>>257504436 Yes and no. He's right in that if the game is being designed to be 'cinematic', framerate can take a lower priority to effects and resolution. He's wrong in that it should never be 'restricted' to 30, if 45 is doable then 45 it should be. If 56 is doable than 56 it should be. If the game could run at 120 then it should not be restricted to 30 for a 'cinematic feel'.
He's also wrong in that games should not be designed to be cinematic in the first place but that's an entirely different can of worms to open.
>>257504504 this comes off as very pretentious and unpractical. Even if you wanted something that has a "cinematic feel", which is understandable, it would simply look smoother and better at 60 fps. That's a fact. I know components of art are somewhat subjective but this is about performance pertaining to technology, and the fact is, 60 frames is a better performance speed than 30. It's just silly really
People who say this shit about video games needing to be more story driven are just fucking M. Night Shyamalan's that don't have any good ideas. They got kicked out of directors school for being dumbshits. A crash needs to happen, if not to improve quality of games in general, but to get these shitheads out of the industry.
This isn't a movie, the higher the framerate the better, the moment you make a sharp turn at 30 fps is the moment you lose your immersion. Also motion blur and depth of field in a videogame are stupid.
60 is better than 30 for video games. That doesn't mean you can't do 30 to get some extra resources. 30 can still be a really great experience. The problem is the developers are lying assholes when they say they're "aiming for 30." These fuckers can't optimize worth a shit and 30fps is something they hope for. The game will drop below 30fps extremely often and anything below 30 is absolute dogshit.
Fuck the cinematic fags and fuck the devs who still can't use D3D after nearly 15 goddamn years.
>>257505725 >Xander Davis is a designer, creative director, and author, consulting worldwide through his design agency XD&A. He is known for his UI Design work on Transformers: War for Cybertron and Darksiders 2, both 9.0-rated triple-A games for Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, & PC, and was thanked for his support in the credits of Indie Game: The Movie and other films. Xander’s writing has also been published on chuckpalahniuk.net (official site of the author of Fight Club).
Well at least he isn't a developer saying this bullshit.
>>257506724 They don't understand that fake motion blur is something that can be seen and focused on, while real motion blur is an actual illusion. Also, they don't seem to understand the difference between rendering something and capturing something.
>>257507445 It's because games don't appear as real to your eye. Movies are realistic enough that they appear to be real, then your eye notices that the motion blur you would normally see is missing, so everything looks unnaturally crisp. The motion blur is missing because cameras do not work like our eyes, to produce 60fps they need to reduce the exposure time, which means that less shit is moving while the exposure is actually happening. The higher the FPS, the less blur there is, the less blur there is, the more unnatural it looks.
In games, blur isn't connected to FPS at all, blur is a post-processing effect. We can add blur to a 60fps game if we want to. Blur doesn't make a significant difference in appearance to us for games, because we don't perceive them as being real in the first place. 30fps footage is equally jarring as 60fps footage in that department. Since uncanny valley shit isn't an issue, the higher framerate naturally looks way better, the way it would if cameras captured footage differently.
>>257508338 If the image in front of you looks real in every other way, (such as being footage of real people), then a small detail like a lack of motion blur is going to throw you into uncanny valley.
Lack of blur isn't an issue for games, because games aren't close enough to realistic yet.
They aren't locking it at "30" fps to give us 1080p, they're locking it at 24, that's right, TWENTY FOUR, frames per second for the "cinematic feel" which means they're going to shit all over their resolution ANYWAYS with motion blur.
The reason films are done in 24 fps is because of motion blur. They claim to want cinema quality, so 24 fps and shittons of motion blur and bloom.
>>257508451 >it's the same shit that happens to consolefags when they try a 60fps game, it feels unnatural and wrong really? an average person will most likely notice the change between 30 to 60 in vidya how will it even feel unnatural or wrong?
>>257504436 If he they were the only dev saying this, then it wouldn't be a problem. But so many devs are parroting this "It's an artistic decision to be sup 1080 and/or sub 60fps" talking point that it's made everyone suspicious.
We already know next gen consoles are pretty underpowered. And this trend doesn't help.
Well at least they aren't including multiplayer in it. Shoehorning multi into a game that doesn't fucking need it is the bane of modern video games. It makes studios focus more resources on a facet that people won't even bother with for more than a month to the detriment of singleplayer.
A slower framerate to capture the 24fps cinematic feel of what most movies use should only be your goal if your "game" has more cutscenes than gameplay sections. A high consistent framerate is always better for gameplay because moving in real life isn't restricted to framerate slowdowns or choppiness, but even more than that consistency in and of itself is something these people fail to achieve, and is absolutely vital for maintaining immersion in gameplay sections.
>>257509693 wouldn't that make his point even stronger? look 60 fps is really fucking important in some games like fighting games, hack and slash, fps, whatever any game that requires very fast decision making needs 60fps, but do you really need 60fps in every game? like if the next civilization game ends up being being 30 fps do you think anyone would give a fuck?
>>257509746 >Who the fuck cares if this game is 30 or 60 fps?
People care because devs are trying to bullshit the easily impressed uneducated ps4 and xbone kids. After they convince them theres a fucking 'cinematic feel' feature, you'll never hear the end of it and only several years of self education down the line will fix that, maybe.
>>257510060 The problem is that its an action game we're talking about here. And by running it at 30 fps, he will have to make several downgrades in the experience to make it playable, including bigger hitboxes, aim assist, bulletsponge mainchar...
a fighting game has 30fps? is this what gaming has become? Why the fuck are the new consoles so expensive if they can't even get a decent framerate and resolution along with passable graphics? seriously, why the fuck are we spending $400 for these machines? People bought 1080p TVs a decade ago and still can't use their full resolution when playing a game
>>257510417 resource allocation, you can put resources into making the game run at 60 fps but that'd usually make the game have issues running on older computers and consoles. if you can get a better game by allocating said resources elsewhere why not?
>>257510874 I had ~25 FPS in open spaces with barely anything going on. Imagine raids. It wasn't rare to dip below 10 fps at times. At least my latency was around 30 ms kek I stuck with it because i was underage and my parents wouldn't buy me a decent computer. I actually "upgraded" the card to a geforce 6200. Go ahead and laugh, seeing as they're the same card. But I didn't know that.
>>257511136 why? explain to me why it's better to have lower resolution but higher FPS is slow paced games, like turn based strategy games or walking simulators or something. also fine you don't have an older computer, most of the population does and the industry does not cater to you.
>>257511284 idk about that, if games like TWD and stanley parable can be good i think games that rely on qte's can also be good. i have yet to see one to convince me it's a good idea, but i'm keeping an open mind
>play all videogames on superlow >turn graphics down below what is available via configs and ini files >disable textures when possible >games run at 420 fps >feels much more immersive than 15 fps ultrasharp beutiful textures
>>257507445 It's because of shitty cinematography, they've been handling 24 fps for fucking ever, they don't know how to correctly shoot higher FPS. On top of that you put in CGI designed for 24 FPS in a film that's running higher than that.
>>257512098 A downgraded third person generic TPS with more corridors to keep your experience as cinematic as possible. Slowing down and thinking for long periods of time is such a tension braker, gotta go fast through the story man.
>>257511490 >Do you not remember how people felt about The Hobbit being in 48 fps? They know what Soap Operas look like Correction! the soap opera look has nothing to do with framerate, as soap operas were broadcast at 30fps and 25fps depending on the country. It was because of the lack of motion blur caused by the fact that they were broadcast live rather than being captured on film, which caused the scenes inherently looked worse as motion blur hides imperfections.
>>257512246 >>257512296 >>257512442 >>257512489 Reason I asked was because when I heard about it I thought it was a 4 player coop wolf/vampire hunting game or some shit. I was confused when they showed the segment at e3 until I realised they were going for another cinematic experience.
>>257512845 true enough, if you want to say this particular game is shit that's fine with me (even if i think you should wait until it's out), just try not to keep an open mind towards the genre or you can end up missing out.
>>257513056 >man tells a lie >Just let him educate the kids as he does.
The idiots need to be shamed. I apreciate any framerate i have if it has no microstuttering and screen tearing, those things annoy me much more than 30 fps. But fuck this cunt covering up his behind with bullshit.
>>257511686 >the PS4 still selling well? Aparantelly just enough for the sony playstation division to be able to pay the interest on their debts.
I seriously hope Sony as a company drop their gaming division soon entirely, its a fucking joke. Microsoft makes more money than Sony is worth as a company every year so they can at least afford to piss away hundreds of millions.
>>257512156 For all we know, this could be the best they can do.
You also have to take into account that Cinematic games are a new trend. We didn't hear about this all the time because we didn't even have many games like this to even hear about in the first place.
All we've heard is that they defended 30fps. It could be bullshitting or it could be legitimate. Cinematic is not a new term. We know that 60fps has been a topic brought up for next-gen (along with 1080p) and that them commenting on it should be expected. However, they've clearly said that the main focus was story and visuals. It is a cinematic game, the very definition of one.
>>257513149 The funny thing is that if they post production applied motion blur to the film in the right spote people would say the 48 frames version looks better, I saw all the versions (24fps, 48fps, and 3D) and I prefered the 48fps version the most since I am used to 60fps because of gaming.
>>257504436 Video games are not cinema and do not have the same requirements as cinema. For one, video games cannot have blur frames for in-betweens during action, because there is no way to know what the "frame" afterwards will be until the game receives a response from the player.
Intentional input delay to provide a buffer for a blurring effect would just make the game feel laggy and unresponsive. I mean, moreso than just 30fps does for itself.
Additionally, the last time I checked information about The Order 1886, it had permanent large black sections at the top and bottom of the screen. This means that while it is technically 1080p resolution, you aren't getting the full 1920x1080 resolution with it.
>>257513715 But they do nothing to deviate from the typical TPS format. It sure isnt cinematic in the graphical quality sense too. Games looked the best they could for a long time, but once someone pushes the bar is when people realise it could be better. Thats how i remember gaming evolving. Obviously the order recieved a graphical downgrade as we saw aswell. So what going on here? That surely isnt a way to make the game more filmic.
All i see is frantic scrambling to put this thing together with as less damage done as possible. They wouldve gotten away with it if they havent opened their mouths in the first place. This shit wouldve blown over without making the game look so desperate to save its face.
The first two posts have some kind of vibe where 60 fps isn't actually wanted or even avoided. It feels as if devs don't give a fuck about gameplay and just want to make the most pretty game so it will sell. Sad times we live in, sad times.
>>257514509 I personally think they were shooting for 30fps in the first place. The 60fps topic wasn't brought up from Ready At Dawn or one they started, either. I think they knew they'd get more out of the graphics with 30 fps. However, I don't believe framerate has anything to do with the downgrade. E3 bullshots have shown countless times. It's common for their to be downgrades (which is problematic.) I do agree that they shouldn't have said anything, but I think it's a bit overblown on /v/ because we've seen threads talking about the Order's framerate whenever there's a thread about this game. I mean, do you really expect a game that puts it's story and visuals above gameplay to be what shows how much gaming moves forward?
When I think of forwards, I think of something like Dead Rising, like when they showed off all the zombies they could render.
I think more of this relies on how Sony has presented next gen, rather than this game in particular.
>>257504436 >in a first person shooter that makes sense. Fighting games are undoubtely predestined for 60 FPS. Well at least he knows what he is aiming for. It's a step above "all games should be 30 for muh cinematic look. What's gameplay?"
>>257515565 Computer monitors refresh at 60Hz. 60 FPS means that you get one frame per refresh. 30 FPS means that you get one frame per two refreshes.
45 FPS gives an odd situation, trying to get three frames every four refreshes. The result is that the image looks jittery and choppy - it's an odd mismatch between what the system in rendering and what the monitor is displaying. The problem is just as bad with 40 FPS or 50 FPS, which will end up keeping "static" frames on the monitor more often to match the refresh rate correctly. That, or the game will occasionally freeze for part of a second for one to catch up to the other. It will need to do it regularly, as well.
>>257515428 Are there even guidelines for a cinematic game? Without a clear distinction for me it will always remain as a lazy copout to force the viewer in the mindset, to avoid as much criticism it can get from criticising it as a video game.
Im sure some older games couldve been labeled as cinematic for their time aswell, but it would just be a comment on execution of some elements rather than an overarching theme for the whole experience.
Either way, i agree that times are changing and some deviate to create a holywood product such as this as it is safe, doesnt require risk on thinking too much about the gameplay, just a generic TPS template. We had these prior, but not so obnoxiously trying to pretend theyre more than they actually are. I really wouldnt care otherwise. Something of a similar nature happened in the past few years, i cant recall the subject matter but the wheel was reinvented and sold as a new thing aswell, its just offensive. Especially when gaming journalists are part of the issue as they are so uneducated to question statements or do bare basic research.
I care more about what the end product looks like more than anything. To talk about FPS alone is almost meaningless, and obviously there's a certain point at which trading off FPS for something else, like resolution or more detailed textures/models and better postproecessing effects, may be a good idea. I suppose that there's also something to be said for "cinematic" FPS rates, so long as movies also cling to that reason. I don't really know (or care) whether or not there is or isn't any merit to that, but it does mean that video games that use the "cinematic" excuse aren't any worse than those in similar industries.
Also, it's not like a 30fps game is noticeably less responsive or anything. 30 FPS is 0.033 frames per second, and 60 FPS is 0.066 frames per second. Assuming both are constant, you'd only really be adding ~0.03 seconds to response time, right? That hardly seems like it really matters.
>>257516497 Yeah, I can understand. Cinematic games is pretty vague, although when you bring it up on /v/, it's pretty understandable what someone means.
Something like Don Bluth's Dragon Lair and Space Ace are cinematic games to me, personally.
It's weird, because I remember playing point and clicks and games like Myst, and getting actual game content out of them, despite a consistent push for a story to be told.
Maybe it's the fact they tacked on a TPS element to it? It arguably could use more than just shooting, like investigating or puzzle solving, like a 90s adventure games. Something to get the brain pumping.
>>257516912 I think it's only talked about the game because it's one of the PS4's next gen exclusives. It has a lot of pressure riding on it.
>>257517287 No, 30 FPS is 30 frames per second and 60 FPS is 60 frames per second. 30 FPS is 0.033 seconds for each frame while 60 FPS is 0.016 seconds for each frame, which is what I think you meant. That's a 16 millisecond difference.
But it's a bit more than that. Specifically, your eye is going to catch movement before it notices a specific pattern to hit. Movement means a change between frames, and the longer it takes to show those frames on the screen, the longer it will take someone to respond. With just two frames, that's 0.066 vs 0.033, or 33 ms. If you're slower and need five frames, that's 0.165 vs 0.080, or a 80 ms difference. And with a fast paced game, that can make a big difference.
60fps gives a frame time of 16mS, this means that the the delay between an input and the result on the screen is at most 16mS, with 30fps it is 33mS. With fast moving games such as FPS, fighting games, and sanic speed racing games like Trackmania this is very important as any noticable input delay will severly effect the users experience to the point where they may lose due to crashing/missing a shot/not blocking at the right time where they would normaly have had succeded.
>>257517754 >Thats not actually right. The diffrence is very noticable. I know the numbers seem low, but the responsiveness is definetly noticable.
See, I'm not buying that. I generally feel no difference in responsiveness between the two; at least, nothing that isn't made totally negligible by any response time delays caused by the game's design or other issues.
>>257507445 I've watched porn in 60 FPS and it was much better. It only sucks in your average action movie because special effects, costumes and shit are dogshit when it comes to quality and normally it's hidden behind motion blur.
>>257512098 Haze #2. Where haze was shitty Halo clone, this is shitty gears clone.
But it looks more similar to other game - Ryse, for obvious reasons.
They could have make it...good Gears clone - don't force "cinematic feel", give it 2(maybe 4?) players coop, local or not(I think that 2 players would easily deal with split-screen), don't make it QTE fest...
But they're probably too far right now, I'm pretty sure they would have to rework every single level, shooting mechanics, AI etc. so it won't work.
Also "cinematic games" are fucking bubble, I have no single idea why do people buy into this shit. There was only one such game that managed to sell more than 5 million units - TLoU, and it followed every single trend we have right now - "zombie survival", parent-daughter relations, crafting elements, lesbians(DLC, wouldn't happen if Gone Homo wouldn't receive praise) etc. on top of trying to make it appear "artistic" which pleased manbaby reviewers and helped with generating hype. Oh and it has actually decent gameplay - shallow and easy, but you can't point any flaw outside of it.
The "core" market of such games is the Uncharted marked - around 3-4 million potential buyers worldwide.
Meanwhile, gameplay-centric CoD(again - you may claim that gameplay is shallow and this time has shittons of problems but most people buy this game for multi, so it's not "cinematic story game") easily sells 10 millions units even when we're talking about relatively badly-received Ghosts.
They can sell it if they'll time it well, otherwise they'll move preorders, some initial sales and badmouth will hit them harder than DA2 or Ryse.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.