Err, not that I disagree with what you're saying, but WipeOut Fusion had terrible slowdowns.
As long as the input polling is done at a higher rate, I'll take locked 30 fps versus fluctuating framerate in any racer.
-
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.
Digital Foundry: Hands-On with Project Cars
- Thread starter Theorry
- Start date
As long as the input polling is done at a higher rate, I'll take locked 30 fps versus fluctuating framerate in any racer.
Ridge Racer 7 was 1080p@60fps at PS3 launch too, but still, we had 4 ridge racers at 30fps at the height of the games popularity and then 3@60 when the franchise was starting to die. If anything that shows that it really made no difference to the masses if it was 30fps before and 60fps later.
I don't think anyone started it. It didn't really escalate from a single game or epiphany. 30fps was always considered to be OK by the masses, in every console generation. People (including myself) played Mario kart 64 at 15fps for crying out loud. Project Gotham Racing (30fps), MSR (30fps), Ridge Racer 1-4 (30 fps), even the original Forza, a sim racer, was 30fps.
It's actually a lot easier for developers to not develop new visual effects and put old engines on faster hardware to reach ever higher framerates and we kind of had a period of that, but its importance is overstated. People seem to prefer more realism/better graphics.
Hope you don't get me wrong, I like higher framerates. To be a little more on topic, I'll definitely get the PS4 version of Project cars, for the better framerate and resolution. It's just not the end of the world that Forza Horizon 2 and Driveclub are 30fps. We've had plenty of 30fps games in the past.
Colin Mcrae Rally was also notoriously bad. Went from 50-something to 20fps. A lot of games on that list were like that. People don't know how good they have it this gen.
Edit: seems Lastword already listed the games that gained their popularity at 30fps
only if you never saw either of them on big screen... DC is a lot better looking game.
I am sure final code will be better too and perfectly playable.. this is completely different game than DC too, I cant wait for it to come out.
Sure, a few of those do have slowdown, but the majority are very consistent.
Wipeout Fusion is an odd one, though, as I don't think it runs poorly at all. It does have some slowdown but it's not that common (at least in the US version). The difference is that, when it does occur, the game doesn't skip frames so it actually results in the gameplay speed dropping. It also drops from 60 to 30fps as well making it seem even more significant. It's good old fashioned slowdown rather than skipped frames.
The thing is, on PS2, there were more games in general going for 60fps. It was a very common target for AAA and low budget titles alike.
Mario Kart 64 is not 15fps either. It runs smoother than that.
You tried to convince me GT6 was consistent when I knew/said it wasn't too, not sure I trust your recollection anymore
In multiplayer I'm pretty sure it's around 15fps on given tracks. Not sure why you prefer slowdown though. Slowdown is not consistency. Mario Kart 64 was a prime example of why I hated slowdown. Moo moo farm played nothing like the other tracks. It was like it was a different game.
It would be interesting to do framerate analysis on some old/retro games.
Well, the EU version that came out ~4 months earlier and I was playing then had serious flaws in its framerate consistency whenever there was heavy action going on track in a tight race. Which can happen quite often in this game (Quakes would make shit happen 20% of the time).
And it didn't simply switched from 60 to 30 fps, but crawled to single digit framerate for a few seconds.
More power to you if these problems had been fixed when the game released in the US, but this kind of bad experience is why I'm happy games can now be patched after release.
Visual quality is a marketing acquisition tool and always works as one. Performance may work like the former in some cases(eg. selling remasters), but in general case it's related to retention.Three said:
Data-studies exist that show both have an impact on revenue(on pretty much all target audiences) - but I'm not aware of one that compares the two head to head to allow for conclusive statements on their respective relevance.
Remasters are "easy" being just ports, rather than building new content. That said direct-codebase translation to new hw hasn't resulted in easy-performance wins on PS2->PS3(with some particularly high-profile examples), nor is it true for PS3->PS4.
Well I've llaye Mk64 more recently but only in single player. I think you underestimate how slow 15fps really is.You tried to convince me GT6 was consistent when I knew/said it wasn't too, not sure I trust your recollection anymore
In multiplayer I'm pretty sure it's around 15fps on given tracks. Not sure why you prefer slowdown though. Slowdown is not consistency. Mario Kart 64 was a prime example of why I hated slowdown. Moo moo farm played nothing like the other tracks. It was like it was a different game.
It would be interesting to do framerate analysis on some old/retro games.
Can't analyze though due to the fact that it's an analog out on real hardware. Detection software can't read it.
There certainly wouldnt be any shitstorms about pre-release code, but I'm sure Joe Gaffer would find something to bitch about.