Because it is a tech analysis and I would expect them to highlight any flaws, no matter how minor. Frame stutter/hitching is noticed by different people to a different degree, I myself am usually quite sensitive to thing like this and while I don't expect this to impact my enjoyment of the game I am grateful it has been noticed by others.And why should this be pointed out, again?
To use another poster's analogy it is like dating a very attractive woman and nitpicking her.
What service is this doing for anybody?
If you're running a site about detailing the aesthetics of a woman in great detail, the people who go there are expecting that. If you don't want it, don't got there.
Wow 59 fps? Thats as bad as 30
So it won't appear in online play aka 95% of my play time?this problem only appears when CPU opponents are active
Normal people will never notice stuff like this. It's like marrying a beautiful woman and claiming she has imperfections when you shine a floodlight on her face and then inspect her with the Hubble telescope.
Cringe.
"Mario Kart 8 is a beautiful game with just a few small flaws that blemish an otherwise faultless presentation."
I think they've reached so far out to find things they've gone for the completely unnoticeable. Im all for technical analysis but it's pointless at the level in the article aside from the multiplayer comments.
Hahaha, one frame, okay.
I don't know how anyone will really be upset about it when playing. So weird.
I'm more upset, I guess, about the 720 thing if anything (and I think we've known about that already, right?).
Damn that 1 frame drop. Much choppiness.
I pre-ordered this game over a month ago and absolutely can't wait to play it.
That being said, so it is possible to notice this? Because I thought I noticed it in videos but figured it was my imagination.
That's pretty ridiculous. I don't think I've ever read an article that's so picky
It's a technical analysis, if you do not want a technical analysis, don't click on Digital Foundry threads.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the point of DF highlighting a drop of just 1fps is not that you'd feel the frame rate difference itself, but the judder it may cause as a result of it breaking sync with your sets refresh rate?
That being said, so it is possible to notice this? Because I thought I noticed it in videos but figured it was my imagination.
They always detail the performance to a single frame level. Of course how much it bothers someone is going to vary. I've not played MK8, I have no idea if I'd care or not, but certainly there is a notable difference between 60fps and anything less.I just feel it's stretching a bit. If Digital Foundry was purely technical analysis then fine, nitpick away. But, when there is so much inconsistency as to what their standards actually are from one article to the next even in the same genres of games, they invite skepticism and criticism on themselves.
Maybe 1 dropped frame is a huge issue, but how can I trust DF's opinion on that when their interpretation of results varies so much?
So who would've preferred 30 fps and AA to 59 fps? I don't think the lost frame will bother me that much.
http://a.pomf.se/gdqvuj.webm
Around the 9 to 11 second mark as Mario is rounding the corner, you can see it pretty well in the words "Star Cup" as it goes by.
http://a.pomf.se/gdqvuj.webm
Around the 9 to 11 second mark as Mario is rounding the corner, you can see it pretty well in the words "Star Cup" as it goes by.
This is actually a really big deal... and one that might keep me from playing the game.
I am terribly sensitive to any frame drops.
I am using a korean 27" 2560x1440 monitor. This monitor in particular simply looks TERRIBLE at anything other than native refresh rate.
I have to have frame limiting and vsync on in every game. Even dropping to 55 - 58 FPS in games causes them to look like they are running in sub 20 fps.
My TV is less sensitive to this, but I still notice the issue. Games simply need to run at the refresh rate of the display they are designed to run on.
Not so obvious if you just now noticed itI don't think AA would eat that much performance. I would highly prefer 40-50 FPS with AA to 59 FPS without AA. Both are out of the 60 FPS V-Sync so it doesn't really matter.
Yep, it's really obvious.
YEP how many reviewers picked up on it???????
YEP how many reviewers picked up on it???????
Not so obvious if you just now noticed it
Yeah, it really does. It's not about the "1" framerate. It could be two or 0,5 - it's about that the engine gets out of round and that can be very noticable. Need for Speed HP on the PC for example, just dropped to 59frames from time to time but that resulted in heavy stuttering till it was back up to 60. VERY noticable. When it comes to framerate, it's not only about the number but also about frametimes and consistency.
It's sad to hear that Nintendo blew it. But it's also a good thing because I don't need to thin about buying a Wii U for 1 game anymore.
This is actually a really big deal... and one that might keep me from playing the game.
I am terribly sensitive to any frame drops.
I am using a korean 27" 2560x1440 monitor. This monitor in particular simply looks TERRIBLE at anything other than native refresh rate.
I have to have frame limiting and vsync on in every game. Even dropping to 55 - 58 FPS in games causes them to look like they are running in sub 20 fps.
My TV is less sensitive to this, but I still notice the issue. Games simply need to run at the refresh rate of the display they are designed to run on.