PGR2: confirmed 30fps only.

[cthellis42]

And what's more? These are all american games, whereas most of the japanese games(PDO, JSRF and more) look just as amazing and run at 60? Seems odd.

Fear of Godzilla destroying their development house if they fail!

 

[Tagrineth]

Guys it's called pushing the envolope. It's easy to make a racer that runs at 60fps solid if it's not very detailed.

Can't help but point this out:

Last gen, we had an absolute marvel of a racer called F-Zero X.

Most of its greatness comes from it being locked at 60fps on the amusingly-well-known-for-poor-frame-rates N64.

Nintendo pushed the envelope by doing a really good job of lowering detail ^^;

 

[cthellis42]

I also rather like how he seems to be saying GT4 is pushing no envelopes...

 

[Almasy]

Can't help but point this out:

Last gen, we had an absolute marvel of a racer called F-Zero X.

Most of its greatness comes from it being locked at 60fps on the amusingly-well-known-for-poor-frame-rates N64.

Nintendo pushed the envelope by doing a really good job of lowering detail ^^;

I remember that game. I was truly marveled at the framerate. I was used to sub 30 fps, so it was very unusual to see a game looking so smooth, even with the low detail.

 

[Qroach]

http://eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=52971

Inevitably all this extra detail comes at a price, with the overall frame rate locked at 30 FPS, rather than the 60 used in the original. Lead programmer Roger Perkins argued: "We wanted to keep the visual quality. We'd rather it was running at a consistent frame rate at 30, than occasionally chugging at 60 as it did in the original. Microsoft did some research and found people didn't even notice whether the game was running at 30 or 60 FPS." And to be fair, having played the game for an hour or so, we didn't notice either.

 

[Almasy]

http://eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=52971

Inevitably all this extra detail comes at a price, with the overall frame rate locked at 30 FPS, rather than the 60 used in the original. Lead programmer Roger Perkins argued: "We wanted to keep the visual quality. We'd rather it was running at a consistent frame rate at 30, than occasionally chugging at 60 as it did in the original. Microsoft did some research and found people didn't even notice whether the game was running at 30 or 60 FPS." And to be fair, having played the game for an hour or so, we didn't notice either.

Polyphony has also added plenty of more detail and effects, and will release a product running at 60 fps (which is very noticeable). The article and the "explanation" that no one notices, is much more of an excuse than anything else.

 

[Vince]

Polyphony has also added plenty of more detail and effects, and will release a product running at 60 fps (which is very noticeable). The article and the "explanation" that no one notices, is much more of an excuse than anything else.

While this maybe true, and percieved FPS is highly subjective; I could never tell the difference in a 3rd person game where movement is almost confined to a specific path. I'd much rather have cosnistency and a visual increase than 60fps over 30. But, IMHO.

 

[Qroach]

Some of us think similar btw, I was totally wrong about the 60fps comment on the original PGR, it was mentioned in this article.

if this means 30 fps locked, then I'm fine with it.

 

[Almasy]

While this maybe true, and percieved FPS is highly subjective; I could never tell the difference in a 3rd person game where movement is almost confined to a specific path. I'd much rather have cosnistency and a visual increase than 60fps over 30. But, IMHO.

Of course, that´d be if GT4 looked exactly like GT3, but it doesn´t. And really, in terms of movement fluidity, it´s very noticeable the increase from 30 fps to 60.

I´d rather have both the increase in detail and the framerate, because even if they could have crammed more detail in a game running at 30 fps, everything looks jerkier, which affects every single visual aspect of the game.

 

[cthellis42]

And to be fair, having played the game for an hour or so, we didn't notice either.

You get used to some pretty foul stenches after an hour or so, too. I wonder what they would have thought if they were switching more often between, say, PGR 1 and 2 (or PGR2 and GT3) and always had the differences close at had to think about.

Considering much detail will ALSO be lost (or at least go unnoticed) when in full motion, you'd think the "motion" aspect would get top billing, at which point you figure out how to make everything else look as good as should be.

 

[chaphack]

As i have seen Edge PGR2 video, i have to say its in the graphics choice. I guess if its locked its fine, since the game looks (once again) ULTRA SLICKY SHARP. I think dropping down a few graphics eyecandy will do a 60fps. Its possible about what Zurich said too.

STILL, i dont do the PS2 60fps > attack KILLL technically Xbox 60fps crap. It really depends on who is making the game and what type of games it arezzz.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

My opinion:

Take Splinter Cell at 30fps and remove all the dynamic lighting, the progressive scan, the widescreen support and the free camera and you get MGS 2 at 60fps. There's really no comparison between the two engines from a techincal standpoint other than the nice particle effects in MGS2, which make great use of the PS2s huge fillrate.

Same goes for GT4 vs. PGR2. GT4 is a shimmering mess and it's a flagship title from a team with 8 years experience working on racing graphic engines. Polyphony is a master at fooling the untrained eye into thinking it is seeing something technically equivalent to PGR, and it's mainly because they've spent huge time and money on it and have a design staff second to none.

Xbox titles that have great graphics at 60 fps:

Dead or Alive 3
Jet Set Radio Future
GUNVALKYRIE
Panzer Dragoon Orta

My personal opinion of the matter is that Japanese companies are more developer driven than US/EU companies which are more marketing driven. The focus groups probably testify that the average casual gamer would prefer better graphics than a better framerate, given limited budgets and time.

In short, it has very little to do with the Xbox hardware and everything to do with development focus. Framerate probably isn't that important to the average consumer and it just isn't pushed too much by most western developers.

With all that being said, I would prefer a slight downgrade in a racer to get the extra smoothness, but it's certainly not going to stop me from picking up PGR2. I do consider it a step backwards for platformers (BLiNX, Oddworld) and racers (PGR 2, Sega GT Online) to downgrade to 30fps, but I won't lose too much sleep over it.

 

[chaphack]

Great post Johnny, great post!

Just to add on GT4, the whole team has the luxury of a man month to capture-model just a car. Applaud goes for their efforts, but certainly that goes to help in GT4 graphics accolade.

 

[cthellis42]

STILL, i dont do the PS2 60fps > attack KILLL technically Xbox 60fps crap.

<blinks>

<peers closely at that remark>

Well, I don't think that... er...

<peers again at the remark>

That is... huh?



Basically I think many of us find it rather curious that for what's bandied about to be an "utterly dominant console" there are so many premiere titles coming out at 30 fps, while the PS2 is consistently delivering 60 fps titles that are both top-tier, and consistently improving their graphical quality as well.

'snot something to get into the fisticuffs over... I think many of us are just confused as to the decisions of most Xbox developers to take that route. Especially on fast-moving games, where precision and flow would seem to have more impact than anthing else.

In short, it has very little to do with the Xbox hardware and everything to do with development focus. Framerate probably isn't that important to the average consumer and it just isn't pushed too much by most western developers.

Of course progressive scan and widescreen and such aren't that important to the average consumer either...

Obviously they're making trade-offs, but you have to wonder why those particular trade-offs for those particular games. Especially, taking PGR2 into account, considering the original! Was that the only way they could really work out how to make it look substantially better and be a "proper sequel"?

 

[marconelly!]

Take Splinter Cell at 30fps and remove all the dynamic lighting, the progressive scan, the widescreen support and the free camera and you get MGS 2 at 60fps. There's really no comparison between the two engines from a techincal standpoint other than the nice particle effects in MGS2, which make great use of the PS2s huge fillrate.

What an amazingly unfair comparision, and all to make an excuse. As a matter of fact, MGS2 can be ran in the pro-scan mode (blaze adapter) and, although it changes nothing, it has a free camera (press the R1 button) Those particle effects come at a price just as the realtime lighting does (not to mention that MGS2 actually does have realtime lights and shadows at the dramatic spots they wanted it to).

 

[Johnny Awesome]

Well it's not much extra bandwidth to enable progressive and widescreen on Xbox. It's a lot more work trying to get the extra geometry to double the framerate.

It really isn't that suprising that big free roaming games have lower framerates. Look at GTA3 on PS2, for instance. It's the biggest game on the system and it's framerate is so bad it makes the last level on Halo look rock solid by comparison.

I agree that there's no excuse for racers and platformers though.

PS: I realize that MGS2 is art to most diehard PS2 fans here, but to me it was nothing special from a graphics standpoint. IMO Splinter Cell puts it to shame.

 

[Tagrineth]

It really isn't that suprising that big free roaming games have lower framerates. Look at GTA3 on PS2, for instance. It's the biggest game on the system and it's framerate is so bad it makes the last level on Halo look rock solid by comparison.

GTA3 is redeemed by its very good motion blur IMO =)

 

[cthellis42]

Well it's not much extra bandwidth to enable progressive and widescreen on Xbox. It's a lot more work trying to get the extra geometry to double the framerate.

Should I ask why you seem to give it much relevance, then?

It really isn't that suprising that big free roaming games have lower framerates.

Like Jak & Daxter?

 

[vrecan]

GTA3 is redeemed by its very good motion blur IMO =)

The motion blur was the main reason I waited for the pc version, IT DROVE ME NUTS!!!@

 

[Phil]

Chris123234:

60fps on halo is NOT a must. Sustained 30fps on halo is a must. Halo is a slow paced FPS. The only FPS's that need 60fps are fast paced ones.

To you it isn't - but to anyone that playes first person shooters, it most definately is. Timesplitters isn't fast past either (story-mode), but the 60 fps comes to a great benefit, especially in precision.

And that stuff about response time being cut in half at 30fps as opposed to 60fps is well...bullshit... After upgrading my video card and going from 30fps to around 80fps its smoother but not more "precise" as you like to say. The only time the response time was "unplayable" is when the fps dips down like like 10-15.

Before you dismiss something as being bullshit, start by taking a good long look at your own post. It's quite simple and I layed it out nicely already: double framerate gives you feedbacks at double the speed which allows for more precision. It's that simple really. This is very noticable in a game like Jak & Daxter (or for example WipEout Fusion) in which the character reacts instantly in 1/60th of a second to your change of movement rather than 1/30th as it would if it had a 30 framerate. This is a fact and can not be dismissed, regardless of your awareness or better, 'lack there of'.