Home General Discussion

Games and 60 FPS : It's not all that good...

1
polycounter lvl 9
Offline / Send Message
Blond polycounter lvl 9
OK ok, risky thread here but a very interesting one if you think about it.

60 frame per second! Ha! The famous 60 frame per second that most PC gamers acknowledge daily in their games. The same thing can't be said for consoles users knowing that most games nowadays on consoles can't catch constant silky smooth 60 frame per seconds due to technical limitations. As a matter of fact, some people even think that 60 frame is useless since human eye can't see past 24 fps (which of course is bullshit, 24 fps has been used in cinema because that's where the motion is consistant enough ,otherwise, the human eyes will see the gap between images).

Now anyway, some poeple won't agree with me here but I think that games, or at least, the realistic one should keep their cinematics in 24 maybe 30 fps and keep the 60 frame thing only for gameplay. Often, I think that games cinematic in 60 fps always seems OFF for some reasons. Acknowledge it yourself with this 60 FPS test of MGS V ( Metal Gear Solid is a serie known for the excellent work on the cinematogaphic styles of cutscenes).

(YOUTUBE NOW SUPPORTS 60 FRAMES HD VIDEOS YAY!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4u-5And3lE

sOMEHOW, don't you think it looks off, like the whole aspect of the sequence has lot its credibility? Don't get me wrong, when it's gameplay time, the games should be playable in full 60 frame motion for a smoother gameplay experiences but why do developpers put their cinematic in 60 frames?

Another 60 frames vide, here, The last of us:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0_sPL03z_0



Once again, it's all pretty smooth and nice looking, but then again, it feels too much like I'm looking at animated plastic polymeshes and not actual characters.

The ''plastic'' look is another 60 fps is to blame for. Since frame transition is twice smoother, it's easier to see the cut-transitions between animation loops, but also the mistakes and rigidity in the characters motion (since vido games animation quality is usually of lower quality thant Animation feauture films and CGI movies).


So to sum things, when I'm playing action, swifty games that require high framerates to be enojyable ( super smash, Jak and Daxter, Mario Kart, Conuter Strike), I don't mind the 60 frame but when we're talking about cinematographic games which focuses alot on realistically accurate visuals, I'm not sure if 60 frame is good thing.


What do you think?



BONUS vid:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zPm3SSj6W8 (prettyyy)


EDIT: If you think about it, the subject of my thread reminds me that the hoobit film was shot and presented in theaters in 48 fps instead of the usual 24. Alot of people felt it looked off (like if you were looking at a documentary), so the same thing applies here.

Replies

  • MrHobo
    Offline / Send Message
    MrHobo polycounter lvl 13
    I dont really think looking "plastic" (Plastic might not be the best choice of words, it doesnt really describe motion very well) would have anything to do 60 fps. I think the problem is that visually we are conditioned by decades of film and TV to see 24 fps as natural. As higher speeds become more common place this will pass.
  • Amsterdam Hilton Hotel
    Offline / Send Message
    Amsterdam Hilton Hotel insane polycounter
    The idea that 30fps in a computer renderer = more cinematic always seemed really naive to me, it's not like a computer frame and a video frame are comparable when one records data over time and the other is data in an instant. I think usually it's marketing people saying this cause it sounds better than "we couldn't hit 60fps at the graphical quality we wanted"

    This is an opinion I guess but games are computer programs. You want them running fast. If you want to simulate how a movie looks maybe hit 60fps and then downsample, lol.
  • Blond
    Offline / Send Message
    Blond polycounter lvl 9
    Well, yeah, plastic as in fake. But maybe you're right. But you think 60 frame will be common in movies?
  • JacqueChoi
    Offline / Send Message
    JacqueChoi polycounter
    The reason gamers want 60fps, is because of controls, not aesthetics.


    Controller responsiveness is much more noticeable in twitch based games, particularly FPS.
  • SurlyBird
    Offline / Send Message
    SurlyBird polycounter lvl 13
    Frame-rate is critical for inputs in fighting games, too. I'm pleased with YT's implementation, for the most part. Watching recorded matches now is more like watching a live game.

    Killer Instinct @ 60 FPS
  • Fogbrain
    Offline / Send Message
    Fogbrain polycounter lvl 5
    SurlyBird wrote: »
    Frame-rate is critical for inputs in fighting games, too. I'm pleased with YT's implementation, for the most part. Watching recorded matches now is more like watching a live game.

    Killer Instinct @ 60 FPS

    /End Thread.

    That video speaks volumes on why 60 is important.
  • Needles
    Offline / Send Message
    Needles polycounter lvl 19
    "Cinematic look" is a thing that needs to die. People are too misty eyed for old outdated compromised standards. The film look is the equivalent of 8bit sound or Polaroid filters. It was a bare minimum for motion to look good on screen and it saved film. Like actual film rolls. People have been conditioned for like 100 years now to feel that 24fps is good and more frames are bad. More frames are never bad!

    Give people 60 fps long enough and they will like it. And will notice how much crappy and jerky anything less actually is.

    I feel that the next generation systems over promised their capability. And now developers are finding the real limitations. That they can't turn on all the eye candy and have 1080p 60fps.

    Console games should come with high med low settings.
  • Meloncov
    Offline / Send Message
    Meloncov greentooth
    Watching a YouTube video doesn't really give you a meaningful comparison when it comes to games. The big advantage of 60 fps is that you see a faster reaction to your input.
  • Ged
    Offline / Send Message
    Ged interpolator
    MrHobo wrote: »
    I think the problem is that visually we are conditioned by decades of film and TV to see 24 fps as natural. As higher speeds become more common place this will pass.

    this is the problem, also we are used to seeing a certain amount of motion blur due to 24 fps tv and when games approximate that same amount of motion blur it seems more "believable". So what we are doing is playing to people preconceptions.

    Same applies to camera effects like dirty lens and lens flare effects and chromatic abberation, if we do them to just the right amount it makes the game seem more real because we are faking old crappy tv camera effects that people already have a frame of reference for. Unfortunately in games we sometimes put too much of this stuff in haha then its just a spectacle and a bit distracting.

    Maybe in 3 years when 60fps tv shows are more common then games at 60 fps will seem more "real". Hard to say.
  • Visceral
    Is this really worth discussing? I thought 60fps where the standard?
  • Grindigo
    Offline / Send Message
    Grindigo polycounter lvl 6
    I was always the one with crappy pc and I used to get max 30 frames maybe, but usually ranging from 15 to 30, ever since I built new pc I hit ranges of 60+ fps I can't even stand anything below 40 frames because it strains my eyes.

    Developers need to take note and stop saying 24fps looks cinematic, this is really stupid to say and everyone else knows it, this is a gimmick nobody wants, pc's are already hitting 4k and pc's will hit 4k with smooth 60fps and vr will change the face of many things, meanwhile consoles will be stuck backwards in the past again.
  • Shadownami92
    Offline / Send Message
    Shadownami92 polycounter lvl 7
    Personally I'm on the 60fps boat. Animation I think can look better at 60fps though I imagine it would be smoother for animations actually designed for 60fps. I feel like physics engines and particle effects really shine with a higher framerate too.
  • pior
    Online / Send Message
    pior grand marshal polycounter
    Once again, it's all pretty smooth and nice looking, but then again, it feels too much like I'm looking at animated plastic polymeshes and not actual characters.

    The ''plastic'' look is another 60 fps is to blame for. Since frame transition is twice smoother, it's easier to see the cut-transitions between animation loops, but also the mistakes and rigidity in the characters motion (since video games animation quality is usually of lower quality than Animation feature films and CGI movies).

    While I totally agree with you on what you call the "plastic" effect, I think you are misplacing the blame : 60fps doesn't cause it, but just merely reveals it. I actually think this is caused by *high* quality mocap animations being applied to very simply rigged meshes. This is especially obvious on the limbs of the characters in The Last of Us : the models look fantastic, the body animations are as realistic as it can possibly get, yet the pants legs and sleeves of the outfits do not show any trace of interaction with the dynamic bodies underneath. Very smooth motion and high framerate seem to make it very obvious : the characters appear to be carrying plastic casts of pieces of clothing.

    Now of course I don't think it would be fair to expect a game like TLoU to go all out and waste resources on such a detail. The return on investment would be pretty minimal.

    Regarding the added cinematic feel of 24 fps game cinematic sequences : I think this is only true when binge watching cinematics independently from gameplay. I personally have a very hard time when a game switches from 60 to 24 fps between gameplay and cinematics, as it totally gets me out of the experience. I also personally really like the look of MGSV cinematics at 60fps as this look goes very well with the hand-held feel of the sequences.

    At the end of the day I am really happy that Youtube now has this option, as a lot of games will highly benefit from it from a marketing standpoint- especially smaller indie titles running silky smooth.

    On a (barely related) side note, I would highly recommend anyone to watch District9 through a video player with solid framerate interpolation. Since most of the movie is a fake documentary, it looks absolutely fantastic at a higher framerate. Quite an unforgettable experience really.

    (also : quite the click-bait thread title you have there man !)
  • SuperFranky
    Offline / Send Message
    SuperFranky polycounter lvl 10
    60 fps is objectively better AND should be a golden standard for all video games. Better visuals, less nausea, less input lag. Nintendo tries to make their games 60fps for a reason, because there are clear benefits to the gameplay. Naughty Dog make Uncharted 4 in 60fps because they believe it's how games should be. Platinum Games make their games 60fps because there's a clear benefit for any action game. Activision strives to make Call of Duty 60fps and people who don't even understand it say that Call of Duty is great because it's more responsive and feels better than other shooters.

    Ask any Dark Souls player who switched from PS3 to PC to play the game and they will tell you how 60fps matters a lot.


    If you think it looks weird or something means you just aren't used to it. There's absolutely nothing "natural" or "cinematic" about 30fps, because in games FPS don't work like in movies.
  • MrOneTwo
    Offline / Send Message
    MrOneTwo polycounter lvl 12
    JacqueChoi wrote: »
    The reason gamers want 60fps, is because of controls, not aesthetics.


    Controller responsiveness is much more noticeable in twitch based games, particularly FPS.

    This. You send a command to a game 60 times a second not 30. Games look matters too. 60 fps is smoother and more pleasant to eyes.

    The only reason we event discuss it is because developers recently try to bullshit people by saying that 30 fps is better. It's not. Done.

    Also movies vs games discussion doesn't hold up. Movies can be displayed in 24 frames because they compansate in other ways (like motion blur).
  • WarrenM
    The only reason we event discuss it is because developers recently try to bullshit people by saying that 30 fps is better. It's not. Done.
    It is if the game can't maintain 60. A consistent 30 is better than a jumpy 60.
  • weee
    Offline / Send Message
    weee polycounter lvl 3
    cinematic feeling = 24fps + decent motion blur
    anything else, STFU
  • SuperFranky
    Offline / Send Message
    SuperFranky polycounter lvl 10
    WarrenM wrote: »
    It is if the game can't maintain 60. A consistent 30 is better than a jumpy 60.

    I don't know many games with consistent 30fps on consoles. It's always something like 22-30.
  • eld
    Offline / Send Message
    eld polycounter lvl 18
    How can we see 60fps if our eyes aren't real!?
  • GlowingPotato
    Offline / Send Message
    GlowingPotato polycounter lvl 10
    my opinion is, 60fps(when possible) or go home.
  • Ged
    Offline / Send Message
    Ged interpolator
    Quake 3 at 125 fps feels more real than Halo 3 that barely runs at 30 fps. Quake 3 still feels more real than BF4 multiplayer.

    I love quake 3 but I think we are talking about different things, how a game feels and how it looks are two different things. Ive played games that feel great and run at 60fps plus(quake3) and Ive played games that look awesome but play at about 30fps(battlefield 3) having a game that does both is like some mythical holy grail that most devs want but in my opinion wont likely be able to achieve on current hardware and still meet expectations.
  • glottis8
  • almighty_gir
    Offline / Send Message
    almighty_gir ngon master
    go big or go home.
  • Blond
    Offline / Send Message
    Blond polycounter lvl 9
    Well thx for the replies. I sure do see things i na different wa now.
  • Quack!
    Offline / Send Message
    Quack! polycounter lvl 17
    It's fine to target 30fps for single player games or if you are going for the 'filmic' look. But as soon as you utter Multiplayer your brain should switch to 60fps or bust.

    I personally prefer 60fps on both single and multi-player, and I wish games would stop trying to be film. We are bad at being films, lets just be great games.
  • Cay
    Offline / Send Message
    Cay polycounter lvl 5
    If I had to choose between super fluid gameplay at 60fps and 30fps, ridiculous features and super awesome graphics.. I'd take #2.. but that's just my opinion. There are people who prefer competitive games and such.. I'm more into story, atmosphere and so on.

    There seem to be many games that look like last gen and run worse than current gen though.. but that's just my personal opinion.
  • Ged
    Offline / Send Message
    Ged interpolator
    I
    But instead of doing that, game studios are doing the opposite. They just go full overkill, put as much ridiculous stuff as possible and we get games that barely run at 30 fps. :poly122:

    yeah I see what you mean, I just think its hard for devs to meet "next gen graphics" expectations and still run at 60fps, but if people dont mind it looking a bit trimmed down then its not such an issue, I think most of the general gaming public wants to have thier cake and eat it though if you know what I mean.
  • Guideborn
    Offline / Send Message
    Guideborn polycounter lvl 6
    JacqueChoi wrote: »
    The reason gamers want 60fps, is because of controls, not aesthetics.


    Controller responsiveness is much more noticeable in twitch based games, particularly FPS.

    He's talking about cinematics, in which you typically do not have control.
  • JedTheKrampus
    Offline / Send Message
    JedTheKrampus polycounter lvl 8
    I personally agree with the original poster that 60 fps is not that good. I prefer it when games hit 144 myself.

    SO SMOOTH
  • The Rizzler
    Offline / Send Message
    The Rizzler polycounter lvl 9
    Guideborn wrote: »
    He's talking about cinematics, in which you typically do not have control.

    regardless, as soon as the gameplay ends and the cutscene begins and you're shunted from 60fps down to 30 it's going to feel like your eyeballs have glue behind them or something
    anyone should instantly be able to tell the difference
  • almighty_gir
    Offline / Send Message
    almighty_gir ngon master
    I think there's an important thing to understand here:

    When you're aiming for a particular FPS output, your animation content is usually authored with that output in mind. If your content is authored with 30fps in mind and then suddenly you start outputting 60, of course you're going to start seeing jagged movements and notice actual animation keyframes.
  • meshiah
    Offline / Send Message
    meshiah polycounter lvl 17
    60 all the way for me. my studio is starting to go down 60 as a standard.

    comment and question.

    i think both fame rates will "look' better when the video card and monitor sync.
    anyone tried that new nvidia monitor? its supposed to sync the refresh of the monitor to the
    out put of the card preventing tearing..

    oculous question (i dont know much about it,)
    doesn't each eye need to be at least 60? so like 120 fps? because we need to git rid of motion blur etc, to get to a better motion model..
  • The Rizzler
    Offline / Send Message
    The Rizzler polycounter lvl 9
    I think there's an important thing to understand here:

    When you're aiming for a particular FPS output, your animation content is usually authored with that output in mind. If your content is authored with 30fps in mind and then suddenly you start outputting 60, of course you're going to start seeing jagged movements and notice actual animation keyframes.

    have you seen what Tripwire Interactive has done with Killing Floor 2? They've mocapped the weapons and the animations are 120fps so even in slow motion you get smooth animation, it's basically gun porn
  • NegevPro
    Offline / Send Message
    NegevPro polycounter lvl 4
    A lot of games don't need a solid 60 FPS to be enjoyed because the gameplay could be slow and the game itself may not require player precision for any type of the gameplay mechanics. In cases like those, I'd rather have the studio developing the game to focus on getting the game to look pretty at 30 FPS.

    As the quality standard for games raises (which it does, every year) console developers are going to have to prioritize since console hardware sticks around for a very long time. Personally, I'd rather have a game that doesn't gain any gameplay benefit from 60 FPS to look up to standard and run at a solid 30 FPS.

    There's also the fact that some developers tie gameplay to framerate. With CoD games for example, the game runs as it is supposed to when you get exactly 60 FPS but if you play on PC and average even slightly above that, it will result in you running and shooting slower than others in multiplayer.
  • JordanN
    Offline / Send Message
    JordanN interpolator
    To me it's:

    Locked Frame rate > motion blur > 60fps > 30fps

    Locked frame rate should always be the standard. Don't care if a game is 999fps but it jumps to 1fps the moment your character starts walking. I prefer consistency, even if it means 30fps.

    Motion blur is next. The smearing between frames is the better key to realism.

    Then it's 60fps.
  • Needles
    Offline / Send Message
    Needles polycounter lvl 19
    60fps gives you "free" motion blur!
  • RobeOmega
    Offline / Send Message
    RobeOmega polycounter lvl 10
    JordanN wrote: »
    To me it's:

    Locked Frame rate > motion blur > 60fps > 30fps

    No more no and no.

    Motion blur is terrible unless it is from a camera.

    Also locked frame rates I generally find are when the hardware is struggling to handle it I.E on console. On PC when there is a bad port from consoles it generally has a locked frame rate

    60 fps> Motion blur with 60>locked frame rate>30 fps
  • SuperFranky
    Offline / Send Message
    SuperFranky polycounter lvl 10
    Do people really like motion blur in games? I always, always turn it off as soon as I start a game.
  • Mask_Salesman
    Offline / Send Message
    Mask_Salesman polycounter lvl 13
    Just hard disable any console commands that show FPS or replace the counter with a static image of 60. JOB DONE.
  • Blaizer
    Offline / Send Message
    Blaizer interpolator
    Buy a gaming monitor like a Benq XL2430T and let me know if you still want to play at 60 fps :)

    Anyways, with some games i can't play at 120+ fps, but i have an average of 80-90 fps and i dislike 60hz monitors, A LOT. The difference between framerates is quite noticeable for me, and god.. my eyes are now happy, as happy as when i had a huge CRT@120mhz
  • Ace-Angel
    Offline / Send Message
    Ace-Angel polycounter lvl 12
    Considering many people want to move to 60 (movie producers for next generation 3D movies + VR) and YouTube recently made the 720@60FPS option open for Google Chrome users, I don't even think it's a question of if is good or not, that's your opinion, but objectively, the higher the better (or at the very least, 120-140 cap).

    If you want to add extra to it, most studio dev's who vouch for 30FPS, are the same people who say 1080p is not needed, when PC's are already moving towards 1440p. If these same developers and publishers put the ounce of effort they do in PR to promote the idea that 60FPS is bad, we would have better shadow system by now that didn't need hacky shaders to emulate SSS.

    Also, since people mentioned Blur and stuff, yeaaah, about that, unless Blur has a gameplay reason to be put in the game (Alien Isolation) I don't think forcing it as a locked effect is logical idea at all, my eye's already do the blurring and doo hickeys better then your Screen Shaders can, just ask my team-mates in Dota 2 whenever I lack map awareness.

    Also, if 60FPS is bad, then I would argue loads of other things are too. Ambient Occlusion in most games is a joke, a character standing in the middle of the room shouldn't be casting AO on the tree's outside, nor should it look like their armpits are oozing the ooze from Power Rangers movie. Were are the complaints about that?

    Overall, good game, but lacks polish. 2/10 ~ IGN
  • Anchang-Style
    Offline / Send Message
    Anchang-Style polycounter lvl 7
    I really can't buy into the argument this cinematic sequence looks really weird in 60 fps, 30 fps is more cinematic. Videogames are a different medium and should establish a visual language on their own and do. I really wouldn't sacrifice 60 fps just because the cinematc sequencies, the director spent so much time into, look weird. Especially since dips are so heavily noticeable with 30 fps.
  • ZacD
    Offline / Send Message
    ZacD ngon master
    Finally, there's a lot of video games I preferred watching on Twitch because 30 FPS on YouTube wasn't high enough to allow you to fully appreciate the game. Super Smash Bros Melee, and Splunkey come to mind first, but competitive FPS and speed runs look a lot better too.
  • weee
    Offline / Send Message
    weee polycounter lvl 3
    for anything >60fps, I dont think you need motion blur, that only adds necessary overhead
  • Amsterdam Hilton Hotel
    Offline / Send Message
    Amsterdam Hilton Hotel insane polycounter
    motion blur is actually a good way to create a filmic effect by simulating the exposure of the frame over time, unlike just capping the framerate somewhere low which makes no sense.
  • ZacD
    Offline / Send Message
    ZacD ngon master
    The problem is motion blur in video games doesn't work close enough to how motion blur works with a camera lens. It just ends up looking messy and horrible in most games.
  • Amsterdam Hilton Hotel
    Offline / Send Message
    Amsterdam Hilton Hotel insane polycounter
    eh. its like arguing against lens flares. unlike with framerate its a subjective thing whether you like it not. that said different games implement it differently, there isn't a universal standard motion blur that we're talking about, there are better and worse ways to do it.

    my main point is that if you want a filmic look shoot for 60fps and add motion blur, don't shoot for 24fps.
  • ZacD
    Offline / Send Message
    ZacD ngon master
    Yeah if you want cinematic, you just need good acting, some color grading, cinematic camera angles and action sequences, etc. Framerate isn't what makes film, film. I still think depth of field, bokeh, and lens flair is some of the least important parts of film.

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MuFWCgDhgE"]The Lord of the Rings - 60 FPS with SVP - YouTube[/ame]
    (Have to watch at 720p60 or 1080p60 in order to get higher frame rates)
  • almighty_gir
    Offline / Send Message
    almighty_gir ngon master
    thanks ZacD, now i want to watch that whole fucking trilogy in 60fps -_-
  • ZacD
    Offline / Send Message
    ZacD ngon master
    http://www.svp-team.com/
    SVP provides GPU acceleration and allows to watch FullHD 1080p-video recalculated to 60Hz in real-time using a mid-range CPU and almost any GPU hardware.

    So you can.
1
Sign In or Register to comment.