The Order: 1886 Runs at 30 FPS for a "Filmic Look"

Weaver

Overcaffeinated
Apr 28, 2008
8,977
0
0
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-order-1886-runs-at-30fps-because-24fps-doesn-t-feel-good/1100-6419888/

Dana Jan from Ready at Dawn, the studio behind The Order: 1886 said the PS4 eclusive will be locked at 30 FPS said it's locking the game to 30 FPS to give it a "filmic look" but isn't going lower because framerates of 24 don't "feel good".

It's also known the game is going to run at theater resolutions of 2.40:1.

Jan also commented that running at 60 FPS would cause the game to "end up looking like something on the Discovery Channel, like an HDTV kind of segment or a sci-fi original movie maybe. Which doesn't quite have the kind of look and texture that we want from a movie. The escapism you get from a cinematic film image is just totally different than what you get from television framing, so that was something we took into consideration."

I find this to be a total crock.

If you can't get the game to run at 60 then fine. I'm not going to crucify a console game for running at a solid 30, as I'm pretty much used to it by now. However, if you CAN get it to run at 60 but are limiting it to 30 because you want it to look like a movie, maybe you should just make a fucking movie.
 

Roxas1359

Burn, Burn it All!
Aug 8, 2009
33,758
0
0
I'll say the same thing I always say when it comes to this: as long as the framerate is consistent then I could give two shits about graphics or about a high framerate. Yes, it's 2014 and this should be standard now, but I've never enjoyed a game I liked less because it had a lower framerate or was full HD. If I like the story, characters, gameplay, and or music then I'm generally fine.

Really though, this trend of false advertising as of late is really not doing good for anyone really, and companies should really stop with this crap.
 

The Lunatic

Princess
Jun 3, 2010
2,291
0
0
"Yeah. This motion here? It's way too smooth. It needs to look more janky."

That is some fascinating logic right there.

Honestly, it's probably just an excuse.
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
18,847
0
0
hahahahaha hahaha

HAHAHAHAHAHA

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA

I really wish she'd just be honest
Neronium said:
Really though, this trend of false advertising as of late is really not doing good for anyone really, and companies should really stop with this crap.
its not false advertising, its bullshitting
 

shrekfan246

Not actually a Japanese pop star
May 26, 2011
6,374
0
0
Weaver said:
However, if you CAN get it to run at 60 but are limiting it to 30 because you want it to look like a movie, maybe you should just make a fucking movie.
As other people have already postulated, I imagine that it's just an excuse because they can't get it to 60.

And, to be frank, I'm not surprised; But not because "lolconsoles" like every other self-righteous PC gamer always starts going on about. I just honestly don't think most developers are skilled enough for it right now. Look back to the release of the Xbox 360 and PS3. Yes, there were games running at 60 FPS, but how many? And precious few continued to be able to hit that mark even as developers began to really grasp the difficulties of coding for those consoles, allowing for larger game worlds with more NPCs and better graphics and cinematics, better sound design and smoother controls, etc.

They've had what, a year, maybe two to work with these new consoles? Everyone who has been paying attention to the games industry for the past fifteen years should know that it's rarely within the first twelve months that the best and most technologically impressive games are released for new consoles.

EDIT: But yes, they're really not doing any good by making up silly excuses for why their games aren't at 60 FPS.
 

The Lunatic

Princess
Jun 3, 2010
2,291
0
0
Gundam GP01 said:
So the choice between pixel art or polygons can be an artistic choice. Turn based and real time combat can be an artistic choice. Chiptunes can be an artistic choice. But frame rate cant be?

Jesus, I mostly play on my PC when I game, and even I think you're being too elitist.
Why dont we wait till the came comes out and we can judge it properly?
Well, it's just not the case here. It's obvious the hardware can't run it at the 60 FPS standard.

It's like saying that somebody whom can't draw is drawing poorly by choice.

It's not that they're choosing to do it, it's that they can't do it.

And even if they could do it, why on earth would you want to?

I mean... Luftrausers had a gimmick in which, when you took damage, the game acted as if it was running at a lower FPS, apparently to simulate old arcade machines.

That's really the only use I can think of for wanting a lower FPS.

It's hard to come up with a decent comparison, as what we usually define as "Art" doesn't feature this kind of thing.

But, the best comparison I can come up with, is the following.

It's like shooting a film, using a phone camera.

Sure, the subject matter can be good, the story can be good. The things you're depicting can be beautiful and pristine, but, the technical process which you are using to display it to the audience is awful and worsens the whole experience.

You can argue you intended to do this, how it's some form of Art, and the contrast is part of it all.

But, at the end of the day, it's still ugly. It's just intentionally ugly.
 

StriderShinryu

New member
Dec 8, 2009
4,987
0
0
I quite enjoy how many of the posters in this thread know better than the developers what can and can't be done with the system and what those same developers can and can't do. It may well be true that they can't achieve 60 FPS. or at least a consistent 60 FPS, but is it really that unbelievable that they're just maybe making the choice they're making for non-technical reasons?

I know being cynical is the flavour of the day but can't we at least wait and see what a game that may not even be out for a year yet looks (and, more importantly, plays like) a little closer to release before we start basically saying that we can do a better job than the devs can?
 

NuclearKangaroo

New member
Feb 7, 2014
1,919
0
0
hahahaha, man, thats like saying

"you see, this chair has 3 legs for artistic reasons"

i dont see why they have to excuse themselves, the game looks great regardless, and this is comming from a PC gamer (tough my machine isnt really that great)

also making your game look like a video game should take priority over making it look like a film, not that i buy this half-assed excuse for even one quarter of a nanosecond

i guess the order 1886 devs dont like grapes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fox_and_the_Grapes
 

The Lunatic

Princess
Jun 3, 2010
2,291
0
0
StriderShinryu said:
I quite enjoy how many of the posters in this thread know better than the developers what can and can't be done with the system and what those same developers can and can't do. It may well be true that they can't achieve 60 FPS. or at least a consistent 60 FPS, but is it really that unbelievable that they're just maybe making the choice they're making for non-technical reasons?

I know being cynical is the flavour of the day but can't we at least wait and see what a game that may not even be out for a year yet looks (and, more importantly, plays like) a little closer to release before we start basically saying that we can do a better job than the devs can?
Yes, it really is that unbelievable.

Anyone whom knows anything about hardware can tell you straight away, that a game of that graphical fidelity is not going to get more than 30FPS on any system costing $500, be it PC, PS4 or Xbone.

Unless Sony suddenly discovers the power of magic and infuses all PS4 with magical rendering engines, capable of rivalling High-end PC hardware, it's just not going to happen.

Honestly, I'd expect the visuals to see a downgrade before release.
 

NuclearKangaroo

New member
Feb 7, 2014
1,919
0
0
StriderShinryu said:
I quite enjoy how many of the posters in this thread know better than the developers what can and can't be done with the system and what those same developers can and can't do. It may well be true that they can't achieve 60 FPS. or at least a consistent 60 FPS, but is it really that unbelievable that they're just maybe making the choice they're making for non-technical reasons?

I know being cynical is the flavour of the day but can't we at least wait and see what a game that may not even be out for a year yet looks (and, more importantly, plays like) a little closer to release before we start basically saying that we can do a better job than the devs can?
you see, its better to believe this is bullshit, because in the very unlikely case this is an honest artistic decision, then here we have a developer that is more concerned about his game working as a film rather than his game working as a video game

just like i said in my previous comment

"you see, this chair has 3 legs for artistic reasons"

well it might be a great piece of art, but its a terrible chair
 

StriderShinryu

New member
Dec 8, 2009
4,987
0
0
NuclearKangaroo said:
StriderShinryu said:
I quite enjoy how many of the posters in this thread know better than the developers what can and can't be done with the system and what those same developers can and can't do. It may well be true that they can't achieve 60 FPS. or at least a consistent 60 FPS, but is it really that unbelievable that they're just maybe making the choice they're making for non-technical reasons?

I know being cynical is the flavour of the day but can't we at least wait and see what a game that may not even be out for a year yet looks (and, more importantly, plays like) a little closer to release before we start basically saying that we can do a better job than the devs can?
you see, its better to believe this is bullshit, because in the very unlikely case this is an honest artistic decision, then here we have a developer that is more concerned about his game working as a film rather than his game working as a video game

just like i said in my previous comment

"you see, this chair has 3 legs for artistic reasons"

well it might be a great piece of art, but its a terrible chair
I'd still rather wait to see what the actual game plays like. Assuming the game is tuned to be played at a constant 30 FPS, it may still play very well. Sure it won't be 60 FPS and that would likely be a downer in some respects, but it's hardly the sort of death knell for the entire experience that this thread is making it out to be. Making a choice with intention towards a particular visual style doesn't make a videogame into a movie, it just makes it into a videogame with a specific visual style. Many highly regarded games of both past and present make choices in visual style for both artistic and technical reasons.

Basically, we're not talking about a 3 legged chair here. We're talking about a 4 legged chair with a slightly lower back such that it may not be comfortable for everyone but it's still totally functional as a chair.
 

The Lunatic

Princess
Jun 3, 2010
2,291
0
0
Gundam GP01 said:
The most creative stories are sprouted from limitation.
Remember how we used to get good Star Wars and Indiana Jones flicks back when people still had the guts to shoot down Lucas' ideas?

And then after he made it big, we got shit like Howard the Duck, the Prequels, and The Crystal Skull?


Yes, the PS4 is weaker than my mid range rig. But if those scrawny stats forced them to use the lower framerate, and we get a game with a neat artistic vision because of it? Then awesome.
Besides, if it can run Infamous at 1080p and 60FPS, I doubt it's exclusively a hardware issue.
You're missing the point.

The argument in this thread is that, they're not doing it from preference, they're doing it simply because they can't run at 60 Fps.

If they can only muster a meagre 30 from the PS4's hardware, whilst making the game look as pretty as it does, then, that's an acceptable choice, choosing graphical quality over frame rate is fine, if you're willing to accept that visuals are more important than the smoothness of the visuals.


However, saying that you're intentionally making a game to only run at a low 30 FPS because it's a "Cinematic experience" is just a load of none-sense.

The issue is not with the game running at 30 FPS, it's the reasoning they're claiming why that is.
 

NuclearKangaroo

New member
Feb 7, 2014
1,919
0
0
StriderShinryu said:
NuclearKangaroo said:
StriderShinryu said:
I quite enjoy how many of the posters in this thread know better than the developers what can and can't be done with the system and what those same developers can and can't do. It may well be true that they can't achieve 60 FPS. or at least a consistent 60 FPS, but is it really that unbelievable that they're just maybe making the choice they're making for non-technical reasons?

I know being cynical is the flavour of the day but can't we at least wait and see what a game that may not even be out for a year yet looks (and, more importantly, plays like) a little closer to release before we start basically saying that we can do a better job than the devs can?
you see, its better to believe this is bullshit, because in the very unlikely case this is an honest artistic decision, then here we have a developer that is more concerned about his game working as a film rather than his game working as a video game

just like i said in my previous comment

"you see, this chair has 3 legs for artistic reasons"

well it might be a great piece of art, but its a terrible chair
I'd still rather wait to see what the actual game plays like. Assuming the game is tuned to be played at a constant 30 FPS, it may still play very well. Sure it won't be 60 FPS and that would likely be a downer in some respects, but it's hardly the sort of death knell for the entire experience that this thread is making it out to be. Making a choice with intention towards a particular visual style doesn't make a videogame into a movie, it just makes it into a videogame with a specific visual style. Many highly regarded games of both past and present make choices in visual style for both artistic and technical reasons.

Basically, we're not talking about a 3 legged chair here. We're talking about a 4 legged chair with a slightly lower back such that it may not be comfortable for everyone but it's still totally functional as a chair.
the thing is however, 60 FPS is objectively better from a gameplay standpoint than 30 FPS, there has been studies about it, gamespot's sciency show actually talked about this

http://www.gamespot.com/videos/reality-check-do-we-need-60-fps-on-ps4-and-xbox-on/2300-6415658/

you are making your game, worse as a game just so it can be better as a movie, of course, assuming this ludicrous tale is true

Gundam GP01 said:
StriderShinryu said:
NuclearKangaroo said:
StriderShinryu said:
I quite enjoy how many of the posters in this thread know better than the developers what can and can't be done with the system and what those same developers can and can't do. It may well be true that they can't achieve 60 FPS. or at least a consistent 60 FPS, but is it really that unbelievable that they're just maybe making the choice they're making for non-technical reasons?

I know being cynical is the flavour of the day but can't we at least wait and see what a game that may not even be out for a year yet looks (and, more importantly, plays like) a little closer to release before we start basically saying that we can do a better job than the devs can?
you see, its better to believe this is bullshit, because in the very unlikely case this is an honest artistic decision, then here we have a developer that is more concerned about his game working as a film rather than his game working as a video game

just like i said in my previous comment

"you see, this chair has 3 legs for artistic reasons"

well it might be a great piece of art, but its a terrible chair
I'd still rather wait to see what the actual game plays like. Assuming the game is tuned to be played at a constant 30 FPS, it may still play very well. Sure it won't be 60 FPS and that would likely be a downer in some respects, but it's hardly the sort of death knell for the entire experience that this thread is making it out to be. Making a choice with intention towards a particular visual style doesn't make a videogame into a movie, it just makes it into a videogame with a specific visual style. Many highly regarded games of both past and present make choices in visual style for both artistic and technical reasons.

Basically, we're not talking about a 3 legged chair here. We're talking about a 4 legged chair with a slightly lower back such that it may not be comfortable for everyone but it's still totally functional as a chair.
Not to mention that functional three legged chairs are an actual god damn thing.

you had to go ahead and ruin my analogy didnt you?

fine, 2 legged chair einstein
 

Elijin

Elite Member
Legacy
May 10, 2020
1,709
507
118


There are plenty of examples of different designs too. Keep going, I can do one legged and no legs, no problem.

This video game is meant to be a retro/noir thing with an old style and dark storyline isnt? In other words, even if it is a case of not being able to get to 60, they saw a way to embrace that thematically, and went for it. Good for them, screw all of you.

Oh and fun fact for the people saying 30fps is broken/unplayable/3 legged chair etc..... So uh...the games most of us have been playing the last 20 years are non functional? I've been living in a dream!