Support NeoGAF

[Seanspeed]

Read the article guys. They do admit pretty straight-up that this is mainly a concession for increased fidelity.

There's also an interest blurb at the bottom that talks about research done that shows that better graphics correlate to better reviews and sales, while better framerate doesn't.

Not surprising, but it does go to show why devs choose to go the route they do.

 

[Dega]

lol

This is just too funny.

 

[metareferential]

If it looked less real VR wouldn't be needing 60fps at the very minimum. They just don't want to say "Yeah we can't do the graphics we have right now at 60fps with the PS4". It sounds better to say it's an artistic choice.

Pretty much this.

Everything rendered real time looks better at higher framerates; less shimmering, less stuttering, etc.

Provided everything scales well, of course (i.e. animations).

Take Uncharted 3 as an example. That short footage of the game running at 60fps is gorgeous.

There's also an interest blurb at the bottom that talks about research done that shows that better graphics correlate to better reviews and sales, while better framerate doesn't.

Not surprising, but it does go to show why devs choose to go the route they do.

And this, with CoD being the exception, I guess.

 

[Militant17]

Does anyone here know what aesthetic means? Lol.

He's basically just saying that it wouldn't look as pretty or have the same effects at 60fps. They're obviously doing a cinematic game so visuals and effects are a big part.

 

[StuBurns]

I'd quite like to see someone try a 24fps mode, with actual FW support for 24Hz input on a TV.

 

[Oersted]

Nope. Just like how people in general hated how The Hobbit looked at 48fps. It completely changes the aesthetic of the game.



Except they didn't say 60fps makes it look less "real". It looks less like a movie, which is the look they're going for.

Sigh. People still not getting the problem with Hobbit.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

Can a videogame even be playable at 24fps?

Spoiler

GTAV

 

[Shabad]

Sounds like bullshit to me... I don't think anyone mind 30fps for this game anyway, so why bother justifying ?

Given what 's shown on screen, as long as the framerate is super stable, and screen tearing disappear in the final version, I will be perfectly happy.

 

[TheBioLover]

Man, Order threads pretty much go to shit really quickly.

 

[DieH@rd]

I'd argue the primary reason the game is 30 FPS is that this way they can throw twice as much processing at each rendered pixel. I know that's a strange idea, but it's just what I think.

Reviewers are not including 30vs60 framerate talk in their reviews. Visuals are much more important for scores:

However, during development, there are hard choices to be made between higher quality graphics and framerate. And we want to make the right choices that reflect our commitment to providing you with the best looking games out there. To that end, our community team did some research into the question of framerate. The results perhaps confirmed what I've known for a long time, but found it difficult to accept without evidence. They found that:

- A higher framerate does not significantly affect sales of a game.
- A higher framerate does not significantly affect the reviews of a game.

And in particular they found that there was a clear correlation between graphics scores in reviews (where they are provided) and the final scores. And they found no such correlation between framerate and the graphics scores nor the final scores. As an interesting side-note, our team also found no direct correlation between gameplay scores and final scores, however it does appear that gameplay scores are also influenced by graphics scores. i.e. Better looking games appear to be more "fun" to reviewers, in general.

Sounds like bullshit to me... I don't think anyone mind 30fps for this game anyway, so why bother justifying ?

Because Kotaku journalist directly asked them about 60 vs 30? And I quote: "I decided to pick his brain and see if he had a response to everyone's hesitations."

 

[SuicidalSteve]

The feel of 24fps

 

[Interfectum]

It's a little worrying that some folk would sacrifice a game playing at it's best just for improved graphics.

Well then you've probably been worrying about the game industry since it was created.

 

[Gbraga]

24fps doesn't just feel bad, it looks like shit too. Can't believe they honestly considered doing it and if not for the gameplay they would think it looks great.

 

[VanWinkle]

Sigh. People still not getting the problem with Hobbit.

Smooth motion looks weird on movies. That's a problem.

 

[Bloodrage]

Keeping it at 30fps also helped them achieve the closest thing to CGI quality in-game graphics I've ever seen.

 

[7DollarHagane]

People who say 60fps looks weird..

I hope someday 120hz is the norm and we can quit dealing with low frame rates. Playing at 120hz on PC is a revelation. Motion is so smooth and everything feels so good.

 

[Dragon1893]

So he's actually saying that going with 30 fps instead of 24 is a concession.
He says that he loves playing games at 60fps and that their game has to feel good, but then literally says that opting for 30fps (as opposed to the "filmic" 24) is a concession.

Is this real life?

I'm fine with a locked 30fps for a game like this but actually considering targetting 24fps? WTF?

 

[Massa]

Read the article guys. They do admit pretty straight-up that this is mainly a concession for increased fidelity.

There's also an interest blurb at the bottom that talks about research done that shows that better graphics correlate to better reviews and sales, while better framerate doesn't.

Not surprising, but it does go to show why devs choose to go the route they do.

Interestingly enough the best selling console games run at 60fps.

 

[ChawlieTheFair]

Driveclub thread v2? (or 3 or 4).

Anyway same argument applies. They've chosen 30 to achieve the visuals they want. Whether they chose 30 out of actually wanting to look "filmic" or simply because they wanted to up the actual graphics/IQ, doesn't matter. As long as it's solid, who the hell cares. And the developer is completely right, framerate changes a huge part of how the game looks, however I do personally doubt they've chosen 30 for it's "filmic" aspects, and its obviously due to the games graphics.

But again, who cares, they claim the framerate is solid, I'm inclined to believe them if they are running at 4xmsaa.

 

[imtehman]

I'd love it if devs would, for once, stop pretending that going to 30fps instead of 60 is some sort of "artistic choice".

It's bullshit. They know it, we know it, why pretend otherwise?

U have to wonder if their excuse for the black bars route really was a cinematic experience and vision instead of we couldnt do 1080p at 30 fps without black bars

 

[Gestault]

The sheer energy that went into making fun of these sorts of justifications from users at the start of the generation makes these statements feel almost comical now. I say this as someone totally content with well-designed 30 fps backbones for games.

 

[Eusis]

one of the best games evurr had black bars and people hardly noticed it

I sure as fuck did, but when I was playing on a 14 inch TV so I lost critical screen space which isn't particularly relevant on larger TVs. And I don't think this will lop off as large a percentage of the viewable area.

EDIT: Misremembered just how much space that takes up relative to the TV screen. I was still right, but going by this it's only about a percentage better than 16:9 on a 4:3 TV.

 

[Cow Goes Moo]

Read the article guys. They do admit pretty straight-up that this is mainly a concession for increased fidelity.

There's also an interest blurb at the bottom that talks about research done that shows that better graphics correlate to better reviews and sales, while better framerate doesn't.

Not surprising, but it does go to show why devs choose to go the route they do.

Reminds me of when Insomniac opted for the same, same wording as well, go figure.

 

[Phire Phox]

Can a videogame even be playable at 24fps?

Isn't OoT like 20 FPS?

 

[TyrantII]

Seems framerates are all the rage these days, I thought some people would be interested. More at the link.


Source: http://kotaku.com/a-developers-defense-of-30-frames-per-second-1580194683

Hmm, that sure is carefully crafted for sure, but by aesthetic it's pretty clear they mean "we'd have to drop asset quality and shaders down, which we're not going to do".

Surely this isn't a "more cinematic" argument, right? Because thats an argument no one should be making.

 

[Woorloog]

I hope they weren't seriously considering 24 fps...

That's what i'm wondering.
Under 30 is usually a pain in the ass to deal with.

 

[Hero_of_the_Day]

I'm not sure why there's all this confusion here. They spelled it out clearly.

Film runs at 24fps. They wanted the look of film above all else, which is clear from the aspect ratio, so they were considering 24fps to keep with the feel of film. They tried it and found it negatively affected the game, and 60fps went too far away from the look of film that they wanted, so they compromised on 30fps.

I think it's a great sign that they're considering issues like this so seriously.

LOL. They didn't go for 60FPS because they want prettier graphics, not to be closer to film. Anyone who ever says things like that are 100% full of shit. It's all about those graphics.

 

[level44]

All good with me.

 

[Radec]

Would like 60fps but I need to play this game at its default framerate to pass judgement.

But I didn't mind 30fps on Uncharted games and TLoU so..

 

[Krakn3Dfx]

They should have an option to play the game in B&W as well.

I remember watching The Mist in color and then again in B&W when the Special Edition DVD came out, amazing experience, the ton of the movie was completely difference, The Order seems like a similar kind of experience.

 

[dwells]

I'd love it if devs would, for once, stop pretending that going to 30fps instead of 60 is some sort of "artistic choice".

It's bullshit. They know it, we know it, why pretend otherwise?

Exactly.

I don't think 30 FPS is a bad thing. I think it has its place, and there's certain titles where I'd rather see 30 FPS than have to see major sacrifices in terms of visuals in order to get to a stable 60 FPS. For a third person shooter that focuses on incredible visuals, I see no problem with it being 30 FPS.

That said, it's extremely irritating to repeatedly be given ridiculous lines like this about the lower framerate being better. It would be so nice just to hear "the game runs at thirty because because it allows us to push the envelope for visuals much further than we could if we were targeting sixty." No more ridiculous spin and lies.

 

[Daedardus]

Two years from now, we'll get 20fps games because "10 fps doesn't feel good".

 

[ChawlieTheFair]

Interestingly enough the best selling console games run at 60fps.

Also interesting to see that the best selling console games run at 30.

Sigh. People still not getting the problem with Hobbit.

As if it didn't have multiple. The 48 fps looked weird cause it was so smooth compared to what we were use to, how is that not a problem?

Does anyone here know what aesthetic means? Lol.

He's basically just saying that it wouldn't look as pretty or have the same effects at 60fps. They're obviously doing a cinematic game so visuals and effects are a big part.

I think he's actually more talking about the "look" of 30 fps, in which it actually looks different than 60. 60 plays a lot better, but 30 gives off a certain tone.

 

[MrChowderClams]

I'm ok with this. Keep the framerate steady and above 30 and I'm game.

 

[VanWinkle]

Two years from now, we'll get 20fps games because "10 fps doesn't feel good".

You act like 30fps is a new thing.

 

[Betty]

Well then you've probably been worrying about the game industry since it was created.

Actually it's mostly just recently, there seems to be a greater concern and emphasis for graphics over gameplay from both devs and players and I think it's a pretty bad way to design games.

A few current gen games already, like Killzone SF, Infamous SS, Ryse, Knack, they feel like they sacrificed greater gameplay for presentation and overall damaged the games enjoyability in the long run.

 

[DangerMouse]

Good, I'm fine with 30fps for this.

24fps doesn't just feel bad, it looks like shit too. Can't believe they honestly considered doing it and if not for the gameplay they would think it looks great.

You might want to read. They never considered it. All he said was that films are 24fps and that that obviously doesn't work for games.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

It's a little worrying that some folk would sacrifice a game playing at it's best just for improved graphics.

Yes I agree. Taking the whole filmic thing way overboard IMO

 

[Cornbread78]

Holy $hit all all the " I demand 60fps or the game is complete, unplayable, crap" uggh, "cinematic feel lulz" it's getting tiring to read at times and it's difficult to tell the difference between "the entitled gamers" and the "Sony trolls." Please be more transparent, I'm too tired on a Monday after a long weekend...

 

[raven777]

as long as it's stable 30 fps than I am happy.

 

[Van Owen]

Looking at videos of this game, there was no way they were going to hit 60 anyway.

 

[ANDS]

Please inform me of what games suffer from having a higher frame rate?

It's not possible that the increased frame rate wouldn't "look" natural and takeaway from what consumers are used to?

This argument reminds me of the kerfuffle that came out with The Hobbit being shot in 48FPS, and many film critics not particularly liking that version of the film because it didn't "look" right. The same could be said here. 60FPS has a VERY distinctive look and feel to it that may not be appropriate for the aesthetic that RAD is going for.

 

[Auto-Reply]

It was a choice, not a technical limitation

 

[Sothpaw]

Ugh. 60fps is such a massive improvement over 30fps. I will still get the game if it's good and I love this studio, just disappointed.

 

[Oersted]

Smooth motion looks weird on movies. That's a problem.

Stop it. Action looks far better in higher frame rates. The Order is a action focused game. Not a slow opera. The problem with Hobbit have been the scenes between the action. The answer to that is post-production downgrading. Half the framerate, add in motion blur. Its pretty easy now, but the technic wasn't there when Hobbit was made.

But again, we are talking about a action game. Not a soap opera.

 

[Seanspeed]

Exactly.

I don't think 30 FPS is a bad thing. I think it has its place, and there's certain titles where I'd rather see 30 FPS than have to see major sacrifices in terms of visuals in order to get to a stable 60 FPS. For a third person shooter that focuses on incredible visuals, I see no problem with it being 30 FPS.

That said, it's extremely irritating to repeatedly be given ridiculous lines like this about the lower framerate being better. It would be so nice just to hear "the game runs at thirty because because it allows us to push the envelope for visuals much further than we could if we were targeting sixty." No more ridiculous spin and lies.

Why should first-person shooters be 60fps and third-person shooters be 30fps?

What is the difference between them where framerate suddenly doesn't matter as much?

 

[onQ123]

Maybe they should have went for 48 then.

 

[Eusis]

Read the article guys. They do admit pretty straight-up that this is mainly a concession for increased fidelity.

There's also an interest blurb at the bottom that talks about research done that shows that better graphics correlate to better reviews and sales, while better framerate doesn't.

Not surprising, but it does go to show why devs choose to go the route they do.

I still wonder about that Insomniac blurb though. Call of Duty does crazy well and maybe that's partially just because of the theme but it's definitely keeping people playing and the same can't be said for a lot of other games that are 30fps out there. It may also be that the games that are cutting edge usually blow off going for 60fps while a lot of lower end ones go for 60fps because they may as well. I do imagine the hardware for last gen wasn't very accomodating to being BOTH HD and 60fps admittedly, but it does seem we're likely in a better situation for this hardware and 1080p.

EDIT: And that point's more relevant to bring up for games that AREN'T fixated on trying to have the highest end graphics without being unplayable slideshows (by the standards of most people anyway) but rather are trying to decide between higher graphical fidelity or 60fps. And I think we're at no danger of going to 20fps, everyone seemingly VERY GLADLY abandoned that with the PS1 and N64 being phased out.

 

[Ludicrous Speed]

I love this word filmic that is getting thrown around a lot. I can see more and more developers using it to explain why something is running at 30fps.

Although Ready at Dawn has had to deal with a lot of negative blowback the past year. 30 fps, no multiplayer, the resolution. And now the delay. Damn, they can't catch a break!

 

[ChawlieTheFair]

It's a little worrying that some folk would sacrifice a game playing at it's best just for improved graphics.

I'd argue better graphics help a game to be played at it's best.