Yeah and FPS is what creates problems with the gameplay. This is part of the problem.MegaManOfNumbers said:
Capcom Explains Why 30 FPS Isn't That Bad
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
Funny thing is, if they hadn't announced it most people probably wouldn't have noticed and just assumed it was at 60 or running smoothed 22-60.Twilight_guy said:
Now they've announced it, everybody knows, cue publicity.
OT: FPS is hardly the most important factor to me, sure 60 is nice, but as long as the game is running smoothly I don't mind. FPS caps don't bug me as long as your average frame-rate is at least 25 (any lower I find the animations too jerky).
30 FPS also leaves room for the game to do more in each second since it's only rendering half the frames.
WTF? If it ran at 60 fps on the same consoles this one will be on how can you bash consoles' performance. Anyway, I definitely notice how slow movies are in the theater. How can you think that when the action "slows down" cinematically for like a finisher or something, that the actual FPS drops? Their reasons for this drop in fps are pure BS. Anyway, to answer my own question from an above post, a different studio means different engine competencies and they sure as hell weren't about to take the time to train everyone and suffer more delays.
...Meaning the things they're trying to do with the engine simply won't run at 60 fps on consoles. So they handed it over to the Capcom bullshit department and they came up with "techniques" that allow your brain to "fill in the pieces". That's like trying to sell me a shitty house for double it's worth and when I ask why it's so expensive you tell me that you had to specially outfit the house so the sun would rise every morning over it.
Until consoles have enough power that it doesn't matter anymore, it will always be possible to take any 60fps game, make more detailed models, write fancier shaders and spit out a 30fps game with better looking screenshots, that also looks better on Youtube.RolandOfGilead said:
That's why every game seems to chug along at 30fps. It's just a choice between playability and marketability. Sadly, publishers prefer the latter. While Capcom is technically correct in saying that 30fps is not that much of a big deal, it's also true that a game with simpler shaders and half the polygons could still look pretty good.
A game's framerate is among the things I couldn't care less about when it comes to a video game, provided it's not running at a slideshow's pace; it has to be playable, of course.
Of course, Devil May Cry, embarrassing remake or not, is among those things as well, so eh.
Of course, Devil May Cry, embarrassing remake or not, is among those things as well, so eh.
Bull and shit capcom. You guys obviously are fucking idiots and take your gamers as complete morons. There's not a single time EVER that I have thought to myself "Oh shit this buttery smooth animation is just wearing my mind out.". Idiotic shit, no wonder I never buy games from these idiots, this game will be no different.
It's quite simple. The number of frames per second doesn't just determine the screen updates, it determines the number of times per second the game can respond to an input.WaitWHAT said:
At high difficulties, which is how you're supposed to play spectacle fighters, this type of game is built around expecting the player to have split second reactions to dodge, counter, and punish enemy attacks. If you can't do that because the game simply can't keep up with your button inputs, then you can't play the game properly.
I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years time, after the PS4 and Xbox 720 have hit the market, these developers will be praising the fluidity of movement created by a standard of 60 fps...
Why even address the issue? Just focus on promoting the positive aspects of your game rather than making up a bunch of BS to justify a fairly minor shortcoming..
Why even address the issue? Just focus on promoting the positive aspects of your game rather than making up a bunch of BS to justify a fairly minor shortcoming..
^^^^
Just registered to say this. I cannot believe people are saying this non-sense about 30fps. If we're talking about a camera's refresh rate maybe, but not something like human reaction time.
Even 10-15 frames is faster than us. In the time it takes for you to reach the next button, press the same button or simply adjust the mouse or analog sticks, the game would have already refreshed several times. Just tell me you can press a button 10 or 15 times in a single second. It would be such a feet that it's pointless in a normal situation. Now try 20 or 30 times a second! Didn't think so. Your own finger would be visibly vibrating in a blur, almost creating a still image of its movement trail. The same logic goes for both digital and anolog directional movement.
Hell, some of the most laggy moments in gaming never gave me any un-responsiveness, in any genre. The character and the camera was doing my every bidding. It's more or less about the player's own ability to cope/pin-point what's going on at said framerate and how well the developers programmed the animations or mechanics. At this point, somewhere below 20fps is where confusion truly begins.
So yes, 60fps is still JUST an ADDITIONAL smoothness and ONLY amounts to the feel of the game's movements, their character, and NOT the availability of input responce time, no matter the game's pace. In no way can the human being be fast enough (and therefore the game's pace) for 30fps to cause trouble in comparison to 60fps. Really... "OMG! OMG! INPUT LAG! MEH CHARA IS NOT MOVIN UR FIGHTIN CUZ IT THIRDY FRAMES A SECOUND! I CAN MOVE NEAR TEH SPEED OF LIGHT!"
So, the truth?
It's none other than personal preference, and a very selfish one at that. So, yeah, 30fps is just passable or even choppy, just because it's not delivering movements quite as naked? A little too farfetched don't you think? 30fps is too fast to be considered "choppy" or "just passable" in a 3D game. It simply has its own feel. Games that run at 60fps require more animation data for realism than 30fps (robotic movement anyone? no?) and have half the console's assets at disposal to insert such data in. I bet frame rate whores would rather have all ps4/720 games be ps3/360 games that simply run at 60-100+fps over having a "horrid" constant 30fps with that "nasty" film-like feel of today (Killzone2/3, Gears and more).
I remember me and my brother worrying if Silent Hill 2 was going to follow the route of having a perfect 60fps, because it would NOT be scary with monsters walking about with the naked animations we've come to know from 60fps (arcade games/other). Even the PC versions cap the frame rate so that it doesn't trail off to a million frames. 30 frames = to adding film grain & overall realism, period. See, MGS2 looked amazing as still photography or a 24fps FMV on the internet, but with the demo in hand, we realized that the game lost the realism of movement when it started using 60fps for its gameplay. The illusion was shattered with all the nakedness. We didn't notice at first, as the outside rainy areas had a type of motion blur going on that smoothed the movements. Our impression dipped for MGS2's graphics somehow, even subconsciously. Luigi's Mansion impressed me much more overall. It's why I like MGS3's frame rate peak of 30fps.
Lastly, God of War 3 doesn't run at 60fps. Performance tests reveal more 40fps, which more or less resembles an upgraded 30fps without the additional 8 frames. It goes to 50fps+ at times, but mosly stays at 30-40fps+.
Just registered to say this. I cannot believe people are saying this non-sense about 30fps. If we're talking about a camera's refresh rate maybe, but not something like human reaction time.
Even 10-15 frames is faster than us. In the time it takes for you to reach the next button, press the same button or simply adjust the mouse or analog sticks, the game would have already refreshed several times. Just tell me you can press a button 10 or 15 times in a single second. It would be such a feet that it's pointless in a normal situation. Now try 20 or 30 times a second! Didn't think so. Your own finger would be visibly vibrating in a blur, almost creating a still image of its movement trail. The same logic goes for both digital and anolog directional movement.
Hell, some of the most laggy moments in gaming never gave me any un-responsiveness, in any genre. The character and the camera was doing my every bidding. It's more or less about the player's own ability to cope/pin-point what's going on at said framerate and how well the developers programmed the animations or mechanics. At this point, somewhere below 20fps is where confusion truly begins.
So yes, 60fps is still JUST an ADDITIONAL smoothness and ONLY amounts to the feel of the game's movements, their character, and NOT the availability of input responce time, no matter the game's pace. In no way can the human being be fast enough (and therefore the game's pace) for 30fps to cause trouble in comparison to 60fps. Really... "OMG! OMG! INPUT LAG! MEH CHARA IS NOT MOVIN UR FIGHTIN CUZ IT THIRDY FRAMES A SECOUND! I CAN MOVE NEAR TEH SPEED OF LIGHT!"
So, the truth?
It's none other than personal preference, and a very selfish one at that. So, yeah, 30fps is just passable or even choppy, just because it's not delivering movements quite as naked? A little too farfetched don't you think? 30fps is too fast to be considered "choppy" or "just passable" in a 3D game. It simply has its own feel. Games that run at 60fps require more animation data for realism than 30fps (robotic movement anyone? no?) and have half the console's assets at disposal to insert such data in. I bet frame rate whores would rather have all ps4/720 games be ps3/360 games that simply run at 60-100+fps over having a "horrid" constant 30fps with that "nasty" film-like feel of today (Killzone2/3, Gears and more).
I remember me and my brother worrying if Silent Hill 2 was going to follow the route of having a perfect 60fps, because it would NOT be scary with monsters walking about with the naked animations we've come to know from 60fps (arcade games/other). Even the PC versions cap the frame rate so that it doesn't trail off to a million frames. 30 frames = to adding film grain & overall realism, period. See, MGS2 looked amazing as still photography or a 24fps FMV on the internet, but with the demo in hand, we realized that the game lost the realism of movement when it started using 60fps for its gameplay. The illusion was shattered with all the nakedness. We didn't notice at first, as the outside rainy areas had a type of motion blur going on that smoothed the movements. Our impression dipped for MGS2's graphics somehow, even subconsciously. Luigi's Mansion impressed me much more overall. It's why I like MGS3's frame rate peak of 30fps.
Lastly, God of War 3 doesn't run at 60fps. Performance tests reveal more 40fps, which more or less resembles an upgraded 30fps without the additional 8 frames. It goes to 50fps+ at times, but mosly stays at 30-40fps+.
