Support NeoGAF

[Prophet Steve]

It's not? Call of Duty is always (or tries to be) 60 FPS. Isn't Battlefield 60 fps now? Wolfenstein is 60 fps. Shadow Warrior is 60 FPS. Even TLOU:R is 60. Metro Redux is 60 FPS too. What shooters don't go for 60 fps now a days. Killzone? Killzone being shit doesn't make 60 FPS not a standard. Racing has been a little split recently, but overall it's been the standard for the big racers hasn't it? The more open world ones have been going 30, but the more track based ones like Forza 5 are 60.

This is likely to be only the case at the start of the gen with shooters. You got many games that have previous-gen versions and the extra horsepower is used to make them 60 FPS. As it would be a lot of work for them to use all that extra power to heavily modify the game graphically.

Battlefield is one of those examples, Hardline will be aiming for 60 FPS too, but looks very similar. And TLOU and Metro Redux are examples of this too. It is not because it is a standard and it is likely we will go back to a lot more 30 FPS games later this gen.

 

[Moral Panic]

This thread just gave me the idea to play FFXIII @ 20fps and see if the even frame delivery would counter the low frame rate. In battles I'd actually say that it does, but once you are able to move the camera it completely falls apart and the low frame rate becomes very clear.

 

[BloodMoney]

Lol at every one saying locked 30 is garbage,horrible,etc. Give me a fucking break. I assume these people had quad-sli when Crysis launched in 07... Or they are too young to remember the days of yesteryear when 60 was always a struggle.

 

[Spaced Harrier]

30FPS mode in TLOU Remastered looked really choppy and slow compared to other typical 30FPS titles for some reason.

Yeah I noticed that felt very choppy.

60 is obviously king, but you gotta lock that down or at least only drop a few frames when something mental happens.

Op is right inconsistent frame rate is awful.

The dreamcast was heaven after the ps1 and n64.

 

[Fbh]

I don't really care that much about 60 or 30 fps and to be honest depending on the game I preffer for them to go back to 30fps in order to push graphics further.

AC is such a case. Those games are so automatic to play that you don't really need the responsiveness of 60fps. To me one of the main appeals of the franchise are the different settings and cities. So if limiting the game to 30 fps means a better looking city or a city with more NPC's that make it feel alive than I'm happy with that.


But yeah, the minimum developers should aim for is 30fps. If you can't keep a constant 30fps then it's time to scale back the graphics or size or number of NPC's or resolution.
I mean, I can understand if it drops a few frames in some rare situations with a lot going on on the screen (lots of explotions and stuff like that), but otherwise they should aimed for the game to be locked at 30

 

[Stinkles]

Kill me pls

 

[Jedi2016]

Lol at every one saying locked 30 is garbage,horrible,etc.

What's become quite obvious in reading this is that most people have never actually seen truly locked 30fps, they just see a so-called "30fps" game running at 15-25fps and believe that's what all 30fps games looks like.

In any event, nice to see some people actually understand the issues I brought up. I'll bring it up now and again in the future, I'm sure, but hopefully in a way that doesn't make everyone automatically jump into the 60fps argument (that doesn't actually exist). I am primarily a PC gamer right now, after all.

While I would definitely prefer GTA5 on PS4 to run at 60fps, I would actually be content with a locked 30fps. Which is most decidedly NOT what we played on PS3.

 

[vazel]

If you thought a 30fps game with a lot of movement like a racing game has was 60fps at first then you probably need a new HDTV. Plasmas are best when it comes to motion resolution.

 

[Thrakier]

Lol at every one saying locked 30 is garbage,horrible,etc. Give me a fucking break. I assume these people had quad-sli when Crysis launched in 07... Or they are too young to remember the days of yesteryear when 60 was always a struggle.

You mean yesteryear like in the early 90s, when I played most of my games at 60FPS? Yeah, that was a struggle.

 

[Mister Chippy]

My opinion is that if you have a fighting game, racing game, or twitch shooter you need the highest FPS you can and anything below 60 isn't good enough. On all other games 30 is fine, although sub optimal.

That said people really oughta stop pretending there isn't a difference. There is, it's noticeable, and if a game can consistently hit a locked 60 fps that's better than if it could only hit 30. No, that difference isn't gamebreaking for most games/people and a lot of people really don't care. Can't we just agree on those things and stop arguing?

Still, if a game can't consistently hit 30 that is a huge problem. 30 is a little low for my liking but I can put up with it, however fluctuating frames or anything below 30 give me an awful headache and make the game feel way less responsive. Some companies are throwing framerates out the window because they don't impact the bullshots or the "vertical slice" you show off at E3 and companies would rather make those look as pretty as possible over anything else.

I just want companies to stop putting out sub 1080 resolutions (no excuse for that one in my opinion) and telling us that 30fps is better. No, we know it isn't better, but we might be willing to accept that 30 is playable and allows you to put in more particle effects and things. Personally I'd also like it if they stopped pushing the current hardware to the point where they can't match the base resolution for everything else right now and focused more on having a unique artstyle than going for photorealism, but if people are just upfront about the fact that 30fps is a concession they made and reassure people that it will be stable that's fine for me.

Just don't go locking the resolution and frame rate on the PC version, I invested in my rig because I cared about both of those things and I feel really dissed when companies don't acknowledge that I'm part of their fanbase too and want to get the best possible experience out of their game. Letting me play at the resolution and FPS I want doesn't hurt anyone else.

 

[Jigolo]

I think gaf in general is too obsessed with frame rate.

 

[NullPointer]

Did anyone read Op

Considering how much of this thread is about 60fps I'm going to say nope.

 

[SeanTSC]

Lol at every one saying locked 30 is garbage,horrible,etc. Give me a fucking break. I assume these people had quad-sli when Crysis launched in 07... Or they are too young to remember the days of yesteryear when 60 was always a struggle.

Or you know, maybe we grew up on the NES and SNES, where pretty much everything was 60 FPS.

I haven't called locked 30 garbage or horrible, but anyone who says that it's anything better than completely Mediocre and anything more than Tolerably Adequate is kidding themselves. It's not great, it's not good, it's not nice or decent.

 

[Buburibon]

30fps, when it's smooth and consistent and does not ever, EVER, drop below 30, can be perfectly playable for many people (depending on game type). Take Driveclub for example, I haven't seen anyone complain about performance (at least not of the game). It may be "only" 30fps, but according to DF, it hits its target 100% of the time. When I played LEGO Marvel on PS4, I actually had a hard time telling it was only 30fps.. I had gotten into this mindset, as many have, that 30fps meant the game had to be choppy and inconsistent, and that's absolutely not the case. The game runs as smooth as butter, and I honestly thought it was 60fps at first.

I mean no disrespect, but the smoothest 30fps you could ever hope for, with perfectly even frame-pacing, still suffers from being "choppy" as the very nature of the technology dictates that every frame must be displayed twice on a 60hz monitor. This "repeated-frame effect" causes "flashing", or "strobing", that is commonly referred to as a "slideshow" by those accustomed to gaming at 60fps and above.

For that reason I have been unable to play Driveclub for extended periods of time. I personally find that the fast-paced nature of the game exacerbates the "repeated-frame effect", as my eyes continue to track the repeated frames, leading to visual fatigue. I could, perhaps, get better acquainted to 30fps through repeated exposure, but in order to do so successfully, I might have to forgo playing games at 60fps for a while.

 

[Tain]

What's become quite obvious in reading this is that most people have never actually seen truly locked 30fps, they just see a so-called "30fps" game running at 15-25fps and believe that's what all 30fps games looks like.

I don't think that's the case. I think that most people passionate enough about this stuff to be posting in framerate threads on GAF do know what a game like Forza Horizon 2 looks like. And to many, myself included, it's immediately obvious that Horizon 2 is a 30fps game, despite being a perfectly locked and paced 30.

I could, perhaps, get better acquainted to 30fps through repeated exposure, but in order to do so successfully, I might have to forgo playing games at 60fps for a while.

Which might be worth it. Depending on the other elements of all games involved, of course.

 

[DonMigs85]

While I would definitely prefer GTA5 on PS4 to run at 60fps, I would actually be content with a locked 30fps. Which is most decidedly NOT what we played on PS3.

Same here. I'll be pleasantly surprised if it ends up 60FPS though. Seems they've been making some extensive enhancements.

 

[Unai]

Lol at every one saying locked 30 is garbage,horrible,etc. Give me a fucking break. I assume these people had quad-sli when Crysis launched in 07... Or they are too young to remember the days of yesteryear when 60 was always a struggle.

What? Most games were 60 FPS when I was a kid.

 

[Imbarkus]

I thought this was going to be a thread about 29.97 fps drop-frame. If we hit consistent 30 do we still drop frames for old NTSC timecode data space?

 

[Buburibon]

Which might be worth it. Depending on the other elements of all games involved, of course.

Good point. It might actually be worth it. Bloodborne is going to be 30fps, isn't it?

 

[SapientWolf]

30 FPS is fine, it's just not fine for you. There is a difference.

Using the same logic, 30 with frequent drops is fine too. It's a hundred percent playable. It was good enough for all the people that played GTAV last gen. .

 

[Prophet Steve]

What's become quite obvious in reading this is that most people have never actually seen truly locked 30fps, they just see a so-called "30fps" game running at 15-25fps and believe that's what all 30fps games looks like.

In any event, nice to see some people actually understand the issues I brought up. I'll bring it up now and again in the future, I'm sure, but hopefully in a way that doesn't make everyone automatically jump into the 60fps argument (that doesn't actually exist). I am primarily a PC gamer right now, after all.

While I would definitely prefer GTA5 on PS4 to run at 60fps, I would actually be content with a locked 30fps. Which is most decidedly NOT what we played on PS3.

You are saying that nobody has actually seen 30 fps on a baseless argument.

It isn't smooth, I can easily see the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS.

 

[Jedi2016]

You are saying that nobody has actually seen 30 fps on a baseless argument.

It isn't smooth, I can easily see the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS.

That's not my argument. Read the OP again.

 

[Mister Chippy]

What? Most games were 60 FPS when I was a kid.

Ehh back in the NES/SNES days maybe, but the 64 couldn't really hit 60 and from that point on most games have been 30. The exceptions to this are fighting games, character action games, racing games, and twitch shooters, all of which have been making a concerted effort to hit 60 frames for as long as they possibly could.

 

[Prophet Steve]

That's not my argument. Read the OP again.

You are saying that nobody has actually seen locked 30 fps on a baseless argument.

It isn't smooth, I can easily see the difference between locked 30 FPS and 60 FPS.

Better now?

 

[Ryouji Gunblade]

Sounds alright. I enjoy Destiny at 30, it doesn't seem to stutter. It just doesn't look quite as good as Metal Gear.

 

[NullPointer]

Using the same logic, 30 with frequent drops is fine too. It's a hundred percent playable. It was good enough for all the people that played GTAV last gen. .

The framerate was often sub-par in GTA5, as was TLOU, which is 90% of the reason I pick up these re-releases.

Can we at least have *some* kind of minimum standards for performance? For those who can't even agree that a locked 30fps should be a baseline standard, what should be?

Or is any sense of minimum performance standards now entitlement?

 

[Mononoke]

I agree that 30 FPS can be even worse, when you consider it's almost never actually 30 FPS. But my problem I have, and that many have, is how people are trying to spin it as being better. As it's actually good for you. I totally can understand if a dev says they can't hit 60 FPS. Either because of their own limitations (their own shortcoming as devs), or the kind of game they want to make pushes other things that make it impossible to achieve it. Okay. But clearly, consumer/gamers want 60 FPS. They are giving feedback, and telling them they want this. If they don't want to prioritize FPS because their vision is something else, okay. But don't try to make people that want higher FPS to look like the bad guy. Or don't try to spin it like 30 FPS is actually better, or good for us, and we are just crazy.

That is what bugs me about all this.

 

[Daingurse]

I prefer 60 fps in terms of game-feel, absolutely. But I do find a locked 30fps playable, locked being key here. I have no problem locking games at 30fps on PC, to gain greater fidelity. Really depends on the genre of game. For example, I currently have Watch Dogs locked at 30fps, because it seems to stutter for me otherwise, even though I can run it at a high framerate. It's perfectly playable with adaptive half-refresh rate v-sync 30fps, I have it locked to.

 

[MaLDo]

Locked framerate > variable framerate

120 > 60 >> 30 >>>> 15

Rocket science.

 

[Mister Chippy]

I can't help but think this. Kind of crazy how far people are willing to defend things. That said, I do understand that some people can't see the difference between 30 and 60 FPS, and therefore don't care. That's fine. But it's the...justification, and them buying into the BS that these publishers spin for why 30 FPS is better that is driving me crazy.

I don't think OP is suffering from this because he's not defending the idea that 30 is just as good or better than 60, just saying that it's suitable for your average person. I'll agree with that, despite finding much less than 60 unplayable myself.

Still, the only justification for 30 FPS I'll accept is "Sorry guys we couldn't make it so we made the game prettier instead" which is fine. Whats not fine is the marketing BS.

 

[Mononoke]

I don't think OP is suffering from this because he's not defending the idea that 30 is just as good or better than 60, just saying that it's suitable for your average person. I'll agree with that, despite finding much less than 60 unplayable myself.

Still, the only justification for 30 FPS I'll accept is "Sorry guys we couldn't make it so we made the game prettier instead" which is fine. Whats not fine is the marketing BS.

I edited my post, because I re-read what he said, and realize that the person I was agreeing with was wrong. That was my mistake. I even read his entire OP, and still messed up. So I have no excuse. Personally, I'm torn. I think gameplay should matter more than graphics. IMO the FPS impacts gameplay a lot more than graphics, because it's how you react to things and move around (whether the camera, or the character itself). That to me, is much more important than graphics. Ideally, I would like both. But if I had to choose, I would pick FPS any day over it.

I'm torn because, I guess I think "we chose graphics over FPS"...isn't as bad as them telling us "30 FPS is more cinematic". At least they are admitting they made a choice, and instead of accepting that some consumers don't think it was the right choice, they try to spin it.

 

[GHG]

Yep. Locked framerates are far superior because they give out a consistent image so your eyes and brain can adjust easily to what's on the screen. There is an element of predictability about it, as in your brain can predict when certain things will arrive on screen due to the consistency, thus it is easier to time your inputs.

That is why even a locked framerate of 25fps is better than a variable 30fps. Even variable 60fps can be horrible dependant on how variable it is.

 

[Jedi2016]

You are saying that nobody has actually seen locked 30 fps on a baseless argument.

It isn't smooth, I can easily see the difference between locked 30 FPS and 60 FPS.

Better now?

For one, I never said that "no one" has ever seen locked 30fps. But there are so few games nowadays that can hit that mark, especially on console, that people have gotten a skewed idea of what "30fps" actually is. What they're calling 30fps is really less than 30 (that's why I keep putting "30fps" in quotes). Ubisoft can't hit 30 with a shotgun, you can't look at those games and call them 30fps when they never get above 27-28fps.

 

[rjc571]

Lol at every one saying locked 30 is garbage,horrible,etc. Give me a fucking break. I assume these people had quad-sli when Crysis launched in 07... Or they are too young to remember the days of yesteryear when 60 was always a struggle.

Maybe you're the one who's too young to remember the 8 and 16 bit era, where almost every single game was 60 fps. Maybe you're even too young to remember the PS2 generation, where a good chunk of games -- well over half of my collection -- ran at 60.

 

[CosmicQueso]

The framerate was often sub-par in GTA5, as was TLOU, which is 90% of the reason I pick up these re-releases.

Can we at least have *some* kind of minimum standards for performance? For those who can't even agree that a locked 30fps should be a baseline standard, what should be?

Or is any sense of minimum performance standards now entitlement?

Every individual has different standards of value and different standards of acceptable quality.

Are you suggesting some kind of regulatory board that determines what video game products can go to market based on technical performance specs?

That's not happening, so the best thing for you to do is buy what meets your personal levels of cost and technical performance and let others do the same.

If 60 fps is what moves the market, that will be what is consistently produced.

If 60 fps isn't a big deal to most (and sales says it might not be) then you're just yelling at the world.

 

[Mister Chippy]

I edited my post, because I re-read what he said, and realize that the person I was agreeing with was wrong. That was my mistake. I even read his entire OP, and still messed up. So I have no excuse. Personally, I'm torn. I think gameplay should matter more than graphics. IMO the FPS impacts gameplay a lot more than graphics, because it's how you react to things and move around (whether the camera, or the character itself). That to me, is much more important than graphics. Ideally, I would like both. But if I had to choose, I would pick FPS any day over it.

I'm torn because, I guess I think "we chose graphics over FPS"...isn't as bad as them telling us "30 FPS is more cinematic". At least they are admitting they made a choice, and instead of accepting that some consumers don't think it was the right choice, they try to spin it.

Oh yeah for a character action game, fighting game, shooter, or racing game 30 fps does not cut it. For any other kind of game I'd still pick frame rate over graphics in a heartbeat (except maybe turn based RPGs).

 

[MaLDo]

That is why even a locked framerate of 25fps is better than a variable 30fps.

Only in a 50 hz display. 25 fps can't be locked in 60 hz.

 

[danwarb]

Most 30fps games average 29 to 30fps. Games that are "22-26fps" are unplayable, and rare.



Alien Isolation is the best game I've played in a long time, even though the console version is 30 with a few issues. Don't let the console wars or whatever this is ruin a geat game for you. Dev studios will do the best they can.

 

[rjc571]

Ehh back in the NES/SNES days maybe, but the 64 couldn't really hit 60 and from that point on most games have been 30. The exceptions to this are fighting games, character action games, racing games, and twitch shooters, all of which have been making a concerted effort to hit 60 frames for as long as they possibly could.

This is blatantly false. I own around 300 games between the Dreamcast, PS2, Gamecube, Xbox and Wii. I would venture to guess that around 200 of them run at 60 fps.

 

[Jedi2016]

I edited my post, because I re-read what he said, and realize that the person I was agreeing with was wrong. That was my mistake. I even read his entire OP, and still messed up. So I have no excuse. Personally, I'm torn. I think gameplay should matter more than graphics. IMO the FPS impacts gameplay a lot more than graphics, because it's how you react to things and move around (whether the camera, or the character itself). That to me, is much more important than graphics. Ideally, I would like both. But if I had to choose, I would pick FPS any day over it.

For what it's worth, I agree.

The point I'm trying to make is that 30fps isn't the standard any more. The new standard is actually sub-30, and there is zero excuse for that. If a dev can't even hit 30fps (and most of them can't), they need to turn some shit down until they do, regardless of how pretty the board of directors wants it to be.

 

[nded]

That is why even a locked framerate of 25fps is better than a variable 30fps. Even variable 60fps can be horrible dependant on how variable it is.

A locked 25fps would lead to pretty bad screen tearing or juddering on most current TVs that aren't 50hz. But sure, it would at least tear or skip very consistently.

I can't wait until variable refresh rate is standard.

also, Destiny almost looks 60fps on our living room TV because of the smooth motion effect. (and no, turning it off doesn't give me any boost in response time, so i just leave it on.)

I don't think this is possible unless your TV is purposely set to introduce a certain amount of input lag even when image processing is turned off.

 

[NullPointer]

Are you suggesting some kind of regulatory board that determines what video game products can go to market based on technical performance specs?

For console games? Yes, definitely. There should be a minimum bar of performance for platform certification, and personally I think that should be a locked 30fps, among other things.

I'm not saying get the government involved. I'm saying the platform holders should enforce some minimum performance standards.

 

[Jedi2016]

Most 30fps games average 29 to 30fps. Games that are "22-26fps" are unplayable, and rare.

You must have a very limited selection of games, then. I watched that video today of Alien:Isolation on XBO, that spent a pretty good chunk of its time under 25fps. And let's not even talk about GTA5 on last-gen... that game was lucky to break 20fps if anything interesting was happening.

 

[Mister Chippy]

This is blatantly false. I own around 300 games between the Dreamcast, PS2, Gamecube, Xbox and Wii. I would venture to guess that around 200 of them run at 60 fps.

Could be. Like any generation fps varies from title to title and I could totally be wrong since I have no hard data about this. Most of the big games I know of for N64 and Gamecube were 30 though, with the exceptions being games in the genres I stated. As far as I know this has pretty much been the average for a while. Five minutes on google looking up "[platform name] frame rates" seems to agree with what I said for most platforms, but I honestly didn't look all that hard so who knows?

 

[Commanche Raisin Toast]

just be glad 1080i isn't really a thing anymore.

when my wife gets on the living room TV, i have to go to the bedroom and use hers. it's 1080i. it's terrible. going back into the living room for a sec and it's a night and day difference.

also, Destiny almost looks 60fps on our living room TV because of the smooth motion effect. (and no, turning it off doesn't give me any boost in response time, so i just leave it on.) plenty of other games are like this too. the ROCK SOLID 30FPS games look 60 to me, but the games that dip below that instantly break the smooth motion illusion.

 

[danwarb]

You must have a very limited selection of games, then. I watched that video today of Alien:Isolation on XBO, that spent a pretty good chunk of its time under 25fps. And let's not even talk about GTA5 on last-gen... that game was lucky to break 20fps if anything interesting was happening.

I do not. You can check average fps easily enough. Like I said, it's very rare for a game to average less than 29fps.

 

[Jtrizzy]

Yeah a solid framerate at 30 is better than one that drops below it, same with 60, 120 and 144.

But IMO the higher the better in every case.

Disagree. I'd much rather have 50-60 with adaptive v sync (or g sync eventually) over a locked 30.

 

[CosmicQueso]

For console games? Yes, definitely. There should be a minimum bar of performance for platform certification, and personally I think that should be a locked 30fps, among other things.

I'm not saying get the government involved. I'm saying the platform holders should enforce some minimum performance standards.

Interesting.

If Sony did that, and if the rumored parity clause is real, then we'd have a console singularity or something and the industry would create a black hole.

Why doesn't the Wii U get more love then, since so many games on it are at 60?

 

[JayEH]

My problem with 30 fps is that it's too low of a floor since most devs can't hit a solid 30.

I also prefer unlocked frame rate compared to locked 30. I thought Infamous and TRE were fine that way.

 

[Jedi2016]

You can check average fps easily enough.

Really? How? Last time I checked, my Playstations don't have FRAPS built into them.