Petition to get DOA5LR cutscenes running at 60fps

[squarewindow]

Last Round will be released next month, It's basically finished, so any petition at this point won't bring anything. Also, where is the problem really? I will never understand the obsession with 1080p resolution or 60fps. The human eye can hardly even make it out.

The character intros, outros and lose poses are also not prerendered, as some in here suggested. If they were, you wouldn't be able to spin the camera around and zoom in or out to your hearts content.

Mythbusters required reading: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/7199031187

Cutscenes are often rendered closer to 24fps to attain a filmic quality that is lost at higher frame rates. It's an artistic choice and a very good one since most people are weirded out by watching things at high frame rates. There's a reason people disable that true motion setting on TVs after all. See also the HFR releases of movies that are almost completely ignored.

Also, the game is not getting anything major changes now. Waste of time.

I personally disagree that it is a good artistic choice. And I stated in the petition that I know it is late in development, I have been pestering them for this for a long time and have just been ignored, so this is my last desperate attempt. They could patch the option in post-release if they really wanted to.

Again, as previously stated, stuff like this is an artistic choice since most films and TV shows actually run at 24fps.

I know and understand this, but it doesn't make any sense for them to change something to 30fps that always used to be at 60fps in the older games. This is a game, not a film.

Honestly guys it always really frustrates me when I see people opposing higher framerates, I just can't get my head around it...

 

[CyberEvil]

Mythbusters required reading: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/7199031187

I personally disagree that it is a good artistic choice. And I stated in the petition that I know it is late in development, I have been pestering them for this for a long time and have just been ignored, so this is my last desperate attempt.

I expect that you enable true motion (or its equivalent) on your personal TV, then? Never complain about the "soap opera effect?" Busted down doors to be first in line for the HFR releases of The Hobbit?

Content that you simply sit and watch looks weird to most people over 24fps because we've been fed content that way for nearly a century. We're conditioned for it. You are welcome to disagree because what you find appealing is absolutely a personal choice. But I'm telling you right now that even had you started this in the original release pre-development window, you would have been overruled. The vast majority of consumers of media (gaming, film, or other content) despise non-interactive scenes being higher than 24fps. You could make a case for 30fps because the difference is hard to discern. The full 60fps, though, looks fake to people on screen.

 

[Cadaveri]

You can definitely see over 1080p, you just cant see over 60fps. Our eyes can process up to 8k or 9k resolutions.

Without bothering going much into detail, human eye can see a diffirence to up to around 200 fps (in gaming)

I mean the diffirence from 60 to 120 is huge, after that it starts to get somewhat un-noticeable, but you can definately see a diffirence from 120 to 200 for example...

 

[squarewindow]

I expect that you enable true motion (or its equivalent) on your personal TV, then? Never complain about the "soap opera effect?" Busted down doors to be first in line for the HFR releases of The Hobbit?

Content that you simply sit and watch looks weird to most people over 24fps because we've been fed content that way for nearly a century. We're conditioned for it. You are welcome to disagree because what you find appealing is absolutely a personal choice. But I'm telling you right now that even had you started this in the original release pre-development window, you would have been overruled. The vast majority of consumers of media (gaming, film, or other content) despise non-interactive scenes being higher than 24fps. You could make a case for 30fps because the difference is hard to discern. The full 60fps, though, looks fake to people on screen.

In that case are you able to explain to me why it is only now, with DOA5, that they have decided to enforce 30fps cutscenes when the previous games ran at 60? It would have been easy to have the old games running at 30fps too, it's technically less demanding, after all. Why the sudden change now? We've been used to 24fps for a century, after all - it's not a recent development unique to the past 4 years.

 

[CyberEvil]

In that case are you able to explain to me why it is only now, with DOA5, that they have decided to enforce 30fps cutscenes when the previous games ran at 60? It would have been easy to have the old games running at 30fps too, it's technically less demanding, after all. Why the sudden change now? We've been used to 24fps for a century, after all - it's not a recent development unique to the past 4 years.

Already did. It's an artistic choice and we're working with a massively different team. Someone made the call to go with that. Especially with story mode cutscenes, I'm glad they did. There is just a lot more non-interactive video content in this game than in previous iterations and that likely influenced it.

 

[squarewindow]

Already did. It's an artistic choice and we're working with a massively different team. Someone made the call to go with that. Especially with story mode cutscenes, I'm glad they did. There is just a lot more non-interactive video content in this game than in previous iterations and that likely influenced it.

Fine, we will agree to differ on whether 30 or 60 is preferable, like a lot of people do. If they had given us the choice between the two then everyone could have been happy.

 

[CyberEvil]

Fine, we will agree to differ on whether 30 or 60 is preferable, like a lot of people do. If they had given us the choice between the two then everyone could have been happy.

Developers rarely do. I want to say inFamous Second Son is the only non-PC game I've seen in years that allows any control over the frame rate. The Last of Us Remastered might have as well, but it's a short list. Game developers, especially outside of the West, largely consider their craft to be art in the same way that a director of a film might. They make decisions the same way. Western developers are significantly more open to development feedback from fans and that's been a double-edged sword. Not a discussion for this thread but there it is.

Personally, I'd love to see an option for those of us that do want little changes like that. I just don't see it happening, especially when the game has likely been content-complete for some time now.

 

[crapoZK]

Without bothering going much into detail, human eye can see a diffirence to up to around 200 fps (in gaming)

I mean the diffirence from 60 to 120 is huge, after that it starts to get somewhat un-noticeable, but you can definately see a diffirence from 120 to 200 for example...

That is indeed true.

 

[synce]

Filmic is one of the stupidest fucking words ever used to describe a game. 30fps is not filmic, it's choppy. Just watch 30fps vs 60fps in slow motion.

Some people may claim they can't tell the difference and I even know one IRL, but I ran a little experiment and had her play the PS3 version of MGS5 (no problems), followed by 60fps PC version (at which point she said PC felt weird), then immediately PS3 version (which she now felt was unplayable).

Same thing with cutscenes. People call it the soap opera effect but once more people start using it in movies and games it'll be considered normal and more people will finally see 30fps for how choppy it is.

 

[CyberEvil]

Filmic is one of the stupidest fucking words ever used to describe a game. 30fps is not filmic, it's choppy. Just watch 30fps vs 60fps in slow motion.

Some people may claim they can't tell the difference and I even know one IRL, but I ran a little experiment and had her play the PS3 version of MGS5 (no problems), followed by 60fps PC version (at which point she said PC felt weird), then immediately PS3 version (which she now felt was unplayable).

Same thing with cutscenes. People call it the soap opera effect but once more people start using it in movies and games it'll be considered normal and more people will finally see 30fps for how choppy it is.

Playing is different than watching. My posts have nothing to do with gameplay and I was referring to cutscenes exclusively. Context.

I have no idea when or if most of us will get used to higher frame rates for video content. I'm not in a rush.

 

[David Gregg]

This is something you should request for 6 instead as like everyone is saying it's too late for LR. The game comes out next month.

 

[squarewindow]

This is something you should request for 6 instead as like everyone is saying it's too late for LR. The game comes out next month.

I know man, but it's something that I'm sure could be patched in post-release if they really want to do it. I have been asking them to do this since the game was announced via Twitter, Facebook and email.

 

[Macca Beam]

I don't know about Story Mode, but 30fps during intro/win/lose poses is definitely a limitation and not an artistic choice. It's not a "cutscene" anymore, it's model inspection time. However, remember that this game's performance shits itself at every opportunity (pay attention to the frame rate in the main menu background and whenever you zoom into someone who just fell into water/snow); it cannot handle the anti-aliasing at a consistent frame rate, simple as that.

Now next-gen is a different matter altogether. This is a naive question, but you did watch the trailers at 60fps and the sequences were playing at 30, right? Youtube videos cap at 30fps on my browser and I can't verify this myself.

 

[squarewindow]

I don't know about Story Mode, but 30fps during intro/win/lose poses is definitely a limitation and not an artistic choice. It's not a "cutscene" anymore, it's model inspection time. However, remember that this game's performance shits itself at every opportunity (pay attention to the frame rate in the main menu background and whenever you zoom into someone who just fell into water/snow); it cannot handle the anti-aliasing at a consistent frame rate, simple as that.

In the DOA5 Alpha Demo the main menu and character select screens ran at 60fps, and they look OK to me. Intro and win/lose poses were still 30 back then though...

Now next-gen is a different matter altogether. This is a naive question, but you did watch the trailers at 60fps and the sequences were playing at 30, right? Youtube videos cap at 30fps on my browser and I can't verify this myself.

Yeah, I'm aware of this limitation, so used a Firefox plugin to download the videos from Youtube and play them in VLC Media Player, the 30/60 change is still there, sadly.

 

[Kite]

I did dust off my PS3 and installed core fighters a week ago to get some practice in before steam version is out. I immediately noticed the frame dropped for the poses at the end of the battle and assume it was because of PS3 performance issue. Now I read this thread it looks to be a design choice. There's no motion blur so it's quite noticeable. My guess is that for the pose they are switching in a higher detailed model to make it look pretty and lower frame-rate because PS3 couldn't handle it at 60fps with this detail.

Hopefully this won't be overlooked by TN when going to PS4/XB1/PC because it shouldn't be necessary anymore. If it's still there I'll definitely support the petition. (Edit: PS4/XB1 60fps videos still show choppy frame rate in poses ><)

As for FPS debate. I'm primary a PC gamer who owns a 120hz monitor and now a 144hz monitor with G-Sync. I also have a GTX Titan to push the frame rate and some older titles I can play at perfect 144fps. Smoothness of moving objects is night and day difference between 60fps and 120fps. The problem with this debate is you need a PC and 120hz+ monitor to experience it. Higher hz TVs don't work because they take 60hz input and generate in-between frames, which also adds lag. If you never experienced it I suggest finding a friend who has a 120hz+ monitor and run some frame-tests on various websites; I would be surprised if you can't notice the difference.

I fully expect DOA5LR on PC to be locked at 60fps, because not doing so will give players with 120hz+ monitor an advantage with the low frame times with online mode. I would love it if single player and local multi-player was at an unlock fps.

 

[d3v]

I did dust off my PS3 and installed core fighters a week ago to get some practice in before steam version is out. I immediately noticed the frame dropped for the poses at the end of the battle and assume it was because of PS3 performance issue. Now I read this thread it looks to be a design choice. There's no motion blur so it's quite noticeable. My guess is that for the pose they are switching in a higher detailed model to make it look pretty and lower frame-rate because PS3 couldn't handle it at 60fps with this detail.

Hopefully this won't be overlooked by TN when going to PS4/XB1/PC because it shouldn't be necessary anymore. If it's still there I'll definitely support the petition.

As stated before, the 30fps for cutscenes may not have anything to do with performance. It seems to have to do more with the theory that 30fps is better for cinematics.

 

[Chapstick]

My guess is that for the pose they are switching in a higher detailed model to make it look pretty and lower frame-rate because PS3 couldn't handle it at 60fps with this detail.

This is not true.

 

[squarewindow]

Hopefully this won't be overlooked by TN when going to PS4/XB1/PC because it shouldn't be necessary anymore. If it's still there I'll definitely support the petition.

They are still 30 on PS4/XB1 so please sign the petition...

PC is unknown at this point but obviously you would expect it to adjust.

 

[Kite]

As stated before, the 30fps for cutscenes may not have anything to do with performance. It seems to have to do more with the theory that 30fps is better for cinematics.

If this is the case they missing extra things to make it feel truly cinematic, because right now it feels like a fast slide show without proper motion blur. I can get used to 30fps if it stays at 30 even though I don't enjoy this framerate, however if I play 60fps for a period of time then switches to 30fps it feels very choppy to me.

They are still 30 on PS4/XB1 so please sign the petition...

PC is unknown at this point but obviously you would expect it to adjust.

I checked out Team NINJA Studio latest HD video recorded at 60fps. Yep, cut-scenes are still choppy when using chrome and selecting 1080p60

 

[Tyaren]

The problem isn't so much, that the character poses run in 30fps (which is perfectly fluid for the human eye), but that it drops under 30fps and that there's some severe screen tearing (at least on the Xbox360) going on. That is, what makes the character poses look so choppy. In these poses, the characters and environments are the exact same, but you have free camera control and there's additional antialiasing and depth of field applied to the characters and backgrounds, to make everything look smoother, which really brings the already outdated graphics engine to it's knees, hence the frame rate drop below 30fps and the screen tearing. Now the game runs on much more powerful hardware, but the graphic engine is still the exact same. So there won't be too much of an improvement, unless TN's programmers overwork the complete thing...which they won't until DOA6, because this takes much time and much more money. DOA5 Last Round is just a quick port and the game is already long finished.