-
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.
Bethesda is being extremely shady about The Evil Within's PC framerate
- Thread starter Grief.exe
- Start date
Yeah, hell at work I can get in trouble for showing the wrong thing to the people in the room next to me. I wouldn't blame the random employees for not being forthcoming, but that doesn't change the fact that the one in charge of releasing this information is making a mistake by hiding it.
Sanctuary
Member
Please understand.
BibiMaghoo
Member
Sure, Bethesda should release this info, and the tweets imply they will, but hounding a guy that cannot speak on his twitter is unfair. Making that employee as the representative of Bethesda on his Twitter is also unfair.
Lets get the info, then pile on Bethesda instead.
Check the first post on page 4. It's a valid reason not to support a game that plays like shit with your preferred control method (mouse and keyboard).
Robert J. Sullivan
Member
speaking only for myself here but i cancelled my preorder on greenmangaming
i am really interested in the game and resident evil 4 is one of my favourite games so i'm excited to see what mikami can produce with the evil within
however a lock at 30fps just mean that i won't be able to enjoy the game as much as i would with 60fps, it would in fact make every tense moment worse as a result for me
some people may not understand it but some folks like me value framerate very much beside very rare exceptions (like a point&click game for example)
this part i think i speak for most people that are in the same situation as me (and isn't directed at you at all) : we would very much like if people would stop taking condesending attitudes or implying that we're graphics whores or that even we don't know how to enjoy a game for what it is just because of this
edit : and to be clear that doesn't mean i won't buy the game at some point, it's one of my most anticipated titles this year, i however won't reward bethesda for locking the game at 30fps by a preorder or a day one purchase
all of this is of course if the lock is indeed real, if it turns out the be false i'll happily resume my preorder at GMG but until bethesda confirmed that it's not locked i will assume it is since those non answers to a simple question are suspicious
Sanctuary
Member
You're assuming Bethesda has anything at all to do with the framerate. They don't, unless you also believe they were paid a lot of money by Microsoft for the now notorious "parity" issue.
While I'm sure everyone that can run the game at 60fps would like to play the game at 60fps, it's silly to temporarily boycott it if you're going to end up buying it anyway later on. You aren't hurting Bethesda by doing that anyway.
Robert J. Sullivan
Member
my bad there, assumed beth was the dev studio, they're just the publisher
bethesda obviously had nothing to do with an eventual framerate cap but someone or some people at tango were, that parity stuff is ridiculous to me and i don't know the reason behind that cap (again, if it exists)
and yes i will still buy the game, however at a cheaper price because a lock at 30fps would reduce my percieved value of the game
i don't expect to achieve anything but i just don't want to pay full price for a game that i would have enjoyed a lot more if it were not for this
I've tweeted Total Biscuit a few times, attempting to get his attention. No response as of yet.
I assumed, of all people, he would take interest in this.
I want to make it clear that we are not hounding him personally for information, but trying to get the ball rolling.
He may be able to make the appropriate people aware of the issue at hand.
I assumed, of all people, he would take interest in this.
I want to make it clear that we are not hounding him personally for information, but trying to get the ball rolling.
He may be able to make the appropriate people aware of the issue at hand.
I don't think any of the personal employees have the ability to talk about framerate. It's up to Bethesda to release that info.
Even if they do know, they'll get in trouble if they say it.
It's good to cause a bit of a stir to let Bethesda know it's important to the PC audience and that they should let us know, but don't expect anything unofficial to come out of it.
I really, really hate this sentiment. It assumes so much from modders, and causes this expectation of "Well someone better fix all my games, don't worry developers we PC we do it now!" Hold developers accountable for their games.
Weapon durability decreases faster at high framerates, hitboxes are different at high framerates, enemy movements are different at higher framerates, and damage changes at high framerates. Depending on your framerate, a backstab could change from a kill on an opponent, to them making it out alive and killing you.
Now, the important question that we don't know the answer to is whether or not the game was INTENDED to play like the 60fps version (with the faster enemies, specific damage, etc etc) or intended to play like the 30fps version.
All in all, Dark Souls II is definitely still a good port, but we shouldn't overlook some of these pretty fundamental flaws, especially for PC.
It might also explain why DSII doesn't support 120fps.
Even if they do know, they'll get in trouble if they say it.
It's good to cause a bit of a stir to let Bethesda know it's important to the PC audience and that they should let us know, but don't expect anything unofficial to come out of it.
I really, really hate this sentiment. It assumes so much from modders, and causes this expectation of "Well someone better fix all my games, don't worry developers we PC we do it now!" Hold developers accountable for their games.
Weapon durability decreases faster at high framerates, hitboxes are different at high framerates, enemy movements are different at higher framerates, and damage changes at high framerates. Depending on your framerate, a backstab could change from a kill on an opponent, to them making it out alive and killing you.
Now, the important question that we don't know the answer to is whether or not the game was INTENDED to play like the 60fps version (with the faster enemies, specific damage, etc etc) or intended to play like the 30fps version.
All in all, Dark Souls II is definitely still a good port, but we shouldn't overlook some of these pretty fundamental flaws, especially for PC.
It might also explain why DSII doesn't support 120fps.
No, way I'm going to support pre-ordering this thing on PC with the lack of clarity.
Say what you want about Capcom, their transparency with Dead Rising 3 on the PC was appreciated. The same here would be nice.
I'm just going to Gamefly the PS4 version and deal with the frame rate. If the game is good, I'll just wait for the PC version to hit $30, but only if there's no cap. They kinda lost my early support on this one.
Say what you want about Capcom, their transparency with Dead Rising 3 on the PC was appreciated. The same here would be nice.
I'm just going to Gamefly the PS4 version and deal with the frame rate. If the game is good, I'll just wait for the PC version to hit $30, but only if there's no cap. They kinda lost my early support on this one.
Robert J. Sullivan
Member
he tweeted that he's got pre op stuff today and surgery tommorow, you should try your luck at the end of the week
Dr Mayonnaise
Member
With many in this thread I will NOT buy a PC game locked at 30 fps. I didn't build a high end PC to play at console frame rates.
Great first post, exactly what I was thinking.
Lmao you guys are killing me here
Krusenstern
Banned
I wouldn't consider canceling my pre-order over a locked framerate just to miss out on a potentially great game but the silence regarding the PC framerate is pretty strange. Why can't they answer such a simple question?
Can't blame people if they're concerned now. Should be in Bethesda's best interest to make this game run at 60fps on PC. Even if needs to be patched post-release.
As you can see in this thread there are people who really base their purchase decision on whether or not the game supports an unlocked framerate.
Can't blame people if they're concerned now. Should be in Bethesda's best interest to make this game run at 60fps on PC. Even if needs to be patched post-release.
As you can see in this thread there are people who really base their purchase decision on whether or not the game supports an unlocked framerate.
Tango Gameworks is the development team that also happens to be a Japanese one. Bethesda is simply pubishing the game and providing access to the iD Tech5 engine.
If you're fine with the lower frame rate, then buy it on PC,anyways. Can always take advantage of higher resolutions and forward compatibility.
Unless you are just planning on selling it.
Poor initial planning.
Well now, i had to repair (with the pouder) my dark drift 4 times, mid-fight with one of the DLC bosses.
I'd say that's a bit extreme, considering i have the ring (+2) to extend weapons' durability.
So that you can play it at 30 fps and a lower resolution? Ok then.
Broder Salsa
Banned
This is a dumb post and you should feel bad for making this dumb post.
Just saw this thread.
What the hell ... .
He's a game designer. Not a coder, nor a technical artist.
He can't make statements about technical information.
The question should be directed to Bethesda.
Alo81 said:
The only thing that can be impacted by higher framerates is time/rates/animation elements.
It's entirely dependent on how they chose to implement it.
Rates defined per number of frames or that trigger on other absolute metrics will not behave the same at 30 as at 60.
Rates defined around time elapsed between frames on the other hand behave the same regardless of the number of world updates per second.
So "damage changes" and "hitboxes being different" on higher FPS is impossible.
Unless you meant hurtboxes.
I can't make claims about TEW, but I know IdTech 5 was built around it running at 60 Hz from the get go.
Removing an artificial 30FPS lock will be easy, you'll see an unofficial patch before the end of the month.
Whether the game behaves the same depends on what their game updates are relative to.
UncleSporky
Member
People often cover for these guys by saying they'd get in a lot of trouble for saying so when they aren't in a position to comment on it, and I totally believe that's true, but are these guys allowed to say that they're not allowed to say anything?
Why can't they just give us the reasonable excuse that other people are making for them?
Is it because that "reflects poorly on the company" or something by making them seem overly restrictive of what their employees say?
Why can't they just give us the reasonable excuse that other people are making for them?
Is it because that "reflects poorly on the company" or something by making them seem overly restrictive of what their employees say?
How can you call these 'flaws' when you admit yourself you don't know if that's the intended way to play or not?
Anyways, like somebody else said, that line of discussion is fairly irrelevant, as the point is that some games have things that don't work quite as intended when played at a different framerate.
And that may be the case with The Evil Within. I'm simply waiting to hear if this is the case. And if so, how bad is it? Dark Souls 1 had a few little issues at 60fps, but it was still preferable. Dark Souls 2, even if the 60fps mode was not 'the intended' way to play, was still absolutely fine to play through. Anybody who has been gaming for any length of time knows that the 'intended' experience is not necessarily the only good one. Its largely a question of if it breaks anything, and how major are these 'breaks'?
nkarafo
Member
Anyway, the only locked 30fps PC game i ever came across that i couldn't unlock was the shittiest port of all time, the glorious Sega Rally 3/Revo.
I hope The Evil Within won't be the second one. Of course it will be a no-buy for me. I didn't pay for all that hardware for this. If i was OK with 30fps i would have bought the cheaper alternative, a console.
Edit: There's always Durante around the corner though, so you never know.
I hope The Evil Within won't be the second one. Of course it will be a no-buy for me. I didn't pay for all that hardware for this. If i was OK with 30fps i would have bought the cheaper alternative, a console.
Edit: There's always Durante around the corner though, so you never know.
AuthenticM
Member
Is this something Durante could fix ?
catapult37
Member
what's the origin of this one?
That's pretty much what I don't get: people that claim they will just buy on console instead. At the least you get some better graphic options and very likely a more consistent frame rate for significantly cheaper.
I understand that in the ideal world every PC game would have a more robust set of options and that it really isn't that hard with some forward thinking. But this all or nothing, either something is awesome or it sucks, is something I don't get. Especially when people are just going to go and speak outside of the other side of their mouth when it comes to console versions.
Dr Mayonnaise
Member
Probably but he shouldn't have to. I don't want a game that I have to mod to get running properly. I also don't want devs thinking its okay to release a shit PC version because people like Durante will fix it for them and than people like Durante not get paid for doing what the devs decided not to do.
Possibly but it would probably be a more involved fix since it's Direct X 11 and this engine doesn't seem to play nice with some of the stuff he developed. But given the time and interest, I'd have faith in him and I'd donate to the cause. I'm not sure what he is up to full time these days. His plate may be full.
As I said earlier in the thread, if I was doing PR, I'd write him a nice check and give him early code to see what he could do.
Red Alert 3 was locked to 30 too, and even if there were some ways to unlock it, the animation and speed of the game was locked to 30 too, so everything just ran at twice the speed once you did.
They claimed it was for MP purposes (something to do with an even playfield online) but even the SP portion was locked.
Different enough case, but it was an example of a game where unlocking it didn't actually help =/
Split/Second is another. That's a game that really needed 60 fps to be playable, too.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
This game continues to prove it's optimized like ass. black bars not that visually impressive below 30 fps often shown in demo's. Why are you using ID Tech 5 Mikami why, Vanquish despite being 30 fps was still technically impressive.
You shouldn't have bothered with an engine your clearly unfamiliar with.
You shouldn't have bothered with an engine your clearly unfamiliar with.
Do people really think this is going to be locked at 30 on PC? It's idTech 5, Rage, Wolfenstein - neither locked, performance was fine.
I'm sure these guys just can't answer because of poor communication in the studio and not going above their pay grade, this thread is totally off-the-rails paranoid right now.
I'm sure these guys just can't answer because of poor communication in the studio and not going above their pay grade, this thread is totally off-the-rails paranoid right now.
FleckSplat
Member
True, at least he's answering as well as he can given his position.
The flaw is that it varies with framerate, not that 60fps is the flawed version.
The fact that any of those change with the framerate is either a flaw (the reality) or FROM came up with a really ludicrous difficulty selection system for their game.
I mean, you can label "only these things can possibly be affected by framerate" but if the final result is that how much damage you do, and whether you hit an enemy, or whether an enemy hits you is dependent on what framerate the game is rendering at, I still think it's perfectly valid to say "framerate causes damage to change" because the literal practical affect is the framerate causing the damage to change.
I imagine for them it's the principle of the matter. They want to play the game and are willing to support it on the platform where the developers did their best to maximize the games capabilities. Regardless of if the PC version will in the end actually perform better, it isn't because the developers invested the time to take advantage of the platform, it's because the user invested the money to workhorse through it.
I imagine that's it.
Maybe. I think its a valid concern. People want to know what they're getting. You'd think this would be a pretty easy thing to communicate within the studio, ya know? And after the debacle over the PC specs, I think people are right to be a little worried over the state of the game.
I'm not flipping my lid or bashing the team. Just anxiously curious.
abracadaver
Member
The next Dead Rising 3?
maneil99
Member
I find 30 fps fine with a controller, but after buying a 144hz montior I can't stand 30 fps (especially vsynced, ew input lag) with a mouse
Krusenstern
Banned
Well this line here:
All in all, Dark Souls II is definitely still a good port, but we shouldn't overlook some of these pretty fundamental flaws, especially for PC.
Makes it sound very much like you're saying the PC version is flawed. And calling it a 'port' when it was described as the lead version by FROM(which I do believe, as the comparisons with the console version are drastic) isn't fair to it, either. I think your point that the console version may have been the 'unintended' way to play has merit.
I would agree that a game that is even slightly 'broken' by a change in framerate is a flaw, but its also a realistic scenario in a time when console-led development is the norm with multiplatform titles.
We'll see! We'll see. Fingers crossed. I'm quite looking forward to this one.