This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - ๐ Aria ๐ฎ
Pages: 1 ... 233234235 236237 ... 352
7021
« on: October 10, 2015, 10:18:07 PM »
Second Son's framerate doesn't look like a sine-wave tho
7022
« on: October 10, 2015, 10:12:06 PM »
60fps is objectively best
Knack would have been better if it was 1080/30. Maybe it would have had more than three enemies on screen at one time.
Knack wasn't capped. It sat in the 30's mostly and dropped below 20 a lot.
Yeah, and if it was made with 30fps in mind instead of 60fps, then it would have been all the better for it. Right off the bat, a stable framerate would have been nice.
60fps is nice, for most genres, when there's room. Populating the game world vs high framerate is a common tradeoff; I'd rather have the former than the latter.
It wasn't aiming for 60fps though.
My bad then, I could have sworn Knack was one of the launch PS4 games that advertised 1080/60. What was the point of not aiming for a stable framerate? 14-60fps is much worse than 20-30.
7023
« on: October 10, 2015, 10:04:41 PM »
60fps is objectively best
Knack would have been better if it was 1080/30. Maybe it would have had more than three enemies on screen at one time.
Knack wasn't capped. It sat in the 30's mostly and dropped below 20 a lot.
Yeah, and if it was made with 30fps in mind instead of 60fps, then it would have been all the better for it. Right off the bat, a stable framerate would have been nice. 60fps is nice, for most genres, when there's room. Populating the game world vs high framerate is a common tradeoff; I'd rather have the former than the latter.
7024
« on: October 10, 2015, 09:59:44 PM »
60fps is objectively best
Knack would have been better if it was 1080/30. Maybe it would have had more than three enemies on screen at one time.
But Knack was a true next-gen masterpiece
Shut up, christmas-cake.
7025
« on: October 10, 2015, 09:56:47 PM »
60fps is objectively best
Knack would have been better if it was 1080/30. Maybe it would have had more than three enemies on screen at one time.
7026
« on: October 10, 2015, 12:07:23 PM »
Prolonged exposure to Sep7agon has clinically proven negative effects on your health.
Symptoms may include;
- Excessive sodium levels in the bloodstream
- Auditory hallucinations
- Paranoid delusions
- Tourettes syndrome
- Psychotic behaviours
- Multiple organ failure
- Internal bleeding
- Metastasised Cancer
The General Medical Council recommends no longer than 30 minutes a day.
Can confirm this, undergoing a combination surgery of chemotherapy and internal suturing atm.
7027
« on: October 10, 2015, 10:05:23 AM »
Only inarticulate swearing and possibly turning the game off. I don't throw anything; it won't make me less angry and then I'd just have to go drop $60 on another controller.
7028
« on: October 09, 2015, 11:11:36 PM »
Actually a very solid game. Only initial complaint is that vehicle controls aren't inverted.
Change it in the settings.
No complaints for the moment, then.
7029
« on: October 09, 2015, 11:05:53 PM »
Actually a very solid game. Only initial complaint is that vehicle controls aren't inverted.
why would you want them to be
Because that's how planes work. Down is up, up is down.
7030
« on: October 09, 2015, 10:54:14 PM »
Actually a very solid game. Only initial complaint is that vehicle controls aren't inverted.
7031
« on: October 09, 2015, 07:06:21 PM »
http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/publications/PDF/Infidelity%20in%20hetero%20couples.pdfA total of 506 men (M age= 32.86 years, SD= 10.60) and 412 women (M age= 27.66 years, SD= 8.93), who indicated they were in a monogamous sexual relationship, completed a series of questionnaires, including the Sexual Excitation/Inhibition (SES/SIS) scales and the Mood and Sexuality Questionnaire, and answered questions about, among others, religiosity, education, income, relationship and sexual satisfaction, and sexual compatibility. Almost one-quarter of men (23.2%) and 19.2% of women indicated that they had โโcheatedโโ during their current relationship (i.e., engaged in sexual interactions with someone other than their partner that could jeopardize, or hurt, their relationship).
7032
« on: October 09, 2015, 06:54:46 PM »
So it's fucking nothing, right?
In terms of affecting first-world countries that is.
7033
« on: October 09, 2015, 06:49:31 PM »
They bought a telescope, an infrared sight, a night vision illuminator, and a number of ambulances in 2012.
7034
« on: October 09, 2015, 06:37:26 PM »
So I thought this was a pre-order exclusive beta, not public
3 hours left e.e
7035
« on: October 09, 2015, 01:12:22 PM »
60 looks the best to me, and I don't think I've ever seen an over-60 frame rate before.
120fps is popular on Quake and Counter-Strike.
7036
« on: October 09, 2015, 12:07:09 PM »
oh
7037
« on: October 09, 2015, 10:46:33 AM »
I don't care so long as it's not a slideshow and it's stable. If that's 30fps, 60fps, 120fps-- I don't care.
7038
« on: October 08, 2015, 10:13:55 PM »
So this is basically a debate about FPS now right? No
You find me a game with something as low as 2fps and tell me thats fun. it could be fun
depends on what i'm doing
The reason why higher FPS is objectively better is because you are in that world, you need to move and react in a second and that reaction needs to flow with you, the lower it gets the less you feel attached to the world. that's all well and good, but i fail to see why that means it's better objectively
Yeah and like, some games actually have the underlying mechanics updating 60 times per second while the graphics run at 30 frames per second, essentially (theoretically) making frame rate a moot point.
Do you have any examples of this? As far as I know, the only cases where mechanics matter with framerate are those that are tied to it. Examples being Killer is Dead, GTAV, and Resident Evil 1.
7039
« on: October 08, 2015, 10:12:03 PM »
A mixture of 120-proof frustration and being fresh off of writing two essays. it's never my intention to frustrate you, but i seem to be having a bit of trouble avoiding that lately
Don't take it personally, I'm just short-tempered as of late. It's a lot of things, arguing just happens to be a cake topper for them.
7040
« on: October 08, 2015, 09:47:51 PM »
I'll even say it in the context of the question posed by Cindo: No, PC gaming is not better than consoles. It is an incredibly subjective descriptor. There are many reasons ranging from convenience and comfort, to choice in available games, what your friends have, to platitudes like "it just feels right". Choosing whether you want to use a PC or console is entirely dependent upon the values on which the individual warrants are important to him or herself. this was really well-phrased, by the way
either you're getting better at phrasing things, or you were just that angry lol
A mixture of 120-proof frustration and being fresh off of writing two essays.
7041
« on: October 08, 2015, 08:53:09 PM »
I wouldn't say it would work in general
Neither would I.
But like all things, it could be awesome if executed well.
but maybe for a quest that's fourth wall breaking; making the screen tear, or massive drops, to convey some matter that's present thematically.
Exactly. The closest thing I can think of was the Mantis boss fight in MGS1 with the "Hideo" screen thing. That shit was cool back in the day.
By "in general", I mean "always a thing through the entire game", especially an MMO. It might be cool at first, but it would get annoying pretty fast; that's why you'd have to limit the period in which it happens.
7042
« on: October 08, 2015, 08:45:02 PM »
A developer using a low FPS on purpose to make the player feel like their game is broken to fit in with a theme of brokeness (or whatever), would be pretty cool IMO.
I wouldn't say it would work in general, but maybe for a quest that's fourth wall breaking; making the screen tear, or massive drops, to convey some matter that's present thematically.
7043
« on: October 08, 2015, 08:43:32 PM »
I don't even think I used the "objectively" in the first place, just "superior" in reference to the platform's performance.
7044
« on: October 08, 2015, 08:32:59 PM »
And I am in all honesty regretful for the manner in which I typed at least half of that post, and the attitude I'd displayed in the last couple of posts I've made. I'm just angry at the fact that you've chosen to interpret my argument completely out of context and the ways in which you've responded. If you want to talk metaphysics, I'll talk metaphysics. But I expect to limit the discussion to metaphysics (heh), and I expect you not to respond with such a flippant attitude.
If the point I'm making is obviously limited in scope in the first place, then respond in a way that is within the same scope.
7045
« on: October 08, 2015, 08:29:50 PM »
Well, I just had it with Luciana in this thread, and it went reasonably well. She sees where I'm coming from, mostly--why can't you? Precisely because we came to the conclusion last time that you're speaking from a philosophical standpoint. And since we've had that conversation, you should damn well know that I'm speaking in terms of tangible differences in terms of performance to judge this. That's why I'm actually a little pissed off that this conversation is coming up again, because we've already had this discussion, and we agreed on each others stances.No--you just have to be aware that you're stating an opinion. If it doesn't pertain to the scheme of all things on God's green Earth (or, in other words, objectivity), then that's what we call a subjective interpretation.
It's great that you think PC gaming has advantages over console games, but that's just your opinion. Are you seriously implying that you can't have an objective stance that doesn't involve to everything available on Earth? "It doesn't matter if a diamond is 24 carat or 8 carat, the quality is subjective because a stable home is more important." If we want to refer to one of the discussion-pieces last time, "60fps isn't better in all cases. For example, found-films." Great. I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the camera capable of 1080p/60fps footage is a higher quality camera than one that can only do 240p/24fps because the former camera's materials allow it to function at a higher performance than the latter. This isn't because it's 1080/60, it's because it's capable of it and the other camera isn't. We even reached this conclusion last time, Verb; that if we speak in the context of a work's critical quality (that is, on the merits of which apply to its field and subjective parts such as acting, themes, etc), then quality is subjective because its contents are innately subjective. But I'm not talking about that, which should have been incredibly obvious by the fact that I even used the words "in terms of performance" to describe the quality.Of course--but I'm not really here to change anyone's opinion on anything.
I'm just saying that PC gaming is not factually better than console gaming.
And I'm not saying that PC gaming is better either. Every response I've given in this thread, besides towards you, was in argument that higher quality does not necessarily mean something is better. That's why I even cited the first OED definition of "superior", specifically so that you wouldn't interpret it as me saying it's "better". I'll even say it in the context of the question posed by Cindo: No, PC gaming is not better than consoles. It is an incredibly subjective descriptor. There are many reasons ranging from convenience and comfort, to choice in available games, what your friends have, to platitudes like "it just feels right". Choosing whether you want to use a PC or console is entirely dependent upon the values on which the individual warrants are important to him or herself.
7046
« on: October 08, 2015, 08:14:01 PM »
Fuck off.
7047
« on: October 08, 2015, 08:12:33 PM »
If you want to go by critical acclaim, the PC version usually shapes out the best. And performing better in every way is very much relating to quality. "It's better because it performs better" is circular logic, Aria, you know that.
Critical acclaim is honestly the only thing you have to go buy. The general consensus is that PC gaming is better, but that doesn't make it so. That's an appeal to majority.
A Volkswagen Beetle is superior to a car from the Flintstones because it has better performance. That's not circular logic Verb, that's supporting why It's superior with information tangible to performance. I don't appreciate that you'd make an appeal like that when it's not even credible to the situation. Superior in higher quality. Where is the quality higher? Performance. Where is the performance? It's shown in the ability to hold a higher stable framerate, have higher visual fidelity, and have more options available due to the platform that are innately available (such as keybinding alterations).
7048
« on: October 08, 2015, 08:08:08 PM »
And before you say "why is necessarily higher in quality": it's indisputable that 1080p is a higher quality than 720p, and 30fps is a higher quality than 20fps. Aria, we've talked about this before. It is. You just have to look at it from a wider lens than that. I've made the arguments already--it's not just that I don't "care", it's that, metaphysically, 720, 1080, 30, and 20 are all just numbers. They can all be better or worse than each other--it all depends on the situation.
30fps is better if you have an artistic purpose involved.
And that's the beauty of choice. If you don't care, you don't have to! You can keep playing PS3 games until the end of time if you don't want to upgrade to a PS4, or choose to continue playing consoles over PC. It doesn't matter because it doesn't have to. Contentment is the penultimate factor in choosing these kinds of things.
any performance advantages PC has. It objectively has zero.
"60fps is better, though."
That's subjective. If what you're looking for is smoother gameplay, then sure, it's better.
But that's not always the criterion.
And we aren't having that discussion again, are we? Do I really have to preface with "if we limit our values to that which pertain to differences in performance relating to processing capability, not in the scheme of all things on God's green Earth"? 60 is greater than 30; a 99 on a test is better than a 98 on a test. If I even specify that I'm speaking of superiority in measures of performance, your rebuttal to that statement should be focused on counter-arguing the contents of that statement. Otherwise, it's simply clouded with irrelevance.
7049
« on: October 08, 2015, 08:01:01 PM »
First definition of superior in the OED, EAT MY ASS cUNT. "Higher in rank, status, or quality"?...
I mean, you used the word "fidelity" earlier. That worked better, I think. PC games tend to be of a higher fidelity than console games--but that does not make them superior.
i don't mean to be pedantic, but
If you want to go by critical acclaim, the PC version usually shapes out the best. And performing better in every way is very much relating to quality. I do think it's a bit pedantic, especially since it's pretty obvious we both understand what I meant by that.
7050
« on: October 08, 2015, 07:57:58 PM »
EDIT: This took longer to wrote than I expected lol. You ninja'd me Verby.
And before you say "why is necessarily higher in quality": it's indisputable that 1080p is a higher quality than 720p, and 30fps is a higher quality than 20fps.
"But I don't care about that"
Awesome, because I don't really care. Actually, "not caring" is where this discussion leads: one of the decisions on whether you want to play PC or console is based on quality vs care. This even applies within PC gaming itself; you could play X at 1080/60, or upgrade a part for $400 and play it at 1920/144. It's perfectly reasonable to be content with the former and opt out of an upgrade.
And that's the beauty of choice. If you don't care, you don't have to! You can keep playing PS3 games until the end of time if you don't want to upgrade to a PS4, or choose to continue playing consoles over PC. It doesn't matter because it doesn't have to. Contentment is the penultimate factor in choosing these kinds of things.
I'm content with consoles at the moment, I might not be tomorrow. But for this moment, I'd rather play consoles despite any performance advantages PC has.
Pages: 1 ... 233234235 236237 ... 352
|
Show Posts