-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Guerilla: Killzone: Shadow Fall's multiplayer is 60 FPS, singleplayer is 30 FPS
- Thread starter ElTorro
- Start date
SanguineShark
Member
Well, I mean, frames matter when it comes to how a game feels and controls.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
If we want this game to have a healthy community for a decent amount of time it's going to need to have 60FPS MP. The competition is raising the game and that's becoming the golden standard for most any game in the genre.
I think GG made a good decision here because it matters less for their single player vision.
I guess everyones different.
It has no impact on me what so ever between 30fps and 60fps.
I can play 30fps FPS or any other genre and it has no impact on my aim or control or anything
I guess some people just aren't as sensitive to these things.
What I am sensitive about is big dips consistently, like 60fps then drops to 30fps, as long as this doesn't happen in KZ, I couldn't care if it's 60fps
mickcenary
Member
Yeah, lack of Radec in KZ3 cut deep, man. Such a rad (pun intended) voice; it really got you razzed up to be a Helghan asshole.
Fear not, though, as the most important and AWESOME soundbite in all of FPS gaming is still present: the KZ chirp (and the even better headshot chirp).
I'm talking about ammo and turrets. In KZ2 and 3, they were key parts to teamwork. If you didn't have at least a good engineer fixing ammo boxes and repairing turrets, you were screwed. It was a good meta-game.
A game would start, snipers would rush to areas to spot and scan, tactitian's would lay out spawns, Engineers would repair the many, many objects around the map. And there was always a struggle to maintain those ammo depots and turrets.
I am somewhat worried that they took all that out. I hope maps are sizable and the abilities are retained for that kind of teamwork. The biggest concern I have is diminished teamwork, and a lack of squads.
Basically, I hope there are maps the size of Salamun Market. That map defined Killzone 2 for me.
I don't mean to speculate so much, but it's not my fault we have such limited info!
Yeah, I knew what you meant. This is the turret that I saw:
The revive you asked about earlier:
As for the ammo boxes; I don't see them in the video, but that doesn't mean that they took them out especially since there is a deconstruct option when Yoshida stood next to the enemy spawn beacon. There is so much stuff under wraps still.
TimeEffect
Member
Since they wont charge for DLC, I'd love to pay them for Radec voiceover, new chirps, etc.
I'd pay so much for a Radec skin.
This may go down as the worst first post in GAF history.
Moon_frogger
Member
Just no. 30 solid frames per second is perfectly functional for gameplay. So many other things like stable net code, interesting design, lag free servers and post game support are critical. Anything more than 30 frames is straight up cosmetic and no more important than having the best lighting or other graphical tricks.
I think I was disappointed because he assumed that the single-player would be 60 FPS as well and, therefore, its visuals gimped. The original article cited by the OP didn't mention multi- or single-player.
Agreed for the most part. However, it's definitely better than 30fps which most online games are moving to. It's a good trend just not as important as a few loud enthusiasts make it out to be. On the other hand, in thankful for their opinions driving the industry standard up. It isn't by any stretch a deal breaker though.
That's an amusing theory that is sure to gain real traction with fans of competitive multiplayer everywhere.
nhlducks35
Member
Moon_frogger
Member
Fans of competitive multiplayer would be best served to lobby for an online infrastructure that supports lag free gameplay instead of allowing players with shitty connections to connect to servers halfway across the world ruining the experience for everybody. Instead they are screaming themselves blue in the face about which game has the most frames per second and missing the point entirely. Furthermore 60 frames per second does not necessarily mean more fluid motion, contrary to popular belief and having your framerate locked at and not dipping erratically is much more important than simply having more frames.
That said, 60 fps is definitely better than 30. It's just the absolute last thing that worries me when it comes to next gen consoles.
Don't know what is so funny, he is actually right.
Though of course it depends on the persons sensitivity, I can say it doesn't impact me at all between 30fps and 60fps, though others may be sensitive to this
But yeah its subjective.
60fps multiplayer is great news and is news worthy. Your assumption that it lessens the importance of those other things is incorrect. We don't have access to the net code, killzone is killzone as far as concept and art (love it or hate it), and I believe my targeting 60fps they mean a locked 60fps. Also kz2 multiplayer was most of the time lag free for me so I'm not worried about that at all really. Didn't play much of kz3 multi.
ProfessorMoran
Member
We need to see some serious hardcore bot play, KZ2 bots were AWESOME.
This. Why are many ignoring this? I see many people commenting on youTube vids as if it's confirmed.
on topic - want to see more of the game, but if it does reach 60 fps for MP, and with the recent news that all DLC will be free, I may honestly buy this game.
I'm still bummed out that max player count is only 24 when Killzone 2 had 32 players. They could have made the maps a bit larger and had 32. It didn't even have to be 32, heck, 28 would be a good number as well - 14 v 14.
I also think the guns sound pretty bad. Not terrible, but not good either. Hopefully they change that.
Yeah nothing as of yet points towards them having the game running at 60fps yet. The framerate in the footage was unlocked and varied a lot.
And to the people tired of all this 60fps buzztalk, for once we actually have a buzzword that means something significant. There are no tradeoffs to target good performance.
And to the people tired of all this 60fps buzztalk, for once we actually have a buzzword that means something significant. There are no tradeoffs to target good performance.
Ranik Regana
Neo Member
That's a really great news! But why would they make SP a 30 fps while MP is 60?
Because 60 fps is a lot less important in SP and graphics are less important in MP?
Exactly.
As long as it´s only for multiplayer i´m fine but for singleplayer i want them to squeeze every single ounce of eye candy out of this game.
DangerDave
Member
How about they offer a digital download of just the multiplayer? I think the 4-6 hour scripted campaign mode stuff is getting pretty old. I can think of maybe three fps games that had a good single player.
Well, they showed just that not too long ago.
All of the improvements had nothing to do with the MP team though, that's all back-end stuff. The class balancing, generally ideology, map deign in KZ3 were all awful, and you can tell just by what's announced so far that there's prioritizing the experience and going back to the KZ2 model of allowing players to really customize the experience.
BeekleMatter
Member
Sounds A-okay to me! The 30fps single player experience may be a damper, but i live in multiplayer.
Americanmushroom
Banned
Wait people arecomplaining about this?
30fps for campaign for the graphic whores, and 60fps for the multi to make it smoother and snappier for the hardcore gamers. Seems perfect to me
30fps for campaign for the graphic whores, and 60fps for the multi to make it smoother and snappier for the hardcore gamers. Seems perfect to me
Always-honest
Banned
For Killzone this is perfect. And it will still look great.
I would prefer that actually. I hardly touch the single player on CoD , Medal of Honor, BF3, and mostly every other fps that I've owned, and I don't plan on playing the Killzone SF single player either.
$40 would be a fair price for MP only.
Don't know what is so funny, he is actually right.
Though of course it depends on the persons sensitivity, I can say it doesn't impact me at all between 30fps and 60fps, though others may be sensitive to this
But yeah its subjective.
I don't know what you mean by first saying "what's funny, he is right; then saying, yeah its subjective". If it's subjective how can he be right, right in the sense that it doesn't make sense to laugh at him.
I for one, don't play games that are at 30 fps. I have a 120 hz monitor, and definitely prefer 120 fps gameplay, but I can deal with 60 no problems. But I don't want to play games that are locked at 30. I think they look choppy and everything suffers from it; the animations, the responsiveness, many fullscreen effects; everything looks worse in 30 fps.
I only play the single player of COD. I don't like the MP at all. But the singleplayer is watching a dumb Michael Bay movie. Would not call it great. But sometimes it is just what you want to do.
NoodleMaster
Neo Member
By the gods of Christopher Walken's nuts....I'm so glad this is happening.
Here's to hoping more games push for 60fps.
Here's to hoping more games push for 60fps.
ChawlieTheFair
pip pip cheerio you slags!
May be really weird and difficult switching between the two. On pc games, if I first play the game at 60 and then increase settings causing the FPS to drop, I find it impossible to play and revert the settings back. I think this may end up being a bad decision, but idk, lets see how it goes.
Always-honest
Banned
The mp is much more fast paced. I think it will not be noticed that much compared to SP.
ChawlieTheFair
pip pip cheerio you slags!
Maybe, and honestly that's what I'm hoping for cause I love Killzone's SP and MP, but the visual discrepancy and control discrepancy could be really jarring.
I don't understand this sort of logic. Most people will blow through the 6 hour campaign and be done with it. After that, hopefully most will transition to multiplayer.
This isn't Elder Scrolls Skyrim with 100s of hrs of gameplay frolicking around in the hills.
95%+ of gamers won't be switching back and forth between SP and MP. That makes no sense too me. Now if this were Dark Souls then yes- I'd understand that argument because it is common for an RPG player to shift between MP & SP. But this isn't Dark Souls. This will be a short SP campaign no doubt. A quick wham bam thank you for the fun ride through a beautiful park
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
Lots of people won't be able to tell the difference. An equal amount won't even touch the single player.
ChawlieTheFair
pip pip cheerio you slags!
Sure, you could make that argument, but what If I start playing MP before I finish SP. Yes you're right, most people will play SP once and never touch it again (me included probably) but if the whole new point of SF's SP is to have open levels with multiple paths to complete the levels, would that not offer more incentive to replay? What about trophy hunters, who are no doubt are gonna have to switch in between the modes often, as well as replay the SP possibly many times.
Bill Rizer
Member
Couldn't they at this point include a 30/60 switch for the campaign too?
I don't think so.
If they would have some kind of "switch" then that switch would have to be linked to MANY parameters, decreasing objedcts LOD and/or turning some objects/geometry off completely.
Dragon1893
Member
This is weird, they should go with 60 fps for SP as well. I know that they are used to having their games being graphical showcases but going by the MP screens the game can still look impressive at 60 fps. I don't feel it's worth the trade-off, especially considering that both modes will end up having a different feel.
SolidSnakex
Member
Don't know what is so funny, he is actually right.
Though of course it depends on the persons sensitivity, I can say it doesn't impact me at all between 30fps and 60fps, though others may be sensitive to this
But yeah its subjective.
It's not true at all. 60fps means decreased input lag. Games that run at 60fps usually have 66ms of input lag, while 30fps have 100ms of input lag at a minimum (only Hot Pursuit has been able to get under 100ms). Most have over 100ms. It's one reason why something like CoD feels extremely responsive and why fighting games demand 60fps framerates.
Ugh no E3 demo was anything but linear. E3 demo was the jungle level which was basically an open area with choose your priority and choose your method type of gameplay
mickcenary
Member
The issue I take with this is that, connectivity issues aside, everyone is on the same playing field with the same level of responsiveness and the same opportunity to hone their skills, be competitive and play the game as the developer intended. And it's not as if 30fps = 'holy shit, what I'm seeing on the screen isn't matching up at all with what my hands are doing! HELPPPPP!'
It's all a matter of adjustment. Decreasing input lag does not automatically make the game more playable/a more realised version of itself; by this logic, the vast majority of games this gen have been unrealised, poor man's versions of themselves, but that's not the case, is it?
Pai Pai Master
Banned
But it looks like we're getting all of that (verdict is out on the servers I guess). So what's wrong with 60fps?
OldAsUrSock
Banned
If the 60fps trend continues then people will become used to 60fps. Then games that are 30fps will die. I know this gets brought up a lot, but people who play COD say "It feels good." or "Feels better than other games." That is because of 60fps. COD players go back to COD because they like the feelDon't know what is so funny, he is actually right.
Though of course it depends on the persons sensitivity, I can say it doesn't impact me at all between 30fps and 60fps, though others may be sensitive to this
But yeah its subjective.
of 60fps
What? The only difference is that you are not against real players. That is not enough reason to be ok with a choppy framerate.
But a rock solid 30fps looks like 60fps!
I didn't care much for Killzone 2 or 3 but I'm looking forward to Shadow Fall for its more open-ended design.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked