Totalbiscuit - The Framerate Police - General

I've been playing games with 30fps or less for 20 years and it's never bothered me outside of a few FPS games where the frame rates tanked to like 7fps. But I'm not gonna sit and say i want 30 FPS to stick around cause it's bullshit in this day and age, even if it does not really bother me too much.

open up in notepad most of the time...

Well we're sorry Mr Totaldickskit, maybe not all of us can afford hyper-quality computers and upgrades for it at the drop of a hat.

[QUOTE=latin_geek;48215469] He's complaining not every car is a Lamborghini, because that's the only thing he drives.[/QUOTE] If we're talking car analogies, I'm pretty sure I'd complain if I bought a Lambourghini and found it was limited to 60mph and had no information of this from the dealership/seller.

[QUOTE=latin_geek;48215469]The fact he finds 30FPS "completely unplayable" renders his opinion completely irrelevant, IMO. Not everyone literally lives off playing games and can afford a dual titan x on SLI setup. A [I]solid[/I] 30fps framerate is a happy minimum, it's playable and enjoyable, anything above it is better, but not necessary. This curator stuff is just that shitty opinion made into something mildly useful and thankfully objective. He's complaining not every car is a Lamborghini, because that's the only thing he drives.[/QUOTE] This isn't about his opinion, this is about "Hey I made a steam curator because Steam doesn't say which games have locked framerates".

People making a mountain out of a molehill jesus christ.

[QUOTE=Mikk;48215157]Am I the only person who doesn't find games unplayable at 30 frames a fucking second?[/QUOTE] It can depend on the game. Once you play a game at 60fps, and then try to play that same game at 30, It's just like Ugh, I'll wait until I can play it at 60 again. First Person Shooters playing at 30FPS is probably the worst for me. I just can't do it, and if you're given the choice between 30 or 60 with say Team Fortress 2, would anyone pick 30?

I think it's great that someone tries to improve the pc gaming standard. Don't know why some of you have problems with that, you can still play the game at 30fps if you want. [QUOTE=Zillamaster55;48215952]Well we're sorry Mr Totaldickskit, [...][/QUOTE] Are you five?

[QUOTE=Mikk;48215157]Am I the only person who doesn't find games unplayable at 30 frames a fucking second?[/QUOTE] Depends on what I'm using to control the game, I'm a lot more forgiving on 30 fps if I'm using a controller, but the framerate has to be 30 and not below that.. which is sometimes the case with games that force that lock.

I honestly can't tell the difference between 30 and 60 and I've played a lot of the former and a fair bit of the latter with lower end games, I'm definitely used to dealing with even as low as 20 FPS and still enjoying games That said this whole bitter spite thing going on by people on lower frame rates against those wanting higher rates is absolutely retarded and bringing money and silver spoon type accusations into this is pathetic Yeah, some people can afford a better PC than you - first of all, who gives a flying fuck, second of all, why shouldn't they want tech to be pushed to its limits wherever possible so those at the higher end of the spectrum get a better experience? What does anyone lose by not bitching about something that doesn't affect them. [QUOTE=latin_geek;48215469]The fact he finds 30FPS "completely unplayable" renders his opinion completely irrelevant, IMO[/quote] I'm sorry but this is just complete drivel, this sort of idea has nothing approaching good reasoning behind it and just exemplifies everything wrong with those shitting on the high FPS advocates in this thread - his opinion is relevant because he can't play at 30 - the issue is inherently founded in people used to playing games at high frame rates finding games locked at lower frame rates unplayable [quote]anything above it is better, but not necessary.[/quote] Its been said already but here: 1) People get accustomed to higher frame rates 2) Companies should [I]always[/I] push the boundaries of tech on their games, especially if laziness is the only excuse - this isn't like console releases being put out of the question because of increased graphics fidelity.

[QUOTE=Dr.Critic;48216170]I honestly can't tell the difference between 30 and 60 and I've played a lot of the former and a fair bit of the latter with lower end games, I'm definitely used to dealing with even as low as 20 FPS and still enjoying games[/QUOTE] I'm sure you'll easily spot the difference in this test: [url]http://www.testufo.com/#test=framerates[/url]

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;48215952]Well we're sorry Mr Totaldickskit, maybe not all of us can afford hyper-quality computers and upgrades for it at the drop of a hat.[/QUOTE] How is not having a framerate cap, or even a cap at 60, a detriment to you then?

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;48215952]Well we're sorry Mr Totaldickskit, maybe not all of us can afford hyper-quality computers and upgrades for it at the drop of a hat.[/QUOTE] That doesn't even make any sense. Are you saying that some games are locked at 30FPS because the devs had shitty PCs that couldn't handle more than 30FPS? :v:

"Here's a curator that has a list of games that have a fps lock so you can be aware of it before purchase" "Thanks <put insult here>" What sort of logic is this? If you don't care about fps, then don't follow him. I care about fps and want to know beforehand if it's locked or not. What's next, we won't care if it's a bad port because hey it's playable. Or we should not put "controller only" because who cares about that either?

I support this because I like playing games at 60fps

I can't even begin to understand the bullshit going on in this thread. TB finds those games unplayable for him, he stressed this, said it clearly and made it a prominent part of his overall point. TB made this list because there's no other way to document this on steam in such an obvious way. This is the only option for that. This does not undermine your opinion or enjoyment of 30 fps games. I enjoy 30 fps, and I disagree with him when it comes to his South Park example, but his point is correct. This is a way for you to document games that do not run at 30 fps. That's it. If you are upset by this, then you should please stop arguing and re examine why exactly you are angry about this. If you're seriously mad at TB saying he doesn't want to play modern 30 fps games because he's a gamer who's spent the money to not have to deal with that, that's ridiculous. I don't have an amazing rig but I'd still rather games became optimized and built for 60 fps rather than 30 fps. You don't have to have an amazing, or even a good rig to agree "I want developers to build their games for 60 fps, or at least tell us that they're going to be 30 fps in clear terms.". We've seen PC games do not get this discussed about in most official reviews. If you care about that, then you WANT people to talk about it. If you don't care about it, then walk on because this has 0 effect on you. People go out of their way to attack TB from what I've seen.

All triple A games should be at 60 fps+ standard unless it has an artstyle like South Park that does better without it. If it's not triple A or whatever then it should just be a recommendation. This is overdoing it quite a bit.

[QUOTE=Fapplejack;48216359]All triple A games should be at 60 fps+ standard unless it has an artstyle like South Park that does better without it. If it's not triple A or whatever then it should just be a recommendation. This is overdoing it quite a bit.[/QUOTE] Why would not triple A be excused from this? If anything, indie games have no excuse to run under 60 as they often are much smaller in both looks and gameplay.

I love that half of that list feature games that would have zero real benefit at 60FPS such as every isometric/side scrolling 2D game on earth that uses sprite based animation, and it really makes TB (and that curator list) come off as snobs 30 FPS is totally alright for most people. 60FPS is superior though to 30 in every way for 3D games, and shouldn't be prevented as an option. If you have the hardware to run 60, then don't prevent people from running 60.

People that complain about TB doing this as bad care more about people bithering about 30 fps I don't buy a 30 fps game and then done, problem solved If I like the game enough I don't care. Alan wake 24 fps average. Onenof the best games ever.

[QUOTE=zerosix;48215329]but the idea of someone going to the extent of setting up a steam page to "report" 30 fps games simply because you are slightly irritated by it is literally one of the stupidest and most counter productive things i've ever heard imagine spending actual hours of your life doing that shit instead of just dealing with it and enjoying a 30 fps game despite the slight annoyance of it not looking ~enitrely~ smooth[/QUOTE] The whole reason he has to do this in the first place is because "30fps" is banned as a tag on Steam. All he's doing is informing the consumer, not telling people what to buy and what not to buy. Imagine spending hours of your life helping people jesus what a loser

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48216338]People go out of their way to attack TB from what I've seen.[/QUOTE] I personally can't stand his snobby attitude, but I still respect him.

[QUOTE=latin_geek;48215469]The fact he finds 30FPS "completely unplayable" renders his opinion completely irrelevant, IMO.[/QUOTE] putting an artificial framerate limit is absolutely fucking haram

Isn't the actual issue (the one so many who personally believe 30fps is fine/tolerable keep ignoring) that the framelock isn't listed on most games store pages? Nobody gives two shits if you think 30fps is fine. The issue is, the people who don't think it's fine can't see if what they're buying is going to be unfit for them by looking at the store page, and it's unknown if some games are locked to 30fps or not until after they're released. It's usually the bigger titles have framerate info released just prior to release by people who get review copies. If I wanted to play a certain game on release but had issues with games locked to 30fps, I'd have to go around googling. Maybe I find a solid source, maybe I don't. But if it results in me buying the game, spending hours downloading it only to find that it was indeed locked to 30fps due to bad sources or lack of info, that's pretty annoying. "ooo u could just wait a few days tee hee" Well, they could also just fucking include whether they lock the frame rate or not in the technical part of the store page.

[QUOTE=Fapplejack;48216359]All triple A games should be at 60 fps+ standard unless it has an artstyle like South Park that does better without it. If it's not triple A or whatever then it should just be a recommendation. This is overdoing it quite a bit.[/QUOTE] But SoT's Art style is not an excuse for it's use of 30fps, The Order 1886 pulled that card and it's bullshit. There is no reason not to use 60 FPS in 2015. However, SoT is not damaged because it used 30 fps that's why it gets away with it, likewise for similar games. At the end of the day, I don't use my GTX8800 card from 2007 anymore so why should you be using a limitation for hardware dated back then. But i refer back to my original post on page 2.

Apparently an indie developer posted in the subreddit with his thoughts on the current group. [url]https://www.reddit.com/r/Cynicalbrit/comments/3dfxge/a_developers_thoughts_on_the_framerate_police/[/url]

[QUOTE=DeeCeeTeeBee;48217066]Isn't the actual issue (the one so many who personally believe 30fps is fine/tolerable keep ignoring) that the framelock isn't listed on most games store pages? Nobody gives two shits if you think 30fps is fine. The issue is, the people who don't think it's fine can't see if what they're buying is going to be unfit for them by looking at the store page, and it's unknown if some games are locked to 30fps or not until after they're released. It's usually the bigger titles have framerate info released just prior to release by people who get review copies. If I wanted to play a certain game on release but had issues with games locked to 30fps, I'd have to go around googling. Maybe I find a solid source, maybe I don't. But if it results in me buying the game, spending hours downloading it only to find that it was indeed locked to 30fps due to bad sources or lack of info, that's pretty annoying. "ooo u could just wait a few days tee hee" Well, they could also just fucking include whether they lock the frame rate or not in the technical part of the store page.[/QUOTE] Yeah that's exactly what TB is talking about, and he's absolutely right.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;48215952]Well we're sorry Mr Totaldickskit, maybe not all of us can afford hyper-quality computers and upgrades for it at the drop of a hat.[/QUOTE] Just because a game can run flawlessly at 60, doesn't mean you have to run it at 60, nor do you need a machine that CAN run it at 60. What he's saying is for those that have the hardware, the choice should be there for them. Just because you don't have a PC that can run these games at 60 fps doesn't mean nobody else does, and if they do they should be able to. Personally I can only run modern games at 30 fps with my rig, with lower settings, but I'm totally ok with that until I can afford to replace my PC, and when I do I want to be able to as well.

[QUOTE=ironman17;48217149]Apparently an indie developer posted in the subreddit with his thoughts on the current group. [url]https://www.reddit.com/r/Cynicalbrit/comments/3dfxge/a_developers_thoughts_on_the_framerate_police/[/url][/QUOTE] He doesn't really say anything we don't already know, in any case it still doesn't excuse arbitrarily locking FPS without at least giving us the option to unlock it. First response pretty much nailed it though: [quote]My thoughts on this are simple. FPS police is purely informational- if you don't run at 60 then you don't run at 60. People who care will now know and not buy the game. People who do not care will buy the game if it's good. If your company releases a game that runs at 30 FPS- good for you I don't really care, but I also don't want to buy your game. If your company goes under because the consumer is informed about the factual state of your game, then you deserve to go under. It sucks, but that's how business works.[/quote]

[QUOTE=KorJax;48216535]I love that half of that list feature games that would have zero real benefit at 60FPS such as every isometric/side scrolling 2D game on earth that uses sprite based animation, and it really makes TB (and that curator list) come off as snobs 30 FPS is totally alright for most people. 60FPS is superior though to 30 in every way for 3D games, and shouldn't be prevented as an option. If you have the hardware to run 60, then don't prevent people from running 60.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry, but this is not true. In the cases of games such as TB mentions ie South Park: The Stick of Truth, yeah 60 fps might honestly not be necessary, but that doesn't mean every 2D game is the same on 30fps as 60fps. It's not as big of a deal as with 3D games but it's still a thing.