you get a point for continuity, but what artistic value is it to have it capped at 30fps?
Quote from: terrorbite on October 20, 2015, 03:58:39 PMyou get a point for continuity, but what artistic value is it to have it capped at 30fps?To have that continuity. He wants the game to be the ultimate tribute to the number thirty. Why? I don't fucking know--it's his favorite number, or something.The point is, I'm right.
but what artistic value is there in making it look bad? things look better and movements are more fluid at 60 or even higher
Quote from: terrorbite on October 20, 2015, 04:10:55 PMbut what artistic value is there in making it look bad? things look better and movements are more fluid at 60 or even higherWhy do they look "better"? What if they don't look better? Why does "higher number" automatically mean "better"?Is getting 60th place in a race better than getting 1st place?
you want the movements in your game to look janky and stuttering? what artistic value is that? higher fps = more realistic movements
Quote from: terrorbite on October 20, 2015, 04:10:55 PMbut what artistic value is there in making it look bad? things look better and movements are more fluid at 60 or even higherThe artistic value is whatever the artist wants, guy. Just because you or I may not be able to come up with a great excuse doesn't mean there aren't any.Why do they look "better", anyway? What if they don't look better? Why does "higher number" automatically mean "better"?Is getting 60th place in a race better than getting 1st place?
Not trying to get involved in this but... That's kind of a silly argumentIt depends on contextGetting 1st place in a race is better than 60th, but getting 60 points in a game of rugby is better than getting 1It depends on context, and in this case, 60 fps is better than 30, personal opinions aside
An example of where changing framerate can produce a desired artistic effect: Mad Max's opening scene.30fps is fine, 60 fps can look better though.
Quote from: Fruitcake on October 20, 2015, 04:19:49 PMNot trying to get involved in this but... That's kind of a silly argumentIt depends on contextGetting 1st place in a race is better than 60th, but getting 60 points in a game of rugby is better than getting 1It depends on context, and in this case, 60 fps is better than 30, personal opinions asideThat IS my argument, though, save for that last part. Under certain contexts, lower frame rates can be better than higher frame rates.Personal opinions aside, 60fps is no better or worse than 30fps. Because they're just numbers. Numbers can only be higher or lower than each other--they cannot be "better" or "worse" than each other.
Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on October 20, 2015, 03:32:30 PMAn example of where changing framerate can produce a desired artistic effect: Mad Max's opening scene.30fps is fine, 60 fps can look better though.A more salient remark would've been "30fps can look better", because it can.Everyone already knows 60fps "can" look better--but is it, objectively? of course not
you want the movements in your game to look janky and stuttering? what artistic value is that?
well if the goal is to make more realistic, immersive games, then yes the higher fps is better
in general, and with the majority of games, 60 fps provides more fluid motion, better reaction times, and if the frame rate does drop, it doesn't run as high of a risk of it dropping to the point where controls become unresponsive or the game stops looking fluid/starts looking like a slideshow
Quote from: terrorbite on October 20, 2015, 04:29:55 PMwell if the goal is to make more realistic, immersive games, then yes the higher fps is betterNow you're speaking my language.If you think 60fps will make your game more immersive, then that's good--60fps is better.But if some crazy developer came up with some idea (and you've been given a bunch of ideas already) to have 30fps instead, then 30fps is better, because it's more suited for that purpose.Really, the fact that you prefer 60fps is absolutely fine. I have no problem with that.What I don't like is when you try to imply that your opinion is a fact, and that 60fps is always objectively better.
We've already had this discussion and it just boils down to Verb and insert another user having some autistic discussion about preference vs objectivity.
Quote from: Fruitcake on October 20, 2015, 04:29:47 PMin general, and with the majority of games, 60 fps provides more fluid motion, better reaction times, and if the frame rate does drop, it doesn't run as high of a risk of it dropping to the point where controls become unresponsive or the game stops looking fluid/starts looking like a slideshowYeah. And if that's what you're looking for in a game, that's fine--but not everybody is.
Reminder that there is no reason for a turn-based game to be 60fps outside of preference.
but why in the world would you make a game to look less realistic when we have easy access to the technology to make it look more realisitic?
Quote from: Luciana on October 20, 2015, 04:36:24 PMWe've already had this discussion and it just boils down to Verb and insert another user having some autistic discussion about preference vs objectivity.More like... People not understanding the difference. We're conditioned to prefer things if they "look" better, and it makes sense, but the problem that I find is that it makes people more closed-minded towards certain forms of art that may not want to conform to what the "standard of quality" is.Aria just brought up the horror thing--if 30fps would make in-game models seem a little bit more jittery and creepy looking, then you have yourself a fantastic reason to implement 30fps. It's just that a lot of people don't really think about that, and I'm just sort of here to open people's minds a bit. That's what the discussion is. I don't think it's "autistic" at all.
Quote from: Prime Megaten on October 20, 2015, 04:42:04 PMReminder that there is no reason for a turn-based game to be 60fps outside of preference.but if the hardware is capable and it costs the same to develop it, why pick 30 over 60?
Why must everything be in a never ending retarded cycle on this site?
Fine. Repetitive asinine shit with people spewing pseudo knowledge like Bill Maher.THERE.I just don't get it. You've made your point, they've made their point. People have agreed with both sides. This was LITERALLY A THREAD like two weeks ago.Why must everything be in a never ending retarded cycle on this site?
Quote from: Luciana on October 20, 2015, 04:46:48 PMFine. Repetitive asinine shit with people spewing pseudo knowledge like Bill Maher.THERE.I just don't get it. You've made your point, they've made their point. People have agreed with both sides. This was LITERALLY A THREAD like two weeks ago.Why must everything be in a never ending retarded cycle on this site?OP is new--he wasn't there for the last discussion we had. I rolled my eyes when I read the thread title, too, but if repeat threads bother you so much, I mean... you don't have to enter them.
Oh he's new?and because when I feel bad, people must feel bad too, you know how it is >.>
is 30 fps acceptable for you?
