I don't see how that's a relevant response to his comment.
-
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.
DF: Can Halo 5 deliver on its 60fps promise?
- Thread starter Theorry
- Start date
I don't see how that's a relevant response to his comment.
RowdyReverb
Member
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't framerate dips and resolution some of the last things worked on during a game's development?
The look of the game and its effects are probably close to final, but judging the performance and resolution of the final game based on pre-release code stinks of concern mongering.
The look of the game and its effects are probably close to final, but judging the performance and resolution of the final game based on pre-release code stinks of concern mongering.
it feels incredibly better but if the cost of IQ is too big i rather have a locked 30 with better visuals, a line has to be drawn when IQ sacrifices are being made, of course you want the game to run at 60 but you also want the game to look great and on consoles is sometimes difficult to achieve both things, no point on having a 60 fps game when you're aiming down the scope of a sniper and all you see is a jaggfest due the low resolution
Call of Duty.
I'll be honest I've gamed over 30 years And owned nearly every console during that time. I learned what framerate meant like 2 years ago. So I agree I don't think most console gamers care.
rokkerkory
Member
Yeah stinkles said so too. Just a few more months til launch tho
Unknown One
Member
Call of Duty sold because it's the most dumbed down first person shooter that anybody could play.
Jesus that's one sentence
Believe it or not plenty knew Cod ran Smooth. You'd be surprised The average console gamer didn't know why. I had to explain to alot of my friends why BF4 Felt so much better on PS4.
BuggeryBugz
Member
Me too.
Anyway, I don't mind so much if the campaign is close enough to 60fps but multiplayer has to be pretty much locked.
And I'm not sure about the dynamic resolution. I think I'd prefer a locked 900p.
Maybe you two might want to avoid tech threads in future where the topic is to with things like resolution.
OT - Sounds like they are quite GPU limited. 832x810 was around the res I was running on an hd4000 iirc in order to get 30fps on dark souls.
Lool
Stone Ocean
Member
Cross gen game running at 30fps
Might as well trash the X1 if it can't even run that
It's just the reverse claim. And in his case, consumers do gravitate more towards immersive graphics, improved physics, AI, NPC counts etc at the expense of framerate in closed systems - it's as it were, a known quantity in the console space. I don't even think that's debatable.
SolarMystic
Member
All it does is fan the internet flames.
How about we put down the torchs and pitchforks until the actual game is finished?
Insane Metal
Member
Ouch. Almost 720p resolution there and the performance is not that good. It's a good thing the game still has a few months of polishing.
It doesn't invalidate the claim that 60fps feels better than 30, however.
It's relevant to the Discussion Of Compromises To hit 60fps. When it's simple not a huge factor in the console world. People on this forum will say this game feels amazing. While millions of other will say damn this looks close to a 360 game.
Yeah, no, this is total BS. Please remind me the last time a game got a significant upgrade in Res/FPS/graphics just a few months before release. At this point the assets are essentially finalized and the team is busy taking care of bugs, optimization is a BS term and usually means cutting something to up the performance.
Correct. The question was never about one being better, ">" than the other. The question is how much you can quantify 60fps in the equation of fun.
I don't think that's quite fair. What's wrong with looking at games in development?
The thing is, games are shipping with pretty serious problems these days more often than not. Highlighting the state of a game prior to release puts it in the spotlight and gets people talking. If the developer can turn around and solve these issues before release they'll look like heroes. Either way, it gives a snapshot of how the game is coming along.
We looked at MGSV well before its release and it was already delivering a stable 60fps. Knowing this ahead of time puts a lot of people at ease, I think, since it basically demonstrates that the game is in good shape even prior to release.
It's not just about "the clicks". At least from my perspective. This is NOT passing final judgement. Would you just prefer glowing previews that ignore all in-development flaws then?
Also, hitting 60fps is hard. Sacrifices have to be made. People complaining about games not being 60fps need to think about this when a game attempts it.
One day I should complete my thesis on the average post and console ownership history in negative Gaf threads. This should be cross referenced with a graph showing the (apparent) relative importance of feature, tech or personnel being discussed and divided by the difference in conversation momentum versus "positive" threads.
There's nothing wrong with DF stories as long as they caveat them and don't make assumptions about the final product. I would say the real issue is what folks with zero legitimate interest in the game then do with the information or more accurately, ammunition they glean.
There's nothing wrong with DF stories as long as they caveat them and don't make assumptions about the final product. I would say the real issue is what folks with zero legitimate interest in the game then do with the information or more accurately, ammunition they glean.
They said they couldn't do split screen whilst still maintaining 60fps which is what the game is built around, enemy animations, whatever. What more of an excuse do you want? They said they couldn't do it, that the split screen players weren't 'trivial' and that it's not a decision they took lightly or are happy with.
Cutting femshep out because only 18% used her is different than cutting a legacy/technical feature because you're not able to have it work satisfactorily in your game. Split screen is going away, why? Because more and more, the majority are playing alone over Xbox Live as opposed to with people sitting next to them split screening on television.
So again, they said they couldn't get it to work, so they had to cut it before final production.
Maybe, but not relevant to that string of conversation, not really. GwantyDog took issue with Seanspeed saying that 60fps makes a game more satisfying to play. All this talk about compromises and the decision between a 30fps/60fps game don't really directly apply to that particular thread.
I don't think Seanspeed was making any particular arguments about the trade-offs or decisions behind 60/30fps games.
3rdamention
Member
Huh? I dont get it. Every thread on NeoGAF has negativity, positivity, fan"atics", resolution matters, framerate matters, etc, etc, etc. If you are saying that some people switch what matters to them the most, depending on how positive and negative a thread is, then that is probably right. Its called console wars.
Count the low-res alpha pixels.
I'm running out of fingers to count, QUICK, SOME ONE GIVE ME FINGERS!
Don't forget to include number of positive/negative posts pre/post release, as well as time spent playing/#of posts!
wumster3000
Member
It looked fine to me when it was shown. The resolution is weird though. I'll still get it, but the final tech analysis is going to be interesting. Should have just stuck with 900p throughout.
rokkerkory
Member
Don't let them get to ya! People just love to jump on things even when unfinished. Game will be judged when its released.
Just give us a great Halo 5 which I know you will.
)
panda-zebra
Banned
Was that supposed to come out quite so defensive, or are you actually suggesting what it looks liek you're suggesting?
EDIT:
Oh, seems so.
so you do get it then.
I agree that 60fps feels better But it can be a risky trade-off. Halo has been played happily at 30fps for years. A lot of people are gonna be expecting a huge graphical leap, which is not possible with the move to 60fps.
Don't let them get to ya! People just love to jump on things even when unfinished. Game will be judged when its released.
Just give us a great Halo 5 which I know you will.
I'm actually not talking about Halo at all - it's a nonpartisan phenomenon, or rather an equal opportunity one, and I am serious about the math.
I have no idea why you took issue with my comment unless you disagreed with it.
Anyways, a game that feels better to play is more fun/satisfying. 60fps enhances the existing gameplay. Dramatically in many cases.
Obviously we're not talking about quantifiable levels of 'fun' here, so I don't know what point you're trying to make. Like seriously, I don't get it. You said 'oh god' to my comment like it was ridiculous but thus far you're not necessarily saying you disagree with anything.
I guess he means that increasingly, negativity triumphs any positivity and we're all noticing it. Is it natural? Maybe. But you can have the world's best game made, but if so and so feature is cut or such and such issue arises, you're going to see that completely overwhelm the original topic or game. You've probably noticed it yourself. Additionally, you also notice how many people upset by this, are largely absent from discussion when it's positive or are even around when the game launches or are part of the game community here. It's not necessarily a requirement, but interesting how someone you've never once seen post in a community thread, or announce thread about how they're excited or are buying the game but are front and center in a negative thread about how they're no longer buying the game, how it's outrageous etc.
At least that's what I think. You can also take notice of certain users XBL gamertag, PSN ID, Nintendo ID and see sometimes how they're arguing against a certain game or system and yet they don't own it, have no intention of buying it, or buying the game and yet will concern troll about how devastated or disappointed they are. Just my thoughts though.
CouchMaster
Member
I'm not going to respond to Uncharted comment, but mainline Halo games (except for 3) have always set the benchmark for visuals on the respective platform. Bad graphics is not even close to how you'd describe it.
You sure he didn't make an argument? The simple fact of suggesting the game will be better off with a certain direction versus a potential trade-off alternative = the argument.
Anyway, satisfying is a very loose word. Fun - now everyone knows fun.
Uh huh.
Seriously. Someone even hauled out Uncharted hate in here for lord knows what reason.
Read again, I didn't say he didn't make an argument. I said he didn't make an argument about a few particular things that he was being responded to with (e.g. the trade-offs associated with 60fps console games).
SaganIsGOAT
Junior Member
Can we include important posts about why they are aiming for 60fps with Halo 5? Like for example, the engine was built upon it this time from the ground up. No, they aren't and can't just "lock it at 30fps gimme 1080p." Control inputs, physics etc are now calculated faster and more precisely to improve gameplay. That 60fps core means less melee kill trades in MP, it means better control input which is ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF A VIDEO GAME. Seriously, they're not just willy nilly aiming for 60fps here. It's not to chase the cod cash, it's to improve Halo at its core going forward. I for one am glad because a good feeling fps will stick around much longer than one that relies simply on looks. But hey, I also think Halo 5 looks pretty damn good.
So your original response boils down to semantic argument. sigh
Your preview of Halo 5 also calls into question the comment made about the game being unable to support splitscreen.
Gravemind IV
Member
So, this the new trend? It seems like every other day that I check GAF there's some negatively formulated thread on Halo 5.
Regardless, we'll see what they can manage. I am currently running all campaigns on legendary solo at the moment, and I completed H2A today. I must say, I love the way that game looks, the definitive Halo look in my opinion. If Halo 5 uses a relatively similar solution as H2A, I will be more than fine with it.
I do have to agree with this one though. With it being pre-release footage and such, it's safe to say that things will get better, but hell.. I have been burned on that notion one too many times to take it as absolute fact. Still, I think nobody would have been concerned (as they are now) if the demo had been grand in scale, as it would have conferred the idea or promise of Halo 5 being the largest Halo yet. With the E3 demo being the scripted linear segment that it was, well.. that's going to give some more reason for people to be alarmed.
Regardless, we'll see what they can manage. I am currently running all campaigns on legendary solo at the moment, and I completed H2A today. I must say, I love the way that game looks, the definitive Halo look in my opinion. If Halo 5 uses a relatively similar solution as H2A, I will be more than fine with it.
I do have to agree with this one though. With it being pre-release footage and such, it's safe to say that things will get better, but hell.. I have been burned on that notion one too many times to take it as absolute fact. Still, I think nobody would have been concerned (as they are now) if the demo had been grand in scale, as it would have conferred the idea or promise of Halo 5 being the largest Halo yet. With the E3 demo being the scripted linear segment that it was, well.. that's going to give some more reason for people to be alarmed.
Primethius
Banned
Well, let's be real for a second. To be part of a "positive" discussion about Halo, you'd have to go into HaloGAF, which is in community right now. There's a lot of reasons why people might not want to do that. I can only speak for myself. I don't care for the current state of HaloGAF. I rarely visit community threads anyways. Thus, I'll be in gaming threads, positive or negative.
There can be plenty of positivity towards Halo. IIRC, the beta convinced quite a few people that the MP was going to be great this time around and got quite a few people on board after Halo 4. However, 343 hasn't really shown why people should be excited for the SP outside of PR talk. On top of that, all the news regarding campaign is about cut-features without anything to show for it aside from "60 FPS is really important."
Is it really a surprise that it's met with negativity?
Hell, I'd be okay with some of the features being cut like split-screen if the E3 demo showed the scale and sandbox fit for a Halo title.
But what did we get? A scripted set-piece at 60 FPS with frame-rate dips.
Wow. Fantastic, simply amazing. Yea, no, that doesn't inspire any sort of confidence whatsoever. There would be more positivity if they showed worthwhile SP stuff, but they haven't.
And I'm not in the business of blindly believing what 343 says after Halo 4 either, which was awful.
60fps vs. 30fps have no place in my equation of what makes a game fun. It's a variable that people know exist but can hardly ever quantify - it's as it were, undefinable. I mean I can ask right now and there's not a single person that could quantify how 60fps makes a game more fun vs a 30fps game - other than claiming that it should because x reason. An all else equal proposition in a world of trade-offs.