I completely agree with his breakdown about the technical logistics between 30 and 60 FPS, but this response is a no from me. Games aren't movies. Interactivity is the point, and there's nothing wrong with giving people options.
Yeah, I've seen the reply. Of course it's not easy, but like the rest, it's a choice to make.
Given this other reply, I really don't think he really likes the idea of 60fps regardless:
And I kinda disagree with that argument too (not the technical one).
I'd be okay with sacrificing some prettiness to get a higher framerate. Most people wouldn't though. Look at the reception to Halo Infinite lol.
I completely agree with his breakdown about the technical logistics between 30 and 60 FPS, but this response is a no from me. Games aren't movies. Interactivity is the point, and there's nothing wrong with giving people options.
I mean he's right, but doom eternal looks better than uncharted and runs at 60fps on console
Yeah unless I'm constantly changing between the two or am playing a fast-paced multiplayer game, I've never really felt the difference in a jarring way. If something feels perfectly fine at 30fps and can give me a visual boost (I am a sucker for good lighting), then I'll take the 30fps every time.Personally I hope they crank fidelity and rendering way up and keep the 30fps on PS5.
The only time 30fps really bothers me is if I go from playing the same game on my PC to the console version– other than that I never really notice that 30fps is a problem (especially if it's a beautiful game at a super stable 30).
I completely agree with his breakdown about the technical logistics between 30 and 60 FPS, but this response is a no from me. Games aren't movies. Interactivity is the point, and there's nothing wrong with giving people options.
Yeah, I've seen the reply. Of course it's not easy, but like the rest, it's a choice to make.
Given this other reply, I really don't think he really likes the idea of 60fps regardless:
And I kinda disagree with that argument too (not the technical one).
I mean he's right, but doom eternal looks better than uncharted and runs at 60fps on console
I completely agree with his breakdown about the technical logistics between 30 and 60 FPS, but this response is a no from me. Games aren't movies. Interactivity is the point, and there's nothing wrong with giving people options.
Please tell me you forgot the /s
But Doom also has better motion blur, particle effects, higher enemy count and even more more dynamic lighting and better shadows. The same things that they have to try and fit in 6ms. Uncharted has higher polygonal density, much much better animation quality, and a lot larger areas with a lot more density but that's not the only thing going on in a game and there are areas that Doom genuinely is more advanced in even when compared to ND's latest game TLoU2.You just prefer the way DOOM looks, which is fine. But the actual assets in Uncharted are way more detailed than DOOM
I mean, of course devs that want higher graphics quality go for 30 fps. It's not deep.
Thread has some interesting technical details, but that'd be more interesting to see why they don't push for a 60fps mode to be available as well.
edit:
Those two tweets show well they have no intention of pushing for 60fps:
I'd be okay with sacrificing some prettiness to get a higher framerate. Most people wouldn't though. Look at the reception to Halo Infinite lol.
I think the Halo Infinite reveal is a prime example of why developers will ALWAYS prioritize graphical fidelity over framerate.
Because it's a ton of work to make two versions of every scene, and they've only got so much time and money
My thoughts exactly.Still prefer how the game plays over pretty visuals that get smeared with excessive motion blur thanks to 30FPS.
There's better looking games than Halo Infinite that run at even higher frame rates.
From a pure systems/rendering perspective, it's not really the time we put in, it's that we want to be able to make certain decisions and leverage them, and a large parameter space at runtime makes that harder, and you pay non-trivial costs for it. E.g. similar to the difference between pre-compiled GPU microcode on console vs IR on PC.I realize in a way I'm saying "that stuff you put a lot of time and effort into, yeah I would rather it not be there"
I'm not nearly knowledgeable enough in game development to know how to make games look better than they do, and I'll venture a guess that you aren't either. Both games look great and prioritize different things, I have to assume that if TLOU2 could run at 60fps without any major sacrifices, it would.But Doom also has better motion blur, particle effects, and even more more dynamic lighting and better shadows. The same things that they have to try and fit in 6ms. Uncharted has higher polygonal density and animation quality but that's not the only thing going on in a game and there are areas that Doom genuinely is more advanced in even when compared to ND's latest game TLoU2.
If the developer doesn't have the time or resources to implement a mode, that's totally understandable. But his response was specifically implying it shouldn't be done because, like in movies, people shouldn't have options.Things like atmosphere play a critical role in determining enjoyment. Even a simple thing like walking through a thick fog versus a thin one can alter a persons perception of how a gamer responds to a game. I think visuals are super super important for immersion in games. Also giving people options is extra work and maybe the dev does not want a game whose atmosphere is significantly paired down to achieve said framerate.
I definitely think he's referring to cases where the hardware doesn't have the flexibility (like base PS4/XB1) for games of the scope he's referring to. At a certain point you'd be offering like 540p/imperfect 60FPS and you gotta' wonder if the sacrifice is worth the guff you'll get online for it.
The general assumption is that 30fps gives you double the frame time for additional graphical bells and whilstles etc, but as this more detailed analysis highlights, it's actually in some cases 4x more for graphics extras, as the rendering time for base elements eats away a large portion of that frame time, so the remaining amount is far more limited to the point where the difference is massively exasperated with a 30fps game vs a 60fps one.
Of course, but that isn't the norm on consoles, nor should people expect it to be.
I mean, yours is a "pretty fucking terrible response". ND games don't launch on PC (so far), and because they don't, they don't have to spend the time and resources to optimize around all of the different pieces of hardware that is available on that platform, and because they don't, they're free to spend those resources on other aspects of their games.This is obviously a pretty fucking terrible response because PC games have had detailed graphics settings for decades and they function just fine without upsetting the "art" of the game.
"I don't see it changing any time soon."
Drill this into your heads people, over and over again. 30fps will always be with us, and that's a good thing.
ND games aren't on PC and he's specifically talking about ND games...This is obviously a pretty fucking terrible response because PC games have had detailed graphics settings for decades and they function just fine without upsetting the "art" of the game.