we.are.the.armada
Member
Hahahahaha! In another dimension, they achieved 60fps AND great looking shadows but Joel's beard looks better in the 30fps option and people lose their shit. That'd be rad.
-
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.
TLOU Remastered: 30 fps option gives better shadow quality [Up: Comparison GIF in OP]
- Thread starter nhlducks35
- Start date
Hahahahaha! In another dimension, they achieved 60fps AND great looking shadows but Joel's beard looks better in the 30fps option and people lose their shit. That'd be rad.
That's disappointing, thanks dude. Looks like I'll be sticking with 60fps mode.
TheDrowningMan
Member
I've always said that I'm perfectly happy with a solid 30, but given the opportunity to switch between the two so readily, this game is SO much better in 60FPS mode. 30 looks & feels incredibly stuttery in comparison.
Unless you intend to traverse the game's locales standing still & forcing NPCs and environments to remain static as well, it's impossible for me to recommend the 30FPS lock.
Unless you intend to traverse the game's locales standing still & forcing NPCs and environments to remain static as well, it's impossible for me to recommend the 30FPS lock.
Lalalandia
Member
52 pages? SMH
Seriously how do folks not get that 16.666 ms per frame leaves you less time for the fancy stuff than 33.333 ms?
Seriously how do folks not get that 16.666 ms per frame leaves you less time for the fancy stuff than 33.333 ms?
Yep, that's what I said that I will do few pages back, but "deffenders of the faith" are quick to start quoting ... You know stuff like this:
And you know how it goes, before you know it... you're drawn into an argument.
Anyway, game is downloading for me as we speak and i'll get to play it later (never played PS3 version) so will test 30 and 60 fps. I hope shadows are not as bad in motion as they are on some of those screens.
how did the orginal poster come to that conclusion, do we have proof or are we just taken his/her word for it?
Cave Johnson
Member
Developers generally do not cater to a specific crowd. It has been noted that ND studio heads are clearly seeing the benefits of 60fps in regards to gameplay (much to the contention from fans otherwise). This isn't some decision they've taken very lightly considering their then de-facto experiences were all 30fps in the last generation.
So why change now? For the 60FPS crowd? That is highly unlikely especially not with that decision would be met with resistance in the studio. What would happen if the other AAA studios pushed it for 30fps in their games? Wouldn't this mean ND put themselves in such a disadvantage of delivering the top tier graphics they were noted for on consoles. Again, as much as I hate siding with the 30fps crowd on this particular issue but yes, it makes NO sense for them to target 60fps on a CURRENT gen title considering the running streak they've had.
But I'm happy that they did
bob_arctor
Tough_Smooth
Revolutionary
Member
Mentioned it in the OT last night, but I switched to 30fps for shits and giggles last night and basically did an Italian Spiderman. Unbearable after playing in 60fps for only 10 minutes. Higher res shadows be damned.
It's happening! Naughty Gods converting people!
What do you mean?
The shadow bias stuff is my conjecture based on posts in this thread that explain how incorrect shadow bias values can make shadows look disconnected from the objects it's supposed to cast shadows from.
(Edit: I guess it could also be related to streaming / LOD and not necessarily bias value. Someone with 3D engine knowledge could probably take a more educated guess.)
That 30 has shadows where 60 doesn't have them is based on the shadow quality in the provided screenshots. Same for screenshots where 60 has shadows and 30 doesn't.
In addition I have verified the latter independently.
Digital Foundry Day1 Patch said:
bob_arctor
Tough_Smooth
You know what, to be fair to benny_a I did overreact, because there were few people quoting me and I went full retard in the heat of the moment.
So, benny_a there's no quotes, my public apology. Hope there's no hard feelings.
boredandlazy
Member
entremet
Member
This is a port essentially. You seem to be talking about developing a title from the ground up, which is a totally different story. I think that's what what you 30FPS guys are missing. Giving the limited time they had with the project, I'm fine with a better framerate and resolution.
My point exactly, another dude was quoting me and telling me to go "fetch" quotes... So I said go fetch them yourself.
stargateheaven
Member
Chri_stoph
Member
I have never been a guy who cared about the frame rate, but being able to directly compare 30fps and 60fps TLoUR I can't understand why anyone would lock the game at 30fps for slightly better shadows.
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
How this single painfully obvious fact has evaded some of the most stubborn posters in this thread is blowing my mind. It's just the way tech works. Demanding visual parity between 30fps and 60fps versions is the dumbest thing I've heard of.
Yup. Somehow ND should have actually put in LESS effort and people wouldn't be complaining as much. It's madness.
Morphine_OD
Banned
Time for the 60fps crowd to accept the truth - people are better off with better graphics, rather then with higher fps.
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
I think that all comes down to preference.
However, calling the 60fps mode "sloppy" or "lazy", because the moving shadows aren't as pretty is ridiculous. In a closed system, there will always be a trade off.
Horse Armour
Member
Not sure if serious, but what if I consider 60 fps "better graphics"?
I consider all of these variables of graphical quality or overall visual presentation, to name a few:
frame rate (i.e. animation smoothness)
resolution
texture quality
model quality
lighting (which you could break down into other elements)
It's driving me crazy that people are simply discounting the effect of frame rate on visual presentation, not even considering the improved control response. I don't consider more stuttery animations "better graphics". Better graphics is a silly arbitrary term. I wish people would stop using it.
Perhaps you should just say you prefer a visual presentation that prioritize other elements rather than animation smoothness.
this is now the definitive shadow comparison pic IMO. there's no question the 60FPS shadows are improved from the PS3 version.
Parhelion69
Member
This is actually a pretty good argument. Games being in 30 fps aren't bad as some people are trying to make them look.
30 fps works fine, and some games are looking great thanks to it. Infamous, Driveclub, The Order all have delicious visuals, and that wouldn't be the case if they were at 60 fps.
The developer has a choice. Framerate, or better visuals. And I can live with 30 fps just fine, Destiny has shown me, that even a shooter can work just fine with a locked 30 fps.
Also, another big argument is that games that are in 60 fps are rarely locked. You see a lot of variance, and drops are very noticeable. I like consistency in my games, variable framerate is very distracting to me, just after tearing, it's the thing that bothers me the most. So a locked 30 fps with no drops is easier to achieve, and gives you consistent gameplay. Something worthy of note
Relaxed Muscle
Member
Never played SH 2 and 3, I guess.
They look worse in a way, the PS3 ones were softer, more natural looking as it hid the jaggies better.
I received the game yesterday, managed to play an hour to the point
.
I checked shadows and I am perfectly OK with them, expected something like Destiny cones on PS3.
What I appreciate VERY much though us butter-smoooth framerate and responsiveness - I remember playing the prologue
how shitty it played due to framerate. This has totally gone. And it plays great.
I will stick to 60 fps hoping more games this gen will play in 60fps or near. It adds to experience even if leaving some graphical bells and whistles behind IMO.
Joel meets the leader of Fireflies
I checked shadows and I am perfectly OK with them, expected something like Destiny cones on PS3.
What I appreciate VERY much though us butter-smoooth framerate and responsiveness - I remember playing the prologue
when Joel has to carry his daughter
I will stick to 60 fps hoping more games this gen will play in 60fps or near. It adds to experience even if leaving some graphical bells and whistles behind IMO.
Summer Haze
Banned
Need new eyes? Dat MGS PS2 quality 60 fps shadow, mmmmm...
Wow, nice cherry picking. My eyes work fine:
30 FPS
60 FPS
30FPS
60 FPS
30 FPS
60 FPS
Do yours?
People like you make me laugh, I haven't even seen you post anywhere but in this thread, I wonder why that is?
Oh boy, look at those PS2 60fps shadows!
/s
Parhelion69
Member
I agree, the PS3 shadows are evidently more inaccurate than the PS4 60 fps ones, but they look better, since they are softer. The 60 fps ones are so jaggy, that are even more noticeable. They should've been dithered or something like that. It's hard to unsee them.
Anyway, it's a compromise. So I'll play at 60 fps. Horrible shadows or not.
This was a game heavily optimized for PS3 architecture. It was apparently a lot of work for Naughty Dog to even get this up and running on the PS4, let alone remaster the entire game into a good looking and functional state.
It will be an entirely different story for games that are built with PS4 architecture in mind.
agree - I actually prefer the PS3 shadows. The PS4 ones are too contrasty, but also don't look much better resolution (maybe down to the also increased rendering resolution?)
Same with the self-shadowing - subtler on PS3 IMO.
IAmRandom31
Banned
30fps all day errrrrrrr day for me
i seriously have never been bothered by framerates. 60 is smoother yes, but I've been playing 30fps games for ages now, so its nothing new.
Summer Haze
Banned
Ah, the old "*insert company name here* faithful" comment. How lazy. You can't just expect to troll and not have people call you out, man. The fact of the matter remains that, even at their worst, the shadows at 60fps are still better than the shadows of the PS3 version.
And in terms of my quote, I wasn't defending anything or anyone, I was simply saying I'm glad that ND decided to prioritize 60fps. Don't try and play the victim here, or try and act like I was berating anyone who chooses to play 30fps, because I wasn't. Expressing my opinion of being glad that 60fps took priority is not the same as mocking those who want to play at 30fps.
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
Actually the 30fps shot's shadow looks "better", it's more realistic given the location of the room in the window and the outside scenery going along with it. The shadows would look a bit blurrier from that vantage point and distance and only be very crisp if those objects were right in the room, right next to the wall.
So in other words, have people just spent 52 pages arguing over a "flaw" that actually turns out to be the correct version going off real-life? Lol.
So in other words, have people just spent 52 pages arguing over a "flaw" that actually turns out to be the correct version going off real-life? Lol.
This is true too. For casting of shadow of objects not directly up against the surface having the shadow casted, it would ideally be a cross between the PS3's rendering technique (soft edges, loose focus) for objects far from a surface capable of displaying a shadow and the PS4's 60fps rendering, just without the jaggies. PS4's 30fps rendering should only be with objects very close to a surface and in a very strong light source.
This is the wrong choice, unless you play the game in stop motion magnifying each shadow you come across instead of playing the game.
Why on earth people would eat dog shit all day errrrrrr day is beyond me.
What are you talking about? Have I said that ps3 TLOU shadows look better than 60fps TLOU ps4 shadows? Where? Give me a quote please.
Also, since when is having an opinion trolling? Seriously... Is it because it's diferent than yours?
TheDrowningMan
Member
If you compare side by side, 30FPS is highly unpleasant. Unless you've purchased the game solely for photo mode or as a shadow simulator - and you may well have - I would say you're doing yourself a disservice. You'd literally have to be the most OCD person in the history of the planet to let the shadows bother you more than the judder 30FPS introduces.
I speak as someone who has never had a problem with 30FPS and wouldn't avoid a game because of it when it is the only option.
IAmRandom31
Banned
my console games have looked ugly as all fuck for long enough. Jaggies all over the screen, blurry texturing, dull color pallets, slowdown, shimmering, you name it. Console developers are wizards for being able to do what they do with what they got, but still didnt stop the game from looking like ass half the time in motion.
On PC's, for the longest time they have had enough RAM and enough extra oomph even in mid-range systems to provide high levels of AA and AF and everything else to clean up the screen a ton.
Now this generation, finally, the systems have the RAM and the power to provide a clean screen. I want my games looking as good as possible on my living room television. I don't want my fucking screen looking like its shaking and moving around like it has ants or having a seizure along every border. Games like Infamous, so freakin good due to the screen being very clean and free of the usual horrors.
I'll play @ 30fps if it provides the better looking picture, without hesitation. Both 60 and 30 should provide a pleasant screen though, so, since I'm not at all bothered by 30, the better shadows is all I really need. Who knows, maybe I play at 60 and love it and never want to play at 30 again because the shadow difference in motion during gameplay isn't noticeable. We'll see.
Byron Bluth
Banned
Ugh, I like the nicer shadows and you can obviously see the change from in menu if you aim the camera at some shadows before pausing. But fuuuuuuuck, 30fps feels like hot garbage when you were just at 60fps.
In the end you will notice the lower fps during gameplay, while the shadows not so much.
In the end you will notice the lower fps during gameplay, while the shadows not so much.
Summer Haze
Banned
You really need to learn how to read. I never said you did say that, I simply said 60fps shadows were still better than PS3 shadows, even at their worst. There was absolutely no accusation on my part of you ever saying that. Plus, when I originally made the comment saying that the 60fps shadows, at their worst, still look better than the PS3 shadows, your reply was the quote I've mentioned below....so although you didn't specifically say "PS3 shadows are better than PS4 shadows", I wouldn't be surprised if that was your opinion, based off your sharp/trolling reply to my claim.
There you go again, playing the victim. You can't pull the "it's just my opinion" card here, quotes don't lie:
My comment:
Your reply:
How on earth is that reply anything but trolling? Are you serious? That's not "an opinion", plenty of people in here have gave their opinions on the shadows at 60fps without making comments like that. You were trolling, it's as simple as that.
Listen, I'm not carrying on this argument any further. I made a comment saying that the 60fps shadows are still better than the shadows on the PS3 version, you countered with a snarky troll comment, complete with a cherry picking comparison. I'm not sure what else there is to say....so...yeah. Enjoy the game when it's done downloading.
Yup. Hard shadowing isn't nessesarily better. Wish we had soft shadows and AO, but last gen engine is still last gen and ported.
For the most part, 60 or 30, most of the shadows absent the flash light in a dark area wouldn't be casting such harsh outlines. The trees shadows and shadows from light bouncing around rooms always looked harsh to me, and now you can get them even more defined.