PGR2: confirmed 30fps only.
- Thread starter Ug Lee
- Start date
Johnny Awesome:
And your point is...? Either you are using such weak arguments to make a complete fool out of yourself or it's simply a sad attempt of distinctively ignoring the fact of it using renderware as middleware as an argument, which hardly does the hardware any justice and has absolutely no relevance to your argument. The Getaway in this regard puts GTA to shame on any level, and that, not at last due to the superiour framerate. Not to mention that Jak & Daxter puts both games to shame (in regards to size, animation, framerate and geometry).
Johnny Awesome said:
And your point is...? Either you are using such weak arguments to make a complete fool out of yourself or it's simply a sad attempt of distinctively ignoring the fact of it using renderware as middleware as an argument, which hardly does the hardware any justice and has absolutely no relevance to your argument. The Getaway in this regard puts GTA to shame on any level, and that, not at last due to the superiour framerate. Not to mention that Jak & Daxter puts both games to shame (in regards to size, animation, framerate and geometry).
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
Hey, everyone's entitled to their own opinion. 
DeathKnight
Regular
Here are a bunch of new super highres shots along with a few older ones:
http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=3607
http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=3607
randycat99
Veteran
Johnny Awesome said:
Hmmm... :? If it has very little to do with the hardware then it wouldn't be a question in the first place to just push framerate and detail. Either the resources are available or not. If not, that's when you have to evaluate the "tradeoffs". The notion that one thing is sacrificed for something else because it is "less noticeable" doesn't mean at all that it won't go unnoticed, altogether. For all we know, noticeability may have weighed in at 55/45 (for detail vs. framerate). Either way, you will notice the thing that gets scaled back. It was just mathematically less noticeable- that's it. I know you wouldn't try to argue that noticeability was more like 90/10...nevertheless, that is really the only way you can formulate an argument that detail would have made a big difference and framerate would go largely unnoticed.
That's not necessarily true, it DEPENDS on the game. A game could be locked at 30fps with the controller input set to check for input 60 times per-second. Complete twitch games like fighters need fast input times. racing games have sudden movements but not quite as twitchy as fighters.
Qroach said:
Of course, but what good is a response time of a 60th of a second if you can only see the upades every 30th of a second? Or for the fun of it and to emphasize my point: what good would be a response time of a 60th of a second if you can only see every update on the screen in 1 second intervals? Think about it for a seconnd, I think the point I'm trying to make it glaring obvious...
It doesn't matter, I'm giving you an example where the framerate doesn't have an impact on controller imput. They aren't always and don't necessarily have to be linked to one another.
You also forgetting if a screen is double or even triple buffered to prevent tearing, this can also effect your response time (this is more of a PC thing). Anyway, I'm not going to go on arguing about this, as it's basically a waste of time.
Frame rate vrs better visuals are tradeoffs that are made on a daily basis with game development. You can argue your point all you want, but I don't see how that changes anything. Like I said before, and the dev team working on PGR2 agrees, the average consumer can't tell if a game is running at 30 or 60fps. Add motion blur at 30 fps and there's no point in running at 60.
Here's a interesting article for ya. It'a few years old but still very appicable.
http://www.ping.be/powervr/fps_discus.htm
Did you notice the article writter? Could that be...???
You also forgetting if a screen is double or even triple buffered to prevent tearing, this can also effect your response time (this is more of a PC thing). Anyway, I'm not going to go on arguing about this, as it's basically a waste of time.
Frame rate vrs better visuals are tradeoffs that are made on a daily basis with game development. You can argue your point all you want, but I don't see how that changes anything. Like I said before, and the dev team working on PGR2 agrees, the average consumer can't tell if a game is running at 30 or 60fps. Add motion blur at 30 fps and there's no point in running at 60.
Here's a interesting article for ya. It'a few years old but still very appicable.
http://www.ping.be/powervr/fps_discus.htm
Ok first of all make sure that you know the difference between refresh rate and frame rate since both are different. The human eye is unable to see the difference between more than 30 fps but the human eye is much more sensitive for changes in intensity : flickering of a screen. For this reason the refresh rate is usually much higher. The refresh rate is how often the electron beam writes the image to the screen (electron beam hits phosphor layer, phosphor layer lights up and then decays, ...). With television 25 or 30 different images are shown per second, the refresh rate however is the double : 50 Hz or 60 Hz. The refresh rate has to be higher in bright rooms then in dark rooms, monitors are in bright well-lit offices and cinema is played in a rather dark room. This means that computer monitors are running at at least 60 Hz while the movies run only at 48 Hz ( each image is shown twice, 24 fps ).There actually is another trick involved : interlacing. Television doesn't write the whole image in one go it writes the odd lines first and in the next pass it writes the even lines and this changes constantly. This trick is used to limit the bandwidth needed (only half needed compared to full screen resolution ! ). This means that the image is written at the double speed ( 50 or 60 Hz) but each time only half of it : so first pass the odd lines are written, the next pass the even lines are written to the screen, that way a full new frame is written every two passes of the electron beam ( 25 or 30 Hz ) . You could say that 50/60 half-frames are written each second and 25/30 full-frames are written each second. By now you are probably wondering why I always write 25/30 and 50/60... well the European system has a higher resolution but a lower frame rate of 25, the American NTSC ( = Never The Same Colour ; ) system runs at a lower resolution but displays 30 frames per second. There are other differences but that is not the subject of this article.
This does answer the often used argument : what about Tekken on Playstation that game runs at 50/60 fps. Well technically it is not possible to do that since the television standard only allows 25 or 30 different frames per second but you can use the same interlace trick to write double frames : change the odd and even lines to represent different frames. But keep in mind that your resolution drops to half. I personally think that it is just a marketing trick... after all who sees the difference between 30 and 60 frames per second
Did you notice the article writter? Could that be...???
DeathKnight
Regular
Don't know if anyone posted this yet, but this is IRobot's response over at the Bizarre boards:
Sounds good to me!
marconelly!
Veteran
I stopped reading right there. I hate when people state BS like that, and I don't really care who said it, as it's clearly wrong.
marconelly! said:
I dunno they talking about 30fps that is 30frames every second or an average . If you make a move run at a 30fps every second with out it changing then u make one at 40fps you wont see a diffrence , but u can see the diffrence if its allways changing . I personaly can't see anything higher than 45 , if it reaches over 60fps it gives me a head ache though , might be my contacts .
marconelly!
Veteran
There are serious medical studies about the issue, and there are several good reads about it on the internet.
Here's couple of articles from people who actually did some research:
http://amo.net/NT/02-21-01FPS.html
http://amo.net/NT/05-24-01FPS.html
http://www.mikhailtech.com/articles/editorials/fps/
Here's couple of articles from people who actually did some research:
http://amo.net/NT/02-21-01FPS.html
http://amo.net/NT/05-24-01FPS.html
http://www.mikhailtech.com/articles/editorials/fps/
Heh, I wonder why some of us can see 60hz refresh flickering if human eye can't see beyond 30
Anyway, to add my useless 2c to this topic, I very much agree with the makers of the game saying "stable fps" > "unstable but higher fps". It's my biggest gripe with PC games among other things.
And look at it that way - SSX is still a great game even though it's running everywhere from 20-60fps. But would it be more enjoyable if the frame rate was locked at flat 30 instead? IMO - yes, without a doubt.
My 2c
I would say that PGR is being pushed to be the best looking Xbox racer..
Currently there are lots of superb looking racers that run at 30fps
I expect that many of these are coded quite efficiently ( in terms of the renderers ) so it isn't possible for Bizarre to magically implement a renderer with 2x the performance. Thus they have to drop to 30Hz to compete..
If they had almost unlimited time they could get the frame rate up to 60Hz, but their publisher might want more detail to compete against other 2nd/3rd generation 30Hz racers etcetc...
I would say that PGR is being pushed to be the best looking Xbox racer..
Currently there are lots of superb looking racers that run at 30fps
I expect that many of these are coded quite efficiently ( in terms of the renderers ) so it isn't possible for Bizarre to magically implement a renderer with 2x the performance. Thus they have to drop to 30Hz to compete..
If they had almost unlimited time they could get the frame rate up to 60Hz, but their publisher might want more detail to compete against other 2nd/3rd generation 30Hz racers etcetc...
I don't fully understand the technical side of 30 vs. 60 fps on tv screen, but when Kazunori Yamauchi was interviewed about GT3, he said that the new gen PS2 allowed them to make the physics and feedback to player much more accurate, because the engine is running full 60fps compared to GT1/2 30 fps.
How does the PGR2 , where
I don't get it, what has the 60 Hz got to do with 30 fps.
Isn't 60Hz just the screen refresh rate, and has little to do with game engine update rate. Ok, I know that a NTSC game that runs solid 60 fps at 60 Hz, runs a little lower fps at PAL 50Hz.
But a sub 30 fps game can run in 60Hz too, like for example GTA:VC.
Edit: Ok, 60Hz is like 60 times per second. So the game engine is checking the player input, car dynamics and AI 60 times per second. That would propably mean that for example AI responds quicker to events.
But would it make much difference to do those at 30 Hz, cos the renderer is 30fps? I mean what use is ther to sample player input 2 times faster than what is draw on screen.
How does the PGR2 , where
work?
I don't get it, what has the 60 Hz got to do with 30 fps.
Isn't 60Hz just the screen refresh rate, and has little to do with game engine update rate. Ok, I know that a NTSC game that runs solid 60 fps at 60 Hz, runs a little lower fps at PAL 50Hz.
But a sub 30 fps game can run in 60Hz too, like for example GTA:VC.
Edit: Ok, 60Hz is like 60 times per second. So the game engine is checking the player input, car dynamics and AI 60 times per second. That would propably mean that for example AI responds quicker to events.
But would it make much difference to do those at 30 Hz, cos the renderer is 30fps? I mean what use is ther to sample player input 2 times faster than what is draw on screen.
rabidrabbit said:
It seems he was talking about the physics engine.
60HZ is just a frequency notation. You can apply to pretty much everything. What the guy said is that their physics/input engine is updated 60 times a sec, whereas the graphics are updated only every frame, which occurs 30 times a second. Many games do have better input than graphics. Wipeout fusion, if I remenber well has 120Hz for its input precision.
