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

Why does no one talk about Until Dawn's frame rate?

P

Pops Maellard

Member
I picked up a PS4 a few weeks ago and since Halloween is just a few days away, I decided to grab Until Dawn. GAF seemed to like it, a friend loved it, and the reviews seemed ok.

Twenty minutes into it, I don't think I can play this. It's so painfully stuttery, and feels like it's running far below 30 most of the time. The frame pacing absolutely ruins any sense of immersion and almost entirely negates the atmosphere for me. Honestly, I haven't played anything with this level of jank since Far Cry 3 on 360. I'm not sure I can finish it, but if I don't at least play a bit I essentially threw away $60.
 
Yeah the frame rate is total garbage but it's not exactly a game that demands a solid frame rate anyways. Still, wish it was better.
 
I think the game being good kind of compensates for its shortcomings, such as framerates. Its easy to just point out a flaw like framerate but it doesnt become a glaring issue if you are immersed in a good game.
 
If the game grabs you enough, you can look past even the worst framerate.

Drakengard 3 literally dropped to 0.5 FPS during one boss battle and sometimes just hovered around 10 or so, but I still love the game despite its enormous technical flaws.

I do agree that it is weird that not many people end up bringing up how variable the framerate is, but then again most people don't care about framerate, or rather, don't know.
 
Tagg9 said:
Holy hyperbole! The framerate isn't perfect, but it in no way impacted my enjoyment of the game.
Click to expand...

Not only that, but the frame-rate was a constant topic in the review thread, and is discussed often in the OT.

"Why does no one talk about" thread are rarely NOT talked about.

People should be post threads titled "why does no one talk about Night Court" or sommit, instead.
 
Its inconsistent. It runs decent if not great for the most part. There are hiccups here and there but conversely during certain scenes the game looks better than anything I've seen on PS4, even at 30 fps.
 
Because it's a great game otherwise and the framerate doesn't really hamper the ability to play it, other than simply being visually unpleasant
 
I feel like I've heard a lot of complaints about the framerate, both in reviews and in comments for LPs

Yeah, it's super inconsistent, but it never actively hurts the experience imo
 
Is it really that bothersome? I get why it'd suck in an action-adventure game or a platformer because those require instant response but this was mostly cutscenes and stuff. It is bad but I don't think it's so bad it makes it unplayable.
 
Dio said:
If the game grabs you enough, you can look past even the worst framerate.

Drakengard 3 literally dropped to 0.5 FPS during one boss battle and sometimes just hovered around 10 or so, but I still love the game despite its enormous technical flaws.

I do agree that it is weird that not many people end up bringing up how variable the framerate is, but then again most people don't care about framerate, or rather, don't know.
Click to expand...
SOTC on PS2 is also a good example of an experience transcending its framerate.
 
hwy_61 said:
No shit it's a joke post
Click to expand...

Yet there are people excusing on the basis of "it's fine" or "didn't affect the experience". Saying 60 isn't necessary is fine and all, but accepting games that dip below 30 for long periods at a time is going a bit far in the apologism.

Noting, this wasn't aimed at you, but the general attitude in this thread so far.
 
That's just not true OP. A lot of people remarked on the frame dips and stutter in reviews, technical analysis, and the official thread,

However, the amount of jutter and the overall impact to the individual's enjoyment of the game varied from person to person.

In my case, I noticed it, but had no problem completing and enjoying the game several times. You might want to watch a Let's Play and trade the game in if you are really bothered by the technical blemishes.
 
Oh it was talked about in the OP, in gameplay and reaction threads, and in the review thread...as well as some reviews..


It was talked about a lot, just nobody made a thread about it I guess?
 
Dio said:
If the game grabs you enough, you can look past even the worst framerate.

Drakengard 3 literally dropped to 0.5 FPS during one boss battle and sometimes just hovered around 10 or so, but I still love the game despite its enormous technical flaws.

I do agree that it is weird that not many people end up bringing up how variable the framerate is, but then again most people don't care about framerate, or rather, don't know.
Click to expand...

Nier as well.

This is not a game that appeals to PC types or the hypercompetitive and not on multiple platforms, so no talk of framerate. Refreshing.
 
For the same reason no one talks much about Life is Strange's framerate. It doesn't matter / doesn't really affect playability.
 
Since user input is very different to other genres I think it goes by less noticed. I know i had less of a problem with it in Until Dawn than I normally would have.
 
victor.m said:
Yet there are people excusing on the basis of "it's fine" or "didn't affect the experience". Saying 60 isn't necessary is fine and all, but accepting games that dip below 30 for long periods at a time is going a bit far in the apologism.

Noting, this wasn't aimed at you, but the general attitude in this thread so far.
Click to expand...

I mean, at the end of the day, is it worth not playing through until dawn because of the frame rate? For me, it was worth enduring the less than ideal frame rate. It's a pretty damn good game.
 
The frame rate is definitely not good, but considering 80% of it is basically watching a movie, it didn't really bother me much. A very ineptly handled choice early on was much more ruinous to my enjoyment of the game. I liked it but wasn't as enamoured as most people seemingly were.

I tried to save Josh given the decision early on and so when he died anyway, I quit the game and loaded my save thinking I might have mixed up the options so I did it again and he still died, at which point I knew it was a ruse and he was most likely "the killer".

Maybe my memory is hazy, but I found the frame rate for The Walking Dead and The Wolf Among Us on PS3/360 to be infinitely worse.
 
Lord Error said:
For the same reason no one talks about Life is Strange's framerate. It doesn't matter / doesn't affect playability.
Click to expand...

Life is Strange doesn't have nearly as bad a framerate so of course it doesn't come up like it does with Until Dawn.

Well maybe it does on PS3 or 360, but nobody seems to discuss those versions at all.
 
I should add that the framerate stuttering is obvious early in the game, especially in cut scenes...

But as the game went on, I either got use to it or it got better, cause I didn't notice it much anymore...
 
Wario64 said:
It's a like B horror movie and movies run under 30 FPS, so it isn't an issue.
Click to expand...

It's not a movie though. I have to control what's happening on the screen, and there's a noticeable delay because of the frame rate.

Hopey said:
I think the game being good kind of compensates for its shortcomings, such as framerates. Its easy to just point out a flaw like framerate but it doesnt become a glaring issue if you are immersed in a good game.
Click to expand...

I can't find myself immersed in it because it jerks me back to reality every few seconds with a massive frame drop.

Mass_Pincup said:
Because not a whole lot of people cares about a framerate for an adventure game.
Click to expand...

Just walking around a scene is frustrating, and it loses any sense of immersion because of it.

Edit: this was basically what I'm trying to say:
victor.m said:
Yet there are people excusing on the basis of "it's fine" or "didn't affect the experience". Saying 60 isn't necessary is fine and all, but accepting games that dip below 30 for long periods at a time is going a bit far in the apologism.

Noting, this wasn't aimed at you, but the general attitude in this thread so far.
Click to expand...

I don't think this game should get a pass just because it's mostly good. The framerate is unacceptable and really ruins the overall experience.
 
Warnen said:
Ok so when does this game get scary? I just finished chapter 5, scariest thing so far is the frame rate.

I love horror movies but this game isn't doing anything for me, might as well finish it at this point.
Click to expand...

Yeah don't know why the frame rate gets a pass.
 
victor.m said:
Yet there are people excusing on the basis of "it's fine" or "didn't affect the experience". Saying 60 isn't necessary is fine and all, but accepting games that dip below 30 for long periods at a time is going a bit far in the apologism.

Noting, this wasn't aimed at you, but the general attitude in this thread so far.
Click to expand...

Thank God we have you around to set us straight :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Why no one talking about Tokyo Scramble?
4
266
Deerock71 replied
Why is no one talking about what is going on with Sony?
2
67
1K
DenchDeckard replied
Until Dawn 2 - Announce Trailer
2
93
193
LastBattle replied
There’s a problem with video game pricing that no one is talking about
2
72
1K
Heimdall_Xtreme replied
The 1996 Strategy Game No One Could Play - Until Now (Wages of War)
Analysis Retro Trailer 
2
184
StereoVsn replied
Top Bottom