Jump to content

whats the deal with 30 fps?

Recommended Posts

Heliocentrical, all of the things you've mentioned already have a clear-cut answer (the way I see it) - not having someone having the other opinion might be considered a flaw of this discussion, but it might also point to a consensus and to the fact there is no discussion, only abuse by devs.

 

Higher FPS = game feels smoother.

Twitch reflex games necessitate higher FPS.

FPS lock creates a skill ceiling for genres like shmups, brawlers, fighting games. A skill ceiling most won't reach, but a skill ceiling nonetheless.

 

That being said, it's not like there's nothing to talk about. Alyxx Thorne made a right comment about FPS consistency being important than the FPS itself, which I agree partially. There are games that run like a slideshow and I just can't enjoy them as they feel too bland, but I might do them with something else in the background. On the other hand, I remember playing Onimusha 3 on the PC (horrible, horrible port) and being annoyed to no end when FPS inconsistency made me miss a block. They both matter - but they can also be temporary. Given enough time, there'll be a computer powerful enough to be able to run them at a constant high FPS, unless (1) the engine is shit or (2) there's an imposed artificial limit to fit the PCs/consoles at the time of release.

That's why I think that in the large scheme of things FPS consistency might not matter very much, although for a single experience it might be a very significant factor of the enjoyment.

Share this post


Link to post

FPS is important to me to some degree. In games like CoD I always lower settings to make the game run faster just to get a higher framerate, but I've experienced that stuttering is a far bigger problem to me than 30 fps. I can work with 30 fps, I can't work with stuttering or moments when the framerate suddenly dips into single digits and then back to 60.

 

My point was that bitching about a 30 FPS lock to the degree people are is unnecessary. It's a minor inconvenience at best, but people are talking about it like it's the downfall of gaming...

Share this post


Link to post
My point was that bitching about a 30 FPS lock to the degree people are is unnecessary. It's a minor inconvenience at best, but people are talking about it like it's the downfall of gaming...

Bitching about people bitching about a 30 FPS lock isn't productive. Other people have said exact the same thing so all you're doing is adding to a circlejerk. Well thought and rational conversations don't come from a two sided "I'm right, you're wrong" debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Well thought and rational conversations don't come from a two sided "I'm right, you're wrong" debate.

 

And those usually don't happen on the Internet. :D

Share this post


Link to post
My point was that bitching about a 30 FPS lock to the degree people are is unnecessary. It's a minor inconvenience at best, but people are talking about it like it's the downfall of gaming...

Bitching about people bitching about a 30 FPS lock isn't productive. Other people have said exact the same thing so all you're doing is adding to a circlejerk. Well thought and rational conversations don't come from a two sided "I'm right, you're wrong" debate.

Well sorry that my opinion is the same as someone else's... I never said you are wrong, just that I think people are exaggarating, and that's just how I feel because it's not something that bothers me...

Share this post


Link to post
FPS is important to me to some degree. In games like CoD I always lower settings to make the game run faster just to get a higher framerate, but I've experienced that stuttering is a far bigger problem to me than 30 fps. I can work with 30 fps, I can't work with stuttering or moments when the framerate suddenly dips into single digits and then back to 60.

 

My point was that bitching about a 30 FPS lock to the degree people are is unnecessary. It's a minor inconvenience at best, but people are talking about it like it's the downfall of gaming...

 

Yeah, well its in a way the same as other aspects that change overtime for the worse. Why make the product intentionally worse than it could be? Yeah, it might save them some time/effort, but as customers we shouldn't be ok with this. There are 2 main drivers for businesses - competition (someone else is doing a better job and has a better product) and demand (if people are satisfied and couldn't be bothered to demand better products, than well, you get what you get).

Share this post


Link to post

I've played games that were downright unplayable on launch, but then the problem was stuttering and framerate drops, not a locked 30 FPS framerate. I think there is a huge difference and crying "doom" just because there is a 30 fps lock on a game is taking it a step too far in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post

This whole discussion reminds me about a video where Ross asked for SSD in exchange for turning Freeman's Mind into high-definition, and where he delved at one point in the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS

 

Anyway, to stay on topic: you can consider me insane or believe I'm an idiot for thinking like that, but personally I don't really care about shooters having a perfect 60 FPS. Yes, 30 FPS makes games like Quake III Arena harder to play because of input lag, but I like to think about that as a challenge.

And regarding Mafia III: I think the gamers are overreacting. No, don't get it wrong: they have a right to be angry, but the way they exploded over the game not having 60 FPS on the PC got me a bit worried. A game does not deserve bad ratings just because of a 30 FPS lock.

Share this post


Link to post
And regarding Mafia III: I think the gamers are overreacting. No, don't get it wrong: they have a right to be angry, but the way they exploded over the game not having 60 FPS on the PC got me a bit worried. A game does not deserve bad ratings just because of a 30 FPS lock.

Agreed on the first part, it's a singleplayer game with no twitch reflex requirement so bombing it with bad ratings just because it lacks a certain specification is uncalled for.

 

I do not agree with the last sentence, though, as it makes a difference in some games and makes things look unnecessarily dated (because VR games, for instance, require 90 FPS minimum to prevent nausea). A 30 FPS lock might be enough reason to deserve bad ratings, and in general FPS and resolution locking is a practice that just shouldn't exist anymore.

Of course, the affects of such restrictions are judged on a per-game basis, but in the best-case scenario they're benign and in the worst-case scenario they're hurtful. So, removing these limitations should an industry standard instead of defending them, as Ubisoft tried doing with "30 FPS is more cinematic" to defend FPS locking on PC to conform with "current-gen console experience" of Watch_Dogs.

Share this post


Link to post

 

I do not agree with the last sentence, though, as it makes a difference in some games and makes things look unnecessarily dated

 

That's like saying a movie is shit only because it uses practical effects in a day and age where CGI is commonplace.

Share this post


Link to post

 

I do not agree with the last sentence, though, as it makes a difference in some games and makes things look unnecessarily dated

 

That's like saying a movie is shit only because it uses practical effects in a day and age where CGI is commonplace.

While it doesn't fit your allegory isn't 1-to-1, that happened. And in the other direction, too - there were movies that used excessive CGI when it was in it wasn't advanced enough instead of using practical effects, causing the movies to look like crap both at the time and in the long run.

I'd say using CGI(/FPS locking) that might fit the era when cheaper and better practical FX exist(/unlimited FPS) is only acceptable if that technology is imperceptible in every single way, which might be very close(/500 FPS, I think I read that somewhere).

Share this post


Link to post
I do not agree with the last sentence, though, as it makes a difference in some games and makes things look unnecessarily dated (because VR games, for instance, require 90 FPS minimum to prevent nausea).

So far I haven't heard of a single VR or VR exclusive game with a 30 FPS lock and VR is kind of a niche thing anyway for people with extremely powerful rigs that can handle such high framerates anyway. And yes, I know you can get cheaper VR experiences but comparing it to something like the latest Occulus Rift or HTC Vive is like comparing spaghetti to pizza.

 

So I kinda don't get the point other than that it would be stupid for a dev to implement a 30 FPS lock in a VR game which I agree with and it's probably why nobody has done it yet (surprising given 30 FPS lock is a recent trend).

 

Ubisoft tried doing with "30 FPS is more cinematic" to defend FPS locking on PC to conform with "current-gen console experience" of Watch_Dogs.

I struggle to get even 20 FPS in that game sometimes. I would be happy if it ran at 30 FPS, lol

Share this post


Link to post
So I kinda don't get the point other than that it would be stupid for a dev to implement a 30 FPS lock in a VR game which I agree with and it's probably why nobody has done it yet (surprising given 30 FPS lock is a recent trend).

The thing is, VR is the latest-tech. If I could play Deus Ex on VR I could because its framerate can be unlocked quite easily. If we get something that's more advanced than VR it's easily unlockable to that framerate, too.

However, if I play on a game designed for 90FPS and that framerate ONLY it's going to be dated with no good reason why. The same goes for 30FPS, but 30FPS is already dated by current tech so it just receives the bigger backlash.

Share this post


Link to post

I think developers value graphical quality far above a decent frame rate. And if they don't lock triple A PC games at 30 fps then they'll probably be afraid that players would be disappointed with having to reduce graphics settings. or if the game needs the newest tech, like Assassins Creed: Unity. Then players wouldn't want to see the 60fps option and not be able enable it until they have better specs much later down the line.

Share this post


Link to post
My point was that bitching about a 30 FPS lock to the degree people are is unnecessary. It's a minor inconvenience at best, but people are talking about it like it's the downfall of gaming...

It depends on the context. If it's a shooter, the input is incredibly difficult to manage on just 30 fps. It's a lot more than a "minor inconvenience"

I love GTA 4 for example, but aiming is incredibly difficult in that game because it's not very well optimized for PC and I only get a framerate of about 30.

Share this post


Link to post

30 fps is especially bad for shooters that don't factor delta time (the realworld time that passes between each frame) into the mouse sensitivity. Granted that's bad practice as is because fluctuating framerates = fluctuating sensitivity but it also creates aim jitter at lower framerates even when it's consistent.

 

30 fps or lower also actually makes me nauseous. Like legit motion sickness.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in the community.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.