> TLoU will have option to switch between 30 FPS and ~60.
> Fans pretend this is some high tech shit.
> Praising it for innovative on a console
> Forget they shit on PC gamers, not understanding their consoles are practically made from the same hardware.
>people will never ever stop complaining about framerate one way or the other
>adding an option in that literally makes no difference to how the game looks or plays
The human eye can't see past 24 fps, this is why film is 24 fps. 60 fps is a gimmick. If pressing start and select turned 60 fps to 30, I could press it while you're in the bathroom after playing 3 straight hours, when you get back, you wouldn't even know.
>mfw a space after the memearrow
If anything the gameplay is what's effected the most.
The most drastic example of this was Crysis 3. I thought it felt like shit, delved into the settings, and found that it was locked to 30fps. Turned that off, didn't even get up to 50fps and I could feel the difference. Not see it (well, I could definitely see it), but FEEL IT. The game controlled much most smoothly. That 20fps was such a drastic change to the gameplay that it made me like a game that I had previously disliked. That's how much of a difference framerate makes to gameplay.
Having options like that IS innovative on a console since consolefags don't usually get options like that. Hell, you can't even rebind buttons 90% of the time.
I think the only other console game to give you any kind of graphical options is the first Bioshock game where you can turn off vsync to improve your framerate at the cost of screen tearing.
Still, good on Naughty Dog for giving people options instead of just locking the game to one framerate or the other. I'm a firm believer in options, that way you can please both people on different ends of a controversial debate.
>I'm a firm believer in options
No one is disputing that. Consolefags have always used the excuse that games don't need options on consoles because it's basically "insert disc and play". No need to get "technical" ( eventhough it's not 1995 anymore ).
Just find it hilarious that these people start to understand the goodness that are options.
>options to make framerate worse
>on consoles where framerate is already shit
>PC has options to make framerates better than 60 and past 120fps
For what purpose?
>sonyponies will defend this
>Just find it hilarious that these people start to understand the goodness that are options.
that's extremely condescending and short-sighted. the vast majority of people who will have actually argued *against* options would be trolling or at least vaguely facetious. ease-of-use is still a thing.
That's not how it works though....Screen tearing happens when your frame rate isn't in sync with your screens refresh rate. That's why it's called vsync. You can even get screen tearing at 30 fps.
Options only make sense when all of the options are useful in some way. Having the option for the game to run smooth or choppy is pointless, 60 fps is a direct improvement over 30 fps. Unless it doesn't actually run at 60 fps, there's no reason to have a pointless option to downgrade the game.
>that's extremely condescending and short-sighted. the vast majority of people who will have actually argued *against* options would be trolling or at least vaguely facetious. ease-of-use is still a thing.
It's not condescending or shortsighted just because you can't believe people genuinely come up with shit like that.
I don't believe that at all. Either way, that's not why they're including it. It's for people that want a steady framerate because they couldn't manage a constant 60 without frame drops.
DAILY REMINDER that is your a console peasant then you either have no respect for yourself as a consumer(xboxfags because of what Microsoft pulled at their console announcement conference), your willing to buy the same game cause its REMASTERED(well you guys are all guilty but sonyfags your in the spotlight), you pay for online twice(xboxfags and sonyfags), and lastly all of you are willing to buy rehashes every year(cod, kill zone, halo, and Mario)
I know some console ports to PC have that option because 60fps can fuck up certain things if the game wasn't written with that framerate in mind (for example traffic cars driving at double speed in San Andreas), but I don't understand why they do it when the game's perfectly playable at 60fps.
On the other hand, it's better to have freedom of choice rather than be stuck on one framerate or the other.
>Some faggot at uni said Flies have fast reactions because they see in 150fps and we only see 60fps
On PCs there are frame limiters to get a more stable framerate, or to prevent it from going too high so the GPU burns out (STALKER main menu)
Either TLoU: RE can't achieve a stable 60fps on the PS4, or this is the streaming vs. torrents debacle on /a/ all over again.
>binding game physics to FPS
why does this exists?
My parents have watched me playing games at 60fps and they both find it nauseating, and can't watch for more than a minute. Granted they're pretty old, but the *average* age of gamers is 33. I'm sure older games would appreciate having the option
But no, instead let's all complain that there's an optional setting aimed at people who aren't us
>all those adventure games that linked enemy AI to processing power
>all those chess games that are now nearly impossible because the computer can now think ahead five moves instead of the one it was on release
To have your physics fixed to a certain time steps not only makes it more stable, you can skip some multiplications (with delta time since you can precalculate it, cause you know, it's always the same ). Not because it's "easier". In the end you still need to apply your linear alegebra.
>Turok for N64 actually had a graphics option menu where you can choose fps over graphics
>Sonyggers think this is innovating on consoles
>striving to achieve 60fps, which is exactly what /v/ want
>including the 30fps option for people who prefer it / if 60fps isn't stable
Why is this a bad thing? Why are people complaining so much about it? I've seen no console babbies talk shit about PC because of this development, and nobody is acting as if it's some revolutionary thing.
Stop making shit up to complain about.
60fps is literally just a better camera. like if you're playing sonic generations zooming through it just makes it so the visuals look like they're going faster.. movies are at a low fps because we see 16 frames per second, our brain molds them into motion. But anything above 10 fps will appear as smooth motion this is because it takes 1/16th of a second for a picture to fade off the back of our eye... high fps movies also make it really unrealistic, so in a way that applies to games too.. higher fps may be relevant to shooters because there is no stuttering
Oh shit, i remember how Killer is Dead tied QTE's to framerate. And made them impossible when you actually change it to 60 fps.
>if 60fps isn't stable
But that's the problem. If the damn console can't even get stable 60fps, why trying anyway? Why adding the option of reducing to 30fps as a "feature". As a fucking feature of all things.
>60fps is literally just a better camera. like if you're playing sonic generations zooming through it just makes it so the visuals look like they're going faster..
Oh this actually makes sense
>movies are at a low fps because we see 16 frames per second, our brain molds them into motion.
Oh never mind.
>high fps movies also make it really unrealistic, so in a way that applies to games too
this is not true what so ever, the reason high fps film looks bad is because of exposure times
which is a non issue for a virtual "camera"
please learn things before talking about things.
No because this is NintendoGaf.
They pulled a Hitler (Nintendo) against Stalin (Sony). Do you remember Sonyntendomination? How the goddamn Xbots (France) went in hiding for fear of their lifes? Now it's Nintenyearolds bashing Sonyggers, So I would say that the evil ones are Nintendo Fanboys and Sony to a certain degree, I haven't seen one of them talking shit for 3 months straight (apart from the people that are pretending to own a PS)
Even Kingdom Hearts: Birth By Sleep let you choose if you wanted a higher color bitrate at the cost of FPS in some areas, which you could compensate by enabling the in-game option to overclock the processor at the cost of battery duration, which you could compensate by plugging the charger in.
I could be somewhat more okay if the 30fps option offered more graphical fidelity, but in this case it seems to be there for the sake of just being there (other than appeal to artsy journos who want their videogames to be art movies)
captcha: dfinni speed
Isn't it actually a good thing for them to lock the game at 30fps? They're going for the whole cinematic experience thing and the controls for the games are sluggish and weighty for realism. The game would be a bit too easy at higher fps too.
you're borderline retarded.
yes that is true, sorry you're an idiot. 24fps looks natural on movies.
"An Unexpected Journey complained that the scenes were “too real” — the 48 fps recording rendering the action so lifelike that they had trouble remembering that Middle Earth was supposed to be a fantasy. Other viewers missed the languid feel of traditional 24 fps movies. Unconsciously, we’re also used to 30 fps and above content being “made for TV,” and are accustomed to feature films showing at the lower 24 fps rate."
if you want to get technical, it was settled long ago as a good compromise between image quality and usage. please don't look down upon others when you're in fact the retarded one.
>TLOU has it because console hardware is already out of date and can't handle 60FPS consistantly
>PC has always had it because it can go way over 60FPS and create screen tearing on 60hz monitors
that in no way says anything about 48fps looking 'unrealistic'.
unless you're saying that it drew more attention to the imperfections in set design, makeup, vfx etc. in which case, ok. but that just means that the standards of those things have to go up to match the improved viewing experience.
nigga there is a difference between a real camera and a digital camera.
real cameras are effected by time exposed to light among other things that digital cameras are not effected by.
Saying that real cameras=digital cameras so 24 fps in a game is okay is down right stupid.
Come on anon the framerate HAS to stop somewhere
I don't think it is. Caught a bit of Rise of the Guardians on a movie channel the other night at my cousin's place and the motion looked really odd for a movie. I thought it was a game at first with how everything was moving onscreen,
I never understood the whole statement of "cinematic experience" in video games.
I mean why are you trying to make a video game like a movie? I thought video games were supposed to be designed to challenge you. Not to walk you through the game like a movie.
On consoles, they can often put fancier effects in by capping the framerate to 30 and lowering the resolution. It's good for screenshots, marketing and the back of the case but it's why console games are aliased and choppy as fuck.
144 is the current cap for competitive gaming although many people play at 120. After 144 it becomes interpolation like with 240hz TVs.
>currently playing stalker on 120hz monitor
>There's people out there who bought a PS4 this early
>And unplugged their PS3.
>tfw when my PC can play more playstation games than Sony's latest console
>buying a next gen console
>buying shovelware and movies and rehashes