure the print mags got review copies as early as possible and frequent updates so that they could have reviews out before the game's release (which was at that point supposed to be August 8th, I think). Companies do NOT do that when they don't have a lot of faith in their games, so clearly both Factor 5 and Sony thought they had a critical hit on their hands, and any suggestion that they're trying to bury it or "send it out to die" is absurd. And having written the 9 review, I (obviously) agree.

HMMM...This makes things 100X more interesting!....

gcubed · (08-05-2007, 04:47 PM)

Originally Posted by deejay8595:

HMMM...This makes things 100X more interesting!....

just give me the damn game already! Lets have more reviews then the 2 we currently have. When does ign and gamespot get it?

elostyle · (08-05-2007, 05:18 PM)

Originally Posted by kaching:

Julian just mentioned on the Insomniac podcast that they went through multiple gold master candidates, right up until the last minute. Doesn't sound like you received the final optimization.

You don't ever optimize anything between gold candidates. Hardly anyone would take such a risk.

PBMax · (08-05-2007, 05:28 PM)

Originally Posted by elostyle:

You don't ever optimize anything between gold candidates. Hardly anyone would take such a risk.

Agreed. The only changes that occur between GMCs are high-priority bug fixes.

Frame rate optimization is not a bug fix.

elostyle · (08-05-2007, 05:54 PM)

I mean, I don't want to crush people's hopes but these last minute promises just never happen. What the play guy said stands, but then again, he's fine with framerate dropping into 20s in a next gen hd game. Even if they had found a last minute silver bullet, the pressure usually is too high to even consider putting it in at the last minute.

We'll see more reviews soon enough.

Onix · (08-05-2007, 06:28 PM)

Originally Posted by devilscallmedad:

The real question is did you guys really give sonic a 9 or is that just a urban myth?

Not this shit again. >_<

Mags, just like most sites, have different reviewers. Don't try to assume things based on other reviewers.

They posted his previous pro review scores in the other thread, and they have been quite reasonable based on gamerankings averages.

Originally Posted by devilscallmedad:

duh, its the same magazine.

So ... are you accountable for what everyone else does at your job?

kaching · (08-05-2007, 06:33 PM)

Originally Posted by elostyle:

You don't ever optimize anything between gold candidates. Hardly anyone would take such a risk.

Apparently Factor 5 did. I'm just reporting what he said on the podcast.

Julian didn't say that the framerate was a perfectly stable 30 fps at the end of the process, but that it had improved significantly by the time they submitted their final gold candidate.