I can’t do 30fps any more.

[rafaqat]

6 hours ago, Mr. Gerbik said:

But all of youse then apparently draw the conclusion that the wonky frame rate is what makes them brilliant, while over here on planet earth we all know that those brilliant games would be *even better* with a good framerate. ? 

 

Actuallllllly, it's people saying they won't even entertain looking at a game (whether it's brilliant or not) because it's only 30fps.

That's what people are pushing back on.  Ocarina of time had a shit frame rate. But it was still a great game.  Would be be even better at 60fps?  Yes.  

But some posters up there presumably wouldn't have bothered playing it because it wasn't 60fps.  That's madness.

[rafaqat]

5 hours ago, Mr. Gerbik said:

WHY are people arguing that it absolutely must be the ones with bad frame rate that I should play? Why would I be missing out by playing others instead? I'm never going to play ALL of them. Crazy.

 

Mate, I think it sounds like you're having a stroke, that or you're willfully trying to turn an argument round into something no one else is arguing for.  No one is saying you MUST play a certain game.  We're saying arbitarily ignoring a game purely on framerate is dumb as shit.

[carlospie]

What I meant was yes the frame rate was bad but the game was so good and engrossing it didn't matter. The games pushed the hardware so much the pay off was worth it. I didn't even know how what FPS was until I started browsing rllmuk 

[Isaac]

27 minutes ago, rafaqat said:

 

Actuallllllly, it's people saying they won't even entertain looking at a game (whether it's brilliant or not) because it's only 30fps.

That's what people are pushing back on.  Ocarina of time had a shit frame rate. But it was still a great game.  Would be be even better at 60fps?  Yes.  

But some posters up there presumably wouldn't have bothered playing it because it wasn't 60fps.  That's madness.

 

Ocarina of Time came at a time when 3D was new and anything above 10fps was acceptable.

 

We've aged out of that now.

 

If Ocarina of Time came out now it would not do well, it's a masterpiece but absolutely a product of its time.

 

A game released at 15fps (or whatever Ocarina was) wouldn't be considered a masterpiece today, regardless of the quality. It would be a great game with game-ruining performance issues.

[K]

This argument is as ridiculous as it is depressing. It's like arguing that you won't watch films that aren't on blu-ray / 4K. Obviously, it's preferable to watch films in high res if at all possible, but it seems preposterous to argue that you can't watch something at SD. It's one step away from arguing that you won't play 2D games, or watch films in black & white.

[K]

8 minutes ago, Pockets said:

Here’s an equally hyperbolic counter - 30fps in 2021 is like Christopher Nolan deciding his next pretentiously overlong film will be shot on cameras form the 1920s with no sound because for modern audiences not to accept that when modern tech exists would be ridiculous. 

 

I dunno - not quite the same, surely? Modern games are at 30fps usually because there's some tradeoff in terms of visual quality / complexity / rendering technique. It's not because they're using Xbox 360 dev kits to make the game. 

 

Plus, filmmakers experiment with form and technique all the time, i.e. making films with grotty digital cameras because they like the look.

[Boozy The Clown]

Flight sim is 30fps though and its awright....*

 

 

 

* fuqqin amazing

[Wiper]

Yeah, on my experience there it's somewhere between 15 and 100 fps depending on the situation, ideal

[Boozy The Clown]

10 minutes ago, Pockets said:

Not on PC. 

 

Maybe on Layte's computer but even that's doubtful.

 

Hey lets not take this further though. Ya said something stupid to score a point. Lets move on...

[Isaac]

21 hours ago, K said:

This argument is as ridiculous as it is depressing. It's like arguing that you won't watch films that aren't on blu-ray / 4K. Obviously, it's preferable to watch films in high res if at all possible, but it seems preposterous to argue that you can't watch something at SD. It's one step away from arguing that you won't play 2D games, or watch films in black & white.

 

There's a massive difference between technological improvements in an interactive vs. a passive medium, but lets agree to disagree.

[Captain Kelsten]

I’ve never been bothered about frames per second. For a long time, I could barely tell the difference. 
 

I’ve just played Elden Ring, Dark Souls 2 and Dark Souls 3 back to back on my Xbox Series X and it’s been glorious. 60fps, fast, snappy, responsive. 
 

Then I booted up Bloodborne on my PS4 Pro. For the first time ever I can tell the difference. Bloodborne feels…jerky. Blurry. Unresponsive at times. And it was making me feel a bit nauseous. 
 

God I hope they release a remaster or 60fps patch for it, because I don’t know if I can stomach it as is. 

 

[Qazimod]

On 13/09/2021 at 10:17, wavey said:

 

I remember the 3D Freescape games on the C64, they would have an on-screen progress bar that filled up up between frames.

 

Freescape or 3D Construction Kit games were measured in seconds per frame  

[Kevvy Metal]

10 minutes ago, Doctor Shark said:

I’ve never been bothered about frames per second. For a long time, I could barely tell the difference. 
 

I’ve just played Elden Ring, Dark Souls 2 and Dark Souls 3 back to back on my Xbox Series X and it’s been glorious. 
 

Then I booted up Bloodborne on my PS4 Pro. For the first time ever I can tell the difference. Bloodborne feels…jerky. Blurry. Unresponsive at times. And it was making me feel a bit nauseous. 
 

God I hope they release a remaster or 60fps patch for it, because I don’t know if I can stomach it as is. 

 

Are you playing on an rllmuk-endorced LG OLED? The quick pixel response of those panels can make 30 fps look more choppy than on a regular LED display. As they’re so much slower, the frames blend a little more in a pleasant way. 

[Captain Kelsten]

9 minutes ago, Kevvy Metal said:

Are you playing on an rllmuk-endorced LG OLED? The quick pixel response of those panels can make 30 fps look more choppy than on a regular LED display. As they’re so much slower, the frames blend a little more in a pleasant way. 

I am indeed! That’s very interesting and I certainly don’t remember it being this bad. The game is also ridiculously dark - way more dark than it used to be on my old TV. Every other game is fine, but on Bloodborne the dark is almost pitch black to the point where I literally can’t see anything. 

[Thor]

Bloodborne is also badly framepaced, which makes the stuttering effect worse than it should be. Just take a look at something like Arkham Knight on PS4 Pro, it looks a lot smoother in comparison to Bloodborne, but they're both 30fps.

[Mr. Gerbik]

3 hours ago, Doctor Shark said:

I’ve never been bothered about frames per second. For a long time, I could barely tell the difference. 
 

I’ve just played Elden Ring, Dark Souls 2 and Dark Souls 3 back to back on my Xbox Series X and it’s been glorious. 60fps, fast, snappy, responsive. 
 

Then I booted up Bloodborne on my PS4 Pro. For the first time ever I can tell the difference. Bloodborne feels…jerky. Blurry. Unresponsive at times. And it was making me feel a bit nauseous. 
 

God I hope they release a remaster or 60fps patch for it, because I don’t know if I can stomach it as is. 

 

Welcome to the connoisseurs' club!

[NecroMorrius]

Bloodborne is godawful in that sense if you’re used to souls at 60+. It’s really the only one which has to be played in that state, between the various PC versions and remakes. Everyone loves Bloodborne and it’s crazy to me that there’s no next gen remaster yet. 
 

I finished it at the time but I can’t go back to it. I tried. It’s an instant nope on a CX. 

[Rayn]

I just came here to namedrop Bloodborne specifically. After Elden I was eager to try Bloodborne as I never really got on with it when it was originally released. It was a massive letdown to find out that it feels ancient compared to Elden Ring, the framerate is choppy, the controls feels a bit off and not having a jump button also felt wrong. I'm going to yet again abandon Bloodborne in hope of a 60 fps patch for PS5. 

[Phantoon]

If a game is great, then it's great regardless of frame rate. There's probably an actual point where a game becomes genuinely unplayable because of frame rate because it's pretty much strobing, but that is way below 30.

 

If you won't play a game because it's below a certain number but no other reason - be it 30 FPS or 1080p or whatever - that's not being a connoisseur. Plenty of godawful games are technically competent and therefore acceptable to you. That's being a snob.

[Captain Kelsten]

4 minutes ago, Phantoon said:

If a game is great, then it's great regardless of frame rate. There's probably an actual point where a game becomes genuinely unplayable because of frame rate because it's pretty much strobing, but that is way below 30.

 

If you won't play a game because it's below a certain number but no other reason - be it 30 FPS or 1080p or whatever - that's not being a connoisseur. Plenty of godawful games are technically competent and therefore acceptable to you. That's being a snob.

In my case it was my TV causing the issue with Bloodborne - the TV was refreshing more quickly than the game could keep up (or something, I’m not technical) and it was super choppy and blurry and made me feel quite ill. Thankfully a few tweaks (the main one seemed to be turning off the PS4 pro’s HDR, bizarrely) and it’s okay now. It’s still blurry, it’s still a bit sluggish, but you soon get used to it. 

[Phantoon]

I was going to say that all games should aim for a stable 60fps nowadays, even at a cost of resolution if necessary. I'm not a particular fan of 30fps myself. But then I remembered that stuff like BotW probably wouldn't be possible on the Switch at that frame rate, and that's not a sacrifice worth having. So, even nowadays, if there's a good (gameplay) reason for 30fps, go for it, developers.

[Sumire]

I can obviously play games at 30fps, and have in the past, (also sub 30fps) but would never choose to if I have the option of to play them 60fps+ as it is a better experience.

[Rayn]

1 hour ago, Phantoon said:

If a game is great, then it's great regardless of frame rate. There's probably an actual point where a game becomes genuinely unplayable because of frame rate because it's pretty much strobing, but that is way below 30.

 

If you won't play a game because it's below a certain number but no other reason - be it 30 FPS or 1080p or whatever - that's not being a connoisseur. Plenty of godawful games are technically competent and therefore acceptable to you. That's being a snob.

 

Don't get me wrong, I still play plenty of sub 60 fps games, heck, even sub 30 fps games and it's usually fine. I think the biggest reason for my letdown with Bloodborne is that I just came off a very similar game that overall feels better and that muscle memory is the main issue. 

[JoeK]

2 hours ago, Rayn said:

 

Don't get me wrong, I still play plenty of sub 60 fps games, heck, even sub 30 fps games and it's usually fine. I think the biggest reason for my letdown with Bloodborne is that I just came off a very similar game that overall feels better and that muscle memory is the main issue. 

 

Bloodborne would have been much more acceptable if the sodding 30fps was properly frame-paced. Honestly, I don't care much what a game is running at, but constant juddering and hitching is absolutely interminable and shouldn't be a thing. 

[Thor]

Aye, I finished Bloodborne back in 2015 a couple of times, got the full and proper ending as well, absolutely loved it. But years later I tried going back to it, and I just couldn't deal with stuttering.