My Thoughts On 60fps

[Shuu]

We've had, like three peopl in the last week making the claim that 30fps is just plain better than than 60fps under certain circumstances, such as for 3rd person adventure games. Just to help me solidify my thouhts, Ima say what I think is going on here.
Assassin's Creed: Unity (for example) may well look better in 30fps than 60fps, but here's the thing: that's the fault of the developers, not of higher framerates as a concept.

Take The Hobbit for example. It was shot in, and shown in some cinimas at 48fps, instead of the more traditional 24fps. Many people, myself included, thought it looked a little off somehow. And it did, and this was because, filming, effects, makeup techniques, etc, have been used in such a way, and for so long, as to fulfil an illusion under the scrutiny of 24 frames per second. Now, with the additional subtlety that comes through when viewing at twice the frame rate, some of those techniques don't hold up. The Hobbit did indeed look a little strange as a result of 48fps. But that's not because 48fps is in some way inferior for films, it's just that film makers need to get better at using it. No big hoohar.

So if Ubisoft had been saing something like "At this point in time, we are simply better at making good looking adventure games in 30fps than we are at making good looking adventure games at 60fps" than I, and probably a lot of people, would be more accepting of what we percieve as an antiquated framerate. But that's not what they (and other developers) are saying. They've been taking the easy way out and just claiming that 30fps is somehow inferior for their purposes.
No devlopers. Bad. Go to your respective rooms.
Just as with the Hobbit example, if AssCreedUinty does indeed look better at 30fps, that isn't a short coming on the part of higher framerates, it simply means they need more practise working with 60fps and more time to develop and update their techniques in order for their games to stand up to the challenge that is looking good in 60fps.
I'm not saying it would be easy. And despite the fact that pleanty of games already do it, I'd be willing to give them that time, without complaining, in order to get used to crafting games for 60fps. But to just fold your arms like a child and volenterily forget how numbers work, or god forbid, make the bat shit claim the human eye cannot percieve 60 frames per second... well it's no wonder people are gobsmacked at the size of the foot currently in Ubisoft's mouth.

 

[tippy2k2]

And my thoughts remain the same since this giant technical pissing match started.

Would it be nice if developers (and hell, I'll even throw gamers under the bus) stopped putting their foots in their mouth and pretending like there is ZERO difference between 30 and 60 (and 720 v 1080 and whatever other technical mumbo-jumbo you want to argue about)? I suppose so.

Do I still have any fucks to give about the frames per second as long as it looks good to me and runs smoothly?

Spoiler: Spider-Man? Care to help me out?

Thanks Spidey!

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Stop comparing movie fps with video games. It's not the same thing.

This whole thing about frame rate in video games isn't a matter of opinion. It isn't worthy of a debate even. 60 fps is literally 100% better than 30 fps. Everything is more fluid and more responsive. There isn't a gamer in the fuckin' universe who after playing a game in 60 fps would say something like "I wish this game ran in 30 fps instead".

60 fps isn't a new concept. It has existed on consoles as well for a long time. All the fighting games are in 60 fps, old Devil May Cry games on the PS2 were in 60 fps, and if I remember correctly so was DMC4. And remember how fuckin' great it felt doing all those combos in DMC3 and 4? You couldn't do that half as well in 30 fps. Which brings us to the fact that sometimes gameplay mechanics need to be crippled because developers are aiming for 30 instead of 60 fps.

IT FEELS BETTER. That's how simple it is. It's more accurate, more responsive, more fluid and more natural. It's more fuckin' immersive. Every time a developer manages to achieve 60 fps these days, they use it as a part of their marketing campaign. Because it's a good thing to strive towards. It offers a superior gameplay experience. There is no way around that because it's an observable fact. Anyone who says otherwise either doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about or they're simply lying. Saying that ANY MODERN GAME is better in 30 fps than 60 fps is a lie.

 

[Mezahmay]

I'd like to think that what people are actually upset about is the publishers and developers thinking we know what we want better than we do than the actual pissing match between resolutions and frame rates. I'd like to think people just want an acceptable experience over specific technical requirements being met. I'd like to believe the previous statements, but this is the internet. Maybe there actually is a difference that I have yet to notice but because I don't notice it I don't care about it. The answer could be some combination of all the above, none of the above, several things I haven't thought of, some combination of the first three, or all of the other four at once.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

I think it's downright funny that devs are trying to convince me of something I can empirically test for myself in literally ten minutes.

Step 1: start up Shadow of Mordor on my computer.
Step 2: crank the graphics until the frame rate hovers around 30.
Step 3: play for a few minutes.
Step 4: tune the graphics down until the frame rate hovers around 60.
Step 5: play for a few minutes.
Step 6: conclude beyond the shadow of a doubt (of mordor) that 60fps creates a noticeably superior gaming experience.

These people are essentially trying to tell me the sky isn't blue, and they think they can get away with it because they like to pretend there isn't a platform that turns their hypothetical trade offs into something we've already measured and evaluated.

 

[Irick]

I don't really think there is the issue of developers not being used to designing for 60FPS games so much as developers not willing to make the sacrifices required to bring that level of gameplay. We see the ones who care do it. Fighting games are nearly all 60 FPS affairs, Rage is a 60FPS monster on the old generation consoles. The developers who really do care about the feel of the experience rather than how the game looks in the screenshots, they tend to shoot for that smooth framerate.

I think it is unfortunate that developers feel that this is the trade off they need to make. I have said and will say again that graphics are not the end all be all of games, they help the experience, but I personally place the responsiveness and feel of the experience at a higher priority. Games to me are a primarily interactive medium, I need to enjoy that interaction, not be frustrated by it.

But, that's just my two cents.

I do agree with your point about the hobbit though. I hope that more people decide to adopt 48 FPS and we see more innovation in the field.

 

[josemlopes]

Now that Youtube has 60fps videos for anyone that uses Chrome I just cant see how 30fps can be better at anything, I would even argue that 24fps+ for movies seem weird because we are so used to 24fps since forever.


To see the 60fps you have to watch at 720p or more (maybe embeded doesnt show, for some reason I am not able to load it at 720p or more here and have to go to watch it on youtube), only there it enables the 60fps. So please, watch around a minute at 480p then switch to 720p and see the difference for anyone what wants to see how much impact it has.

 

[Mezahmay]

Now that Youtube has 60fps videos for anyone that uses Chrome I just cant see how 30fps can be better at anything, I would even argue that 24fps+ for movies seem weird because we are so used to 24fps since forever.

Oh cool. I didn't know YouTube finished the 60fps thing in videos. Thank you for mentioning that. I notice the difference for a few seconds after switching, but then they seem the same. Does the difference become more apparent when you play?

 

[josemlopes]

Now that Youtube has 60fps videos for anyone that uses Chrome I just cant see how 30fps can be better at anything, I would even argue that 24fps+ for movies seem weird because we are so used to 24fps since forever.

Oh cool. I didn't know YouTube finished the 60fps thing in videos. Thank you for mentioning that. I notice the difference for a few seconds after switching, but then they seem the same. Does the difference become more apparent when you play?

It depends, and the worst really is a framedrop, when you are inside a building and it runs at 60 to then the moment you look out the window have it drop to 30, that is worst then having it always 30.

Then overall it just looks more fluid, and depending on the game it does help it (if the game is too fast there is a lot that can happen between those frames, maybe a flash before an explosion instead of 2 frames is now 4 with 60fps and when doing a turn where that flash is moving across the screen it does help to see more of it), in fast games like Ninja Gaiden or Quake you do feel the lack of 60fps, I really dont see what kind of game 30fps would help.

The term "more cinematic" is correct for the 30fps since so far most movies with very few exceptions are filmed at lower then 30fps, but then I could claim that a game that runs at 2fps is more "Powerpointic", it doesnt make it any better.

So to me there are games where it doesnt matter much but in no way do they get better with less fps, and it is noticeable, I simply dont mind much if the game doesnt suffer much from it.

 

[Bombiz]

Now that Youtube has 60fps videos for anyone that uses Chrome I just cant see how 30fps can be better at anything, I would even argue that 24fps+ for movies seem weird because we are so used to 24fps since forever.

Oh cool. I didn't know YouTube finished the 60fps thing in videos. Thank you for mentioning that. I notice the difference for a few seconds after switching, but then they seem the same. Does the difference become more apparent when you play?

for me i was able to tell the difference right away and through out the video. As for 60fps in general once you get in game it just feels smoother

 

[G00N3R7883]

I'm not usually too bothered about the framerate debate, but playing Lichdom recently has opened my eyes a bit. Its Cryengine3 so you can imagine it looks gorgeous, but its also very demanding, and maintaining a solid 60 FPS has been a challenge (even though I'm well above recommended specs from the Steam store page).

Some areas are fine, but others, particularly with lots of enemies on screen, are a problem. And because I hate screen tearing, I like to play with Vsync enabled, so as soon as my framerate starts to dip, it drops me to 30. So I've experienced a direct comparison between 30 and 60, and I can immediately clearly see the difference between the two. Everything is just so much more smooth at 60. (I've done some tweaking, including using adaptive Vsync, which has improved things, but that's not really what this thread is about).

Now, the other point to make is that 30 FPS is still playable in this particular game. It might not be in others. Lichdom has some enemies that throw homing fireballs, so I want to watch those projectiles approaching me and then dodge at the last possible moment ... the lack of smoothness at 30 FPS hasn't stopped me from doing that. I'm not dying more often.

So in conclusion, 30 FPS can be playable, but 60 FPS is definitely better. Any developers who claim 30 is better are either a) lying for marketing purposes or b) stupid.

I also long for the days that devs, journalists and players have debates about other game mechanics such as AI, level design, weapon/skill variety, multiple quest solutions, branching narratives etc instead of just "graphics, graphics, graphics".