-
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.
60 FPS. Settle for nothing else. Ever.
- Thread starter Drinky Crow
- Start date
There are certain games where framerate is lower than 60 FPS for "stylistic" reasons such as Project Zero (Fatal Frame) and Silent Hill 2. While those games are survival horror titles and not pure action games, a conscious effort was made to keep the framerate lowered to set a mood for the game. If Silent Hill 2 ran at 60 FPS, a bit of the creepy surreal tone would be lost yet ironically, if Silent Hill 3 ran at 60 FPS, it would become an intense action title and more scary as those weird monsters start ganging up on you really fast. It would be interesting if the upcoming hardware could grant us a framerate switching option on the systems so that the gamers can decide what framerate they want in their games (Better yet, make it so you can switch the FPS in gameplay as well as realtime).
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
guys, he's actually right.
i learned it in film class
buckfutter
Member
Yeah, he's correct. It's rare, though. ICO is one of the only games that comes to mind that had an artistically capped framerate.
60 FPS games actually look pretty good. I mean, go pop in Mario Kart: Double Dash into your GameCube and look at how smooth everything is. That game runs at a full 60 FPS.
I gotta say, I wouldn't mind if games started actually running at 60 fps instead of trying to pump out every bit of power possible and only getting 20-30 fps.
I gotta say, I wouldn't mind if games started actually running at 60 fps instead of trying to pump out every bit of power possible and only getting 20-30 fps.
JonathanEx
Member
Ken promised 120 FPS, that's what I expect. 
I know the circumstances were a tad different, but damn near everything released on the PS2 during its first couple years on the market was running at 60 fps. Of course, even on XBOX, the number of 60 fps titles early on was significantly higher than XBOX360. XBOX360 is a step back in that regard.Ranger X said:
Funny as you say that as Fatal Frame 1 actually DID run at 60 fps.
I can't recall where it was, but it should be obvious by the resolution choice. Field rendering uses two fields to create 60 fps from odd and even scanlines. They chose to use only one field to achieve a lower resolution image at 30 fps rather than combine them for 60 fps and additional clarity.Ranger X said:Seriously i don't believe this. Where, why + link to dev confirmation please?
Also, all of the ICO footage on the NICO DVD runs at 60 fps.
The interview I read way back when mentioned that they were trying to create a dreamy look and felt that the crisp, higher resolution look (which would also have been flickery as a result of the field rendering) wasn't working for the game.
That's really why it uses such a strange display method.
Diablohead
Member
It might have already been said but 30fps makes a game feel much more cinematic, 60fps is sometimes too smooth.
But then I can play a 30fps shooter without any problem at all, some are bad aimers I guess
But then I can play a 30fps shooter without any problem at all, some are bad aimers I guess
tanasten
glad to heard people isn't stupid anymore
Interesting the cinematic thing of the 30 FPS. I thought of this so many times and never got to a certain result. Really, you can look a TV show and compare it to a movei. A movie runs at 24 FPS meanwhile a TV show runs at 60 FPS.
Time ago, I used this to diferentiate a TV series from a Movie, and alwayes liked too much the 24 fps thing. But ey, what about on gaming? what about gameplay?
Woah, that's a huge thing to think.
Time ago, I used this to diferentiate a TV series from a Movie, and alwayes liked too much the 24 fps thing. But ey, what about on gaming? what about gameplay?
Woah, that's a huge thing to think.
dark10x said:
I always thought the lower resolution was because it was a PS1 game and they didn't want to redo some graphics + was easier to run with less slowdown at 30 fps.
And whatever, what's uncommon or artistic in prefering 30 fps for your game??
Diablohead said:
Of course it does look more cinematic because that's what we are used to in the cinema industry. Movies would be smoother (at 60 fps) and not only you'd see the action better when shit's going fast but you would perceive the 60 fps games as "more cinematic".
While 60 fps isn't "mandatory" or a deal breaker, it makes anything just "better".
Also, about that 30 fps where you can aim perfectly... maybe the controls were already 30 fps because you do have 30fps more to aim with 60 fps controls so it means you can react/aim more accurately.
No, not at all. The game runs at 640x240 and was a design choice. 30 fps + lower resolution + heavy blurry = dreamy visuals
On normal SDTVs, they were right, it gives the game a look very different from typical PS2 titles. That problem with PS2 titles around that time was that their rendering method resulted in a very flickery looking image and they wanted to avoid that with ICO. The game has a much softer look than most PS2 titles.
Buggy Loop
Member
Iceshade said:
That bold part didnt make any sense, i can agree on the artistic side of 30fps like in ICO, but monsters dont start to gang up on you faster because its 60fps rather than 30fps.
ELS-01X said:Subjective. To me, 30 fps are better
Or, the controls are 30 fps too and he's just good at aiming.
Not really subjective. I'd like to have you real argument as why you'd prefer the same same same game but in 30fps. I'd be dying to make you play your fav 30 fps game in 60 fps and you would never go back to 30 fps i swear.
Also, the aiming thing it's just pure logic. If we are both fast enough to react "at 30 fps" you won't see difference. But if we play a 60fps game and he isn't as fast and accurate as the 60 fps game, if i am i'm gonna kill him.