Just lost my interest in Dead Rising 3...

[MerlotC]

Old build.

 

[testement]

Why are some people more worried about resolution and fps then how the game plays.
Is these things more important than game play???
I for one can't wait till the next gen consoles to come out so all this nonsense can stop (or will it just be the beginning)

 

[Keith Wallace]

Resolution's not a big deal, but FPS is. When you're cappign the game at 30 FPS, any dip starts to get really bad. 60 FPS is supposed to be the limit of what we can perceive, while 30 is supposed to be about the threshold for playability. If 30 FPS is the high-end, then any FPS dips are going to affect gameplay to a noticeable degree.

 

[Polychrome]

Can I ask what's wrong with 30 FPS? I know it's nice to have 60 on video games, but remember most TV is 24 or 30. That never bugs me, and if your TV is set to inbetween, you'd likely never notice it anyway.

(Honestly, inbetweening on TV shows looks weird to me.)

 

[berty6294]

Can I ask what's wrong with 30 FPS? I know it's nice to have 60 on video games, but remember most TV is 24 or 30. That never bugs me, and if your TV is set to inbetween, you'd likely never notice it anyway.

(Honestly, inbetweening on TV shows looks weird to me.)

Huge difference between video playback and gameplay.

 

[Polychrome]

Huge difference between video playback and gameplay.

I understand that, but remember some systems back in the day couldn't do over 30fps not because of their own hardware limitations, but because of NTSC limitations. I remember the original PlayStation at least appearing to be perfectly smooth, and that was with the FPS limited.

Also, we've got people in the thread commenting that DR3 has appeared perfectly smooth even though it's 30fps. It's possible that the devs are only guaranteeing 30fps, not saying it won't go above. Or the TV it's playing on could be inbetweening after all.

 

[berty6294]

I understand that, but remember some systems back in the day couldn't do over 30fps not because of their own hardware limitations, but because of NTSC limitations. I remember the original PlayStation at least appearing to be perfectly smooth, and that was with the FPS limited.

Also, we've got people in the thread commenting that DR3 has appeared perfectly smooth even though it's 30fps. It's possible that the devs are only guaranteeing 30fps, not saying it won't go above. Or the TV it's playing on could be inbetweening after all.

Oh no I'm not arguing that, 30fps is very smooth. But for somebody who is used to 60fps the difference WILL be noticeable!

 

[Keith Wallace]

This really is embarrassing, though. There's a point at which you have to ask how rushed the game is, if not the console as a whole. If you're dropping below 20 FPS at 720p, the validity of calling the machine next-gen (even if the game's poorly-optimized) becomes a bit of a stretch. Microsoft says that they're going to work on shrinking the Kinect and OS footprints, and get them somewhere south of the 10% line they're at now, in relation to GPU strain, and I wonder if that does anything to help. I guess the question is if it's a GPU thing, or if the CPU is to blame. We see MMOs get bottlenecked by CPUs, so is it possible something similar happens when you create a massive world with no load screens and add in a bajillion characters?

If it's a CPU thing, then he Sony fanboys have no leg to stand on. If it's a GPU thing, then Microsoft has some freaking explaining to do, and we can only hope that any freed-up GPU power can help pull this game's head out of its ****. I mean, really, dropping below 20 FPS on a brand-new console...AFTER you scaled back the resolution? Either this game got badly rushed because Microsoft decided to launch its console earlier than it planned and needed another launch title, or the entire development team working on Dead Rising needs to be fired for doing such a terrible job coding the game. 20 FPS...pitiful.

 

[theeboredone]

Sadly, this is why I don't bother with year 1 releases, let alone launch games. There's just too many things that can go wrong with the console or the games.

 

[jlzimmerman]

IMO, games can have sub-par specs and still be phenomenal games. Specs are only a side dish to the game. With that said, I am looking forward to developers focusing only on next gen consoles to get it going.

 

[Coreldan]

I think it's a bit too narrow to just look at the resolution and FPS in this case, as it's quite relative. I'm sure a game can be made that will make the most powerful PC rig on these forums kneel to 20 FPS. At the same time, Minecraft at 1080p/60 fps still can't be called impressive no matter how you look at it, cos it doesn't sport "proper" textures or really proper anything else.

Another example to explain what I mean could be Ryse lowering polygon count on characters a while back. I don't remember the numbers and frankly they don't matter. I had a friend (who is more of a PS4 fan) come to me saying like "look how Ryse had to lower polygon count" cos it was reported online. Well, first of all they lowered polygon count to add more detail to the world and the second thing is that it's all relative and in the end that alone says NOTHING about the console and more about the game. What I mean with this is that lets say the average polygon count per character in next-gen is 1 million (fictional numbers). Now, a developer makes characters have 3 million polygons and has issues with performance and ends up lowering polygon count. This gets reported online, but people don't look at whether the numbers were anywhere near standard to begin with. Now, they lower it to 1 million polygons but they look bad cos your average crap journalist let alone the consumer has no idea whats a normal polygon count and it makes the console look bad "herpderp it doesnt have enough power so they had to make it look worse".

Now, I have no doubts that DR3 is likely a bit badly coded and optimized in all the rush, but we have to look at what happens in the game. I would say that the amount of stuff on the screen, the zombies, are not standard. It looks really damn sweet when they are that many, but I have no doubts they could reach 1080p/60fps if they wanted to if they had a more standard approach and just copy the typical "3 bad guys in the screen at one time" of your average shooter. Then there's the whole open world with no loading times which also taxes the system. Nobody probably would've complained the tiniest bit if there was some small loading screens when you move to a whole different area and this could've freed them to go for more performance.

Now, I don't really care for zombies or the kind of "silly gameplay" of DR3 to begin with, but I do must say that having seen it with my own eyes as well as seeing most PS4 launch games, it's still pretty much the most impressive games with next-gen consoles during launch. I can't deny that next gen dropping down to 20 fps occasionally at 720p wouldn't sound weird, but we must remember how narrow those two numbers are, cos once again, Minecraft at 1080p/60 fps doesnt make it more technically impressive game, there is so much more that has to be considered.

EDIT: I would feel this kind of numberpoking would be more fair to a game like CoD: Ghosts, although at 720p, it at least runs at a constant 60fps, something PS4 couldn't manage at 1080p.

 

[DavidinCT]

Can I ask what's wrong with 30 FPS? I know it's nice to have 60 on video games, but remember most TV is 24 or 30. That never bugs me, and if your TV is set to inbetween, you'd likely never notice it anyway.

(Honestly, inbetweening on TV shows looks weird to me.)

That becomes a big discussion here. The human eye cant really detect more than 30fps anyway. Just like if you take a camcorder and try to record a SD video from a TV, you see all the lines in the image (interlaced display). From the start of TV, it's always been at 30fps, Even cartoons are done at 15fps (take the Simpson's for example is done at 15fps).

The only thing you might notice all overall is smoothness of the motion by getting a higher frame rate. I was a primary PC gamer for a long time before I even got into console games (even though I had a 360 for a long time from release, it's why my gamer score is so low). I'm pretty hardcore, I am at least playing a game 4-5 times a week, and for at least an hour or 2 a pop (this is with a job, marrried and 2 kids). I have played PC games at 120fps and most around 90fps, to be dead honest with you, I notice only minor differences in those vs a 40fps, under 30 is where it's very noticeable but, this would vary person to person.

This becomes the other side of it but, like everyone else, I expect a certan level of quality when it comes to NextGen games on a top end game system. I guess it's acceptable for some of the more "rushed" release titles but, it better not be like this for very long. No question, I am dispointed in seeing these top end games come out @ 720p AND 30fps, Really ?

 

[ncxcstud]

does it stink that many of the next gen games aren't up to our (very) high standards as gamers? Sure. But, just as when the 360/PS3 came out, launch games are not indicative of what a system can do. As I've said before, go look at the launch games for each system 8 and 7 years ago... They look terrible compared to now. I still remember people saying when the 360/PS3 came out, "Why do we need new consoles, look at what the PS2 can do! Or look at this XBOX game! Wow! The graphics on the new systems are only marginally better..."

It takes time. And I think DR3 is similar to last gen's Kameo - a game initially started in a previous generation (or in Kameo's case, the N64 era) and 'ported/shoved' into a next gen hole.

That becomes a big discussion here. The human eye cant really detect more than 30fps anyway. Just like if you take a camcorder and try to record a SD video from a TV, you see all the lines in the image (interlaced display). From the start of TV, it's always been at 30fps, Even cartoons are done at 15fps (take the Simpson's for example is done at 15fps).

The only thing you might notice all overall is smoothness of the motion by getting a higher frame rate. I was a primary PC gamer for a long time before I even got into console games (even though I had a 360 for a long time from release, it's why my gamer score is so low). I'm pretty hardcore, I am at least playing a game 4-5 times a week, and for at least an hour or 2 a pop (this is with a job, marrried and 2 kids). I have played PC games at 120fps and most around 90fps, to be dead honest with you, I notice only minor differences in those vs a 40fps, under 30 is where it's very noticeable but, this would vary person to person.

This becomes the other side of it but, like everyone else, I expect a certan level of quality when it comes to NextGen games on a top end game system. I guess it's acceptable for some of the more "rushed" release titles but, it better not be like this for very long. No question, I am dispointed in seeing these top end games come out @ 720p AND 30fps, Really ?

 

[DavidinCT]

does it stink that many of the next gen games aren't up to our (very) high standards as gamers? Sure. But, just as when the 360/PS3 came out, launch games are not indicative of what a system can do. As I've said before, go look at the launch games for each system 8 and 7 years ago... They look terrible compared to now. I still remember people saying when the 360/PS3 came out, "Why do we need new consoles, look at what the PS2 can do! Or look at this XBOX game! Wow! The graphics on the new systems are only marginally better..."

It takes time. And I think DR3 is similar to last gen's Kameo - a game initially started in a previous generation (or in Kameo's case, the N64 era) and 'ported/shoved' into a next gen hole.

Yea, and I know, we have had this discussion before on other threads. I think we agree to disagree on this subject. When a new console is released, it needs to have titles to set a benchmark for the system. As with the 360/PS3, there were a few titles that were majorly impressive over the PS2/Orignal Xbox. As you said, if the games looked the same, why would one bother to go to nextgen systems ???

STILL, the part of me will stay and stand by it, the new system (NOT EVEN RELASED yet), Claims to have the highest specs over last gen systems, it's a big junk more expensive than the older systems (at least for the 360, the PS3 was $599 on release and PS4 is $399). There is a level of quality we expect for the NEW nextgen systems and for me, that is 1080p gaming @ 60fps. I kind of expected it... Maybe it's just me.

Yea, in 6-8 months, who will care about a few release titles (I hope) but, as long as the gaming level gets to where it SHOULD be for every game, then it's a non-issue. I just hope it's for these release titles.

No question for a $500 brand new game system, with $60 game, I do expect 1080p....so yea, I am a little disapointed...as most people SHOULD be but, again, maybe it's just me...

 

[gsquared]

I think it is all stated right here: "does it stink that many of the next gen games aren't up to our (very) high standards as gamers?"

Your expectations are too high! Enjoy it for what it is, a game where you get to kill Zombies in all sorts of cool ways. Once you allow your expectations to become too high you will always be dissapointed in the end. The OP is already dissapointed for a game that has yet to be relased. Does anyone else not think that is f^*)@d-up?

 

[Keith Wallace]

I think it is all stated right here: "does it stink that many of the next gen games aren't up to our (very) high standards as gamers?"

Your expectations are too high! Enjoy it for what it is, a game where you get to kill Zombies in all sorts of cool ways. Once you allow your expectations to become too high you will always be dissapointed in the end. The OP is already dissapointed for a game that has yet to be relased. Does anyone else not think that is f^*)@d-up?

The problem is seeing and reading the quality of the game. The talk of poor optimization and not-infrequent dips under 30 FPS. I'm not on the whole "resolution" train, my eyesight's not good enough to care about 1080p vs. 720p, but if you can't take a next-gen console and get 30 FPS at 720p, you have a serious issue.

I agree though, that expectations are too high. That doesn't just go for visual quality, but gameplay quality. People are mad that Call of Duty and Battlefield are more of themselves, as if you're supposed to take a decade-old franchise like Call of Duty and produce a game that's not Call of Duty with it, but still have the Call of Duty name on it. People expect originality from a 10-year-old franchise, yet so many of those same people eat up the game garbage gameplay in GTA V and the same tired jokes in garbage shows like Family Guy. They just want something that isn't Call of Duty from Call of Duty, rather than buying something other than Call of Duty to scratch that it.

But the visual requests aren't that far-fetched. I don't think you should expect 1080p and 60 FPS right away, because development becomes more-efficient, especially when you stop having to worry about the previous generation of consoles (meaning more man-hours on the next-gen version). However, when you start talking 720p and 30 FPS, you get to the limit of tolerance, so when your game has that as the high-end, and it drops noticeably on multiple occasions of action, that's intolerable, to an extent. It has to make you question Microsoft's GPU decision, at least a little.

On the other hand, getting games like Need for Speed at 1080p and 30 FPS might be solid, as long as it holds that 30 FPS (flying around in a car with FPS dips = crash). Getting a solid 60 FPS from Battlefield and Call of Duty and Forza and Ryse is good. Imperfections in textures is one thing, but video lag is a bad deal.

 

[DavidinCT]

I think it is all stated right here: "does it stink that many of the next gen games aren't up to our (very) high standards as gamers?"

Your expectations are too high! Enjoy it for what it is, a game where you get to kill Zombies in all sorts of cool ways. Once you allow your expectations to become too high you will always be dissapointed in the end. The OP is already dissapointed for a game that has yet to be relased. Does anyone else not think that is f^*)@d-up?

No, I dont think it's "f^*)@d-up". When you talking that a game that is unrelased drop in frames below 30fps in a top end console, I agree 100%. No question that Microsoft QUOATED, 1080p games, we are not getting this and with the possable performance issue here, yea, it's a big deal.

It's funny that people here are spending $500 of their hard earned money on a console but, wont even question the possable performace issues that Microsoft quoted would not happen (due to the next gen hardware and 1080p gaming)... Hey, it's your money...

To me it's kind of like buying a Ferrari and only getting a old Chevy v8 in it....Sure it will perform good and be fairly fast but, not have the performance that you were quoted when you paid for it. 0-60 in 3.2 seconds ? Yea right, maybe about 5 seconds....Not exactly what you paid for

 

[Coreldan]

But we are also getting those 1080p and 60fps games. Not to mention that it's still easy to reach thsoe numbers if you just make the game lower detail just otherwise, it would just be sleight of hand if they did that, though.

 

[DavidinCT]

But we are also getting those 1080p and 60fps games. Not to mention that it's still easy to reach thsoe numbers if you just make the game lower detail just otherwise, it would just be sleight of hand if they did that, though.

I guess we'll see how it plays out, pretty much everyone in this thread is getting a Xbox one (with some acceptions). When it really comes down to it, it will be how the games look, sound and play. This is the most important thing to me. If this, 720p 30fps thing is still happening 6-12 months from now, I am for sure going to see some flaws with the system. One of the key things I want this system for (same with the PS4) is 4K gaming and video as MS has said. If we are having ANY issues with some games getting to 1080p @ 60fps, How the heck are they going to do 4K @ 60fps ?

Yea, we are getting some games in 1080p 60fps but, we are also talking some other AAA tiles for Xbox and with the level of performance, it's a little disaponting...

I hope in 6 months this is not even a discussion any more but, as we have nothing else to talk about on the system now(as no one has one), the only thing we can talk about is the numbers, and yea, I'm following that trend too. From a product spec, again by the numbers, you can see the point that people are trying to get across.

I do understand some release games are normally rushed a little, so it's a possable performance issues could pop up but, I hope they are all resolved over patches...

 

[berty6294]

I guess we'll see how it plays out, pretty much everyone in this thread is getting a Xbox one (with some acceptions). When it really comes down to it, it will be how the games look, sound and play. This is the most important thing to me. If this, 720p 30fps thing is still happening 6-12 months from now, I am for sure going to see some flaws with the system. One of the key things I want this system for (same with the PS4) is 4K gaming and video as MS has said. If we are having ANY issues with some games getting to 1080p @ 60fps, How the heck are they going to do 4K @ 60fps ?

Yea, we are getting some games in 1080p 60fps but, we are also talking some other AAA tiles for Xbox and with the level of performance, it's a little disaponting...

I hope in 6 months this is not even a discussion any more but, as we have nothing else to talk about on the system now(as no one has one), the only thing we can talk about is the numbers, and yea, I'm following that trend too. From a product spec, again by the numbers, you can see the point that people are trying to get across.

I do understand some release games are normally rushed a little, so it's a possable performance issues could pop up but, I hope they are all resolved over patches...

Dude legit 4K games are not going to happen on the PS4 and Xbox One. Like yeah maybe like solitaire or some BS game will display 4K, but there is just no way these consoles will be able to put out games as intense as Call Of Duty, Dead Rising, Battlefield, Forza, Titanfall, etc with native 4K resolution! Hell, the consoles are physically capped at 30fps 4K for video, but I still don't see games running at this, and any less framerate I would prefer it just be in 1080p at 60fps.