Support NeoGAF

[squicken]

http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/826/826346/vids_1.html

IGN has a video interview with one of the producers of FEAR. Mostly things we already knew. But he said in the porting process, they discovered they had some extra system performance unused and are implementing HDR for the 360 port. I'm paraphrasing here, but he said it will be the PC version with all sliders turned up, plus HDR. November release.

I'm incredibly skeptical of this statement. I played FEAR on my PC with max settings at 1280x720 (WS hack), and no XBOX 360 game looks as good as FEAR did running on my PC. Max settings is 16xAF and 8xAA iirc. Not to mention the incredibly high res. textures and v-sync. I'm looking forward to playing some of the game's MP on XBL, which I never did on the PC. But this is the sort of PR fluff that leads to a big letdown. I hope I'm wrong and it looks incredible, but I just don't see it happening.

 

[wiiboxstation]

so it confirms the fact that the 360 GPU is the only current GPU able to do HDR + AA with ease using predicated tiling

 

[dirtmonkey37]

all at how many frames per second? 30. How did I know? It's unrealistic to think otherwise

 

[dirtmonkey37]

besides, why would you need a game with HDR lighting when you spend over half the game in dark, lightless corridors (I haven't played fear yet, but I've seen a bunch of videos)

 

[MightyHedgehog]

besides, why would you need a game with HDR lighting when you spend over half the game in dark, lightless corridors (I haven't played fear yet, but I've seen a bunch of videos)

HDR's for far more than just outdoor sun flaring, bright skies, and torches. Having the game based almost entirely inside of buildings and such, with flourescent lighting, hard (flood lights) and soft (CRT glow) light sources, as well as the flashlight and muzzle flare could be a great way to show off well-done HDR effects.

 

[rod]

they had "extra power" left over but i betcha the game still will run at 30fps

 

[dark10x]

all at how many frames per second? 30. How did I know? It's unrealistic to think otherwise

How do you know you're RIGHT?! I've expected 30 fps out of many other FPS titles on 360 and, outside of CoD2, they all deliver sub-30 fps. Considering how bad the framerate in Condemned is, I'm not holding out a lot of hope for FEAR. Perhaps they've optimized the engine here, but I doubt it would be enough. *IF* they somehow pull off a solid 30, however, it could be a nice port.

I'm not a big fan of FEAR, but I didn't hate it either. Playing it at a constant framerate on my current setup could be enjoyable.

 

[dark10x]

Double post? Hmm...

 

[jet1911]

Considering how bad the framerate in Condemned is

Huh?

 

[dark10x]

Huh?

What's there to "huh" about? Condemned constantly runs under 30 fps and often feels very unresponsive because of it. If you start moving the camera in a cirlce just about anywhere, you'll see the movement speed change as the framerate changes. In fact, I was just playing it last night, for some reason, and the lower framerate really stuck out. The game plays fine, despite that, as you really don't need to aim, but it wouldn't work very well for FEAR. I'm baffled that you're baffled, actually. :\

 

[Vark]

How do you know you're RIGHT?! I've expected 30 fps out of many other FPS titles on 360 and, outside of CoD2, they all deliver sub-30 fps. Considering how bad the framerate in Condemned is, I'm not holding out a lot of hope for FEAR. Perhaps they've optimized the engine here, but I doubt it would be enough. *IF* they somehow pull off a solid 30, however, it could be a nice port.

I'm not a big fan of FEAR, but I didn't hate it either. Playing it at a constant framerate on my current setup could be enjoyable.

You honestly don't think they'd improve the engine over a launch game? I mean come on.

 

[jet1911]

Well the framerate drops from times to times but I don't remember it being that bad.

 

[dark10x]

You honestly don't think they'd improve the engine over a launch game? I mean come on.

I didn't say that, now did I? What I did say, however, is that Condemned is bad enough and FEAR is demanding enough (based on the PC version) that I have little faith. Add in the fact that virtually no similar 360 game has yet to actually run at a great framerate, and you should see why I'm skeptical. Better to set expectations low, I've found. Different engine, I know, but if you were to have asked me about Prey 360 prior to release, I would have told you that I expected a solid 30 fps. Unfortunately...

I'd imagine the game will run better than Condemned, but I wouldn't expect a great framerate. If they DO pull it off, though, that would absolutely rock.

Well the framerate drops from times to times but I don't remember it being that bad.

It rarely becomes choppy, but it constantly runs at a fairly sluggish clip and is almost always sub-30 fps.

 

[bengraven]

I never complained about the framerate in Condemned at all. It was always fairly constant for me.

 

[Proelite]

Wow. That's nice. It shows once again how the Doom 3 engine is shit for multi-threaded processors. :lol

 

[dark10x]

Wow. That's nice. It shows once again how the Doom 3 engine is shit for multi-threaded processors. :lol

This doesn't use the Doom 3 engine, though it doesn't matter as the engine used with FEAR and Condemned isn't exactly fast...

 

[Chiggs]

Considering how bad the framerate in Condemned is...

I don't remember it being that bad.

 

[mckmas8808]

Why do so many people bitch on GAF about 30 fps games? I mean as long as it's consistent.

 

[Fatghost]

Surely we can cut Condemned some slack since it was a launch title. Alpha kits and all that, right?

 

[dark10x]

Why do so many people bitch on GAF about 30 fps games? I mean as long as it's consistent.

That's the problem, there isn't a single FPS on the 360 with a consistent framerate.

Surely we can cut Condemned some slack since it was a launch title. Alpha kits and all that, right?

Oh yeah, I've cut it some slack. I wasn't slamming it or anything, simply pointing out that the framerate was generally quite low. However, based on the performance of the engine across other machines (PC)...I have low hopes. FEAR is a bit more demanding that Condemned anyways...

 

[DaCocoBrova]

Fluck that HDR shit. Just make the framerate stable (and a smooth 60fps) bitches!

Why do so many people bitch on GAF about 30 fps games? I mean as long as it's consistent.

I dunno... Maybe because we spent upwards of $500 for amazing gaming experiences. Maybe because the PSX and every 3D console ever made has had its share of 60fps games and they're better gaming experiences as a result (more responsive for one).

I really get tired of people's 'let's settle for less' mentality. **** that shit.

 

[InsertCredit]

Wow. That's nice. It shows once again how the Doom 3 engine is shit for multi-threaded processors. :lol

??

As pointed out, Fear's running on it's own custom engine.
Secondly, the doom3 engine is capable of full multi-core support.

Quake4's framerate dramatically incrases after enable multi-proc support by adding r_useSMP=1 in the .ini file.

-_-;;

 

[dark10x]

I really get tired of people's 'let's settle for less' mentality. **** that shit.

I agree with this. I can't BELIEVE that people have the nerve to defend sub-30 fps framerates with serious tearing issues. That's just not acceptable.

 

[parada911]

Looks really good. November (FEAR+GOW) can't come soon enough.

 

[nextgeneration]

I agree with this. I can't BELIEVE that people have the nerve to defend sub-30 fps framerates with serious tearing issues. That's just not acceptable.

I'm with you on this, Dark. 30 fps, CONSTANT, should be the bare minimum with games on 360. Ditto with PS3. I much prefer a constant 60 fps on both systems for all games, but we all know that ain't going to happen.

 

[DaCocoBrova]

Optimization is a lost science. It's just not done the way it should be, more than likely due to over-eager publishers.

 

[jetjevons]

How do you know you're RIGHT?! Considering how bad the framerate in Condemned is, .

I had absolutely no problems with the frame rate in Condemned. Zero.

 

[dark10x]

I had absolutely no problems with the frame rate in Condemned. Zero.

I'm sorry, jet, if you didn't have problems...you simply weren't looking. I was playing Condemned last night even, and they were as bad as ever.

Slowdown does not necessarily mean that the game speed will dramatically change or the game will suddenly become a chop fest. Not at all. Condemned has a very unstable framerate, but it never really sinks too low. It's just up and down all the time.

Nobody has a magical 360 either. I'm suprised you didn't notice it, to be honest, as it stuck out immediately for me.

 

[Eel O'Brian]

I had absolutely no problems with the frame rate in Condemned. Zero.

Me either. Maybe we have magical 360s.

 

[krypt0nian]

I had absolutely no problems with the frame rate in Condemned. Zero.

Thank god I am one of the bissfully unaware. Unless a framerate halves like in WOW (indoor to outdoor goes from 60 to ~30) I cannot notice.

I feel sory for those who can have great games ruined for them because of it. Just like those wireless controller lag folks.

 

[squicken]

Thank god I am one of the bissfully unaware. Unless a framerate halves like in WOW (indoor to outdoor goes from 60 to ~30) I cannot notice.

I feel sory for those who can have great games ruined for them because of it. Just like those wireless controller lag folks.

Agreed. I'm much more adverse to screen tearing than mild frame rate fluctuations. If it's a pretty constant 30fps with v-sync, I'm happy.

 

[PepsimanVsJoe]

I dunno I just finished Condemned last night and it was closer to 30-60(on very rare occasions) fps I thought. Then again like I've said before I'm blind but I have finally started noticing screen-tearing in some games(I have to look really hard but I notice it).Also now I like all games slightly less because of this..thanks internet.

Either way I doubt they'll go with 60 fps. It would be a pleasant surprise for once but my only other option for 60 fps Fear is buying a new PC so yeah. Max settings and a constant 30 FPS will be fine since I know I'm not paying $60 for it anyway.

 

[TheDuce22]

I agree with this. I can't BELIEVE that people have the nerve to defend sub-30 fps framerates with serious tearing issues. That's just not acceptable.

Isnt shadow of the colossus one of your favorite games?

 

[DaCocoBrova]

^^

C'mon. Look at how ambitious it was! We're intelligent enough to cut devs slack where it's due...

 

[Any1]

Well atleast it's nice to know that us 360 owners will be able to play the real unwatered down version like are PC brethren were stuck with. j/k

I do though remember that one of the main complaints about the game is that it used too much of the same environment. If anyone knows, has there been any expansions that have been released on the PC yet? Especially ones that may have offered some new environments. And if so, does anyone know if they will be added to the 360 version?

Either way, this is one of my most anticipated games this year but it would be nice to get something a little extra like what Painkiller did for the Xbox.

 

[dark10x]

Isnt shadow of the colossus one of your favorite games?

While the framerate was crushingly disappointment, I'm not an idiot. It's pretty obvious that the game was pushing the PS2 to the limits. In those rare cases, I can stomach a low framerate. What really made up for it there was the amazing animation, motion blur, and general look of the game while moving. The game also used vertical sync, which helps. Of course, PS2 offers more 60 fps 3D games than any other console ever made...so it becomes a little easier to accept when something that is pushing the machine to its limits can't reach that framerate. Believe me, when MGS3 was discovered to run at less than 60 fps...I was absolutely crushed. Same goes for the recent Gokumakaimura on PSP (though 60 isn't common on PSP, unfortunately).

When we're looking at games that barely even seem to scratch the surface of what a new machine can really do, it becomes a LOT more annoying. I expected stuff like FEAR to represent the LOW end of what the 360 would be doing, if asked before launch of the machine, I would have expected a solid 60 fps with no problems.

Basically, what I'm saying, framerate is ALWAYS an issue with me (especially when coupled with weak animation)...but how much of an issue it is depends upon other factors. I can enjoy a game with a slower framerate, but it better be doing something to make up for it.

For example, Oblivion and GRAW on the 360 do not hold a constant 30 fps (and Oblivion gets downright choppy at times)...but I understand what they are doing AND find them to be excellent games. I do not hold all games to the same standards, though poor framerates will ALWAYS bug me to some degree.

In regards to Condemned, I really wasn't....condemning it, per se, but pointing out a flaw. If a new game was coming to PS2 and said to be based on the engine used for Killzone, for instance, I wouldn't hold out hope for a good framerate. The framerate in Condemned was never all that great, but it didn't ruin the game for me and I never said it did. I was simply using it as an example of the engine on 360 and observing that FEAR may not run as well as I'd like (and as it is a much faster game that relies on guns, it WOULD be a problem).

I do though remember that one of the main complaints about the game is that it used too much of the same environment.

Yes, it was terrible. If you thought the Library in Halo was visually repetitive...FEAR takes it to a whole new level. Difference is, FEAR is set within dim, ugly office buildings and you feel as if you are limited to either exploring offices or the maintenance areas around them. I usually don't allow repetitive environments to get in the way of good gameplay, but holy hell, those were some boring levels. The game has some kickass gunplay, though, and is still worth playing. If you go in expecting the worst (in terms of level design), you might actually get more out of it.

 

[plagiarize]

i love condemned, but the frame rate is all over the place. doesn't hurt the game much, but it's definately there.

out of interest, do we have any pc owners who can talk about how FEAR and Condemned ran on their PC's respectively? did condemned run better or not?

just be interesting to know.

at e3 they were running with stuff turned down compared to the pc version at a stable 30, but they did say they hadn't done much optimisation yet. this news seems plausible.

 

[Chiggs]

Basically, what I'm saying, framerate is ALWAYS an issue with me

SECRETS OF GAF REVEALED!

 

[TheDuce22]

I dont know. I still fail to see how framerate is such a huge issue for you when the game with possibly the worst framerate of the last generation was so enjoyable. Obviously its not THAT much of a problem.

 

[dark10x]

I dont know. I still fail to see how framerate is such a huge issue for you when the game with possibly the worst framerate of the last generation was so enjoyable. Obviously its not THAT much of a problem.

As I said, it made up for it somewhat by animating beautifully, using motion blur, and vertical sync. It still LOOKED good while moving, even when the framerate became low. I was not pleased by the low framerate, but it still managed to move beautifully.

I also, somehow, enjoyed Advent Rising...despite the god awful framerate (worse than SotC) and generally shitty visuals. I'm not even sure HOW I managed to enjoy it, but I did.

I've played many games with poor framerates, you know. I don't actually AVOID games with bad framerates, but I will complain about it. I'm able to enjoy those games too, but it does tend to have an impact on my enjoyment. How much it bothers me depends on how the game plays and how it animates. I will say that motion blur is able to offset a poor framerate in a lot of ways. PGR3, for instance, was only 30 fps...and I was initially extremely angry about it. However, the motion blur is just incredible and allowed me to ignore the framerate (mostly).

 

[RegularMK]

I'm sorry, jet, if you didn't have problems...you simply weren't looking

You know you're jaded if you go into games searching for their problems.

 

[dark10x]

You know you're jaded if you go into games searching for their problems.

I did not, however. I didn't anticipate any issues, to be honest, and was suprised when they were there. I don't HAVE to search for issues like that.

It did not have significant impact on the game for me, though. The things I didn't like about Condemned had nothing to do with the framerate...

 

[RegularMK]

I remember framerate chugging noticeably in cutscenes, but I honestly don't remember it being a problem during the actual gameplay.

Can't really say for sure, however. I couldn't play past the second level because it scared me too bad.

Hopefully they get FEAR running at a consistant 30. That'd keep me happy. Hopefully with v sync. I'd probably buy it then.

 

[squicken]

i love condemned, but the frame rate is all over the place. doesn't hurt the game much, but it's definately there.

out of interest, do we have any pc owners who can talk about how FEAR and Condemned ran on their PC's respectively? did condemned run better or not?

just be interesting to know.

at e3 they were running with stuff turned down compared to the pc version at a stable 30, but they did say they hadn't done much optimisation yet. this news seems plausible.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=92740&highlight=Condemned

I only played the demo of Condemned for PC, but it ran better than FEAR. For FEAR, I got about 40 fps. With Condemned, my avg fps was closer to 60. But FEAR looked much better than Condemned, though Condemned PC looked better than Condemned 360.

 

[Core407]

What's there to "huh" about? Condemned constantly runs under 30 fps and often feels very unresponsive because of it. If you start moving the camera in a cirlce just about anywhere, you'll see the movement speed change as the framerate changes. In fact, I was just playing it last night, for some reason, and the lower framerate really stuck out. The game plays fine, despite that, as you really don't need to aim, but it wouldn't work very well for FEAR. I'm baffled that you're baffled, actually. :\

Are you talking about the PC or 360 version? If it's the 360 version then youre a goddamn liar.

 

[Razoric]

another framerate discussion? :|

 

[Kabuki Waq]

wtf I thought condemned was smooth?

 

[BigBoss]

So...does the Condemned dmeo on the Marketplace run at a higher framerate than the final game? I ask because the demo ran at a smooth 30 fps and I doubt the final game has a worst framerate than the demo.

 

[Gigglepoo]

Are people still excited for this? With Gears of War coming out around the same time, and that Half Life 2/Team Fortress/Portal pack coming early next year... where does FEAR fit in?

 

[Kabuki Waq]

So...does the Condemned dmeo on the Marketplace run at a higher framerate than the final game? I ask because the demo ran at a smooth 30 fps and I doubt the final game has a worst framerate than the demo.

it ran fine for me i only played it at 480 p tho