Didn't you know that? If it's ok in a business sense or if casual gamer won't notice the difference between 30 and 60 anyway, you are supposed to like the product too. It's all about what makes sense, not how you feel about it.
-
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.
Dead Rising 3 PC "optimized" for 30fps. User can uncap at own glitchy risk. Cacpcom.
- Thread starter Salsa
- Start date
Didn't you know that? If it's ok in a business sense or if casual gamer won't notice the difference between 30 and 60 anyway, you are supposed to like the product too. It's all about what makes sense, not how you feel about it.
Max settings and high frame rate has only become the norm since last gen where cross pollination was heavy. Before that you needed a massive card to run games at max settings and a high frame rate or sometimes you needed a card that wasn't out yet. In Q3 and UT at launch people were turning down settings to get a high fps.
Exactly, turning down settings for a better framerate. That's what I do if I have to as I'd rather have the 60fps than some graphical effects. Shadows & motion blur? BYE.
Aspirations26
Member
Dead rising games get boring really fast. This will definitely be a 10 dollar or less purchase from me. The locked 30 fps helps that decision even more.
How can I not read "I'll skip this game because there are other games with unlocked framerates" as "I put literally zero weight into every single other aspect of a game's design"?
I just cannot believe that there's any genuine interest here in the first place. Which is fine, obviously.
ClaptoVaughn said:
If you aren't acting out of principle, that means you actually cannot play stuff like Metal Slug, the original Doom, and God Hand. That must really suck.
Retro-gaming is a completly different beast, obviously. It makes no sense bringing up games from the past when people talk about their expectations in the future. Things don't need to stay the same for decades.
Besides that, there were plenty of early games which ran at 60FPS for a reason. And the games you mentioned would all have been a lot better at 60FPS. I don't even get which argument you are trying to make. You behave like DR3 is the game of the century, an absolute must play - I'd say it isn't and it's perfectly fine to skip if for other gaming experiences which are about average or good (or even very good) and enjoy these instead of DR3. It's not like people have unlimited time to play everything.
Oh, guess what, I played TLOU because, judging from the reviews and the reactions, it was supposed to be "that game of the century which you need to play" - so I played it. And I wasn't able to enjoy the gameplay at all, because the framerate was so shitty. I would have been better of waiting for the remake or just watching a "Let's Play". So, yeah, I do think that framerate is the very first principle which needs to be right and great to make it possible for me to enjoy a game. It's like the gatekeeper for a great gaming experience. If the framerate is shit, the gate stays closed - and I keep my money. Understandable? Thanks.
I was really looking forward to DR3. I've actually watched around 4 youtube playthroughs of it and played it vicariously through others because I thought this was the only way I was going to experience it (short of buying a Xb1, and that's not an option). Hell, I even endured DSP.
DSP.
Just so I could experience a bit of Dead Rising 3.
Having said that however. I am not so starved for games that I feel the need to ignore any standards or preferences I have for 60fps just so I can play one game. I made a mistake with Diablo 3, I let my heart lead my head. I wanted the new Diablo experience and I didn't care what that entailed, I just wanted it. Well. We all know how that turned out (though its in a far better state these days).
I am far more discerning about the games I purchase now. I heed the warning signs, I don't just blindly go "day 1" any more. A game can't just 'be' to be deserving of my cash. Just porting DR3 to the pc doesn't win you an accolade. I'm glad that its happened, but I'm not doing backflips right now.
£15 in a Steam sale.. maybe £20. That's the value of it to me, certainly not full retail, because its a sub-standard offering. If you're not going to put the effort in, you don't deserve my money. That's all there is to that.
Juke Joint Jezebel
Member
What's that, a Capcom PC port being poorly done. Stop the presses!
Chance Hale
Member
Most Capcom pc ports are stand out efforts(even if they take too long), Resident Evil 4 was a long time ago and was finally righted with QLOC's amazing remaster.
What I meant was that Dark Souls didn't launch with a 60 fps option, only enabled by DSFix. It's a different situation in Dead Rising 3. They already have the option, but the game is coded in a way that it might break physics. We can't be sure how much it will affect the game, but it's not normal either way.
Which Capcom ports in recent memory have been poorly done? I feel like this is an off-base remark.
It seems most recent examples have been at least as expected or even quite good, and still improving.
RE6, RER, Strider, DmC, RE4 (after timely patching) have all been completely solid. DmC in fact was the definitive version and ran beautifully. They're working on AE Steam transition fixes. Which ones did you have a beef with?
This isn't them saying it's only officially recommended at 30 fps only for parity reasons. There are technical issues involved. There's a difference.
I get it's fun to hate on Capcom, and they do/say a lot of dumb stuff, but at least do so with where it's warranted.
Bjoern the Smexy
Member
I for one don't care as long as it's a better port than DR2OTR.
OTR was playable but had TREMENDOUS amounts of slowdown in areas that don't even have that many zombies on screen.
DR2 vanilla fared way better in that way.
As long as DR3 has a variety of resolutions available and a steady framerate then I am okay with this. Especially if you are able to unlock the framerate.
With the option to unlock the framerate I don't even see any sense in cursing Capcom.
OTR was playable but had TREMENDOUS amounts of slowdown in areas that don't even have that many zombies on screen.
DR2 vanilla fared way better in that way.
As long as DR3 has a variety of resolutions available and a steady framerate then I am okay with this. Especially if you are able to unlock the framerate.
With the option to unlock the framerate I don't even see any sense in cursing Capcom.
Sword Of Doom
Member
30fps on PC is gonna be a choppy mess. wtf are they thinking?
grandwizard
Member
Capcom makes some of the best PC ports out there. They have even done amazing work on RE4 which had many problems from porting a 10 year old game custom made for eccentric hardware.
This is disappointing news but I hope he is simply exaggerating the level of broken stuff that happens with an unlocked framerate. If it is minor stuff like once in awhile a physics-enabled object will hang in midair like RE4 at 60fps then I can deal.
If it isn't a matter of principle why would it matter how old the game is? He's saying that he cannot play games that fail to hit a certain threshold because he's accustomed to higher standards. If he's being honest, he should also be unable to play Metal Slug and Doom. Unless, of course, it actually is a matter of principle, but he seems horrified at the suggestion.
Well, I don't know about you, but I approach retro games with a complete different mindset than modern games - and I enjoy them for other reasons, mainly nostalgia.
I don't know what you are trying to imply with that "principle" thing anyway. What are you onto, detective? Want to proof that every 60FPS fan is a hypocrit because he may or may not enjoy a 25 year old game at a lower framerate? Please, put some sense into that.
CadetMahoney
Member
This guy gets it.
ClaptoVaughn
Member
I played Metal Slug at the arcades when I was a child. I didn't even know what framerates were at the time.
And get with the times. I don't think anyone on PC has played Doom 1 with framerate capped at 30-35 (whatever it was when it first came out) in a decade. Zdoom and various other methods like it can uncap it. I also have the Brutal Doom mod but that's more of a recommendation for anyone who hasn't tried it rather than having anything to do with framerates.
In regard to God Hand, well I can't prove it anything because it might violate the TOS in regards to emulators. However, if a mod can confirm I won't get banned, I'll show you a screenshot of God Hand like you've never seen it.
But to answer your question(s): can I play those games at 30 fps? No, because I'm on PC. I don't need to.
I assume you are talking about this when you mean Godhand could blow peoples minds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=170gS21KKIY. I mean yeah its cleaner but it doesn't seem that big of a deal to me as far as oh my god this is amazing. Plays the same as my ps2 copy.
ClaptoVaughn
Member
Play it at 60 fps and tell me if it plays the same as your ps2 copy.
You can talk about the capabilities of emulation without worrying about the TOS.
I've emulated God Hand and I've worked on Doom source ports, don't worry. You can run God Hand at normal speed (the emulator reporting 100% speed and 60hz, so the usual PS2 game's 30fps), but running it at 60fps involves doubling the speed of the game logic. Same with Metal Slug. These games are not playable at 60fps, even on PC. If you have 60fps footage of God Hand that doesn't look like playing the game in fast-forward, please show me. Maybe I missed something!
Thrakier said:
I don't play older games for nostalgia, typically. We weren't talking about you or I, though, but someone else incapable of enjoying 30fps because of what they're accustomed to. You've made it pretty clear that you dislike 30fps games on principle.
I'm calling him out on the principle thing because I think the principles themselves are toxic.
Lots of posters make pretty huge proclamations of what they can and can't enjoy, and they are so wild to me that I don't think they always think them through. These silly little lines in the sand pertaining to framerate and resolution are drawn so often and, when taken at face-value, they completely lock one out of so many options, yet these lines are being held up as noble standards to be respected because of this twisted idea that some shitty faceless game that only manages to excel in matters of IQ is somehow more "pro-consumer" (lol) than, say, a 1024x720 30fps Mikami masterpiece.
So I ask a lot of questions just in case.
Ah, now I get your point. Instead of letting him (or me, for that matter) stick to his/mine principles, you'd rather want us sticking to YOUR principles. Cool story.
For your information: on PC, there are tons and tons of great games at 1080p/60FPS - more than I can ever play. My backlog is so huge already, I'll never get through it. I don't play "shitty faceless games", no matter the framerate.
Also, I don't believe that a game, that puts graphical fideltiy over playablity, can be a true masterpiece. Why? Because it doesn't FEEL like one.
Wow, I had no idea Doom ran at 35fps or whatever.
Anyways, if it's the option between playing Dead Rising on PC at 30fps or never getting it, I'll choose the former.
I'm not going to turn away on a game, especially when the developer probably had to pull some eleventh hour shit to put out a game on a console for launch and never intended it to hit PC.
And especially when we don't even know if there's anything majorly wrong with the game running at 60.
Anyways, if it's the option between playing Dead Rising on PC at 30fps or never getting it, I'll choose the former.
I'm not going to turn away on a game, especially when the developer probably had to pull some eleventh hour shit to put out a game on a console for launch and never intended it to hit PC.
And especially when we don't even know if there's anything majorly wrong with the game running at 60.
Easy. The only way to vote where you want videogame industry go, is your money.
My game backlog has games for a decade so I can afford not to buy a game I like everyday of the week.
Also, as a PC gamer, this thread is pretty embarrassing. Are you guys seriously so insecure about the platform that you can't handle the fact that this game is releasing in the best possible state that it can given how it was made, on the PC, and that best possible state includes a locked framerate?
This thread is honestly worse than some of the console warz bullshit I've seen here. I mean goddamn, the armchair developers in here telling the people who made the game how "lazy" or "incompetent" they are over something they don't even understand is mind boggling.
This is just lunacy, sheer and utter lunacy. "Voting with your wallet" in this scenario doesn't result in more 60fps games. It just results in less games period on the platform. Me? I'd rather have Dead Rising 3 on PC with a locked framerate than not have it at all because Capcom was afraid to release a game that due to design reasons made inside of the scope of the original release made it impossible for them to release it without a locked framerate.
This thread is honestly worse than some of the console warz bullshit I've seen here. I mean goddamn, the armchair developers in here telling the people who made the game how "lazy" or "incompetent" they are over something they don't even understand is mind boggling.
This is just lunacy, sheer and utter lunacy. "Voting with your wallet" in this scenario doesn't result in more 60fps games. It just results in less games period on the platform. Me? I'd rather have Dead Rising 3 on PC with a locked framerate than not have it at all because Capcom was afraid to release a game that due to design reasons made inside of the scope of the original release made it impossible for them to release it without a locked framerate.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
That's the thing. The game would have to be phenomenal compared to its peers to overcome the IQ deficit, and with something like DR3 I would just play something else instead.
The only thing embarrassing is people like you that make excuses for bad port jobs (it is not impossible to fix! they have the fucking source code, they can fucking fix it!) and then demand people not use one of their rights and powers as a consumer (the power not to buy the product)!
lifeexpectancy
Member
Its amazing that you can somehow be inside my head and tell me what I do and dont care about. People care about things to varying degrees. I can enjoy a game LESS with a worse framerate, but still enjoy it to its fullest potential it its released state, even if that potential is lower than it could've been at 60fps.
It isnt a 100% absolute one way or the other for SOME of us. But hey, thanks for the quasi-personal attack and telling me how I should or shouldn't post. How dare I attempt to have a rational discussion about the subject. It's attitudes like yours which give certain groups of gamers a bad rap at times. SMFH at your post man. SMFH.
I guess these guy's don't care about framerate at all either:
Weird how some will sacrifice on something they care about if it's a game they want to play. Man, I must really not care about framerate, like, at all. :rollseyes:
You're right man and I don't disagree. You guys that want FPS at 60 no matter what certainly have the right to vote with your wallet. I don't think he meant to come off saying you shouldn't. I think he just meant that it might not have the intended effect.
Rather than causing devs to make more games at 60fps when they port them to PC, it might just lead to them not bothering to port them to PC at all. He'd rather have a sub-par version of the game than no version at all. At least, I think that's what he was saying.
My thoughts, exactly. Besides, every once in a while I willingly choose to deal with a console exclusive that is capped at 30fps because I really want to play it, and it's no different here. The PC port of DR3 is the best version around, and I'd rather have it than not.
It does not even support running at 60FPS.
But it's not appearing in it's best possible state. It's appearing in a state representative of how much money Capcom is willing to put into the port. This isn't an old game with lost source code that has to be emulated. This is a brand new game with an active dev team.
mhayze
Member
'We don't know what's going to happen at 60fps'? Sheesh. Fucking pay a game tester $15/hr to test the game on the PC. At PC settings - i.e 60hz, maximum IQ
. Which is why people buy your games on the PC. With money. That you take to bring the game to the PC.
(actually real PC gamers play at 120hz+)
Is that not what "Users can uncap at own glitchy risk" means?
No. If you can accept games with capped framerate and/or resolution, you can accept being a console gamer. That's not my case and then playing on pc is the only way I can reach my expectations. I can accept to pay whatever it takes in hardware to get always optimum experience on all my games.
In recent years there are very few 30 fps games in pc:
Split/Second - No fix. No buy.
Resident Evil 4 - fixed in newer RE4HD edition
L.A.Noire - fixed using Art Money or CheatEngine
NFS The Run - fixed with a game patch
SkyDrift. Bought and regretted for life.
Vikings - No fix. No buy.
Double Fine games (minus Brutal Legend that was fixed) - No fix. No buy.
Dark Souls - fixed by based Durante.
NFS Rivals - fixed with command line parameters + new nvidia drivers
Those are exceptions into a catalog with thousands of games. So, no a big loss for me. I know is not a problem for a lot of people, and I respect that.
Didnt know you need Dead Rising 3 for living.
Sometime is better lose something instead of give up and continue to full developer wallet with half asset game.
He won't be able to do anything. Changing the way the game's physics work would require low-level access he won't have.
It happens. Another example would be Rage: you can (or could) remove the 60fps cap on the PC, but this causes/d the game logic to speed up accordingly. I want to say id later hid the cvar with a patch, but I'm not sure and I don't have the game installed so I can't check.