Seriously?The programmers were worried it might create too much separation between the players and the characters, that the movements would feel too fluid for a game.
Seriously??And when asked if 60 FPS will become the new standard for games, Gregory was optimistic. "We hope so," he said.
Looking good up until the bolded part. The difference between 30 and 60 fps is astounding so I don't think it's wise to say it's going to change the experience "just a little bit"At 60 frames, seeing his breathing change, or when a Clicker shows up and you hear that sound and the way he moves changes, because all the animations are that much more fluid, I think that comes across even more now. That's going to change the play experience just a little bit in the way the players experience that
Agree with @Wolfe here, you'd have to be as ignorant as Kaz to think that 60 fps is a bad idea. Separation? Really?Naughty wasn't completely sold on the idea of implementing 60 FPS at first. The programmers were worried it might create too much separation between the players and the characters, that the movements would feel too fluid for a game.
Brownie Points for realizing that 60 > 30 fps. Almost a complete 180 from what they said above.The Last of Us, going back and playing the 30 fps version feels, to quote some people in the office, 'broken.'
And when asked if 60 FPS will become the new standard for games, Gregory was optimistic. "We hope so," he said. "It used to just be that first-person shooters were 60 by default, but a lot of other games didn't feel the need for it. I think we're showing that it does make a difference even in a non-FPS type game.
Agree with @Wolfe here, you'd have to be as ignorant as Kaz to think that 60 fps is a bad idea. Separation? Really?
Think about talk shows. When the show switches from interview to musical act, the frame rate changes.
Now developers are actually inclined to imitate 24fps film? And they pass it off like it's the way it's supposed to be?
Really, what frame rate do they choose? I don't watch these shows but TV is 60hz and 50hz. I doubt they start lowering frame rate mid broadcast.
When in an editing studio watching moving images of oneself, it quickly becomes apparent that high frames = total tool. In stark contrast to low frames..... partial tool. Music videos look astonishingly amateur unless the frames are dropped to 24 or less. As for talk shows and their musicians, I'd think they must shoot at 30 frames, pushing it out at 60Hz, then switch down to the magical 24 or less (right down to 15 still works from memory), still outputting at 60Hz. A 24 fps film at 24Hz and 60Hz are very similar, 24Hz is just that bit more stable for not having to do the horrendous mathematical calculations required. Therefore being much less vulnerable to judder.
Real life has motion blur, and 24 fps is meant to be the sweet spot in capturing the right amount of blur on film. Unfortunately just as people are becoming increasingly used to pitch correction, along with it's sine wavey side effects (and actually end up missing the side effects when not present), motion interpolation is contorting peoples' perception of what is natural in video. Their augmented reality looks unnatural to me, and good old non-interpolated video might look smudgey or something to them.
As for games, there's plenty that wouldn't be playable at 24 fps, but that's probably as much to do with the compound effect of input lag. As it turns out @wolf, the indie devs might actually be the ones more likely to try something at 24 fps. I don't know how 24Hz recognition works on tvs, but I'd love to try perhaps a walk 'em up with a 24/24 marriage.
I think there's probably a lot that can be done towards proper syncing for video games. It may be that we won't realise what we we're missing until we see genuine smooth, as opposed to the "more frames good" mentality. I run Assetto Corsa sometimes and just shake my head at the high frames I get while the image is still jumping around like a lunatic. You'd think that locking at 60 would get it done at 60Hz, but no.
Also, I could be wrong on some or many of these things. Just trying to make sense of stuff I've picked up along the way.
Incredible. I wonder if developers like ND will eventually realize they are trying to morph Video Gaming into an already existant genre, are they aware movies exist? Video Games should be aiming for the most fluid experience possible, not making shoddy decisions because it effects 'muh story telling'. Good thing they seen sense and tried a 60FPS mode for the remastered edition.
Maybe the display you use has to do with it, because my CRT never misses a beat, with regard to input lag or any malady brought about by the image processing on HDTVs. I agree that motion interpolation looks wrong, but I think that's because it's terribly stuttery/inconsistent. At least it looks that way to me.
I don't think what I said validates Naughty Dog's concern. Going from 24fps to "60fps" is plainly similar to going from <30fps to 60fps.
These days more than ever the director will only see anything remotely like their vision for a film at the editing and processing stage. It wouldn't matter what frame rate it was recorded at, most dierctors would still want it dropped down to 24 for the final render. If you have a device that can record at 24fps and 60fps you could do a test: Record half a minute or so of yourself singing into a hairbrush or playing air guitar using 24, then 60 frames. Watch both of them back, and I guarantee that you will prefer the 24fps version. If you dropped it further in an editing program you may like that even more.I understand the point, that it's not how the director saw it while working on it. On the other hand, it wouldn't necessarily violate their creative vision. After all, 24fps isn't always a deliberate choice, it's mostly an accepted standard.
I did come up with a possible analogy for your point, though -- taking a game in the opposite direction, like running a PC game on a minimum-spec system with a very poor framerate.
I did get to the bottom of it eventually. Like I said already, it would be frames of animation in a game that could cause augmented reality issues if too high, rather than the overall frame rate itself.Fps is to games as what Hz is to movies, the higher the better.
Kudos on naming the Sony XBR960. Looking it up, that's one heavy mofo, but it's exactly the type of display that would be an ideal upgrade for me. 👍 Our house isn't very big, and I've been concerned that when I eventually get an HDTV, I'd have to set up my CRT in another place for older games.
I could go on about how 60 > 30 regardless of the situation but I think TotalBiscuit describes it best. If you've watched this video then you'll know what I'm talking about.