Support NeoGAF

[LCGeek]

It's better in the direct feed webms I knocked out a couple of weeks ago.

It's pretty much on par with the fantastic motion blur from PGR4/Horizon in my opinion and I never had a single issue with either of those games being 30fps. They were responsive, had a great sense of speed and generally two of the best racers released last gen.

So what.....

Not to be rude but just cause you can't see an issue doesn't mean it's not there. For certain consumers this unavoidable. Rather I will redirect my intentions and points. Are you basically saying that due how to some perceive motion in games they should simply deal with it?

The difference between 30 fps and 60fps in terms of MS is the difference between low latency internal networks and the net for games.

 

[rjc571]

30 FPS is not "choppy", Jesus fuck.

Those webms posted above say otherwise. At the game's speed, the scenery passing by at 30 fps looks more like a series of distinct images than an animated picture. It's rather nauseating.

 

[EatinOlives]

Locked 30 is fine when you're the best looking driving game on the market.

Only for a short while. Then another big-name racer will offer superior visuals and the sacrifice of gameplay will be for nothing in the long run.

Like I said in the other topic with the interview with Eurogamer, pretty graphics stop being pretty. A good framerate is good forever.

 

[ChawlieTheFair]

Real life, and familiarity with 60fps+ racers.

I haven't played Forza Horizon at 60fps, but I have no trouble feeling that it's not perfectly smooth in motion.

Most if not all gamers also deal with these things, but many (not all, as evidence by you and others) have no problem with 30 fps in terms of it's feel. I guess we will boil it down to different strokes and opinions.

I've already discussed why 30fps is bad for that and will sum it up in two words "temporal resolution"

In regards to high fps and ticrate situations I was referring to fact that valve could run most of their well known games at a high ticrate, but they don't. CS:Go is 64, but CS:Source was 33 same for L4D. They don't require it because most people playing the games can't run it that well consistently.

People gloss over the fact games in terms of fps be it 30 or 60 don't actually run it that rate constantly or huge majority of the time.


I just see us on different sides of a balancing issues devs could deal with better, but as I mentioned some of these things aren't their decisions as much as they try to seem like it is.

Well are you talking about tic rate there or frame rate? If frame rate sure, but journalists previews are clamining they are a at a solid 30 with DC. Don't know shit about tic rate, so i'll assume you're right.

I just see us on different sides of a balancing issues devs could deal with better, but as I mentioned some of these things aren't their decisions as much as they try to seem like it is.

Yes, I do as well. But if they wanted it at 60 they could get it so 60, as seen by Forza 5. Unless your saying Sony is strong-arming their decision, which is a possibilty.

 

[malyce]

It's not rocket science... it's not as simple as "hardware can't do 60FPS lolwuttroll", it's a choice that a developer makes.

No shit Sherlock. It's still a compromise. If the machine could do 60 with the level of graphics they get at 30 they would. They simply chose the prettier option over the frame rate.

 

[Nafai1123]

Only for a short while. Then another big-name racer will offer superior visuals and the sacrifice of gameplay will be for nothing in the long run.

Like I said in the other topic with the interview with Eurogamer, pretty graphics stop being pretty. A good framerate is good forever.

So PGR is shit now? How about Forza Horizon? Surely that must be shit as well now that it's graphics are old and it runs at the vastly inferior 30fps right?

Good games are good games regardless of framerate and will continue to be good even after the visuals are surpassed.

 

[Business]

Nope. You choose what you want, 30FPS and these visuals, or 60FPS with visuals a step below.

It's not rocket science...

The fact that this is one of the few posts in 5 pages that reached this seemingly obvious conclusion is baffling.

EDIT:

No shit Sherlock. It's still a compromise. If the machine could do 60 with the level of graphics they get at 30 they would. They simply chose the prettier option over the frame rate.

No man you still don't get it. What they are saying is if they had more power they would push even prettier graphics at 30fps.

 

[Galactic Barret]

If its locked, how is it choppy? I thought, and common sense would dictate, that dips or jumps in the framerate cause a moving image to appear choppy.

Doesn't Sensory Adaptation make it so you only get used to external stimuli as its being applied to you? If so, how could you ever get used to 30fps images once you are removed from it, especially if its choppy?

 

[BloodMoney]

I don't remember my Amiga running 60fps

 

[malyce]

The fact that this is one of the few posts in 5 pages that reached this seemingly obvious conclusion is baffling.

EDIT:


No man you still don't get it. What they are saying is if they had more power they would push even prettier graphics at 30fps.

Oh. Can't wait for the GT7 comparisons then.

 

[R_thanatos]

If the game is locked at 30fps and they focused on response time from the controller , I DONT KNOW why there are complainers.

30Fps locked is damn fine..

What iis trully important in a racing game for me is not 60fps , but how fuild the game feels when i'm playing it.
There cannot be drop in frammes , nor tearing and every action when i drive must be met with the right answer on screen.
So if they can garantee 30fps locked i'm damn fine with it.

 

[Deleted member 22576]

I guess its not really a twitch racer like burnout.. but this game better look sick as fuck.

 

[Zoned]

Spoiler

This 30 vs 60 crybaby bullshit is getting a bit old. I remember the days when running graphically intensive PC games at 30 fps was an achievement, and most people were perfectly happy playing a game like Half-Life in the 20's. Too many spoiled little kids who think the $400 or $500 hardware their mother purchased them is as capable as a $3,000 PC. Most threads are littered with these bullshit comments.

Driveclub looks amazing and as evident through KZ:SF, 1080p locked at 30fps, provides solid gameplay.

Comparing a racing game to a single player shooter in frames? lol

 

[BloodMoney]

Comparing a racing game to a single player shooter in frames? lol

Are those not the two genres which Gaf consistently pouts about with regard to the need for 60 frames per second?

Answer:

Spoiler

Yes... yes they are.

 

[Goldrusher]

Clouds are indeed much more important in a racing game than responsive controls and sharp visuals without judder and blur.

 

[EatinOlives]

So PGR is shit now? How about Forza Horizon? Surely that must be shit as well now that it's graphics are old and it runs at the vastly inferior 30fps right?

Good games are good games regardless of framerate and will continue to be good even after the visuals are surpassed.

Lol, I never said they were "shit". But the graphical fidelity of both titles isn't impressive in 2014 than they were on release. That's the basic rule of graphical improvement in video games. Graphics age over time, there's simply no arguing about that.

What I'm getting at is that even though graphics age, a good framerate doesn't. Locked 60 FPS will always be "good", no matter if it was on the N64 days or the PS4 days. At no point has anyone ever said "yeah 60 FPS on F-Zero X was good back in the day, but only 60 FPS is way outdated now".

 

[nullset2]

Infinite power of the cloud?

 

[Riderz1337]

Infinite power of the cloud?

Hehe

 

[coldcrush]

seriously, locked 30fps is fine.
To me 60 can have that horrible ''sped up'' feeling from watching an old 60's movie or Adam West Batman when they speed up footage to make the cars look like they are driving faster.
I would chose 30fps nice graphics with good handling over worse graphical fidelity and detail and 60fps any day. As long as handling is responsive and sharp its fine

Kind of like I prefer the old Lord of the rings shot at filmic 24 fps to the 48 fps of the new hobbit movies which just look weird

 

[Nethaniah]

seriously, locked 30fps is fine.
To me 60 can have that horrible ''sped up'' feeling from watching an old 60's movie or Adam West Batman when they speed up footage to make the cars look like they are driving faster.
I would chose 30fps nice graphics with good handling over worse graphical fidelity and detail and 60fps any day. As long as handling is responsive and sharp its fine

Kind of like I prefer the old Lord of the rings shot at filmic 24 fps to the 48 fps of the new hobbit movies which just look weird

It's time to stop posting.

 

[coldcrush]

why because I have an opinion that differs from yours? Or that you can't understand the point I am trying to make?

 

[Nethaniah]

why because I have an opinion that differs from yours? Or that you can't understand the point I am trying to make?

You're talking about movies, this whole discussion is about the framerate of a game the two are not comparable.

Also responsiveness is tied to framerate just so you know, so if we are talking about that specificly a higher framerate would always be better (in any case really but w/e), a game running at 30fps will never be as responsive as one running at 60 and there is nothing a developer can do about it.

 

[ref]

I primarily play games on PC, got 2 670's in SLI, and love 60 fps. I'll actually wait to play a game until I upgrade my computer if I cannot run it at 60 fps maxed out... on PC.

That being said, I've played plenty of console games at 30. I find it interesting that people find 30 'unplayable'.

To me, it's absolutely playable. I'm actually fine with it. It takes an hour or so to get used to after strictly playing 60, but once I'm used to it, I have no problems with it... don't get me wrong, I prefer 60, the difference is absolutely noticeable, but saying 30 fps is like a 'slideshow' is a little much...

I think 30 fps was the right choice for DriveClub. Game looks fantastic. After playing Forza 5 on XBone, I'd much rather have great visuals at 30 fps for an 'arcade' racing game. Project Cars, Forza, Assetto Corsa all provide me the 60 fps 'sim' experience.

 

[Finest]

In shooters and in racing games I rather have 60fps and lower resolution if they must compromise, having said that this game looks good and I played other racers at a lock 30fps not a big deal the game is looking good can't wait to try it!

 

[Metallix87]

Launch window? Maybe.

Look at previous console launches going back generations, this one is shaping up to be one gangbuster first year.

There is such a thing as unrealistic expectations though.

Hang on, "launch window"? This game is coming out a year after the system launch. The launch window has always, traditionally, referred to the first three to four months on the market.

 

[coldcrush]

Honestly, we will have to agree to disagree, whilst yes the framerate is tied into responsiveness technically, I I am talking about how well the cars handle, how tight the gameplay feels.. A badly designed game at 60fps can still feel unresponsive.

I have no problem saying 30 vs 60fps responsiveness may be more important in something far more twitch based like COD multiplayer

There is no problem comparing it to a movie because my whole point is that in my opinion the look of 30fps can be nicer than 60 in some instances. I referenced a well known movie to help explain my point. Generally most people agree the hobbit feels ''too fast'' and has something jarring to the eye about the way it was shot

 

[Nethaniah]

Honestly, we will have to agree to disagree, whilst yes the framerate is tied into responsiveness technically, I I am talking about how well the cars handle, how tight the gameplay feels.. A badly designed game at 60fps can still feel unresponsive.

I have no problem saying 30 vs 60fps responsiveness may be more important in something far more twitch based like COD multiplayer

There is no problem comparing it to a movie because my whole point is that in my opinion the look of 30fps can be nicer than 60 in some instances. I referenced a well known movie to help explain my point. Generally most people agree the hobbit feels ''too fast'' and has something jarring to the eye about the way it was shot

Again, the two are nothing alike, you don't play movies you watch them, you keep bringing it up like you're a 100% sure you're right but in reality you could not be more wrong.

30fps will ALWAYS be worse than 60fps in every scenario unless the developer made a game that doesn't function properly at higher framerates.

 

[molnizzle]

I'm with the Driveclub director here. I used to think that I hated 30fps. What I actually hated was 20fps – 30fps is just fine.

We've simply been conditioned to expect for "30fps" to have frequent dips to the low 20's when the shit hits the fan. That's jarring and it takes you out of the experience. Locked 30fps, though? That's just fine. Absolutely, 100% fine.

I've been playing all of my PC games at capped 30fps with all settings cranked to max. It's been wonderful, having a constant frame rate makes every game that much more enjoyable to play. I'll never understand how some PC players play their games with judderific performance that fluctuates between 45-60fps. That is what's unacceptable. Constant, locked 30fps is far superior to that.

So good on you, Driveclub team. Your game looks fucking phenomenal and it has a locked-ass frame rate with no dips.

Perfect.

 

[Feindflug]

Honestly, we will have to agree to disagree, whilst yes the framerate is tied into responsiveness technically, I I am talking about how well the cars handle, how tight the gameplay feels.. A badly designed game at 60fps can still feel unresponsive.

I have no problem saying 30 vs 60fps responsiveness may be more important in something far more twitch based like COD multiplayer

There is no problem comparing it to a movie because my whole point is that in my opinion the look of 30fps can be nicer than 60 in some instances. I referenced a well known movie to help explain my point. Generally most people agree the hobbit feels ''too fast'' and has something jarring to the eye about the way it was shot

 

[NullPointer]

I'm with the Driveclub director here. I used to think that I hated 30fps. What I actually hated was 20fps – 30fps is just fine.

We've simply been conditioned to expect for "30fps" to have frequent dips to the low 20's when the shit hits the fan. That's jarring and it takes you out of the experience. Locked 30fps, though? That's just fine. Absolutely, 100% fine.

I think you're 100% spot on here. Most console games that are advertised as 30fps can't even maintain that, and that's the choppiness and sluggishness that we read so much about.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

I'll never quite understand the distinction people make between arcade and sim when talking about framerate. The more arcadey it is, the more likely you're going to need to be able to recognize and react to a given moment-to-moment game situation that involves unrealistically faster obstacles/weapons/racers/driving speed, yet the more realistic the handling and driving model, the more necessary it becomes to detect smaller variations in speed and subtle movements to react appropriately to a given moment-to-moment situation in a game that is more demanding about precision in timing and racing line. Both types benefit from the greatly reduced input latency and doubled visual datastream that 60fps brings because both ask the player to detect high speed movement and quickly changing situations on-track in order to better navigate traffic and course layouts...especially in racing where it is all about competitive play and tenths to hundredths of a second.

 

[Eusis]

Need for Speed Hot Pursuit on the PS3 was a great game with a great sense of speed. It was 30 fps and I enjoyed it 10 times more than playing Burnout Paradise on my PC at 60 fps.

Given how that game looks compared to Driveclub I suspect it was hobbled more by stupid code. Not necessarily bad code, but it does sound like the FPS tie in was extremely short sighted, as was all of the online functionality. I wouldn't surprise if 60fps could've been really easy to do without compromising visually at all, at worst maybe a resolution drop on XB1.

I'll never quite understand the distinction people make between arcade and sim when talking about framerate. The more arcadey it is, the more likely you're going to need to be able to recognize and react to a given moment-to-moment game situation that involves unrealistically faster obstacles/weapons/racers/driving speed, yet the more realistic the handling and driving model, the more necessary it becomes to detect smaller variations in speed and subtle movements to react appropriately to a given moment-to-moment situation in a game that is more demanding about precision in timing and racing line. Both types benefit from the greatly reduced input latency and doubled visual datastream that 60fps brings because both ask the player to detect high speed movement and quickly changing situations on-track in order to better navigate traffic and course layouts...especially in racing where it is all about competitive play and tenths to hundredths of a second.

I'd actually just point at Mario Kart. Whether the game design was better or not it definitely felt MUCH nicer playing the likes of Double Dash than MK64, and I'm sure similar applies to MK7 versus MKDS despite how MK7 sounds a bit bare bones comparatively.

 

[HueyFreeman]

I'm with the Driveclub director here. I used to think that I hated 30fps. What I actually hated was 20fps – 30fps is just fine.

We've simply been conditioned to expect for "30fps" to have frequent dips to the low 20's when the shit hits the fan. That's jarring and it takes you out of the experience. Locked 30fps, though? That's just fine. Absolutely, 100% fine.

I've been playing all of my PC games at capped 30fps with all settings cranked to max. It's been wonderful, having a constant frame rate makes every game that much more enjoyable to play. I'll never understand how some PC players play their games with judderific performance that fluctuates between 45-60fps. That is what's unacceptable. Constant, locked 30fps is far superior to that.

So good on you, Driveclub team. Your game looks fucking phenomenal and it has a locked-ass frame rate with no dips.

Perfect.

This is a great point - the recent ability with some PS4 games (KZ, Infamous) to lock the framerate at an essentially faultless 30fps has been awesome, to my eyes looks way better than their native unlocked state. To me the ultimate goal of a framerate is depiction of the action without drawing attention to itself. That's the only relevant comparison to movies you can make - you never notice film or television framerates, because they never falter. You can bet your ass though that you'd notice if a movie slowed down to 15fps during action scenes. We should therefore have the same expectation for games moving forward. Whatever FPS a developer chooses to target, the only shit I give is whether or not they achieve it.

 

[Nafai1123]

Lol, I never said they were "shit". But the graphical fidelity of both titles isn't impressive in 2014 than they were on release. That's the basic rule of graphical improvement in video games. Graphics age over time, there's simply no arguing about that.

What I'm getting at is that even though graphics age, a good framerate doesn't. Locked 60 FPS will always be "good", no matter if it was on the N64 days or the PS4 days. At no point has anyone ever said "yeah 60 FPS on F-Zero X was good back in the day, but only 60 FPS is way outdated now".

60fps is not a requirement of aging well. There are plenty of games at 30fps that are just as playable today as they were at launch. What graphical fidelity will do for the game now is make it stand above the pack and offer a unique visual experience at launch, when they actually care about selling copies. If the game is good, it doesn't matter whether it's locked 30 or 60fps, it will age just fine.

And honestly, I don't give a shit whether this game looks "old" five years from now. Right now it looks incredible and that's one of the main reasons I buy new consoles. I don't want every game to look like South Park just because it will age well and I don't want ever game to be 60fps if it doesn't need to be.

 

[imtehman]

shows how powerful the ps4 is when their racer is barely better lookiing than forza at half the framerate and forza is a launch title to boot, with an older engin

 

[Night Angel]

shows how powerful the ps4 is when their racer is barely better lookiing than forza at half the framerate

Notsureifserious.jpg

I hope this is an IGNbro parody.

 

[Thrakier]

So PGR is shit now? How about Forza Horizon? Surely that must be shit as well now that it's graphics are old and it runs at the vastly inferior 30fps right?

Good games are good games regardless of framerate and will continue to be good even after the visuals are surpassed.

That's not true. 60Fps games age way way better.

 

[Chobel]

shows how powerful the ps4 is when their racer is barely better lookiing than forza at half the framerate and forza is a launch title to boot, with an older engin

Parodying IGN guy?

 

[abstract alien]

shows how powerful the ps4 is when their racer is barely better lookiing than forza at half the framerate and forza is a launch title to boot, with an older engin

It's the developer, not the power of the system. That's why I've never played much into system specs. They are important to a degree, but in the end most of it comes down to the development.

 

[Kratos' 2nd cousin]

I swear sometimes I feel like I'm the only person who really isn't bothered by the whole 30/60 thing.

But when you're someone who still thoroughly enjoyed the N64 despite games playing barely above 10 frames per second, a consistent 30 feels like a luxury I guess?

I'm sure Driveclub will still feel great to play.

 

[molnizzle]

This is a great point - the recent ability with some PS4 games (KZ, Infamous) to lock the framerate at an essentially faultless 30fps has been awesome, to my eyes looks way better than their native unlocked state. To me the ultimate goal of a framerate is depiction of the action without drawing attention to itself. That's the only relevant comparison to movies you can make - you never notice film or television framerates, because they never falter. You can bet your ass though that you'd notice if a movie slowed down to 15fps during action scenes. We should therefore have the same expectation for games moving forward. Whatever FPS a developer chooses to target, the only shit I give is whether or not they achieve it.

 

[Lima]

Man what the fuck is it with some of you saying that PGR and Horizon are considered shit now? No one is fucking saying that.
The point is they would be better games if they were 60.
So yes they made a bad choice because a racing game at 60 is always better than the same game running at 30. That is just a fact if we are talking how a game plays.

 

[ChronotriggerJM]

Good on them. I just hope they have enough wiggle room for weather in the future.

And not just rain, I want lighting storms in this bitch. That lighting engine with lightning would be breath taking.

The point is they would be better games if they were 60.
So yes they made a bad choice because a racing game at 60 is always better than the same game running at 30. That is just a fact if we are talking how a game plays.

That "same game" is based on imaginary infinite power to just double the frame rate because they feel like it. There is no doubling the frame rate for the same game.

 

[charsace]

Of course it was a choice. They could have went for less graphical effects and gotten 60fps if they chose to.

30fps doesn't mean the game won't play well though. The other things could update faster than the graphics do.

 

[boredandlazy]

Man what the fuck is it with some of you saying that PGR and Horizon are considered shit now? No one is fucking saying that.
The point is they would be better games if they were 60.
So yes they made a bad choice because a racing game at 60 is always better than the same game running at 30. That is just a fact if we are talking how a game plays.

60 is Better? Yes. Does 30 make it bad? No.

So it's not a 'bad' choice.

 

[Dr. Kaos]

16.6 milliseconds (+ display lag) when playing 60fps between your button presses and seeing them reflected on the screen.
33.3 milliseconds (+ display lag) when playing 30fps.

Are your reflexes are fast enough to notice an additional ~17ms? Is the game fast-paced enough for it to matter?

Only you can decide.

 

[Hollow]

Bullshit. It was a compromise. If the hardware could do 60 they would.

If the hardware was capable of playing the current form of Driveclub at 60fps, the devs would likely lock it at 30fps and push more visuals.

It is a choice.

 

[Discusguy]

30fps is the reason I stopped caring about racers. I miss the the days where control and gameplay trumped graphics.

 

[IAmRandom31]

This is a great point - the recent ability with some PS4 games (KZ, Infamous) to lock the framerate at an essentially faultless 30fps has been awesome, to my eyes looks way better than their native unlocked state. To me the ultimate goal of a framerate is depiction of the action without drawing attention to itself. That's the only relevant comparison to movies you can make - you never notice film or television framerates, because they never falter. You can bet your ass though that you'd notice if a movie slowed down to 15fps during action scenes. We should therefore have the same expectation for games moving forward. Whatever FPS a developer chooses to target, the only shit I give is whether or not they achieve it.

As evidenced by these videos themselves a locked, steady, smooth 30fps can be fantastic. The game looks so smooth in motion sometimes it has the fluidity of a 60fps look despite being 30fps.

 

[Hollow]

16.6 milliseconds (+ display lag) when playing 60fps between your button presses and seeing them reflected on the screen.
33.3 milliseconds (+ display lag) when playing 30fps.

Are your reflexes are fast enough to notice an additional ~17ms? Is the game fast-paced enough for it to matter?

Only you can decide.

http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/stats.php

Although there are people that have faster reflexes than that.

I also read that your height can effect your response time as shorter people have shorter nerves meaning the signal from eye-to brain-to finger doesn't need to travel as far thus making it faster.

I really don't notice a difference in responsiveness between 60fps and 30fps titles.
I notice it visually, and I prefer 60 due to just looking smoother. But for controls I don't notice a thing. Still plays the same to me.