Le contenu de cette page est en Anglais. Pour afficher la page en Anglais, cliquez ici
…and I'm just sitting here. Playing Mass Effect 1 that often drops to 24FPS during combat and not caring at all.
The PS2 Ratchet games would also drop down to around 30 when combat got intense. Still ran far better than FFA which is locked at 30 at all times.
You might not care about the quality of the framerate, but I do. 30 fps on the PS4 is absurd for a 3D platforming shooter.
I don't know what it is, people always fight the Framerate wars. But all it does for me is amuse me. I always think ''Aaah, get to cover. We have a framedrop!'' and wait for the game to catch up. I honestly don't think it's worth my complaining. 
I don't know what it is, people always fight the Framerate wars. But all it does for me is amuse me. I always think ''Aaah, get to cover. We have a framedrop!'' and wait for the game to catch up. I honestly don't think it's worth complaining.
Whatever. I think your opinion on this ruins R&C's gameplay. That's the biggest thing about this game to me. People were so willing to accept this sub-par framerate. We have R&C games that look good, and run at a decent framerate, why can't the new ones do the same? On the freaking PS4?
Insomniacs reason for cutting the framerate in half was stupid.
MoSCoW rule:
Must
Should
Could
Would
Insomniac would want 60 FPS. Making it move farther down the list. 30 FPS is fine with me, 60 is 'unneeded luxury''.
MoSCoW rule:
Must
Should
Could
Would
Insomniac would want 60 FPS. Making it move farther down the list. 30 FPS is fine with me, 60 is 'unneeded luxury''.
They gave their absurd reasons for changing it. They also said it made the game feel more like a movie.
Luxury? Having a smooth framerate opposed to a PS1 grade framerate is luxury? No. It's the standard. There are plenty of games out there that look just as good, and run smoother than present Ratchet.
60 FPS might be the standard for PC, it isn't for consoles. A lot of PS4 games have fake 60 FPS that only work during cutscenes and certain points of the game. They still drop to 30 FPS more often than not. Consoles can't handle a steady 60 FPS the entire time, you'll need a PC for that.
I understand you want your game to run smoothly, but that means 30 FPS. Anything lower is a bother, anything higher is a plus.
60 FPS might be the standard for PC, it isn't for consoles. A lot of PS4 games have fake 60 FPS that only work during cutscenes and certain points of the game. They still drop to 30 FPS more often than not. Consoles can't handle a steady 60 FPS the entire time, you'll need a PC for that.
I understand you want your game to run smoothly, but that means 30 FPS.
That's right, consoles can't handle a solid 60 fps 100% of the time. Not even the PS2 R&C games did. However, they did run considerably higher than 30 fps most of the time. This is very noticeable in the newest R&C games where they are locked at 30.
My other point also stands. Plenty of games today, even console games, look just as good and run smoother than new R&C.
Oh dear, we're talking framerate again. I'm going to have to say here that I am personally getting very fed up with this "standard" of 30 FPS. It's ridiculous. If you had the chance to alternate a bit between 30 and 60 FPS games I assure you that there would be a difference.
I found Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes to be a prime example of a game that just feels much nicer to play on the PS4. First we should note I do not play PC games, and am very accustomed to a standard of 30FPS on the games I play.
MGSV:GZ on PS3 was technically around 720p at 30fps
MGSV:GZ on PS4 was technically around 1080p at 60fps
I didn't know any of that when I played the games. All I knew was that the PS4 version was more impressive. The pop-in was noticeably improved, and the game felt "smoother". I never came to appreciate games for their framerate until this late on when I had such a great comparison. After this I could return to the older Ratchet & Clank games to see that there really was quite a difference I had never noticed before. But with this next generation of consoles, you'd think achieving 60fps would be a fair bit easier.
There is more to a game than how each frame looks graphically. Games already look absolutely stunning these days, so now my focus is shifting more and more on the devs aiming for and above the (should be) standard of 60fps.
http://www.30vs60.com/
Oh dear, we're talking framerate again. I'm going to have to say here that I am personally getting very fed up with this "standard" of 30 FPS. It's ridiculous. If you had the chance to alternate a bit between 30 and 60 FPS games I assure you that there would be a difference.
I found Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes to be a prime example of a game that just feels much nicer to play on the PS4. First we should note I do not play PC games, and am very accustomed to a standard of 30FPS on the games I play.
MGSV:GZ on PS3 was technically around 720p at 30fps
MGSV:GZ on PS4 was technically around 1080p at 60fps
I didn't know any of that when I played the games. All I knew was that the PS4 version was more impressive. The pop-in was noticeably improved, and the game felt "smoother". I never came to appreciate games for their framerate until this late on when I had such a great comparison. After this I could return to the older Ratchet & Clank games to see that there really was quite a difference I had never noticed before. But with this next generation of consoles, you'd think achieving 60fps would be a fair bit easier.
There is more to a game than how each frame looks graphically. Games already look absolutely stunning these days, so now my focus is shifting more and more on the devs aiming for and above the (should be) standard of 60fps.
http://www.30vs60.com/
Exactly. R&C looks amazing as it is, I don't think the graphics need to improve any more. I had the same opinion with Halo 3. I'm just hoping now that R&C PS4 doesn't run like FFA, that would be disappointing.
Dammit, I had a fantastic post ready: ''You aren't logged it anymore'' *facepalm
Anyway… the PS2 has a lower resolution, fewer assets and fewer polys. A lot of games on PS2 indeed ran 60FPS. Take your pick. A game that looks beautifull or a game that runs better than good. Cause 30FPS is good.
There are many grogeous games on PS4. Alien: Isolation, Dragon Age: Inquisition, Shadows of Mordor. All of them 30 FPS. If you want 60 FPS you're looking at sports games and Minecraft, mostly.
…..
I can vouch for a swap between the same game. For example, I have played Mass Effect 3 (2012) on both PS3 and PC (ultra everything). Does it run better? No. I mean yes, it does. It has 60 FPS instead of 30 FPS. Do I feel the difference? No. Did I try to feel the difference? No, because way back when I didn't even know there was a difference!
60 FPS will become a standard, I'm sure. But right now we're in the early stages of next gen consoles. Eventually we will probably swap, but now isn't the time that is likely to happen.
Dammit, I had a fantastic post ready: ''You aren't logged it anymore'' *facepalm
Anyway… the PS2 has a lower resolution, fewer assets and fewer polys. A lot of games on PS2 indeed ran 60FPS. Take your pick. A game that looks beautifull or a game that runs better than good. Cause 30FPS is good.
There are many grogeous games on PS4. Alien: Isolation, Dragon Age: Inquisition, Shadows of Mordor. All of them 30 FPS. If you want 60 FPS you're looking at sports games and Minecraft, mostly.
…..
I can vouch for a swap between the same game. For example, I have played Mass Effect 3 (2012) on both PS3 and PC (ultra everything). Does it run better? No. I mean yes, it does. It has 60 FPS instead of 30 FPS. Do I feel the difference? No. Did I try to feel the difference? No, because way back when I didn't even know there was a difference!
60 FPS will become a standard, I'm sure. But right now we're in the early stages of next gen consoles. Eventually we will probably swap, but now isn't the time that is likely to happen.
The PS3 is also more powerful than the PS2 in pretty much every aspect. I said it twice and I'll say it again… There are plenty of games that are just as good as R&C graphically, and run at a much better framerate. I don't care about graphics at this point, they look amazing, any more is just overwhelming.
If you can't see the difference between 30 and almost 60 fps, then you're either blind or lying.
The PS3 is also more powerful than the PS2 in pretty much every aspect. I said it twice and I'll say it again… There are plenty of games that are just as good as R&C graphically, and run at a much better framerate. I don't care about graphics at this point, they look amazing, any more is just overwhelming.
If you can't see the difference between 30 and almost 60 fps, then you're either blind or lying.
You ment PS4, not PS3. Or at least I thought you ment PS4 in your previous posts.
Oh, I see it. But I don't feel it. When you watch a video 60FPS is amazing. When you're inside the game, I simply don't feel it. 30FPS isn't low enough to cause lag. Again 30FPS is a 'must', 60FPS is a 'could' when it comes to consoles. But if you're that bummed by framerate, you'll either have to buy a gaming PC or wait for the current generation to catch up.
The PS3 is also more powerful than the PS2 in pretty much every aspect. I said it twice and I'll say it again… There are plenty of games that are just as good as R&C graphically, and run at a much better framerate. I don't care about graphics at this point, they look amazing, any more is just overwhelming.
If you can't see the difference between 30 and almost 60 fps, then you're either blind or lying.
You ment PS4, not PS3. Or at least I thought you ment PS4 in your previous posts.
Oh, I see it. But I don't feel it. When you watch a video 60FPS is amazing. When you're inside the game, I simply don't feel it. 30FPS isn't low enough to cause lag. Again 30FPS is a 'must', 60FPS is a 'could' when it comes to consoles. But if you're that bummed by framerate, you'll either have to buy a gaming PC or wait for the current generation to catch up.
I did mean PS4, my mistake.
A video can get away with lower framerates and still look good, that's why movies are 24 fps. A game is completely different. A 3D game like R&C plays far better with a smooth framerate.
You'd be surpried how few AA/AAA PS4 games actually run 60FPS:
http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/PS4_vs._Xbox_One_Native_Resolutions_and_Framerates
I can understand why people want 60FPS, but I personally couldn't care less. If there's no lag, I'm totally fine with it, I don't truly feel the difference anyway. The game just runs a bit smoother, it's all still very subtle. I'm not saying I want to play R&C at 24 frames, not at all. But as long as it's 30, I feel I'm not even allowed to complain about it.
Perhaps I will chance my opinion once I've played more games with true 60 FPS, but for now I'm something that doesn't worry me. If it runs, it runs. 
I've been replaying the first R&C lately and I honestly felt that the Clank section of Orxon is slow and exhausting. Keeping track of 10 Gadgebots that don't find you when re-spawning is awful. Hope that doesn't return.
+1, I agree, but Insomniac Games said Clank will have a brand new gameplay, don't worry about it.
