PC LA Noire locked to 30 fps, WTF

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

ph0b0s123:

Korten12:

ph0b0s123:

It does feel pretty laggy at 30 FPS, since I am used to 60. Maybe you have more of a tolerance for lag and stutter. Am liking the innovative investigation and interrogation mechanics. Not worth the full price though, wish I knew about this issue before purchase.

I don't really see any lag or stutter, in fact the game runs fine.

So you have more of a tolerance to stutter and lag than others, so what.

You mean than to you? You're one of the very few people I've ever seen complain about this.

Tubez:

So why should I have to play at 30 fps when I have bought and paid several of thousands swedish kronor so I can play at the fps that I want and what I feel is best?

Because you didn't make the game, and you already answered the question. So what if you wasted money on some monstrosity of a computer, does that mean companies should have to shell out a couple more million to get you 10 more FPS. NO. Go whine somewhere else.

ph0b0s123:

Korten12:
I believe I heard it's capped at 30 fps because of the facial animations. Honestly, I have been playing it and it still is just fine. Since the game doesn't require 60 fps.

It does feel pretty laggy at 30 FPS, since I am used to 60. Maybe you have more of a tolerance for lag and stutter. Am liking the innovative investigation and interrogation mechanics. Not worth the full price though, wish I knew about this issue before purchase.

30 frames per second is not an "issue". If you want a game that has "issues" with frames per second, go play Skyrim on PS3. Once you get too far and the framerate drops to single digits because the engine can barely sustain itself, then you can complain about "framerate issue". A solid 30 FPS that doesn't drop and is there for a good reason is NOT an issue.

Sleekgiant:

Tubez:

So why should I have to play at 30 fps when I have bought and paid several of thousands swedish kronor so I can play at the fps that I want and what I feel is best?

Because you didn't make the game, and you already answered the question. So what if you wasted money on some monstrosity of a computer, does that mean companies should have to shell out a couple more million to get you 10 more FPS. NO. Go whine somewhere else.

Really?

So I shouldnt be able to complain on products?
Well hello there mister corporate drone then.
Im the fucking costumer I can fucking whine about everything that I feel is wrong with a game, and they can ignore me if they want. The same way I can ignore them with my money.

But I guess its good to know that the only viable complaints is from somebody that made the game and is trying to sell it.

Anyone telling there's no difference between 60 and 30, try playing a game locking at 60 with regular drops to 30. I do it regularly with Jedi Academy and it couldn't be more obvious when it happens. Why the hell is there an enforced cap in the first place?

ph0b0s123:
Picked up LA Noire of sale on Steam for 8. Happy I only played 8 else I would have felt ripped off. Now I understand why the 30 fps limit is needed, due to the funky face technology in the game, but talk about blatant console port. There are hacks, but they cause all sorts of graphical issues. So it does feel like the game is quite stuttery, even though my frame rate is stuck fast on 30 the whole time and only 40% of just one of my two GPU's is being used.

Otherwise the games seems relatively good with almost a modern take on an adventure game. So I would not say don't buy it, just not for more than the 8 sale price I did. If I had paid the full price, I would be very annoyed.

yea, I agree. Although 30 FPS isn't that annoying to me (I'm just as much a console gamer as I am a pc gamer), the problem I have is that the games just not THAT good. But hey, for the price of a top of the line Indie title (Bastion, Hydrophobia, Terraria, dungeon defenders, etc.) I got a decent AAA game... price really does effect how much I enjoy a game.

Unless is Skyrim. Good lord has that been worth every bit of my money since I bought it opening night!

Sleekgiant:

Tubez:

So why should I have to play at 30 fps when I have bought and paid several of thousands swedish kronor so I can play at the fps that I want and what I feel is best?

Because you didn't make the game, and you already answered the question. So what if you wasted money on some monstrosity of a computer, does that mean companies should have to shell out a couple more million to get you 10 more FPS. NO. Go whine somewhere else.

But I do get what he's saying... it just doesn't seem that hard?

I really don't want to get in the middle of the flame war that's inhabiting this thread... I'm just saying... it seems........ odd.......

TehCookie:
FILTHY CONSOLE SCUM HOLDING BACK THE PC MASTER RACE! /troll

If you can't tell the different here's a back to back comparison: http://www.boallen.com/fps-compare.html

I'd rather have a better fps than graphics. I don't really care about graphics but I do want fluid gameplay and 60 is quite a bit smoother than 30.

I genuinely can't tell the difference between the 30 and 60. I can tell the difference between 15 and 30, but not 30 and 60. Not that I don't think there is a difference. I'm sure some people can tell, but not me.

Waaghpowa:
I distinctly remember John Carmack saying that they did some testing with people with Rage running at 30 and 60 fps. He said that people saw a significant difference between the two. Whether you think it's "just fine" is simply your opinion and many of use would rather have it at 60. There's no reason to lock it on PC anyway.

Well there is a reason to lock it for this game, because of the facial animation needs a constant framerate or it will end up ruining the lip syncing and stuff. Other games is a bit different though.

Deshara:
-snip-
You're one of the very few people I've ever seen complain about this.

Then you have not been looking very hard and have read past all the others agreeing that the games definitely displays lag or stutter, to them, and is not a smooth as they are used to with PC games.

This was always going to be subjective, as is micro-stutter with multi GPU setups. Some see it some don't. Just because you don't see it does not mean others do and get annoyed by it. This is the first PC game I have come across that has had it's frame rate forcibly locked without any way around it. I believe that deserves comment.

Korten12:

ph0b0s123:

Korten12:
I believe I heard it's capped at 30 fps because of the facial animations. Honestly, I have been playing it and it still is just fine. Since the game doesn't require 60 fps.

It does feel pretty laggy at 30 FPS, since I am used to 60. Maybe you have more of a tolerance for lag and stutter. Am liking the innovative investigation and interrogation mechanics. Not worth the full price though, wish I knew about this issue before purchase.

I don't really see any lag or stutter, in fact the game runs fine.

I see it at that speed, though. Some people can see fluorescent light flicker when most can't, some people can see fan blades where others see a blur. Just because you're not perceiving it doesn't mean it's not there, or that others can't detect it.

lacktheknack:

Korten12:

ph0b0s123:

It does feel pretty laggy at 30 FPS, since I am used to 60. Maybe you have more of a tolerance for lag and stutter. Am liking the innovative investigation and interrogation mechanics. Not worth the full price though, wish I knew about this issue before purchase.

I don't really see any lag or stutter, in fact the game runs fine.

I see it at that speed, though. Some people can see fluorescent light flicker when most can't, some people can see fan blades where others see a blur. Just because you're not perceiving it doesn't mean it's not there, or that others can't detect it.

Oh trust me, I can tell the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS, but honestly, I could really care less.

Korten12:

lacktheknack:

Korten12:

I don't really see any lag or stutter, in fact the game runs fine.

I see it at that speed, though. Some people can see fluorescent light flicker when most can't, some people can see fan blades where others see a blur. Just because you're not perceiving it doesn't mean it's not there, or that others can't detect it.

Oh trust me, I can tell the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS, but honestly, I could really care less.

Good for you. But see, I care a lot. It actually HURTS MY EYES at 30 FPS or lower after an extended period of time. I can barely watch a full movie without getting a headache.

lacktheknack:

Korten12:

lacktheknack:

I see it at that speed, though. Some people can see fluorescent light flicker when most can't, some people can see fan blades where others see a blur. Just because you're not perceiving it doesn't mean it's not there, or that others can't detect it.

Oh trust me, I can tell the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS, but honestly, I could really care less.

Good for you. But see, I care a lot. It actually HURTS MY EYES at 30 FPS or lower after an extended period of time. I can barely watch a full movie without getting a headache.

Well, sorry but tough luck. There is a patch to get the game to 60 fps, but the facial animations are recorded in 30 fps, so even if you do it, it looks wierd. Plus the fact that the console versions only have 30 fps on this game, so they wouldn't do all the facial animations over in 60 fps, since it is impossible since Bondi has shut down.

Korten12:

lacktheknack:

Korten12:

Oh trust me, I can tell the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS, but honestly, I could really care less.

Good for you. But see, I care a lot. It actually HURTS MY EYES at 30 FPS or lower after an extended period of time. I can barely watch a full movie without getting a headache.

Well, sorry but tough luck. There is a patch to get the game to 60 fps, but the facial animations are recorded in 30 fps, so even if you do it, it looks wierd.

Nope, I'm just not buying the game. They COULD have recorded in 60 FPS and cut out every second frame for the consoles, but I don't think they were planning a PC port.

lol I've been playing games with 15-25 fps for like a decade now. Just can;t get ahead of that technology curve that keeps racing ahead every other year.

A stable 30 fps would be wonderful, cant imagine ever noticing a difference between 30 and 60. Let alone complaining about it..

Waiter my fries arent salty enough ;_;

heh

Sleekgiant:
Unless you have superhuman sight, I don't see how you notice a difference.

Sweet! Just made my day :D

I can tell the difference between 30 and 60, very much so on a monitor than on a TV, but, for games, the difference is quite telling for myself.

You get very used to high frame rates, and when something is reaching half of what you're used to, it's rather jarring.

Point is, players (especially on PC) should be able to choose and experiment with things like framerate caps. Time was, an in-game command window letting you manipulate almost all game values was industry standard. That is the point of an open platform like this -- not better graphics, but user freedom.

Now, 30fps is acceptable, but hardly ideal. The ideal is at least the same as the current screen refresh rate (60 for NTSC TV, 50 for PAL TV). The issue is not that it doesn't look as good; that definitely varies per-game and per-user. The issue is input response. Higher framerate means less time before the results of your input can appear; in short, lower lag. That makes higher framerate ideal, because in the ideal game, player performance is limited by player ability more than anything.

razer17:

Waaghpowa:
I distinctly remember John Carmack saying that they did some testing with people with Rage running at 30 and 60 fps. He said that people saw a significant difference between the two. Whether you think it's "just fine" is simply your opinion and many of use would rather have it at 60. There's no reason to lock it on PC anyway.

Well there is a reason to lock it for this game, because of the facial animation needs a constant framerate or it will end up ruining the lip syncing and stuff. Other games is a bit different though.

I did address this in my second post in this thread. Something like that is understandable, if it's really the case. If it were otherwise, I wouldn't see it as acceptable.

you see a difference because you want to see a difference. yes if you look at a single object and concentrate you can tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps. when you are looking at everything happening on screen if you are noticing the difference then you are concentrating on the wrong thing.

if you are concentrating so much on noticing the difference between 30 and 60fps then why the hell are you bothering to play a game.

lacktheknack:
Nope, I'm just not buying the game. They COULD have recorded in 60 FPS and cut out every second frame for the consoles, but I don't think they were planning a PC port.

This is the mentality everyone should have, if you don't consider it a product worth your money, don't buy it. People have a tendency to protest something then end up giving in, in doing so, you're simply validating it's value.

Also, articles on the escapist have suggested that a PC port was never planned and was simply made in an attempt to make up for the low sales on the consoles. Why do you think RDR hasn't been made for PC yet? Rockstar can go to hell.

Why do people make such a big deal about framerates? You can't notice the difference anyway.

Funkysandwich:
Why do people make such a big deal about framerates? You can't notice the difference anyway.

My thundering head and the pounding in my eyes say otherwise. I can detect a change in FPS up to 80 to 90 FPS, and cannot deal with 30 and below for more than an hour or two.

reonhato:
you see a difference because you want to see a difference. yes if you look at a single object and concentrate you can tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps. when you are looking at everything happening on screen if you are noticing the difference then you are concentrating on the wrong thing.

if you are concentrating so much on noticing the difference between 30 and 60fps then why the hell are you bothering to play a game.

It must be nice to have a lower internal "refresh rate" that you'd have to concentrate to notice a difference. I'd love to have that. As is, I have to concentrate really hard on what I'm doing to NOT notice.

Iori Branford:
Point is, players (especially on PC) should be able to choose and experiment with things like framerate caps. Time was, an in-game command window letting you manipulate almost all game values was industry standard. That is the point of an open platform like this -- not better graphics, but user freedom.

Now, 30fps is acceptable, but hardly ideal. The ideal is at least the same as the current screen refresh rate (60 for NTSC TV, 50 for PAL TV). The issue is not that it doesn't look as good; that definitely varies per-game and per-user. The issue is input response. Higher framerate means less time before the results of your input can appear; in short, lower lag. That makes higher framerate ideal, because in the ideal game, player performance is limited by player ability more than anything.

I think you are forgetting the fact that this is a console port and that developers that focus on consoles generally don't give a f**k about the pc side of things. So I guess what I'm saying is that I can't even be surprised or outraged at this. The BEST GAME EVAR Skyrim came out on pc with memory leaks, inability to use more than 2 gb of ram and didn't give the player the chance to modify basic graphical settings that have been standard in games for quite some time now. A 30 fps cap seems minor in comparison.

i noticed the difference in the 60 and 30 fps. but it wasnt enough for me to call it laggy and stuttery..sure i noticed it but it wouldnt be a deal breaker for me. but i am not you. You notice a HUGE difference apparently. i notice only a minor difference. i guarantee you at least half the population wont notice a HUGE difference but might notice minor differences. either way they should lock the framerate. thats something the user should choose. i agree its bullshit but tis thread derailed so fast its not even funny...

lacktheknack:

reonhato:
you see a difference because you want to see a difference. yes if you look at a single object and concentrate you can tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps. when you are looking at everything happening on screen if you are noticing the difference then you are concentrating on the wrong thing.

if you are concentrating so much on noticing the difference between 30 and 60fps then why the hell are you bothering to play a game.

It must be nice to have a lower internal "refresh rate" that you'd have to concentrate to notice a difference. I'd love to have that. As is, I have to concentrate really hard on what I'm doing to NOT notice.

and again, that is because you want to see the difference. if it were not for the fact that the OP was told that LA was locked at 30fps he probably would not have noticed, an extremely large majority of people would not.

a great example is bf3 vs wm3 on console. bf3 plays at 30fps wm3 plays at 60... no one cares because it makes no difference (well except cod fanboys). in fact its arguable that bf3 plays better then cod does.

the only reason you see a difference is because you are looking for it. if you get a whole bunch of people to watch 2 videos and tell them after that one was 30 and one was 60fps i bet they would do no better then the 50/50 chance to guess which is which

the only time the difference between 30 and 60fps is really noticeable and will effect a game is if it uses slowdown or slowmo

Wolfram01:
Know what I think is even worse? NFS: The Run is also capped at 30. And NFS is using Frostbite 2, that's the engine DICE made for Battlefield 3.

So stupid.

A racing game capped at 30 FPS? Haha! What the hell is wrong with Blackbox?

Missing sensory input between 30 and 60 FPS is extremely noticeable. Playing a game of Ratchet and Clank at 60FPS is awesome while playing it at less is not nearly as much. There's a smoothness factor and a feeling of losing out when those frames aren't presented. Sure certain game genres can still be played fine on lower framerates (strategy games for example), but having more feedback can and does help.

I'm looking at this, everyone's responses, and your responses to everyone else, but I have to ask... What your bloody point? You seem to be shooting down everything everyone says towards you just being used to 60fps or whatever, and I just don't get why it's such a big deal. Yes it seems laggy, I've seen it. Yes you're bothered by it. But what does making this thread, and pretty much telling everyone you're pissed in a quoted response gonna do bout it? I mean really now, you sound like you're saying "but I'm not used to it dammit, listen to me and agree with me!!!!!" to every single person you respond to. Sorry, don't wanna come off as rude, but seriously, does this really have that much discussion value?

Ah, so you think that they should have re-shot all the motion capture at a higher resolution just for the small number of people that become slightly irritated by the lower frame rate? Quite frankly I'm more frustrated by the DRM that prevents one running the game under wine.

lacktheknack:

Funkysandwich:
Why do people make such a big deal about framerates? You can't notice the difference anyway.

My thundering head and the pounding in my eyes say otherwise. I can detect a change in FPS up to 80 to 90 FPS, and cannot deal with 30 and below for more than an hour or two.

How do you watch movies then? They are 24 FPS. Or TV. Or any video footage at all?

reonhato:

lacktheknack:

reonhato:
you see a difference because you want to see a difference. yes if you look at a single object and concentrate you can tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps. when you are looking at everything happening on screen if you are noticing the difference then you are concentrating on the wrong thing.

if you are concentrating so much on noticing the difference between 30 and 60fps then why the hell are you bothering to play a game.

It must be nice to have a lower internal "refresh rate" that you'd have to concentrate to notice a difference. I'd love to have that. As is, I have to concentrate really hard on what I'm doing to NOT notice.

and again, that is because you want to see the difference. if it were not for the fact that the OP was told that LA was locked at 30fps he probably would not have noticed, an extremely large majority of people would not.

a great example is bf3 vs wm3 on console. bf3 plays at 30fps wm3 plays at 60... no one cares because it makes no difference (well except cod fanboys). in fact its arguable that bf3 plays better then cod does.

the only reason you see a difference is because you are looking for it. if you get a whole bunch of people to watch 2 videos and tell them after that one was 30 and one was 60fps i bet they would do no better then the 50/50 chance to guess which is which

the only time the difference between 30 and 60fps is really noticeable and will effect a game is if it uses slowdown or slowmo

"if it were not for the fact that the OP was told that LA was locked at 30fps he probably would not have noticed, an extremely large majority of people would not. "

As the OP, I can tell you your time-line is the wrong way around. I brought the game on sale without knowing about the 30 fps limit. I installed it and started playing, after playing for a bit of play, I found it to be rather laggy and stuttery. Especially when driving around or on foot chases after bad guys. This is what prompted me to fire up FRAPS and then to try to diagnose why it was only going at 30 FPS. Only then did I hit the internet to discover this limitation and then post a topic. So my perseption of the lack of normal smoothness I am used to with PC games was reach completely independantly without any outside influence.

So all those saying you can't notice unless you are specifically looking and it does not intrude on the perceived smoothness of the game-play, for me you have it wrong. I will soldier on as I like the gameplay and the game did not cost me much. It is just another example of things PC owners have to put up with when it comes to PC ports. It can be added to the list of only normally being Directx 9, only having 5.1 instead of 7.1 sound and lack of decent anti-aliasing support. All things this game in particular suffer from. So if the 30 fps did not annoy you the jaggies will.

Some seem to be happy for the crumbs from the console table they get and don't want to complain in case even those crumbs are taken away. I say screw that, even if it means PC's only get a few games a year. As long as they have actually been built for the platform rather than being hobbled versions of games from hobbled platforms, I could not care less. Quality over quantity any day of the week.

ph0b0s123:
Picked up LA Noire of sale on Steam for 8. Happy I only played 8 else I would have felt ripped off. Now I understand why the 30 fps limit is needed, due to the funky face technology in the game, but talk about blatant console port. There are hacks, but they cause all sorts of graphical issues. So it does feel like the game is quite stuttery, even though my frame rate is stuck fast on 30 the whole time and only 40% of just one of my two GPU's is being used.

Otherwise the games seems relatively good with almost a modern take on an adventure game. So I would not say don't buy it, just not for more than the 8 sale price I did. If I had paid the full price, I would be very annoyed.

Yes, but it is still cheaper - new - than on console and higher resolution and better controls etc.

It is better. Just not so much better as it could have been.

Angry Juju:
Be honest, can you really see THAT much of a difference between 30 and 60?

See? Not as much. I can if I've been doing a lot of high framerate games then drop to a locked framerate game... then a few minutes later I'm used to it again.

Feel? Yep... As control instructions can only issued at the start of a frame rendering, the lower your framerate the less responsive your controls are. Not always a noticable thing but take someone who plays fast paced games at high framerates then drop it to mid or low framerate and a lot of them are going to feel the controls being 'off', 'laggy' and/or 'sluggish'.

Treblaine:
Yes, but it is still cheaper - new - than on console and higher resolution and better controls etc.

It is better. Just not so much better as it could have been.

They didn't put in the 'free headjob' coupons then?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked