0
1

[–] stinkytaco 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

He needs to add MX vs ATV all 3 of their games have serious frame issues. The developers finally capped Reflex at 30FPS for multiplayer

1
-1

[–] Enigmius1 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

I don't think attaching shame to this sort of thing is appropriate. This is one of those topics that boils down to "my preferences are more important than your liberties." It's a real shame, because it's just another one of those stupid topics that creates divisions in the community. Because we need more of that over stupid shit.

The gamers were the ones who spoke up and said they want more games, more indie games, more cheap games, but they still demand AAA performance. Having cake, eating too. Doesn't work.

0
0

[–] InfectedAI ago 

This is a ridiculous comment. It's not just preferences. 60 is objectively better. It looks better and results in smoother gameplay. How is this infringing on anyone's liberties in any way? That's ludicrous.

And 'AAA performance'? AAA does not have anything to do with this. You don't need a million dollar budget to hit 60 FPS. Don't lock your framerate arbitrarily, done. Some optimization wouldn't hurt either. Maybe you should understand the technicalities of game development a bit better before pulling the entitled gamers card.

0
0

[–] Enigmius1 ago 

It doesn't matter if "60 fps is objectively better." There are tons and tons of gamers who don't really care. You could argue that this engine is objectively better than that engine, and nobody is lining up to curate a Steam list of developers with the audacity to use a lesser engine.

I love how you talk about "some optimization wouldn't hurt" and in the same paragraph tell ME that I don't understand the technicalities of game design. Why don't you demonstrate your profound understanding by explaining what "some optimization" involves. (Hint: I know what it involves, because I've done it, so don't think some half-assed answer is going to fly, and don't think avoiding the question is going to work, either.)

0
1

[–] thebeatles518 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Can someone explain to me the hate for 30fps? Is it really that awful, or is it just bad after seeing 60 for most of your time? I ask because when I try to play something on my PC I'm lucky to get 10, 30 would be a dream.

0
0

[–] InfectedAI ago 

It's objectively bad. 30 FPS is less responsive and looks worse. PCs can handle running at 60 since there's no set hardware so arbitrary limits are ridiculous. The difference is even more jarring when you get used to 60 and play something locked to 30.

0
0

[–] thebeatles518 ago 

Ok, so why is there a 30fps cap? Not trying to argue, I'm genuinely not very computer savvy when it comes to FPS.

1
0

[–] forgetmyname 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago  (edited ago)

This is complete bullshit. TB can go suck another dick. Some of these games are older than his lame claim to fame. Next He will release a list of DOS games that dont run at 30fps. All hail glorious corporate and the newest generation of hardware! total shill for Activation / Blizzard

[–] [deleted] 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] InfectedAI ago 

If you don't care that's fine, but there's nothing wrong with informing people about the framerate of the product they're purchasing.

[–] [deleted] ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] thecid ago  (edited ago)

The only justification for locking games to a particular FPS is if it calculates physics on a frame-by-frame basis. Older games, particularly console/handheld games, frequently did this. (The original Space Invaders famously sped up its framerate as it took less time to render the aliens!) A port of those has no choice but to respect that. It's silly to tar and feather those games with the same brush as newly-made games.

0
0

[–] InfectedAI ago 

Except nothing in the past decade or even longer should be designed to tie physics, animations, or anything really to the framerate. It's bad design and it should be called out so consumers can make better purchasing decisions. If you decide it's still worth it for the reasons you listed or any other great, enjoy your game. However people should know what they're buying. There's nothing wrong with a list than can help people make more informed purchases.

0
0

[–] thecid ago 

Yes, I'm thinking particularly of 32-bit and older games, but some of the games on that list are games which you'd expect to be tied to framerates because they were originally developed for one console, and weren't even multiplatform at the time. The older Final Fantasy games are pretty clearcut examples of this.

(I'd also give a pass to things like VVVVVVV which are clearly retro-styled games.)

1
0

[–] ingenoire 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

I think TotalBiscuit should be doing the opposite: promote the games that achieve 60 FPS or higher with stable, optimized performance natively.

0
0

[–] throwawayposter ago 

It shouldn't be an achievement to have a game run at 60+ fps on good hardware, the group is good for showcasing shitty console/mobile ports that fail to reach that standard of quality or optimization.

0
2

[–] AJ34 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Why? That should be standard. We shouldnt praise people for doing what is required of them.

0
0

[–] VeganHarry ago 

I hope he's not measuring with fraps because I heard it will halve the actual value, so 60fps shows up as 30 on fraps.

0
0

[–] AJ34 ago 

Steam has a built in framerate counter. And no, that is blatantly wrong info you have there.

0
0

[–] BIackTuesday ago 

He doesn't. If you watch he video on the new Batman game and Dying Light he talks about not using Fraps due to the issues it causes to being accurate.

load more comments ▼ (5 remaining)