If it’s an action game I want the shortest possible time between action/reaction because it’s intrinsically frustrating when they get out of sync.
I could go for an adventure game that plays with a 24hz presentation for sure.
1 Like
same! btw i didn’t mean for the post to be a retort, i just thought it was a good opportunity to dig into the details of why certain executions might not work, as i’m used to seeing blanket statements on the subject without much interest in hair splitting
1 Like
Additional trigger pull + face button to trigger a fully depressed action on Xbox and it’s preserved on PS3
1 Like
no worries at all. I’m glad to split the hairs with someone, especially about framerate presentation!
The mechanical & narrative experiences are much the same, which is one of the reasons the game interests me. I’m about (I guess) 2/3rds through TLOU2, so it remains to be seen whether the same holds true for the sequel. (No spoilers for TLOU2 in responses or I will shiv you—and the shiv’s craftsmanship will be shoddy and slapdash, which you will notice.)
2 Likes
what’s going on is that since the graphical fidelity stayed the same but the motion resolution increased, you’re getting a kind of motion uncanny valley since things look closer to what your brain thinks is right but everyone looks like cartoons
30 fps probably looks better in a bunch of games because of a combination of the increase of allowed fidelity and you being used to the heightened look of film, which you can fake pretty well with the wheelhouse of effects we have (not chromatic aberration, you can get out)
steadiness is more important that big numbers, 30fps is fine but i prefer 60 in almost every case, frame rate should be something that can be toyed with creatively obviously, playing on old frame rates should absolutely be an option in remasters and shit, i also played through all of tlou1 this weekend, i thought the 60fps was sick, also i still think that game is pretty good for what it is, definitely play it on survivor difficulty it’s way way better with more limited resources and without batman vision, the ending is way more miserable than i even remembered, that said i think the game is just ok at being Art but it’s very good at being a big bag of spatial awareness real-time-final-fantasy-tactics puzzlebox encounter design,
6 Likes
It’s too long but that’s Naughty Dog for you.
3 Likes
I love low framerates. did you know all the psx final fantasy battle scenes run at 15 fps?
I don’t think they’d gain much from a higher framerate! it’s actually kind of cool in terms of the way it stylizes the animations!
high framerates are good too! it just depends! I’m p much with @meauxdal where I feel like it tends to work against games trying to be cinematic.
there are other aesthetic concerns of course but both the hd remaster and subsequent remake of shadow of the colossus just don’t “feel” right with higher framerates! the original has this blasted out barely holding on kind of quality to it that imo made it all the more thrilling.
6 Likes
and the menus run at 60fps
They take advantage of that framerate in some of the animations, like some of the jump-attacks and a lot of the summons. The way that large monsters tend to quiver and tremble is absolutely relying on non-smoothed position snapping. Still, it’s leagues away from the incredibly-intentional held keyframes of 3D like Guilty Gear Xrd.
As long as we’re separating the key player response from an element of the visual presentation, I can get behind it. You could apply the FFVII trick to an RTS or a point-and-click adventure game or any indirect cursor-based control system and play with the temporal blur.
6 Likes
there are cases where it’s appropriate with direct gameplay as well, I don’t know. I think horror games benefit from it, and any game that doesn’t rely on twitch inputs. I think it’s valid as a creative tool that I think many types of games can use!
I’m just saying I find the focus and emphasis on framerates kinda distressing. excluding competitive gaming where it obviously matters very much, I honestly think it only really matters in a handful of edge cases and only in certain genres. I understand and respect preferring it aesthetically, but there’s this tendency to insist that it’s always objectively better to have high framerates and I’m sorry but I’m just not convinced
4 Likes
apology accepted
4 Likes
It’s not aesthetic at all for me, it’s the responsiveness of inputs. If I’m playing Myst or Pajama Sam it may as well be 1 FPS. But if I control a camera or character 1:1 in space I want it to translate my inputs to the screen as fast as possible so my eyes can translate the inputs to my brain and back again.
Set your monitor’s refresh rate to 30hz and drag a window around. It feels bad immediately to me.
3 Likes
Proprioception is too delicate across a controller already, and too beautiful to risk
imo this is still an aesthetic preference
Would e.g. pressing a key switch, changing gears in a car, etc as well?
Screening a film out of focus or misprinting a book is not an accurate presentation because the machine isn’t functioning correctly. I don’t think greater visual fidelity is an ordinate value but eliminating unauthored flaws in the presentation - the game engine running the simulation - is always welcome. I’ll always take lower visual fidelity for more consistency and responsiveness.
3 Likes
i’m probably going to have to step back from this discussion because much as i’d like to treat it as a nuanced, multifaceted topic with no right answers, i really cannot think of a single realtime game whose feeling hasn’t been directly improved or at least made more coherent* at higher rates. it’s such a vivid, immediate difference to me; i feel more alive and alert and clear-minded while playing and i’d take that any day over the latest ambient occlusion or fern rendering tech.
*this includes making it more obvious when the feeling is off as well, so while this may be a stretch i think i partly blame targeting lower framerates for why “cinematic” action adventure games have such loose, spongy and incongruous avatar control; you don’t let that shit slide if you’re fully conscious of how your inputs affect what’s onscreen. this is arguably also a problem of selling games on trailers/screenshots and not demos, though
3 Likes
yeah no i don’t buy the “it’s fine as long as you’re not in direct control” - it’s a tool. it does things! it can make you feel disembodied or out of control or seeing a vision or in a waking dream. 15 FPS games can control just fine thank you very much. wave race 64 and king’s field 3j are not improved at 60 FPS - they are actually entirely demolished
the only argument i take from this is “low framerates are a tool, but a bad tool. the use of them is beyond the pale and obviously suboptimal, so no one should ever intentionally use lower framerates” and i weep
if selectbutton of all places is axiomatic about high framerates=good, there’s probably no hope for me finding anyone else who even agrees with me huh.
well, thank you toups <3
5 Likes
I’m with you meauxdal I can’t even see 69fps!
1 Like
if i come off as indignant in my stances i just want to make clear that that’s squarely aimed at the AAA end of development; technically gargantuan projects that are already engineered to extract as much performance from their target platform as they can get away with, before artistic preferences even come into it.
if we’re talking about freedom to get experimental with the medium’s foundations, i’m all for that kind of stuff. i just don’t have many points of reference in this case