Horror: The Evil Within will be locked at 30fps despite the steep requirements - Sensationalist Headlines

four years to work on something that'll flop around like a dead fish gj, you killed what looked like a decent game in the beginning

[QUOTE=Covalent;46190147]four years to work on something that'll flop around like a dead fish gj, you killed what looked like a decent game in the beginning[/QUOTE] Maybe it'll sell like shit on pc but that doesnt mean it will be dead on arrival you know

Imagine how depressing it must be to work on a game that aim to only have 30 fps, knowing what a joke it really is but no one will listen to you.

[QUOTE=Covalent;46190147]four years to work on something that'll flop around like a dead fish gj, you killed what looked like a decent game in the beginning[/QUOTE] The game isn't going to flop because it has a locked frame rate; most people don't give a shit about the frame rate unless it's horribly inconsistent. [editline]9th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Pnukup;46190188]Imagine how depressing it must be to work on a game that aim to only have 30 fps, knowing what a joke it really is but no one will listen to you.[/QUOTE] I'd be more depressed that people can't look at past such a small technical detail and have immediately written off a game that they might actually enjoy.

[QUOTE=Pnukup;46190188]Imagine how depressing it must be to work on a game that aim to only have 30 fps, knowing what a joke it really is but no one will listen to you.[/QUOTE] im pretty sure exactly 0 people in the development staff are depressed over this "issue" after all they didnt even touch the pc version, it was outsourced to an external studio according to rumors. they probably would get depressed reading the shit delusional pc gamers post online.

This is seriously a retarded idea honestly. And this pretty much proves they didn't bother to optimize the game at all, especially by looking at the specs that offer for the game. edit: And as for the cinematic experience for 30fps they say. I find that as a bullshit excuse.

[QUOTE=Wiggles;46190411]I'd be more depressed that people can't look at past such a small technical detail and have immediately written off a game that they might actually enjoy.[/QUOTE] I'm depressed that additional input lag, screen tearing and actually depriving players of screen space with black bars is apparently acceptable in 2014

[QUOTE=Wiggles;46190411]The game isn't going to flop because it has a locked frame rate; most people don't give a shit about the frame rate unless it's horribly inconsistent. [editline]9th October 2014[/editline] I'd be more depressed that people can't look at past such a small technical detail and have immediately written off a game that they might actually enjoy.[/QUOTE] Thing is, as people have pointed out many times, it IS not just a "small technical detail"... especially with those insane system requirements. Screen tearing, input lag, murkier graphics, emulation sickness, and stuttering are all things that are more likely to happen at 30 fps than at 60. That's fact, not subject. That's not to say the game won't be good, hell, it might be the best horror game of the year, but don't disregard peoples completely justified critisims just because you personally don't mind 30 fps. If you are okay with 30 fps then enjoy yourself, nobody is stopping you from buying and enjoying the game, but personally I expect more of a "next-gen" title with those system requirements.

[QUOTE=Muggi;46190541]Thing is, as people have pointed out many times, it IS not just a "small technical detail"... especially with those insane system requirements. Screen tearing, input lag, murkier graphics, emulation sickness, and stuttering are all things that are more likely to happen at 30 fps than at 60. That's fact, not subject. That's not to say the game won't be good, hell, it might be the best horror game of the year, but don't disregard peoples completely justified critisims just because you personally don't mind 30 fps. If you are okay with 30 fps then enjoy yourself, nobody is stopping you from buying and enjoying the game, but personally I expect more of a "next-gen" title with those system requirements.[/QUOTE] I'm not ignoring people's criticisms, I'm saying that writing off a game entirely because of the frame rate is a ridiculous thing to do, particularly when most people haven't even tried the game for themselves. Imagine if people had written off Dark Souls because it only ran at 30 fps; we'd have missed out on one of the best games of the previous generation.

[QUOTE=Wiggles;46190600]I'm not ignoring people's criticisms, I'm saying that writing off a game entirely because of the frame rate is a ridiculous thing to do, particularly when most people haven't even tried the game for themselves. Imagine if people had written off Dark Souls because it only ran at 30 fps; we'd have missed out on one of the best games of the previous generation.[/QUOTE] Yeah... and Dark Souls also runs and plays better at 60 fps.

[QUOTE=Wiggles;46190600]I'm not ignoring people's criticisms, I'm saying that writing off a game entirely because of the frame rate is a ridiculous thing to do, particularly when most people haven't even tried the game for themselves. Imagine if people had written off Dark Souls because it only ran at 30 fps; we'd have missed out on one of the best games of the previous generation.[/QUOTE] Absolutley, but the last generation standard for console games was 30 fps. Nobody expected differently, and the only way to experience 60 fps was to game on PC (and only if the games were optimized well, or developed exclusively for PC). The new systems were [I]supposed[/I] to change that, making the new standard 60 fps at 1080p. Thus far, the new systems have dissapointed, especially the Xbone. We are simply judging the game for not living up to the next generation promise in graphical fidelity. So, if the game had been a console exclusive, it could have used the limiting hardware as an excuse. But it's also coming to PC, with high demanding system requirements, and it STILL doesn't run 60 fps out of the box, on hardware that is more than capable of running it. After all, this is the same engine that the new Wolfenstein game used, and that game performed well, even on consoles. Simply put, this is starting to look like a terrible, ressource greedy port, which is a shame. Still might be good, but the technical problems will tarnish the experience. It should also be noted that Dark Souls can be modded to play at 60 fps, and it plays way better at that framerate(even with the engine issues), and Dark Souls 2 hugely benifitted from supporting 60 fps out of the box.

[QUOTE=Naught;46188706]cinematic experience in movies is bs too, its so much smoother and crisper at 60 fps compared to 24 its just because you're used to seeing everything in sub-30 fps[/QUOTE] 40+ fps still feels cinematic enough to be since it's a movie (Hobbit would be lovely to see in a theater) its just that stupid people have asserted this thing where "but but but the human eye can only see!" [QUOTE=Rusty100;46189208]Considering they have a bunch of console commands to change basically anything, it really seems like it was an artistic choice. You know that RE4 has always run locked at 30fps until the latest port, and although I do prefer 60, 30 worked for RE4. Considering it's the same director I imagine he wants to create a similar tone. RE4 also featured black bars top and bottom on gamecube. It didn't need to, but it was a choice they made. I don't think it's fair to completely write off making a game feel cinematic. There's a right and wrong way to do cinematic in games, and there's a right and wrong genre to do it. Horror is the right one for it. And there's also a difference in actual design choices and covering up bad optimization, which I really don't think this is. That said, I will probably unlock the framerate and get rid of the bars. But provided there's actual reasons for it for the game's experience, I don't have an issue. For once. Seriously, trust Shinji Mikami.[/QUOTE] even still, 30 fps in games make no sense unless you're playing LA Noire because of the tech behind the game, and 30 fps only TRULY makes sense in Don't starve, where everything is meant to have a 'handmade' feel to it, where 30 fps and 60 truly wouldn't make a difference. Horror is generally far too fast paced for low fps.

[QUOTE=J!NX;46190848]40+ fps still feels cinematic enough to be since it's a movie (Hobbit would be lovely to see in a theater) its just that stupid people have asserted this thing where "but but but the human eye can only see!" even still, 30 fps in games make no sense unless you're playing LA Noire because of the tech behind the game, and 30 fps only TRULY makes sense in Don't starve, where everything is meant to have a 'handmade' feel to it, where 30 fps and 60 truly wouldn't make a difference. Horror is generally far too fast paced for low fps.[/QUOTE] Wasn't the biggest reason for 30fps in LA Noire the fact that they captured their facial animations at 30fps, and the models would go spaghetti if the framerate were higher?

[QUOTE=woolio1;46191324]Wasn't the biggest reason for 30fps in LA Noire the fact that they captured their facial animations at 30fps, and the models would go spaghetti if the framerate were higher?[/QUOTE] pretty much yeah

[QUOTE=werewolf0020;46186451]How is 30 FPS the "intended experience" ?, Cant they get people have more than powerfull enough rigs to run the game at 60 fps if at least decent optimization was done..[/QUOTE] Its the "intended experience" ever since devs started to get lazy and watching everyone else doing it, and giving the excuse of "artistic purposes".

[QUOTE=woolio1;46191324]Wasn't the biggest reason for 30fps in LA Noire the fact that they captured their facial animations at 30fps, and the models would go spaghetti if the framerate were higher?[/QUOTE] That's what they claimed, but it also makes no sense (Well, it makes sense if you tie the animation playback rate to the frame rate, but you shouldn't ever do that) You can playback keyframed animations at any frame rate and the only difference is that they should be smoother at higher frame rates, if they break then something is wrong with their implementation.

[QUOTE=RichyZ;46197194]iirc the facial animations were basically video files tho[/QUOTE] Might have started off that way, but they processed it into normal animation data for playback in game (Halo 4 used the same method and it's 60fps on the XBone) That's the cool thing about keyframed animations, you can linearly interpolate between the keyframes as much as you want. If they tied the actual playback rate to the game frame rate then you'd see issues, as running the game at 60fps would cause all the animations to play twice as fast (GTA3 has a similar issue with physics)

Give it a bit, Durante will save us again. He did it for Dark Souls, and Final Fantasy 13. I pray that he will continue his work with this one too, considering that there are debug options already in place to change the limit and aspect ratio.

[QUOTE=Daemon White;46197381]Give it a bit, Durante will save us again. He did it for Dark Souls, and Final Fantasy 13. I pray that he will continue his work with this one too, considering that there are debug options already in place to change the limit and aspect ratio.[/QUOTE] Is he? as far as I know of, I though he is fixing Final Fantasy XIII first... Did he ever posted his "to-do list" publicly? if not, i'm taking your comment as a grain of salt.

[QUOTE=darkedone02;46198039]Is he? as far as I know of, I though he is fixing Final Fantasy XIII first... Did he ever posted his "to-do list" publicly? if not, i'm taking your comment as a grain of salt.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Daemon White;46197381][B]I pray that he will continue his work with this one too[/B][/QUOTE] Call it intense optimism.

[QUOTE=Daemon White;46197381]Give it a bit, Durante will save us again. He did it for Dark Souls, and Final Fantasy 13. I pray that he will continue his work with this one too, considering that there are debug options already in place to change the limit and aspect ratio.[/QUOTE] he doesn't need to. the game itself will have console commands to unlock the framerate. once again people are jumping on a game with a knee jerk reaction instead of actually reading the article

I have an AMD 7870 will that run this game okay.?

So you guys are arguing for 2 pages about frame rates when the real elephant in the room is the black bars that the game will put on screen. They are putting aspect ratio bars on a VIDEOGAME

[QUOTE=Rusty100;46204812]he doesn't need to. the game itself will have console commands to unlock the framerate. once again people are jumping on a game with a knee jerk reaction instead of actually reading the article[/QUOTE] I mentioned that the debug controls are there, however, the article says it's unsupported which leads me to think that something is going to fuck up when those settings are disabled/enabled.

[QUOTE=meppers;46204942]So you guys are arguing for 2 pages about frame rates when the real elephant in the room is the black bars that the game will put on screen. They are putting aspect ratio bars on a VIDEOGAME[/QUOTE] You get to render less, making your game perform better on consoles, while calling it an artistic decision. I'd say that's a win for everyone but the player, wouldn't you?

[QUOTE=woolio1;46205495]You get to render less, making your game perform better on consoles, while calling it an artistic decision. I'd say that's a win for everyone but the player, wouldn't you?[/QUOTE] i bet you the black bars are an overlay and everything is still being rendered under them, giving no performance increase whatsoever

[QUOTE=Rusty100;46205506]i bet you the black bars are an overlay and everything is still being rendered under them, giving no performance increase whatsoever[/QUOTE] Maybe. Although, they could be using an occlusion culling system and rendering the black bars as a 3D model to unload things underneath them. That'd probably be too smart, though, for a studio that can't get more than 30FPS out of consoles that handled The Last of Us at 60, wouldn't it?

[QUOTE=GHOST!!!!;46186905]I love when people say that one framerate is better than another like it's a fact, it's entirely subjective, I find that 30 FPS gives me a Cinematic experience, other people may or may not agree but I don't say my opinion like it's a fact, you just can't go down that path because YOU find it better. If the game ran at 60+ FPS with ingame options to cap it at 30 or 60, that'd be great, but 30 by default without proper ways to change it? That's just dumb.[/QUOTE] You have a screen that can display 60FPS, maybe even 120 or 144. Saying 30 looks better is like saying a game running on the lower third of your screen looks better. They can add motion blur or post-processing effects to make a game feel "cinematic" without cutting response time in half+

[QUOTE=woolio1;46205527]Maybe. Although, they could be using an occlusion culling system and rendering the black bars as a 3D model to unload things underneath them. That'd probably be too smart, though, for a studio that can't get more than 30FPS out of consoles that handled The Last of Us at 60, wouldn't it?[/QUOTE] Just look at his most similar game, RE4. 30fps, black bars. Same deal. The game was made at 30fps, it was specifically designed around it from the very beginning. Shinji is clearly just a big fan of 30fps in games. I don't think it's an indication of it's optimization. [editline]11th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Zeke129;46205591]You have a screen that can display 60FPS, maybe even 120 or 144. Saying 30 looks better is like saying a game running on the lower third of your screen looks better. They can add motion blur or post-processing effects to make a game feel "cinematic" without cutting response time in half+[/QUOTE] I don't agree with Shinji on it, but I can see where he's coming from. We should wait until we see how it runs unlocked on PC before condemning it [editline]11th October 2014[/editline] If it were anything other than a very dark, survival horror, I'd be totally against the 30fps in every way. But I really can see how it fits the style.

[QUOTE=Rusty100;46205971] If it were anything other than a very dark, survival horror, I'd be totally against the 30fps in every way. But I really can see how it fits the style.[/QUOTE] I never understood how specific framerate can fit a style. Running game at a slower framerate does not contribute jack to style imo. Dark survival horror games work just as well if not better at 60. I doubt this new one will be an exception. It's the same argument as sluggish controls make a game more tense. All it does is makes your character annoying to control and works against immersion.