MeBecomingI
Member
I'm alright with this. I think an option to maybe lock it or unlock it would be great, but I'll take it.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Killlzone Shadow Fall's SP runs at unlocked frame rate
- Thread starter SniperHunter
- Start date
Dark, don't you think most people have a level of tolerance above 30 fps? Inconsistent at 20-30 is very jarring (separate from frame judder), and consistently slow at 20 fps, like most N64 games, is very distracting. I think that, for the vast majority, inconsistent but faster than 30 actually yields the impression that the game is much smoother than it is running. This is why you are seeing such positive feedback about God of War 3, no?
I don't have issues with framerate typically. I'm much, much more affected by blur resulting from subnative resolutions.
I don't have issues with framerate typically. I'm much, much more affected by blur resulting from subnative resolutions.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
Well hey, think what you want. But I'd rather have times where the game is ultra smooth instead of just constantly slow. To each his own.
And no it isn't, with a variable framerate, you will have moments of butter smoothness, and other's not so much. At a locked 30, you will have consistently "not so much". How is higher framerate at times less smooth than just lower framerate? What your saying makes no sense. Is it less consistent? Absolutely. But don't confuse smoothness and consistency. A car driving 30-60 miles per hour at any given point will get to the destination quicker than a car doing a constant 30.
velociraptor
Junior Member
GOW3's framerate is brilliant IMO. I experienced zero judder, and the game felt smooth as butter.
The new footage *IS* the proof. There's nothing else to explain.
You really clearly do not understand how this works, I see.
With something like G-Sync, yes, 35-45 fps would be SMOOTHER than 30 fps. With standard displays, however, this is not the case. It may be faster but it is not SMOOTHER or more fluid. Now we're just arguing semantics, however.
What you're saying is that you don't see or mind judder and prefer a faster framerate.
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
It would be nice if console games utilized dynamic resolutions in singleplayer to keep the framerate consistent. Take Killzone: Mercenary for example. In most situations, and online the game runs at full qHD on the Vita (960x544) but during intense sequences in singleplayer it will cut the resolution in half to keep the framerate steady. And only when you are in motion. If your character is not moving the resolution will always be full qHD.
I wouldn't care if KZ:SF did this in singleplayer, drop the resolution to like 900p during intense sequences to keep the framerate a constant 60 (or even 45).
I wouldn't care if KZ:SF did this in singleplayer, drop the resolution to like 900p during intense sequences to keep the framerate a constant 60 (or even 45).
ChronotriggerJM
Member
Exactly this.
Yeah, I think it's just a mix of inability to see what we're talking about and pure ignorance on how displays work. I mean, logically, it would seem like more frames per second WOULD be smoother but, due to the nature of displays, that's not the case.
Apocryphon
Member
It has to be as a result of logical conclusion.
1) The most recent footage, as we've seen, does not feature tearing
2) If the framerate is unlocked and v-sync were disengaged we would be seeing tearing almost 100% of the time (basically any time it couldn't hold 60 fps). So all footage would be full of non-stop tearing.
3) Double buffering would result in 30 fps if it could not sustain 60 fps, so we know it's not using that
Triple buffering is literally THE only way to achieve framerates between 30 and 60 fps without constant screen tearing so they HAVE to be using it. There simply is no other option.
Apocryphon
Member
We'll that clears that up. Thank you.
But most people are reacting to the response time of the controls when they talk about smoothness, IMO, not necessarily how long particular frames are on screen. Which is why I think most people can't detect it.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
Well even if we were just talking about the visual display rate, it is in fact smoother. No matter how many ways you cut the pie, more frames in a second will be smoother. Again I stress that it won't be as consistent, but it will in fact be smoother. I don't know if anyone in their sound mind would argue that GOW3 felt less smooth than Uncharted 2 for example. At times, GOW3 felt ridiculously smooth, and that never hit 60FPS as far as I know.
I think we're going to have to agree that our definition of "smooth" must be different. Judder != smooth. It's faster, not smoother.
God of War 3 did actually hit 60 fps in quite a few areas, I should note, and generally ran closer to 60 fps than 30. Killzone seems to average lower than God of War by quite a bit from what we're hearing.
I thought the average framerate of God of War 3 was in the low 40s...are you sure it was "closer to 60"?
It really varies per area, to be honest. There were a number of areas where it averages closer to 60 and some others than fall more into the lower 40s. Ascension was quite a bit lower as well. Still, with the on-rails camera it never felt as jarring as it does in a game with a freely controllable camera.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
Of course there's judder, but as I mentioned earlier, staying at a locked 30 will just produce all that much more natural motion blur. You have less frames being displayed every second. If you are at anything higher framewise, you will naturally cut down on that blur. 30 Frames per second will never be "smoother" than 45 frames person second. When you are locked at 30, you are locked at a blurrier image.
Just admit that you really know nothing about this topic and move on.
What you're saying would actually be true on a G-Sync enabled monitor, however.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
No, I just think you and I are on paths to different countries...
As you mentioned with the numbers earlier, a locked 30 would be 1 1, 2 2, 3 3, etc etc etc. Or 30 frames in one second. I'm arguing that anything above that number would still be more frames in a second, regardless of the consistency. 30 frames in a second is clearly more stable, I'm not arguing that, but it's less frames being displayed in that second. That's all there is to it. If you can eliminate tearing, you'll get a smoother image.
G-sync eliminates the need for triple buffering and v-sync no?
I think we're arguing over the word "smoother", quite frankly.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
Most definitely lol.
Could be terrible, could be great.
With GG on super-honest mode, I'm actually optimistic. Have a feeling it's gonna be hovering between 40-45 most of the time with drops to 30 at intense moments but which would be perfect.
I assume if they had a little more time they could have got it to 60fps in single player with no/little reduction in quality graphics.
Gonna be a good gen.
With GG on super-honest mode, I'm actually optimistic. Have a feeling it's gonna be hovering between 40-45 most of the time with drops to 30 at intense moments but which would be perfect.
I assume if they had a little more time they could have got it to 60fps in single player with no/little reduction in quality graphics.
Gonna be a good gen.
I don't think some of you realize how much this will fuck up your input. 60fps is superior because of the fact your inputs are registered quicker and are much more responsive. 30fps is fine and manageable but the higher, the better. But having it go back and forth constantly is going to interfere waaaaaaay too much and become really annoying. Thank goodness the MP is locked though, right?
It's not about level of tolerance - people are fine with TLOU as well and that's far from being a gold standard, in fact, it's pretty shit framerate wise and still people love it. So if we take the approach of "what are people thinking" this leads to nothing as always. If we try to be more factual and analytic we should think about what does an unlocked framerate bring to the table? What you get is a pretty minimal advantage for input lag in SOME SCENES and what you let go is a consistent experience THROUGHOUT the COMPLETE game. This trade off is flat out wrong and it's worriesome that a major developer like GG does not know it any better. But after their "hey below 60FPS is actually better than 60FPS" speech it really is not surprising. Sometimes one does not know - do they just fall over their own PR constrictions and therefore speak shit, is it the journalists who do not understand or are there just devs who don't no shit about their own tech and medium. I think, sadly, it's the latest point. And I thin there probably were people within GG who strongly hint the benefits of a locked 30FPS but for some bullet point or whatever they went for the inconsistent, shit experience. Just like ND did it with TLOU but in the other direction actually - that was even worse. And who cared, besides me and dark10x? Obviously no one, certainly not the reviewers...
Dual thumbstick control and auto aim mean that the few millisecond increment response time improvements as the framerate rises above 30, are NOT going to demonstrably hurt anyone's control.
This isn't a high sensitivity mouse where fluctuation in input lag, even for the better, will cause people to over/under shoot.
Metroid-Squadron
Banned
Not necessarily. When the framerate goes above 30 it will feel smoother, but when it goes back down you'll get the opposite effect. It'll feel less smooth than locked 30fps. And then there's the judder too.
Static images flashing on a screen don't produce motion blur, lol.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
How many frames are displayed in that second will absolutely create a natural motion blur. If your character moves 10 feet in one second hypothetically, If you display that in 30 frames versus 60 frames, you're just seeing more of the picture. Your mind doesn't need to fill in as many gaps.
People got really weirded out by the Hobbit movie because it was filmed at double the framerate, making it look too lifelike, all it did was cut down on the blur lol.
VFX_Veteran
Banned
I think a lot of the misunderstanding here is from semantics.
"smooth" should be how many frames in a given sec can be made. The higher the frames in a given second, the smoother the animation. That's just a fact. But keep in mind we are talking about a "constant" number. Not a fluctuation. For example, if I run a 10 min clip of gameplay and I can squeeze 30fps locked, and then compare it to the same 10min clip running 60fps locked, the latter scenario will appear smoother to the naked eye..
Here is a test: In DS on the PC, you could choose between 30fps and 60fps both locked with VSYNC enabled.
Can you tell which one is 30fps?
"smooth" should be how many frames in a given sec can be made. The higher the frames in a given second, the smoother the animation. That's just a fact. But keep in mind we are talking about a "constant" number. Not a fluctuation. For example, if I run a 10 min clip of gameplay and I can squeeze 30fps locked, and then compare it to the same 10min clip running 60fps locked, the latter scenario will appear smoother to the naked eye..
Here is a test: In DS on the PC, you could choose between 30fps and 60fps both locked with VSYNC enabled.
Can you tell which one is 30fps?
I think a lot of the misunderstanding here is from semantics.
"smooth" should be how many frames in a given sec can be made. The higher the frames in a given second, the smoother the animation. That's just a fact. But keep in mind we are talking about a "constant" number. Not a fluctuation. For example, if I run a 10 min clip of gameplay and I can squeeze 24fps locked, and then compare it to the same 10min clip running 60fps locked, the latter scenario will yield a smoother form of animation.
Here is a test: In DS on the PC, you could choose between 30fps and 60fps both locked with VSYNC enabled.
Can you tell which one is 30fps?
They are the same.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
I think a lot of the misunderstanding here is from semantics.
"smooth" should be how many frames in a given sec can be made. The higher the frames in a given second, the smoother the animation. That's just a fact. But keep in mind we are talking about a "constant" number. Not a fluctuation. For example, if I run a 10 min clip of gameplay and I can squeeze 24fps locked, and then compare it to the same 10min clip running 60fps locked, the latter scenario will yield a smoother form of animation.
Here is a test: In DS on the PC, you could choose between 30fps and 60fps both locked with VSYNC enabled.
Can you tell which one is 30fps?
Like night and day lol.
VFX_Veteran
Banned
No they aren't.
The left is 60fps the right is 30fps.. Keep staring at it and you'll notice it.
Grr.. I hate unlocked framerates. It's the fluctuation and constant up and downs that bug me. Knack is supposed to have it, too. The problem is that, when lots of stuff is happening and it drops to 30fps, it suddenly feels like the game is running slowly, even though it's still at a "playable" framerate.
I'd much prefer a locked and steady 30fps to a fluctuating 35-50fps.
Re: The GIF, I don't think it's displaying properly. It's coded at 50fps, not 60, and doesn't appear to be running at full speed even then. On my computer, without actually loading it into an editor, it really does look identical.
But it's moot anyway.. it's not the difference in framerate that should be being discussed, but rather the change in frame rate from one moment to the next. Your GIF (whatever it's framerate may be) is constant.
I'd much prefer a locked and steady 30fps to a fluctuating 35-50fps.
Re: The GIF, I don't think it's displaying properly. It's coded at 50fps, not 60, and doesn't appear to be running at full speed even then. On my computer, without actually loading it into an editor, it really does look identical.
But it's moot anyway.. it's not the difference in framerate that should be being discussed, but rather the change in frame rate from one moment to the next. Your GIF (whatever it's framerate may be) is constant.
fortunately, killzone vets are pretty well equipped to handle a little input lag.
IcyBlueStrawberry
Member
Using Firefox, they do actually look very close. The one on the right looks a little more choppy, but it's not a night and day difference.
When I open the gif in Chrome, though, it's really obvious.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
Also take a look at the parts that have to travel the most distance. The sword tip in general is very easy to differentiate.
GalacticaN7
Banned
Considering most games were between 20-30fps this last gen....I don't mind a variable framerate above 30 for my SP games. MP I would prefer 60 though.
Here is a test: In DS on the PC, you could choose between 30fps and 60fps both locked with VSYNC enabled.
Can you tell which one is 30fps?
I can't tell.
VFX_Veteran
Banned
Here is another test that you should definitely see at the end when they do a slow-motion to that video..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AURWBEeF72Q
Now imagine the game running at 60fps and then dropping to 24fps within a short time-frame.. You'll notice it -- this is called "judder".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AURWBEeF72Q
Now imagine the game running at 60fps and then dropping to 24fps within a short time-frame.. You'll notice it -- this is called "judder".
Mass Effect
Member
I see no issue with this as long as it stays above 30.
The right one obviously, but I don't think using a gif with such jarring animation (the character, not the gif itself) is the best way to test framerate.
Unless that's the point, to make it harder to tell.
I think a lot of the misunderstanding here is from semantics.
"smooth" should be how many frames in a given sec can be made. The higher the frames in a given second, the smoother the animation. That's just a fact. But keep in mind we are talking about a "constant" number. Not a fluctuation. For example, if I run a 10 min clip of gameplay and I can squeeze 30fps locked, and then compare it to the same 10min clip running 60fps locked, the latter scenario will appear smoother to the naked eye..
Here is a test: In DS on the PC, you could choose between 30fps and 60fps both locked with VSYNC enabled.
Can you tell which one is 30fps?
The right one obviously, but I don't think using a gif with such jarring animation (the character, not the gif itself) is the best way to test framerate.
Unless that's the point, to make it harder to tell.
th4tguy
Member
I think a lot of the misunderstanding here is from semantics.
"smooth" should be how many frames in a given sec can be made. The higher the frames in a given second, the smoother the animation. That's just a fact. But keep in mind we are talking about a "constant" number. Not a fluctuation. For example, if I run a 10 min clip of gameplay and I can squeeze 30fps locked, and then compare it to the same 10min clip running 60fps locked, the latter scenario will appear smoother to the naked eye..
Here is a test: In DS on the PC, you could choose between 30fps and 60fps both locked with VSYNC enabled.
Can you tell which one is 30fps?
One on right is 30fps, it's more jittery.
VFX_Veteran
Banned
It's not that hard to tell though. Even moreso in a FPS when your eyes have a point of reference (every object in the scene in front of the camera). It's just an example of what your eyes can pick up with regards to 'smooth' animation and 'jittery' animation -- and that includes the camera making sweeps across the screen (which KZ:SF will do almost 100% of the time).
Can you tell which one is 30fps?
Easily. 30 FPS on the right.
So that DS gif above is running at 50fps, right? (I thought there was a problem with 60fps gifs)
In that case, the frame-rate of the gif does not match up with the 60Hz refresh rate of my display, so there should be stuttering, right?
If so, I can't say that I can see any stuttering, though I know it should be there, given the way displays work. Perhaps it's because it's such a small image and the movement is so fast, but it's completely unnoticeable to me.
In that case, the frame-rate of the gif does not match up with the 60Hz refresh rate of my display, so there should be stuttering, right?
If so, I can't say that I can see any stuttering, though I know it should be there, given the way displays work. Perhaps it's because it's such a small image and the movement is so fast, but it's completely unnoticeable to me.