-
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
If is? Didn't a Giant Bomb guy say that the game had 'more frame drops' than he was expecting? it might have been jittering. DF article link?
This
Lets just trust their decision until we see for ourselves
- Im sure its fine.SniperHunter
Banned
Dark10x did the same. Max settings, smaa4x and 30 fps lock.
Tearing has 0 to do with variable framerate. Uncharted 1 was locked 30 and it teared like motherfucker. Meanwhile GOW3 had 0 tearing and was unlocked 40-60 game
They either will have Vsync, triple buffering or simply their engine is doing good work and do not produce tearing (which is often the case with engines)
reptilescorpio
Member
GG said they would lock it at 30 FPS, but I guess they decided against it.
Thoughts? Very strange no?
Minimum FPS = 30
Max FPS = 60
With V-sync of course
Very strange. Unless they have it consistently between 45-50fps or something.
Really odd they wouldn't lock it :/
1.21Gigawatts
Banned
I guess its better than locking it at 30. Because... why would they not lock it if locking it were better?
flipswitch
Member
Because some people claim that smoother gameplay for most of the time with drops to minimum 30FPS is worse than playing non stop @ 30FPS.
I play PC games almost my whole life i can't simply grasp why people are so jaded over unlocked frame-rate. Especially of now most of people have minimum 60Hz tv sets and monitors that goes to 120hz. 1 frame added or not doesn't make that much of a difference in 50-60fps games and when game drops to less than 40 you have essentially ton of additional Hz to put frames as you want.
Now if you would have old 30Hz set then that would be terrible but almost no one now has 30Hz set.
Firstof all, I'm talkng about dropsfrom 60 not constant fluctuation. There are people clamouring for locking stuff down to 30 if it ever strays even a bit, meaning they'd take always 30 fps over a game running at 60 that drops to 50 or lower when a couple of things explode or a setpiece is doing its thing. I'd rather have higher fps at 95% of the time instead of a 100% locked lower framerate.
And what is proper GPU hardware? I have a 7870 upclocked to 1050 MHz and besides maybe Shank2 all the games I played on it had drops. Even CoJ Gunslinger that runs very well most of the time. Not all of us can fit 7970s or higher in their case or budget.
NTIETS13A_Superiority
Banned
I always assumed lcd tv:s Refreshed only when new frame was recieved up to their max rate... Tech is idiotic from start if that is not the case.
I'm in the crowd that found GOW pleasing with its 40-45 fps, would have looked worse for me if they locked it down to 30. Due to the way their animations and motion blur is handled, the judder was a non-issue for many here, except for the super elite. So for GOW, this was a good decision.. BUT:
Varying framerates can be quite jarring if the changes are frequent. On GOW, the camera is controlled by the game, so sections don't *jump* between 30 to 60 in an instant.. There's gradual change in frame rate.
On Killzone, one can look at the sky and get 60fps, and start looking to the horizon and the frame rate would go down to 30fps. Unless they have a way of gradually changing the fps (which is possible if you are going upwards but impossible if you are going uncontrollably downhill in the fps side), you'll get frequent changes on the frames per second. This could be mitigated by limiting the upper frames per second based on the performance of different sections if you have profiled it well enough so you don't let your fps go above a certain threshold even when looking up, it might work..
Sum up: Unlocking frame rate can be badly distracting on an FPS, and the GOW comparisons may not necessarily apply.
Varying framerates can be quite jarring if the changes are frequent. On GOW, the camera is controlled by the game, so sections don't *jump* between 30 to 60 in an instant.. There's gradual change in frame rate.
On Killzone, one can look at the sky and get 60fps, and start looking to the horizon and the frame rate would go down to 30fps. Unless they have a way of gradually changing the fps (which is possible if you are going upwards but impossible if you are going uncontrollably downhill in the fps side), you'll get frequent changes on the frames per second. This could be mitigated by limiting the upper frames per second based on the performance of different sections if you have profiled it well enough so you don't let your fps go above a certain threshold even when looking up, it might work..
Sum up: Unlocking frame rate can be badly distracting on an FPS, and the GOW comparisons may not necessarily apply.
Its safe to say that a few standouts don't make a rule.. I mean its not a pandemic in PC gaming. To paint it as a standard problematic gameplay -hampering- issue in PC gaming *unlocked framerates above, but not below 30fps* is a bit disingenuous.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
Why are people calling for it to be locked at 30 when it's confirmed to be running at between 35 - 40? 5 frames isn't going to be noticeable and it will probably only drop to 35fps when lots of things are going on at once. I'm happy with this. Stop complaining for the sake of it for goodness sake.
sol_bad
Member
I have not noticed this on PC before, no idea what you are talking about.
I'm happy they have an unlocked framerate.
With all the affects they have going on it would be impossible to lock it to 60 and I'd hate them to lock it to 30 if the PS4 has enough power to use v-sync.
Dictator93
Member
Oh I was not talking down on your hardware, I was just saying not everyone has large fluctuations from 60!
I probably expressed that poorly...If you are saying you like an unlocked framerate... I am agreeing with you! That is... unless the standard variation is something like... 60 sometimes to 25 fps all of a sudden.
reptilescorpio
Member
I would be shocked if this was the case and they didn't lock it. Or at the very least implement some kind of solution that would avoid the noticeable judder.
And some people can't see 60FPS, some people can't see tearing, some people can't feel input and some people can't even see a high resolution. That doesn't mean it isn't there.
Also, their animation system was decoupled from the actual frame rate, so any frame showed the correct animation position with respect to whatever point in time the frame gets to be displayed. If they "baked" animations strictly into 60hz sequences, it wouldn't look as good.
TheVampire
Banned
I'm sure if the unlocked framerate was a problem the devs would recognize it and take measures.
If you can't notice that, then you won't notice the diference between locked 30 fps and variable framerate. So I don't know what you are happy about. Unless you had a beastly pc(which the PS4 isn't) running vsync and where actually capped at 60fps(on a 60hz screen) or running a high framerate(60+) without extreme framedrops.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
I think 30fps looks juddery in and of itself, so locking it there kind of defeats the purpose. If you can triple buffer at a higher framerate I think you'll have a smoother play experience overall.
Backfoggen
Banned
Did they show the forest bit there?
wow, look at all the bitching about variable frame rate.
and it will probably like that the whole game.
and it will probably like that the whole game.
I disagree, I can at least get used to a solid 30fps after a while. Consistent framerate changes is always jarringx(though variable framerate around an average of 60fps is better, which I doubt is the case here).
SniperHunter
Banned
Also the camera was locked and that helped. In kz if you look at sky you will get 60 fps and if look directly ahead, the frame rate will drop by 20 to 30 fps. Bad choice
Opus Angelorum
Member
The most recent footage certainly didn't look consistent, and this explains it.
.
These guys do this for a living, so I'll believe them. Unless people here think they are lying for some weird reason and actually want to make their game worse.
The Mana Legend
Banned
Goddammit that's annoying. Just keep it at locked 30 fps if you can't achieve smooth 60 fps.
I hate unstable framerates.
I hate unstable framerates.
I'm wondering if that's the encoding of the videos mixed with the variable framerate and it's actually much smoother in person.
Big company with large teams can sometimes mean that 'bad' decisions happen even if only due to a lack of communication. There's no need to appeal to authority here, we've seen plenty of devs make obvious and glaring mistakes (Guerilla among them).
feint_ruled
Member
Let's allow the devs to make their own artistic decision. People are too quick to make demands. Have a little faith in their ability. If it turns out to be shit, then criticise, not before.
Lagspike_exe
Member
I really hope this is triple buffered. Double buffered with vsync is unplayable.
It's not though, loads of my friends just can't tell the difference when I show them.
Oh, come on, it's simple logic. Without something like G-Sync, a framerate that is not evenly divisible by the refresh rate will produce judder as a result of duplicate frames. It's unpleasant to the eye and creates a feeling of instability. It's not a good idea.
Technically speaking, it HAS to be triple buffered. Double buffing would result in a maximum framerate of 30 fps if it could not hold 60. Triple buffering is what allows for tear free framerates between 30 and 60 but it always produces judder.
SniperHunter
Banned
Double buffer leads to 30 fps no?
Portugeezer
Member
For framerates in between 30 and 60? I actually prefer that if they don't fluctuate too much.
Play BF3 at locked 45fps on PC and it looks fine and plays smoother because of it.
Play BF3 at locked 45fps on PC and it looks fine and plays smoother because of it.
Yeah the huge input lag and bad netcode in Killzone 2 was totally the best decision. To say nothing of the studio never doing the narrative justice, and fucking up a ton of things throughout Killzone 1-3 so far.
That's why. Guerilla isn't perfect and we've seen it time and time again. They aren't a bad dev but they are not above criticism or doubt.
GoW ran in the 40-60 range 99% of the time, it depends on what range SF runs in and how much it fluctuates. Big differences depending on that.
Yeah stutter was already annoying in GoW3/Ascension in some spots and these games hadn't free camera, on a FPS it would probably be much worse.
no. Motion blur has nothing to do with how screen process information. Also it wasn't camera because camera in GOW3 is rarely static and often change views (if for example QTE is used).
They simply put created game where they had framerate 40-50 FPS ALL THE TIME. No 30 fps drops always 40-50.
and now we are truly in dreamland. GOW3 was triple buffered supersmooth 40-50FPS game. No any sturrer.
Simple intuitive logic is often wrong. One of the great things about exclusive games on standardized hardware is what devs can do with it, so what is true for PC isn't necessarily true for console. Judder can be hidden or minimized in that environment.
And again, they know the tech, they built the game, so if they say unlocked 30-60fps = better experience, then that is probably the case. On an individual level, of course, ymmv.