When Are You A Framerate Whore?

Other Games
1

Since there’s not much else goin’ on, I may as well make my own pointless topic… with a point.

I was just in a stupid argument with a friend about framerates for next-gen systems, and Panzer Dragoon Orta surfaced as one of my examples.

Looking back I have one very odd, needling disapointment with the XBOX’s run. It has almost become the “30-fps is good enough” system of this gen. About half-way through the life of the system it seems like that became the bar, like it just didn’t matter after that. And it’s clearly nothing to do with hardware limitations, as Smilebit, Team Ninja and a handful of other devs prove.

Don’t get me wrong, I know there’s just as many PS2 and GCN games that run at 30fps, or even worse. But if you look at the signature killer-apps for PS2, that magic number 60 comes across like a much bigger priority. Although clearly due in large part to the greater representation of Japanese heavy hitters.

But compare that to XBOX? The FPS genre is virtually owned by XBOX, and every big title is 30. Every Tom Clancy game, taken as a whole a huge selling point as the ‘prettier’ versions are all on XBOX, also 30-fps. The racing genre became a vary particular strength for the 'box, and the 2 most hyped-up “GT Killer” titles ship running at 30-fps. (Thank You d.i.c.e. for delivering at least one 60-fps racer that inarguably rates visually versus GT3/4!)

Now, most of those examples can easily be understood and forgiven. The type, variety, and comprehensive level of effects that the Halos, Splinter Cells and PGR’s deliver clearly leaves little to complain about for most people. But outside of the bump-map-happy FPS standards that are becoming expected, the XBOX middle ages have represented less impressive engines for nearly all of it’s second-tier exclusive games than what was already seen in a few, notably SEGA MADE first and second gen efforts.

I’ve been especially disgruntled by Rare. Yeah the games weren’t what people wanted in the first place, but to add insult to injury the visuals in the 2 games they have delivered don’t look remotely like something that couldn’t have been achieved at 60. Not that Rare is exactly known for good framererates (snarf), but their only other game this gen was actually a beautiful 60-fps and one of the most flashy tech-demos to ever grace the Gamecube.

OK, I didn’t set out to make a big case out of this actually… I’m just left with this notion that things have settled in so there’s no incentive to push for the magic number on XBOX, it’s not any sort of priority at all. And it’s agravating to me because I would personally choose 60-fps over detail always, in like 9 out of any 10 games. And as the XBOX representative in our fave series shows, it doesn’t even have to be much of a tradeoff.

Umm, sorry that’s so long, it was hard to distill everything that’s on my mind this moment. Anyway, so here’s the debate. It’s looking likely that PGR3, Kameo, Perfect Dark Zero and all too many other first gen X360 titles will be running at 30-fps.

Is anyone else vaguely nervous that this may be setting a precedent?

How many people notice/care about 30 vs 60-fps?

Are there only certain game genres that it matters?

:anjou_sigh:

2

60 frames per second used to be the holy grail benchmark right around the time Dreamcast came out, but has now basically been replaced by, like you said 30 is enough mentality. Quite frankly I don’t mind.

The fact that TV and Movies run only around 24-32 frames per second, and people don’t complain says something, because at that speed it looks natural. And as developers push graphics farther I think it gets to a point where either A: They really can’t get 60 frames per second out, so they stick to a rock solid 30, or B: They just don’t have the time to optimize a game to run perfectly.

I think this is a greater controversy with PC gamers who, if they want the extra FPS will go out and invest in hardware to get it, however in the console world, you play on a TV that you have seen images flash by at the same speed all your life, so 30 frames per second seems the most logical and time efficient at this point. 60 would be nice, but I’d rather have a couple good games at 30 than one at 60.

3

I think it’s more important to have a consistent framerate rather than a higher one - there’s nothing worse than everything getting all juddery when the game gets a bit busy. 30 fps is fine - 60 is better but the difference isn’t that huge that it is terribly noticeable.

4

Consistant framerate over high framerate here also.

5

Hey, thanks for the response. I know I’m in a minority about it on these terms… lemme ask about it in a more specific context though.

After the existing experience of Panzer Dragoon Orta, would you trade half the framerate for an extra 50% or so detail? I’m saying 50% because the memory limits of XBOX couldn’t really support that much of a visual increase in over what we already see in PDO, 50% is perhaps even liberal.

BTW Felix, most TV originated content has been equivalent to 60 (or 50 PAL) all along. At least in the sense that you’re seeing the exact same update that you would when playing any 60-fps PS2 game on a normal interlaced TV.

And for cinema, there is a difference in what you’re actually seeing in most cases. Even though the material update is 24-fps, an effect known as temporal blur essentially fills in the gaps between frames when things are moving fast. Providing an illusion to your brain that you aren’t directly aware of, it approximates the same persistence phenomenon our own eyes ‘suffer’ from.

To achieve a true temporal blur, along the lines of what Pixar are known for pioneering in CG, requires that you render ghosted versions of every part of the scene that is in motion. Which could easly meet or even exceed the preformance load of simply running at double the framerate. It can be approximated, or cheated in many ways, but it will never be the same.

I’m not arguing with anyone, I asked for opinions after all, and I appreciate getting them. It’s just that I’ve seen that argument before Felix, and I hate to let the misconception of the simplification go without comment. :anjou_happy:

6

Personally a smooth framerate matters a lot to me. If the graphics are great, but the game doesn’t run smoothly, then there’s little point in those extra graphical options in the first place. After all, if the game isn’t enjoyable to play, then all those fancy effects are for nothing.

Saying that, 30fps is enough for some games. I have no problem playing Halo on Xbox, for example. It runs great. However, after playing Sonic Adventure 2 on the Dreamcast it was difficult to go back and play the first game because it runs so choppy in comparison. Because of the speed of the game, the difference certainly could be noticed.

Even though Microsoft may have a “no lower than 30fps” policy on Xbox games, we still experience slow down in parts of games like Morrowind and Fable on Xbox which is a shame. Usually if that’s the case, I’ll try and get the PC version if there is one, as I do believe that it’s worth paying extra for a machine that offers a smooth gaming experience. It would be nice if the Xbox 360 runs original Xbox games at a smoother framerate.

7

I also can’t stand 30fps in most games…

Many people claim the difference is not visible at all but, well, it’s more than visible to me. On PC games I prefer reducing visual quality to get a smoother frame rate rather than the other way around…

Anyone with Half-Life can do a test…
Run it properly and play for ten minutes or so.
Bring down the console and type: fps_max 30

If you can’t see the difference seek medical assistance. The experience becomes downright horrible for me like that.

Other games allow similar options so if you don’t have Half-Life look that up…

And for the record, I’m not one of those counter-strike players that want to have 100 or even 200 fps (which I agree really make no difference) and buy the best PCs just to run an ancient game like that. I never really have the fps shown in any game. I just see the difference right away, without trying.

In UT2004 for example, I even notice when the fps go down to something like 40-45 (I verified with console commands AFTER I noticed slowdown in certain areas, not before).

Really, smooth visuals and smooth gameplay are top in my list…

Though as Solo said, some games look alright (even more so when played on a conventional TV rather than a high definition monitor) on 30 fps.

The first time I noticed the difference between 30 and 60 (and never went back) was a memorable one…

I had a PSOne and was playing Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver on it for quite along while… Then @ the store I saw the Dreamcast stand and the same game on it. I asked to try it out, and I wondered what the big deal was as after playing it for a while it seemed to be the exact same game (it didn’t have any visual upgrades other than frame rate).

The shock came when I returned to playing the PSOne version and what was once one of the most beautiful things I had seen, now looked choppy as hell…

8

[quote=“Al3xand3r”]
Anyone with Half-Life can do a test…
Run it properly and play for ten minutes or so.
Bring down the console and type: fps_max 30

If you can’t see the difference seek medical assistance. The experience becomes downright horrible for me like that.[/quote]

To be fair, you’re running a 30fps limit on a game that you are used to seeing at a higher resolution. If a game is normally running at 30fps, then you hardly notice the difference between specific games.

9

Heretic Agnostic, thank you for clearing that up. Indeed there was more to the issue than i initially saw.

As for the Half-Life 2 issue, I don’t have the most state of the art computer and the first time I played HL2 all the way through was at around 30-40 frames per second, and I thought it was absolutely fine.

In the end I would say it is better to have a constant frame rate rather than a high one, since there is nothing more annoying than frame rates jumping up and down.

10

What does the resolution have to do with this? I gave another example that you may find more suitable in the end of my post. Though I don’t really agree with this point. 30fps is 30 fps no matter how you look at it. You’ll still only see 30 frames for every second therefor the animations, camera motion and everything else will not be as smooth as in a game with higher fps, wether the fps are limited by the system it runs on or it has a hardcoded fps limit.

11

Well, the way I see it, there’s only one way to look at it: does it affect the gameplay experience?

For something like an FPS or a twitch-game, sure. Framerate can affect how quickly the action moves or whatever. But, for example, for a turn-based RPG? Or heck, even a racing game… it has little to no effect on the gameplay whatsoever.

12

And even for FPS games… no need for framerates that are higher than the amount of frames the human eye can see in a second. It’s kinda like having a Ferrari when you can only go 120km/h maximum on the highway. XD It becomes a bit pointless.

13

Nobody said it should be higher than what the human eye can see, what are you on about?

And Abadd, I think the difference is fairly visible in racing games too. Wasn’t Sega Touring Cars running on 30fps? Most people I know found it running very choppy wether they knew what “fps” is or they were just casual gamers… Unless STC was running even lower than 30, I don’t know.

Anyway it’s not just a matter of gameplay to me, it’s also how the game looks. Regardless of how pretty it is, if I can see the “choppyness” of the motion it makes it lose a lot of appeal. Certain games get around that but most I’ve seen don’t.

It’s just a matter of what you have seen I guess… Like with modern games, going back to first generation 3D, everything looks way too low poly and with way pixely textures etc. Even though back then they seemed drop dead gorgeous. Same with this, after seeing better, and getting used to it, I really can’t go back to 30fps unless it’s a special occasion…

14

Choppyness only comes about with an inconsistent framerate. A game with a solid 30 fps will not be choppy. The animations and whatnot may be not quite as fluid, but they are by no means choppy. The difference is that with a solid 30 fps, you get consistent gameplay/animations/controller response time. With an inconsistent framerate, all of the above go out the window.

15

I think at this point nearly every fighting game aficionado would have a HUGE problem if a new game in their favorite series released running at 30-fps. For one thing it’s the only genre for 3D that has been typified by 60-fps gameplay even since the 32-bit era. It’s also such a narrow focus experience, even the people who don’t consiously ‘see’ framerates would probably feel the effect is has on the gameplay.

For myself I absolutely cannot forgive racers anymore, and I’m not a car nut or hard-core racing gamer. But I played and enjoyed PGR a lot, Burnout 2 is one of my fave games ever, and I simply cannot fully enjoy PGR2 at this point. It fundamentally fails to deliver the same rush of it’s predecessor, which means I could not care less how much extra detail there is in a building face!

I admit that I have been wrong about some old games, they looked so smooth at the time that in retrospect I thought they were probably 60. Like the Atari 8-bit version of Ballblazer I recently saw for the first time in many years… NOT 60-fps. It is certainly a function of conditioning, after all you can’t miss something you’ve never had.

But that doesn’t change the fact that I now know what I’m missing.

As Al3xand3r said, it’s beyond the immediate needs of the gameplay. The very fact that I notice the framerate removes me one step from the ‘solidity’ of the experience. It’s not immersion as such… but like the difference between playing with Legos or a cheap knock-off, you can tell.

At this point I almost prefer a floating framerate in certain games to a fixed lower one. The original Tomb Raider, or more recently Morrowind are examples, the fact that I can’t ever escape absolute awareness of the frame stepping makes it somehow easier to make peace with it. But 30-fps is just like a tease anymore.

Now, as I implied already I would not always consider 60-fps worth every compromise. For instance even on new systems a game like Azel/Saga would probably benefit more to me from insane detail over 60-fps. You’re looking at slowly moving enemies and backdrops with plenty of oportunity to appreciate the finer points. In much the same way Morrowind is all about the absolute picturesque effect.

There is another mediating factor of which there’s too few good examples for me. Careful choices in relative speed and acceleration of visual changes can greatly affect the sense of ‘smoothness’ a game has. Two of the best examples I can think of are Panzer Dragoon Zwei (and Omega Boost inherits this) and Mario Sunshine, for example they have a more subtle camera system that moderates sudden movement and linear acceleration. Halo is also just the right ‘pace’ so that it still looks sweet.

Who knows, the temporal blur in PGR3 may end up being so good even I wont mind if it ships at 30-fps. shrug It’s not the end of the world, but again it’s just about priorities, and I still want it to become more of a priority next-gen than it has been, especially for XBOX, this gen.