Print

[Xbox-Scene]

E3: PGR 4's Lack Of 60 FPS A 'Conscious Decision' Posted by XanTium | July 13 16:58 EST | News Category: Xbox360

From gamasutra.com: "We looked at that," commented Adam Kovach, PGR 4's global product manager during an E3 demonstration. "We debated for a long time... we looked at what we would be giving up if we tried to go to 60 versus 30 frames a second. We don't want to lose the visual fidelity... we made a conscious decision that 30 frames plus all the effects in the game was far more important than having a pure 60." He added: "If we take a look at 60 frames a second in Forza, which looks great, if you look at the visual fidelity with PGR - you look at the motion blur, all the particle effects, and everything that we put on the screen to ensure that's it's visually stunning - it's really a rich experience, not just a simulation experience." Full Story: gamasutra.com

[ThaCrip]

for the average racing games (aka this sorta game) it might not be a bad idea to use the 30fps with top notch graphics.

but for forza2 60fps was a must... cause forza's all about gameplay so it dont need the great looks.

PGR4 aint going to be nothing special anyways... cause Forza 2's the king of simulation race games/race games in general.

[dmitri]

As long as I can rock dubs with that motion blur I don't care..

Also important is to wheelie half of the track on my motorcycle, just like they do in real Moto GP races.

[jacksprat1990]

TBH I thought that Forza is overated. It's pretty boring. Its the same things all the way through, a bit like Gran Turismo and looks like Gran Turismo in terms of graphics where as PGR has different things to do. Im glad that they stuck with 30 fps because if your playin forza at 60 fps, I dont feel like im going fast. In PGR however, i feel like HOLY S**T! THIS IS FAST!. So yeah im glad they stuck with better visuals and slower fps.

[ixus238]

It's really pathetic.   It's no secret that American developers have a long history of have difficulty developing a 60fps game.  I still remember that sad-looking greenish xbox 1 console menu running at 30 fps while PS1 and dreamcast running theirs at 60fps years ago.  Beside all the Japanese developed 60fps games for xbox 1 & 360,  I can't seems to recall any 60fps running xbox games beside some ea sports games.


The main reason of no 60fps is that all those lazy programmers don't have to work that hard at all for the optimization.  Now they basically have twice the polygons to use, so they would waste it on here and there, and the graphic can still look a lot inferior, less realistic when compare to Gran Turismo 4 for PS2 (and that's not even account for the frame rate difference, yet.)


And it's even more pathetic when ppl here would simply accept whatever low quality wasted Microsoft give you, and find a reason to justify.  If you prefer low fps then who don't you go back to "Hard Drivin"  running at 15fps.

This post has been edited by ixus238: Jul 14 2007, 05:54 PM

[FCTE]

QUOTE(ixus238 @ Jul 14 2007, 12:28 PM)

It's really pathetic.   It's no secret that American developers have a long history of have difficulty developing a 60fps game.  I still remember that sad-looking greenish xbox 1 console menu running at 30 fps while PS1 and dreamcast running theirs at 60fps years ago.  Beside all the Japanese developed 60fps games for xbox 1 & 360,  I can't seems to recall any 60fps running xbox games beside some ea sports games.
The main reason of no 60fps is that all those lazy programmers don't have to work that hard at all for the optimization.  Now they basically have twice the polygons to use, so they would waste it on here and there, and the graphic can still look a lot inferior, less realistic when compare to Gran Turismo 4 for PS2 (and that's not even account for the frame rate difference, yet.)
And it's even more pathetic when ppl here would simply accept whatever low quality wasted Microsoft give you, and find a reason to justify.  If you prefer low fps then who don't you go back to "Hard Drivin"  running at 15fps.

If the game still offers a great gaming experience and is still visually stunning and stable regardless of FPS who cares? Graphics are not everything.......................... and pleease Forza kills Grand Tourismo.

Who gives a crap what the dashboard runs at?  

[ixus238]

QUOTE(FCTE @ Jul 14 2007, 01:37 PM)

If the game still offers a great gaming experience and is still visually stunning and stable regardless of FPS who cares? Graphics are not everything.......................... and pleease Forza kills Grand Tourismo.

Who gives a crap what the dashboard runs at?  

Apparently everyone cares about framerate, from the 2d console era, saturn-psx era,  to the dreamcast-ps2 and PC gaming, for the smoothest and realistic gameplay.  Only when xbox/360 appear to the market, framerate mysteriously no longer becomes important.  Nice job MS.

Forza 2 the GT killer "again"?  Maybe it's GT killer if all the FAKE screenshots (rendered from the development machine, not real time)  on the Internet are real.  It's the typical Microsoft hype and full of the disappointment after you fired the disc to the console.  Where are the gorgeous racer we saw on the Internet promised by the Microsoft?  
Check out both the Gamespot and IGN Forza 2 screenshot page,
http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/743/743956/imgs_1.html
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/driving/fo...tag=tabs;images

Did you notice NOT A SINGLE REAL IN-GAME REAL-TIME RENDERED SCREENSHOT WAS POSTED even after the game released?  Maybe because real-time rendered in game looks like real shit when compare to the fake pre-rendered shot?  At least in the past ign posted like 10 Forza 1 in-game screenshots (which look pretty bad) after the release.  In comparison, GT4 pages has like thousands real in-game screenshot.   It's the fact, Forza 2 looks and plays worse compare to GT4, after all the 360 horsepower and all these extra yrs.

For the xbox1 dashboard, I just want to point out that in the early day, they are incapable of even making that ugly menu at 60fps.

This post has been edited by ixus238: Jul 14 2007, 06:56 PM

[perfectdark]

I'm not sure why we are talking about GT4 and Forza in a PGR4 posting but oh well

I traded me PS3 for a 360 because lack of games and lack of up coming games until 2008 that interest me.
So i played the Gran Turismo PS3 demo and I've played GT4 and i rented Forza 2 (P.S I hate Forza 2, just seems slow and boring to me) but the game's graphics and realism look far superior to both GT4 and GT demo on PS3... it looks like I'm watching racing in real life, so i don't know how people can say GT4 looks better, unless your drinking that cheap watered down American beer
Anyway, that being said 60fps or 30fps who cares, look at the graphically achievements thus far and there are great for most games. What we need to get back to is gameplay... Take games like The Darkness and Prey, they look great but gameplay is lacking. I find myself trying harder and harder to enjoy gaming, when it should be natural
But that should change since X360 has the most hotest upcoming titles from now until Christmas holly crap

[Heet]

They do a good job at 30FPS although, I'd like ALL bells and whistles just like everybody.

I was pissed when they said PGR2 was 30FPS and it looked good.  I was also pissed when they reported the resolution of PGR3 and it looked OK.


Maybe this will look great at 30FPS.  I have a feeling it will.

This post has been edited by Heet: Jul 14 2007, 07:43 PM

[FCTE]

QUOTE(ixus238 @ Jul 14 2007, 01:24 PM)

Apparently everyone cares about framerate, from the 2d console era, saturn-psx era,  to the dreamcast-ps2 and PC gaming, for the smoothest and realistic gameplay.  Only when xbox/360 appear to the market, framerate mysteriously no longer becomes important.  Nice job MS.

It doesn't matter as long as the game looks great and plays well.

QUOTE

Forza 2 the GT killer "again"?  Maybe it's GT killer if all the FAKE screenshots (rendered from the development machine, not real time)  on the Internet are real.  It's the typical Microsoft hype and full of the disappointment after you fired the disc to the console.  Where are the gorgeous racer we saw on the Internet promised by the Microsoft?  
Check out both the Gamespot and IGN Forza 2 screenshot page,
http://media.xbox360...956/imgs_1.html
http://www.gamespot....tag=tabs;images

 I don't think you've actually played Forza 2. You can take screenshots all day long that look that outstanding, the game is superb, it's got 9+ on every review and it's one of the number one selling games on the 360.

QUOTE

Did you notice NOT A SINGLE REAL IN-GAME REAL-TIME RENDERED SCREENSHOT WAS POSTED even after the game released?  Maybe because real-time rendered in game looks like real shit when compare to the fake pre-rendered shot?  At least in the past ign posted like 10 Forza 1 in-game screenshots (which look pretty bad) after the release.  In comparison, GT4 pages has like thousands real in-game screenshot.   It's the fact, Forza 2 looks and plays worse compare to GT4, after all the 360 horsepower and all these extra yrs.

Fire up the game and take all the in game shots you want, they all come out gorgeous.

QUOTE

For the xbox1 dashboard, I just want to point out that in the early day, they are incapable of even making that ugly menu at 60fps.

No one gives a damn what the dashboard looks like. If you care that much about the dashboard then you don't own a gaming console for the right reasons.

[twistedsymphony]

QUOTE(ixus238 @ Jul 14 2007, 01:28 PM)

It's really pathetic.   It's no secret that American developers have a long history of have difficulty developing a 60fps game.  I still remember that sad-looking greenish xbox 1 console menu running at 30 fps while PS1 and dreamcast running theirs at 60fps years ago.  Beside all the Japanese developed 60fps games for xbox 1 & 360,  I can't seems to recall any 60fps running xbox games beside some ea sports games.
The main reason of no 60fps is that all those lazy programmers don't have to work that hard at all for the optimization.  Now they basically have twice the polygons to use, so they would waste it on here and there, and the graphic can still look a lot inferior, less realistic when compare to Gran Turismo 4 for PS2 (and that's not even account for the frame rate difference, yet.)
And it's even more pathetic when ppl here would simply accept whatever low quality wasted Microsoft give you, and find a reason to justify.  If you prefer low fps then who don't you go back to "Hard Drivin"  running at 15fps.

did you seriously register just to troll and and bash American developers?

It seems you need to do your research, because honestly you come off like an uninformed DICK
1. PGR is developed by Bizarre Creations, a European studio (Liverpool UK), not only that they're not even MS exclusive they have developed for Nintendo Sony Sega and PC in the past and they even have Nintendo and Sony games in development now.

2. Forza was never meant to be the best graphical racer. From it's inception it's goal has been Realistic physics. which it does have and it calculates all of the cars physical characteristics and reactions in real time. AFAIK it's the only game that does that. Even the GT series just uses pre-calculated numbers and stats. It doesn't matter which console you're working with, there is only so much power to go around and if you're going to calculate all of your physics in real time then the graphics are going to be toned down a bit as a result. You might as well go poke fun at some ducks down at the pond because they can't quack as loud as your dog can bark... but really they were meant for swimming and flying, and your dog sucks at one (physics) and can't even do the other (crash damage). I'm sorry but any "simulator" that leaves out crash damage is no simulator at all.

Even at that Forza 2 still runs at 60FPS, even with all those lazy American developers bogging it down.

3. From your dis of Hard Drivin, which is arguably one of the most realistic driving simulators in terms of gameplay and physics, it's obvious the only thing you care about are graphics. In which case I implore you... GO WATCH A MOVIE.

[ixus238]

QUOTE(twistedsymphony @ Jul 14 2007, 11:06 PM)

did you seriously register just to troll and and bash American developers?

No.  I'm posting it mainly try to question the intelligence of the previous poster(including YOU), and trying to bring some balance to the matter.

Beware of your word usage, "troll and bash" ?  I just merely point out the fact that most US and EU devs make 30fps games.  Where is the freedom of speech, "American" ?  It's like saying oppose to war == unpatriotic , pls leave your kind of american spirit to yourself or maybe in Texas.

QUOTE(twistedsymphony @ Jul 14 2007, 11:06 PM)

It seems you need to do your research, because honestly you come off like an uninformed DICK
1. PGR is developed by Bizarre Creations, a European studio (Liverpool UK), not only that they're not even MS exclusive they have developed for Nintendo Sony Sega and PC in the past and they even have Nintendo and Sony games in development now.

You're right.  My mistake.  I played MSR back in Dreamcast and I should know.  But it does not change the fact that vast majority of the US and EU developers only dev 30 fps games.  Only explanation is either they lacks the skills (unlikely), or just plain lazy, unwilling to put the extra efforts to optimize.

And wow beware of your word, head mod?  If i'm the dick, I guess you're the dick head, head mod.

QUOTE(twistedsymphony @ Jul 14 2007, 11:06 PM)

2. Forza was never meant to be the best graphical racer. From it's inception it's goal has been Realistic physics. which it does have and it calculates all of the cars physical characteristics and reactions in real time. AFAIK it's the only game that does that. Even the GT series just uses pre-calculated numbers and stats. It doesn't matter which console you're working with, there is only so much power to go around and if you're going to calculate all of your physics in real time then the graphics are going to be toned down a bit as a result. You might as well go poke fun at some ducks down at the pond because they can't quack as loud as your dog can bark... but really they were meant for swimming and flying, and your dog sucks at one (physics) and can't even do the other (crash damage). I'm sorry but any "simulator" that leaves out crash damage is no simulator at all.

Those are all just marketing term.  In the end only the results (graphic and gameplay) matter.  It's just like term "HEMI" or "VTEC", at the end it's the HP and speed that counts.  Just to remind you, rendering actual 3D object is the basis of the real physical simulation.  The fact is PGR3 at 30fps and GT4 at 60fps.  Saying PGR3 renders physics at 360fps is like saying my optical laser mouse render at 8000fps.  Ridiculous and highly misleading.

And you called that kind of crash damage a real simulation?  A real physics simulation of the crash damage would be blown the car into many pieces, tire exploded and wheel falling off.   A few bumps and fake glass shattering here and little slow down there are hardly a realistic physical damage simulation.  The car looks like damaged but in term of physical damage simulation in a racing game, both PGR3 and GT4 hardly get it right.

QUOTE(twistedsymphony @ Jul 14 2007, 11:06 PM)

3. From your dis of Hard Drivin, which is arguably one of the most realistic driving simulators in terms of gameplay and physics, it's obvious the only thing you care about are graphics. In which case I implore you... GO WATCH A MOVIE.

I appreciate both photo realistic graphic and convincing gameplay, that's why I'd go extra effort of playing GT4 in the KAI network.   Seems like ppl here have a tendency of lowering their gaming standard for the developers convenience.  That's why I suggest you further lower yourself and settle on hard drivin.  Who knows, you might like it if it's from Microsoft not Atari.   I sure know I wouldn't settle for anything less than 60fps.  For christ sake it's 2007 and the next next next gen gaming,  if you like 30fps you've a problem.

By the way, I have a 360.  Madden from 30fps => 60fps is for a reason.

This post has been edited by ixus238: Jul 15 2007, 10:26 AM

[Fract504]

60 fps do really matter at least for me.
PGR1 was 60 fps and had that really superfluid feel.
PGR2 disappointed, because all of a sudden the speed feeling was lost and camera sweeps and stuff became stuttering because of the 30 fps. I don't care about the graphics detail. The game must run absolutely superfluid like a good arcade game.

I still have an old PAL-TV and run the games in PAL60 on a XBOX1.
The 60FPS games runs supersmooth on that TV.

For testing purposes I brought my XBOX to friends with plasma and LCD-TVs.
Only the plasma TV could rival the old PAL TV in terms of response time and "smoothness" of 60 FPS.

60FPS on LCD-TV? Forget it. Blurrish and not pleasing for the eye...

You may think different, but for me smoothness is top priority. I hope my old TV won't blow any time soon, as it seems to become near to impossible to still get good 50/60Hz TVs (Sony Trinitron anyone?).

A good monitor test is the rotating "Diamond" in the Quantum Redshift Title screen. I was totally shocked when I saw it moving on 100Hz TVs or LCDs.  Playing the game itself on the 100Hz TV was not fun either...

[Kr0n1k]

Twisted, pull out the ban hammer. ixus is obviously one of these eurotrash guys with half a brain. Don't come on a forum questioning someone's intelligence when you can't even speak or type English properly. It makes you look even more worthless than you already are. And Forza is a prime example as to why devs are choosing 30fps over 60fps for alot of games. You lose overall graphical quality when attempting to go 60fps. Same thing goes for 1080p. The performance hit you take when trying to run REAL 1080p is so great, you'd end up with a high resolution game with low-res textures. Not to mention, the human eye can only process 30fps, which is why movies are run at something like 28fps at the theatre. 60fps and 1080p are buzz words used to push hardware to the ignorant people like yourself. The guys working on PGR4 are going to up the ante on the 360 when it comes to visual fidelity and effects with real-time weather, lighting, etc. I'd rather have a game that looks absolutely amazing, than a game like GT4 or Forza 2 running at 60fps with ho-hum graphics.

This post has been edited by Kr0n1k: Jul 15 2007, 09:37 PM

[hamwbone]

you can tell a diffrence between 30 and 60. that whole human eye thing is a lie. they can get away with 30 in games in movies because they use motion blur.

WIKI "Computer animation
Similarly, in real-time computer animation each frame shows a perfect instance in time (analogous to a camera with an infinitely fast shutter), with zero motion blur. This is why a video game with a frame rate of 25-30 frames per second will seem 'jumpy' and strange, while natural motion filmed at the same frame rate appears continuous. To compensate for this, much higher frame rates are desirable, of 60 frames per second or more. The majority of next generation video games feature motion blur, especially racing or flight simulators feature motion blur effects because of camera high relative speeds.
"