157 réponses à ce sujet

[Commandr_Shepard]

Discuss. But know this. If console versions run at 30fps again, the PC race will end up with the same enhanced higher polygon graphics, only at 60fps.

[RZIBARA]

Discuss. But know this. If console versions run at 30fps again, the PC race will end up with the same enhanced higher polygon graphics, only at 60fps.

 

Yes run it at 30fps LOCKED. 

 

As much as I love 60fps, for a game like Mass Effect, which has a lot more dialogue and cinematics than just gameplay, I would like the game to look as good as possible.  If it is 30 fps locked like ME3, then the game will run perfectly fine.

 

And as for your comment, the PC version will most likely look better regardless of the framerate, unless it is a terrible port.

[o Ventus]

Uhh, no? If the technology is available to run it at a higher framerate, it should be done. This isn't even a point of opinion, higher framerate is better than lower.

[Gothfather]

Uhh, no? If the technology is available to run it at a higher framerate, it should be done. This isn't even a point of opinion, higher framerate is better than lower.

 

Yes and no.

 

There is no visual or interactive difference between 59 fps and 30 fps. This is because monitors and computers work in multiple of 30 fps. So yes there is a huge difference between 30 fps and 60 fps, but no difference between 30 fps and 50 fps. The ONLY advantage of having higher fps within the range of 30-59 is that dips in frame rate. So if you are running at 40 fps that is the exact same as 30fps in terms of performance/responsiveness but if you dip 7 fps in an area a player running at 35 fps will start to have issues as the frame rate drops bellow 30. Also if you are running at 60-61 fps but experience multiple frame rate drops while playing you are better off running locked at 59 fps as this way you are not constantly fining the game's responsiveness change up and down on you as you play. So again it isn't as simple as saying 'higher frame rate is better than lower period,' it is a little more complex than that.

 

If the console hardware can't run at 65-70+ fps consistently and runs only around 60-61 fps with frame rate dips but can be locked at "30" fps with little to no dip in frame rates then that is the better choice. The worse place to be is on the cusp of 30 or 60 as this will cause you to feel changes in responsiveness to the game which will feel like the game is "lagging." This is why you will see pc gamers with powerful videos cards lower their settings to get out of that cusp even though benchmarks say it is running at 62 fps with higher graphics. So they are running at lower graphics than other players with inferior cards because they don't want to ride that cusp.

 

 

So it isn't quite as simple as more FPS is always better.

[Akrabra]

Pretty much what o Ventus said. Though it will probably run at 30 fps. 

[Excella Gionne]

If it runs as good as DA:I, then I will be fine with 1080p at 30fps. I don't want fps jumping all over the place.

[AlanC9]

Maybe it's just me, but I can't really tell the difference between 40 FPS and 60 FPS, and I'd not sure I'd notice if the game dipped to 30.

[Just My Moniker]

Everybody be bitchin' over 30 fps and 60 fps and I'm just sitting here not being able to tell the difference between the two

 

MFW I even watched a video detailing the differences:

 

 

 

30 fps and 60 fps look the exact same to me

[Just My Moniker]

Maybe it's just me, but I can't really tell the difference between 40 FPS and 60 FPS, and I'd not sure I'd notice if the game dipped to 30.

You really gotta 'ninja' me like dat? 

[o Ventus]

Maybe it's just me, but I can't really tell the difference between 40 FPS and 60 FPS, and I'd not sure I'd notice if the game dipped to 30.

 

If you have a PlayStation 4 and Killzone: Shadow Fall, that would be a solid example of the difference between 30 and 60. The campaign for that game is locked to 30, while the multiplayer runs at 60 but is uncapped (so it is prone to dip lower when there is more to render). The difference is very, very noticeable. 

 

 

Watch the video on YouTube itself, embedded videos won't go to 60 fps for some reason.

 

30 fps on the left, 60 on the right. The animation quality is noticeably smoother on the right-hand side compared to the left. This thread is specifically referring to the console versions of MEA, so I'll make a few extra points relevant to that. Not only is animation smoother with a higher framerate, but games actually play better with higher framerates too, particularly if the game in question is played on a TV as opposed to a computer monitor. TVs tend to have lower refresh rates than monitors (because they're mostly used for watching movies and shows, which are non-interactive and thus don't really necessitate having a high refresh rate because faster visual processors are more expensive), which can cause input lag (which is when you input a command on a controller or some other device, and there is a delay between the button being pressed and the command being carried out). LCD TVs in particular are bad with this because they tend to use some kind of post-processing when rendering, which adds more milliseconds. Of course, input lag in games is inevitable and always present, but if a game is optimized properly and coded with any sense of competence, then it will be negligible to the point of being unnoticeable. In theory, at the absolute minimum, a game running at 60 frames per second would have an input lag of 17 milliseconds. At 30, it more than doubles to 36 milliseconds. Of course, those are absolute minimum figures and are almost certainly going to be higher when taking things like refresh rate of the display, quality of the control hardware (i.e. a fresh new controller vs. an old beaten-up one), and how well the game was optimized into account. 

 

TL;DR -- higher framerate is smoother and cleaner to the eye when things are moving on the screen, and it's actually a better playing experience with a higher framerate due to less input lag caused by modern TVs.

[Excella Gionne]

If you've played Dynasty Warriors on PS4, you'll see just how irritating it is when a game that is said to be in 60fps dips down to 30fps almost every time, and it is very noticeable when the game dips. Play split-screen and it starts dipping down to the 20s. Uggh. 

[o Ventus]

If you've played Dynasty Warriors on PS4, you'll see just how irritating it is when a game that is said to be in 60fps dips down to 30fps almost every time, and it is very noticeable when the game dips. Play split-screen and it starts dipping down to the 20s. Uggh. 

 

That's what happens when the game is uncapped and has to render a bunch of different effects at the same time. Splitscreen only makes it worse because the console is effectively rendering the game twice in synch (which, incidentally, is why less and less games actually offer splitscreen as an option).

[Excella Gionne]

That's what happens when the game is uncapped and has to render a bunch of different effects at the same time. Splitscreen only makes it worse because the console is effectively rendering the game twice in synch (which, incidentally, is why less and less games actually offer splitscreen as an option).

I'm well-aware of it, but it should have been kept at 30fps capped in the first place. If it's advertised at 60fps, then it better stay at 60fps for the majority. I'm just glad the game didn't have Frame Skip on OFF. 

[o Ventus]

Yes and no.

 

There is no visual or interactive difference between 59 fps and 30 fps. This is because monitors and computers work in multiple of 30 fps. So yes there is a huge difference between 30 fps and 60 fps, but no difference between 30 fps and 50 fps. The ONLY advantage of having higher fps within the range of 30-59 is that dips in frame rate. So if you are running at 40 fps that is the exact same as 30fps in terms of performance/responsiveness but if you dip 7 fps in an area a player running at 35 fps will start to have issues as the frame rate drops bellow 30. Also if you are running at 60-61 fps but experience multiple frame rate drops while playing you are better off running locked at 59 fps as this way you are not constantly fining the game's responsiveness change up and down on you as you play. So again it isn't as simple as saying 'higher frame rate is better than lower period,' it is a little more complex than that.

 

If the console hardware can't run at 65-70+ fps consistently and runs only around 60-61 fps with frame rate dips but can be locked at "30" fps with little to no dip in frame rates then that is the better choice. The worse place to be is on the cusp of 30 or 60 as this will cause you to feel changes in responsiveness to the game which will feel like the game is "lagging." This is why you will see pc gamers with powerful videos cards lower their settings to get out of that cusp even though benchmarks say it is running at 62 fps with higher graphics. So they are running at lower graphics than other players with inferior cards because they don't want to ride that cusp.

 

 

So it isn't quite as simple as more FPS is always better.

 

We're not talking about monitors and computer gaming, we're talking about the console version of ME:A, which 99% of the time will be played on a TV, which renders different than a computer monitor.

[rossler]

Maybe it's just me, but I can't really tell the difference between 40 FPS and 60 FPS, and I'd not sure I'd notice if the game dipped to 30.

 

There's a clear difference to me.

 

Couldn't find any 40 FPS videos.

[AutumnRose]

The enemies are harder at higher FPS. You sure you SPs can handle that?

[Jehuty]

If you've played Dynasty Warriors on PS4, you'll see just how irritating it is when a game that is said to be in 60fps dips down to 30fps almost every time, and it is very noticeable when the game dips. Play split-screen and it starts dipping down to the 20s. Uggh. 

Zone of the Enders HD collection had this problem as well. It was beyond horrific. Especially that battle....

 

That's what happens when the game is uncapped and has to render a bunch of different effects at the same time. Splitscreen only makes it worse because the console is effectively rendering the game twice in synch (which, incidentally, is why less and less games actually offer splitscreen as an option).

Halo 5 ditched it's split-screen in favor of 60 FPS. Even then you can see the sacrifices made if you pay attention. I think Reach came out with an update that reduced graphics quality during split-screen in favor of performance as well. Battlefront (So I hear) has split-screen but reduces the game to 30 FPS. 

 

 

 

As for topic, it depends. I think they should focus on storytelling and content, along with several other things before focusing on 60 FPS. If it has to be 30 then so be it. 

[DaemionMoadrin]

It's sad that 30fps is even considered an option in 2016. The technology for more has existed for ages, it's just that developers have to limit themselves because of the consoles.

 

While PCs on the other hand could raise the standard to 120fps if they had the push they had in the pre-console time.

[Jehuty]

It's sad that 30fps is even considered an option in 2016. The technology for more has existed for ages, it's just that developers have to limit themselves because of the consoles.

 

While PCs on the other hand could raise the standard to 120fps if they had the push they had in the pre-console time.

Xbox one for example is underpowered. Granted it can run games at 60 FPS but not without cost. PCs on the flip-side while more powerful, are more expensive and require constant upgrading and such. If it wasn't for Halo I would have moved to PC already, something I plan to do within a year then move to Planetside 2.

[Gileadan]

The enemies are harder at higher FPS. You sure you SPs can handle that?

That is a peculiarity of the Unreal3-engine. Frostbite doesn't have that problem.

[Spectr61]

Yes and no.
 
There is no visual or interactive difference between 59 fps and 30 fps. This is because monitors and computers work in multiple of 30 fps. So yes there is a huge difference between 30 fps and 60 fps, but no difference between 30 fps and 50 fps. The ONLY advantage of having higher fps within the range of 30-59 is that dips in frame rate. So if you are running at 40 fps that is the exact same as 30fps in terms of performance/responsiveness but if you dip 7 fps in an area a player running at 35 fps will start to have issues as the frame rate drops bellow 30. Also if you are running at 60-61 fps but experience multiple frame rate drops while playing you are better off running locked at 59 fps as this way you are not constantly fining the game's responsiveness change up and down on you as you play. So again it isn't as simple as saying 'higher frame rate is better than lower period,' it is a little more complex than that.
 
If the console hardware can't run at 65-70+ fps consistently and runs only around 60-61 fps with frame rate dips but can be locked at "30" fps with little to no dip in frame rates then that is the better choice. The worse place to be is on the cusp of 30 or 60 as this will cause you to feel changes in responsiveness to the game which will feel like the game is "lagging." This is why you will see pc gamers with powerful videos cards lower their settings to get out of that cusp even though benchmarks say it is running at 62 fps with higher graphics. So they are running at lower graphics than other players with inferior cards because they don't want to ride that cusp.
 
 
So it isn't quite as simple as more FPS is always better.

This.

In fact, in ME3MP, (PC), would cap frame rate at 60.

The reason was because at 100 or so it was a totally different game, difficulty-wise.

[DaemionMoadrin]

This.

In fact, in ME3MP, (PC), would cap frame rate at 60.

The reason was because at 100 or so it was a totally different game, difficulty-wise.

 

Why are you using past tense? ^^

 

And yes, enemy difficult scales directly with fps. They have a number of frames for each action, meaning the higher your fps, the faster enemies act. That means they can see you, take aim and shoot you in the time you walk around a corner if you play at 120fps. Even better: If you are the host and your connection is a bit slow, you can entertain three random strangers with the most difficult ME3MP ever.

[Gileadan]

Or you could force your FPS down to 15 and run circles around enemies unharmed...

[DaemionMoadrin]

Or you could force your FPS down to 15 and run circles around enemies unharmed...

 

You could indeed. But playing like that isn't any fun. ^^

[Gileadan]

You could indeed. But playing like that isn't any fun. ^^

Playing like that is a pain in the derriere. But I liked messing with the engine. It also cheats by treating AI projectiles that should go in a straight line as homing missiles... geth prime plasma bolts for example.