KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
Ubisoft came under fire again this week after it was revealed that Assassin's Creed Unity would run at the same sub 1080p resolution and frame rate on both the Xbox One and PS4 in order to ‘avoid debates'. Since then, developers behind the game have been trying to put a positive spin on the 30 frames per second lock.
AC:Unity World Level Design Director, Nicolas Guérin, recently told TechRadar that 30 frames per second was actually a design choice in order to give the game a more ‘cinematic' feel, he also doesn't think that pushing a 60 frames per second standard is a particularly good idea:
“At Ubisoft for a long time we wanted to push 60 fps. I don't think it was a good idea because you don't gain that much from 60 fps and it doesn't look like the real thing. It's a bit like The Hobbit movie, it looked really weird. So I think collectively in the video game industry we're dropping that standard because it's hard to achieve, it's twice as hard as 30fps, and its not really that great in terms of rendering quality of the picture and the image.”
Assassin's Creed Unity Creative Director, Alex Amancio, also jumped in stating that “30 was our goal, it feels more cinematic.” He then went on to say that the game “feels better for people when its at that 30 fps.”
Discuss on our Facebook page, HERE.
KitGuru Says: It seems like some developers are looking to downplay the significant effect that 60 frames per second has on gameplay rather than just admitting that the new consoles don't have the horsepower. 30 frames per second is much easier to achieve on consoles but don't lie to people and claim that it somehow makes the game look or feel better. What do you guys make of this? Would you support developers trying to turn 30 frames per second in to the new gameplay standard? How important is frame rate to you?
Source: TR
I’ll only believe them once I make every one of them wear a Oculus Rift thats running on 30FPS for the rest of their life.
Boom! Self Inflicted Headshot
Except… even console player, PS4 for the matter, playing The Last Of Us Remastered at 60fps admitted that going back to 30 fps is a pain. That’s it: no assassin’s creed unity for me…
pc problem solved
30fps feels sluggish 40 and higher are way smoother
Let’s give it another generation or two and hopefully consoles will die out. I know it’s not ideal but it needs to happen, consoles have become a poison in the industry and it’s destroying the technological capabilities of today as we know it. Why should I have to buy dual 980’s and an i7-5960x just to only just play a mediocre looking game for the benefit of consoles?
RL is much more than even 60FPS, so is it weird? Marketing is so marketing…
This.
Then they are wrong, 60fps should be the minimum standard for gaming, regardless of what they think, yes granted, Console gamers do not tend to care about the difference, because generally that have not experienced the difference, as a PC gamer, the standard should be no less than 60, simply because anything less looks and feels crap, especially for FPS and TPS games.
Consoles should NOT set the standard for how games are made. Games should not be set for a set frames per second either, they should be set to an unlimited frames per second for PC gamers and if consoles play them at 30-60fps, then so be it. Let PC gamers enjoy their games at 60+ fps on their custom built $1,000 rig (like mine).. True gamers are PC gamers, not console.
It’s not though. Many developers make the game for console and port it over. Which is a hindrance to the visual effects bonus that PC’s can offer. Ubisoft purposely lowered the graphics on WatchDogs for PC so that console sales would hurt when people realized that PC pushes way better visuals for that game.
Soooooo bored of fps chat. Gameplay/story are what make a game.
No one should be arguing for more than 60 fps. Our eyes / brains only use 60 fps to view the world. Dragonflies use 120 so maybe boost it if you want to impress them.. I think devs need to concentrate on richness of textures, plots, particles and level design. Get back to what really makes a good game. Not super high resolution or above human capacity frame rates. 30 is fine for most games, 1080p should be a minimum for this generation.
Amancio is absolutely right. 30 feels much more organic and cinematic. 60 fps, tbh, is too hyper-real for my eyes.
I tried TLOU with the 30 fps lock on my PS too. Yes, it was jarring initially but I had way more fun than 60 fps. That cinematic feeling (for me) was rather a very important piece in the narrative. But hey, that’s my opinion.
are u serious? 30 fps is better? God have mercy…
How about they give the people the option to lock their fps or not? I see a lot of people having different opinions and perspective about fps. For me, a locked frame rate is very nice cause my eyes are so sensitive that it can see even 2-3 frame drops. but I think that 30 frames as well is not that enough. Just like LoL, it gives us the choice whether to lock our frames or not, and so I think its better if Ubisoft leaves the decision to us when we play .
What are you talking about? We don’t see in frames per second you moron. Our eyes aren’t sending digital signals to our brain. What we see is a continuous flow and not chopped into frames. The only reason things are blurry in real life is if our eyes arent physically able to rotate in their sockets fast enough to focus on a fast moving object. Yes we can notice a difference between 60 and 120, this is why 144Hz monitors are very popular with competitive gamers. 60 fps should be the minimum standard. Yes all of the components you listed are important, but I’d argue they’re null and void if one isn’t immersed in the game, and frame rate and resolution are two big immersion breakers. I agree with you, however, that 1080p should be a minimum standard, and it should be reached by sacrificing textures and other in-game graphics settings instead of frame rate. Consoles are just not up to playing games at 1080p 60fps without them looking last-generation.
You do not really see in fps in RL tho. What they say works for movies, because lower framerate emphasizes storytelling, so you feel like you are being told a story rather than living the movie. It does not really work in games because they still don’t look like cgi, you can easily distinguish them from reality. Maybe sometime in the future, it will be good for cutscenes or slower paced games, but fast gameplay in 30 fps? That’s so slow even from the response time standpoint.
consoles… just holding back gaming as usual
I also heard that 720p is better than 1080p. First off, its easier to render than 1080p and it is closer to dvd quality, offering the same ‘dvd style’ cinematic experience through softer edge and less detail. This is clearly more desirable than 1080p or even 4k because higher resolutions often overload the user with fine detail, detracting from the gaming experience. Ultimately, 720p feels better.
hahaha
I prefer 60 FPS when it comes to movies as well. I have a program that uses interpolation to simulate 60 fps for videos, even YouTube ones (it’s called SmoothVideo Project or SVP if you’re interested) and it really makes everything look amazing. It’s like watching a 60 FPS webm, everything flows really well and looks fluid. It’s great.
Absolute tosh! Having played rfactor for months on 120hz monitors and 120fps, it was hugely noticeable going back to 60 fps. 60fps should be the minimum as going back to 30fps is just horrible. People can talk about the cinema feel and make comments about the hobbit, and of course it might look a bit weird if you watch 1 million movies at 24 frames per second and suddenly double that. It’s the same with games, but if you actually play at 60fps and get used to it, you’ll find it hard to go back. It’s like comparing playing a game at 480p to 1080p.
I am sure I would prefer that too, but I am kinda afraid that after a while, watching anything on 30 wouldn’t be pleasant for me. Especially when i watch a lot of animes, where the difference is huge like in games. So i’ll stick to standards unless all of my devices will be capable of SVP.
So your peasant mind can’t deal with high resolution, that’s what you are saying basically.
Anime looks absolutely wonderful with SVP on.
But yes, if you watch it on mobile devices or a tablet you wouldn’t be able to watch it with SVP.
Much Console Owner
play the game at 15 fps I will see how you say fps doesnt matter… you dont even understand what it means
On pc you have that option, and even if you dont have it, modders give it to you…
Ok, so this is where it starts to matter. The human brain perceives anything running 24fps or higher as a fluid motion. Whilst i’m not saying you can’t tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps, what I can tell you is that a 30fps game is entirely playable.
If a game isn’t good at 30fps, it’s not going to be good at 60fps.
And equally, if a game is good at 30fps it’s not going to be exponentially better at 60fps.
The reality is, we were hoping for generation of consoles that offer more than they do. But making developers focus on hitting goals like 60fps at 1080p is not the right way to go about it. We need to care a little less about reaching these goals, and more about the passion that goes into creating great games with amazing gameplay and engrossing plots.
Then why do they lock it at 900p? LOL.
No, lazy ass developers is the issue here.
THE HOBBIT LOOKED GLORIOUS AT THAT HIGH FRAME RATE! I hate these nut jobs, ruining the game industry for us ):
Personally, I don’t see any need to go beyond 2 colour 320X240 screens.
Personal opinion. Got a problem, nigga?
Yes, I agree with giving us the choice of fraps lock part.
Even in terms of movies, I’d prefer the 24 fps format over the new 48/60 fps mania. It’s all about personal choices of viewing aesthetics.
What are these people smoking? They are just being wienies and catering to the consoles. I guess we pc users need to all send these people a bag of shit. That seems to be what their trying to give us. Hard to pay hard earned cash for a cheesy looking game!
What are these people smoking? They are just being wienies and catering to the consoles. I guess we pc users need to all send these people a bag of shit. That seems to be what their trying to give us. Hard to pay hard earned cash for a cheesy looking game!
why is it always 30 or 60? Why not 40 or 50, since even that small bump is alot smoother? And they still fail to realize it is a noticable drop for people used to higher fps :/ The human brain adapts to it. And as trololol stated approx 4hours ago “make every one of them wear an Oculus Rift that’s running on 30FPS”
Since when can’t the PS4 run a 60fps
I’d like to see 1FPS games, for that authentic ‘slideshow’ experience.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Good question. Partly because, I suspect, vsync et al and framerate locking have led to the misunderstanding amongst console gamers (perpetuated by devs) that 30/60 are the only options. Remember that if you knew anything about the ways that these things were made/about hardware then you’d have a PC and the argument would be over; so there’s a safe assumption of ignorance. It’s also a useful tagline to say ‘we use 30FPS *intentionally*, so it’s like a movie’ which makes it easier to cover up than ‘we could hit like 34FPS, but the hardware is too bad so we limited it’.
If the reason was genuinely because they thought the aesthetic was better with 30FPS then they would give a lock that was removable. Unfortunately, the real reason is not the aesthetic but inferior console hardware, and so they won’t give the option because that would reveal the inferior HW of the consoles.
This is a myth that’s been around for years my friend.
60 FPS is not a ‘goal’. Limiting a game’s frame rate has to be built into the game engine from the ground up. It’s a management decision, basically. I don’t really care if they limit the consoles to 30FPS, as long as I can play at 60+ FPS, and they are lying about basic things and misleading people just because they make more money from consoles on release.
Your understanding of framerate is exceptionally primitive. The myth about 24FPS being chosen in cinema because that’s when the brain sees fluid motion isn’t useful, or even true. Think about it for a second. Say you’re watching a movie about the real time progress of clouds, that movie will look ‘fluid’ in 120FPS or in 12FPS. But say you’re playing a first person shooter with constant super-quick movement, 30FPS looks really jarring (it gives me a headache, personally). It is entirely context dependent. The only reason that movies are perceived as fluid at 18-24FPS is because of the blurring which uses the mind’s trick to simulate/perceive motion. Unfortunately, this is completely unsuitable for video-games. I could go on but honestly it would be much better if you just did some research for yourself.
agreed, i stand by the ‘get with the times or get the fuck out’ way of thinking
its inevitable that they will die out because the hardware is evolving exponentially and it will get to the point that you will need a new console every year at which point the value of a gaming pc will become apparent
its a shame so many console users will have to waste so much money on not only consoles but on their overpriced games too. “pay £50 for sub par experience? or pay £30 for a performance tailored to you along with much more” i know what i’ll take
What? are you retarded?
The eyes can only see up to 0.5fps 😉
yehh when i went to see it i came out of that cinema astounded by how amazing it looked
these people must’ve been staring at their drink during the movie or something
since forever, only games it does run at 60fps are ports of old games
People call me outdated, but I’ve always preferred each frame being flown in by carrier pigeon.
maaaaaybe that’s because none of the new games are capable of running at 60? or is it just not possible hardware wise
I was joking! 😛
I like SLI configuration, so i copy what my nephew is painting – with my finger, Charcoal and some spit if needed.
i believe the hardware is to blame
both systems opt’d for slow 8 core processors over fast quad cores and i believe although the GPU’s were outdated anyway, they went for most cost efficient ones, which usually means low output
i would have preffered they went for an older but more power gpu even, as it would at least run at decent frames
even my gtx570 can run most games 1080p 60fps at reasonable settings
And im not even a console hater, as i have a wii U and several other consoles, its just a shame they they opted for cheap hardware to maximise profits rather than a little increased price for genuine product
at least the ps4 added the benefit of ddr5 system memory which gave it that little boost, pair they with some decent other parts and they would have had a monster
Won’t be long until they cap them at 24 fps like movies for a more “””””cinematic experience””””””.
It didn’t give it the old authentic feel like the original lord of the rings movies had, it looked a bit cartoony, and somewhat sped up running at that fps. For me personally.
You know, if they’re talking about cinematic feels all day then maybe its time to switch to movie-making instead? At least then maybe their mouths wouldn’t have to spill out as much daily BS as its currently doing.
Yet i’m sat here with a 1440p 144Hz G-Sync enabled monitor because i think the standard should be higher than 60fps because if looks and most importantly feels a thousand times better. I also saw the Hobbit in 48fps and thought it looked great. It maybe in the eyes of the user and the wallet but when a game plays at 30fps i feel it the most, its like a slow sludge of painful motion. I also have both consoles, and i don’t buy any games for them what so ever because 9/10 times its 30fps or worse lower than 1080p.
I personally don’t want Consoles to die as they keep the market that i love working but companies like Ubisoft and others need to pull that love stick out from the behind of consoles and stop watering down the products with excuses.
Andy, John is right. It’s not the devs, it’s the the console hardware limitations. Consoles can’t properly run games at 60 fps while being fluid. But yes, you can call the devs statements being totall bullshit.
I think it’s a combination of both really.
I know the current console hardware isn’t the best but if developers sat back and looked at what they’ve got, they could easily sacrifice a few elements that wouldn’t lower the graphical quality too much but that would allow them to achieve 60 fps.They have a fixed hardware set which should actually make their job easier as they don’t need to spend time on compatibility coding!
The thing that makes me say they’re lazy is now that they have x86/x64 consoles, they seem to be setting those as their target and then aren’t bothering to code separately for the PC (or even each console).
How one can possible f*ck it up so many times in just a year. Even EA is not that bad, seriously. This is absolutely bizarre. Although 30 fps may look better in certain situations 60 fps is smother that 30. I dont want to watch a f*cking movie, I pay 60 bucks to play a game. Don’t rush this movie bullsh*t on me, it ain’t gonna happen fellow.
This Dev’s are either dumb or deaf, 60 FPS at least for pc its the way to go in a action game, it’s just painfully slow to play a action game at 30 fps when you’re in a pc with mouse and keyboard because for example the movement with the mouse is more fluid so there’s the need to have more FPS on screen to keep up with the mouse and keyboard fluidity, for consoles yes 30 FPS is enough but the same doesn’t apply to PC
Well i didn’t know that, but if it is true Ubisoft is digging it’s own grave, by not listening to what each platform wants…If a console cant handle it just make a lesser quality version for it, me as pc and console player don’t care to see a game looking the same in the two at the same time if that MEANS HOLDING BACK IT’S QUALITY FOR THE SAKE OF A LESSER CAPABLE ONE…GROW UP UBISOFT WE PAY SO YOU ARE OBLIGED TO FULLFILL OUR DEMANDS, OR YOU WONT GET OUR MONEY, THERE IS PLENTY OF DEVELOPERS THAT WILL EVENTUALY TAKE ADVANTAGE ON THAT POLICY TO MAKE YOUR MARKET SHARE SHRINK…And then you Devs wonder why piracy is increasing when you guys do shit like that.
They just have to make the option for multiple FPS Lock’s, I’ve seen plenty of games do that why can’t they do it and bring pleasure to every single one…are they dumb or deaf !?!?
well pointed out man…xD
I dont get it why cant they mod exhisting high end hardware and make a capable console, instead they make a 2/3 year orld spec console with less clock’s and bandwith, it’s non-sense!!!
Yes it’s mainly hardware problem.
Yet your brain when need responsiveness allows you to seeat 60 FPS so it’s also organic and realist, not hyper
play a FPS every day for 3 month’s at 30FPS and in the same day at 60 FPS and see in which one you do betterand then you will undestand…you can feel it when you have to respond quickly
Oh and by the way one game less to buy at launch at least 😀
ddr5 is only for the GPU Ram, not the system RAM. And all GPU’s have had DDR5 for quite a while now…..
Even tho im a pc player im not really to affected by this 30fps block set for the console player, if it was 60fps that would be so much better but i dont think what people relise is, you may have $1000 rig but if you have got a 60hz or even a 120mz monitor you are still limited to that.
price doesnt matter, its all about the monitor. You have a standard 60mz monitor your only limited to 60fps
Yes i know i forgot to add in the G
and you might wanna read up a bit on the ps4 hardware, because you will find that it is infact system memory (afterall gddr5 is based on ddr3 architecture and can be used by such processors)
Well for me it’s hyperrrealistic. I prefer the slower rates for certain games. I’ve enjoyed BF4 at 60 fps and have equally enjoyed Destiny at 30. I don’t see much wrong with the low rate. My hatred for 60 worsened since I played Wolfenstein The New Order. It gave me headaches.
Actually, PC. Console just for a couple o’ games.
For me it’s better.
Yes, giving options to please everyone is the best way out rather than downgrade shit. I can agree to that.
It is rather obvious i thought, but Devs aren’t feeling like working
thats preference, cause for example a professional player needs the extra responsiveness, while the normal player may or may not need it…
But I must still daresay it’s not about professionalism but rather just personal tastes. Playing Destiny’s crucible mode at 30 fps didn’t really cause any major hinderance in responsiveness, tbh.
That’s because in consoles you have a fixed turn velocity so you can only have a fixed responsiveness, where in the pc you can turn the mouse at greater speed so you need more responsiveness to coordinate your moves perfectly
I think it has to do with how Vsync works, which most games use nowadays.
At 30fps, a game has 33ms of delay, at 60fps, it has 16ms (half). However, because of the nature of Vsync, even when using Triple Buffering, if you get 45fps for example, you’ll still have 33ms of delay. So in theory, 45fps Vsynced +TB doesn’t have an advantage over 30fps in terms of responsiveness. Nonetheless, it still has an advantage in motion clarity.
Ideally, every game should be LOCKED at 60fps (a.k.a almost never drop below 60) to get all the benefits of a higher framerate.
It’s more than feasible if developers (and consumers) wouldn’t favor eye-candy and resolution over a good framerate. The hardware isn’t really to blame, the developers’ use of the hardware is.
yeah that’s exactly what I think too!
Some games already ran in 1080p60fps on the PS3 for example, but that’s because they were very simple visually and weren’t demanding (a lot of small games on the PSN Store did, like Fat Princess, PixelJunk games, etc.).
The PS4 could easily render any game from last gen in 1080p60fps, but because they keep pushing other graphic aspects, it becomes hard to do once again.
Personally I don’t care about resolution anymore as long as it doesn’t look all blurry and doesn’t have too much jaggies, however 60fps should be standard for every. single. game.
This is funny I play on PC, and a 30 fps game to me is so laggy if I wanted to watch a slide show I would buy one of the supposed next gen gaming system holding back the true power of a PC called the console. This will be a game I will only pay $4.99, for like all Ubisoft games. Failing the PC for over a decade now I dont see a point in giving them more then the $4.99. When they will screw over the PC side with a terrible port from probably be the Xbone 1. With poor optimization and lack of any to get it to work on something called VRAM, and not unjfed memory on a console.
There is no old authentic feel. It’s just nostalgia. It’s like Directors in the old days used to try to find tricks to remove lens flares from the camera or scene. Now they try to add them like fools. It’s all BS. When we are viewing the scene through an actor’s eyes for example there shouldn’t be lens flares like that.
Same with old movie feel. We just got used to it and low res because tech was not able to do better when we were young. But the newer generations will not be subjected to that experience and they will prefer the better fps and res of today’s tech that is closer to reality.