GS News Top 5 - Bloodborne gameplay revealed; Oculus Founder Calls 30fps a “Failure”
Dark Souls’ successor “Bloodborne” gets a gameplay trailer, Microsoft explain their lack of PC games at E3, Oculus Creator says 30fps sucks, and more!
Old footage of Project Beast was to be shown at TGS 2013, That the leaked video you shown.
Before it was named BloodBorne. The ps4 gameplay demo footage is the new Pre Alpha Stage one.
How a self-respecting gamer can say 30 fps is good enough as they spend $60 on a game with day 1 DLC...my God people, what is wrong with you?
You do know there is a large visceral disconnect when a game isn't over 60fps don't you? Try playing GTA4 with mods and tell me the experience isn't awesome..having graphics that rival games coming out in 2014 with buttery smooth frame-rates..
I'm convinced, the industry's mean age might be 30, but sites like this are filled mainly with 16 year olds...maximum.
Yes, 30fps is a complete failure of incredible magnitude, thats why the Halo franchise is one of the worst selling franchises of all ti........ oh wait. derp.
I am completely stoked for Bloodborne. Millions of gamers have followed it since its leak as Project Beast, and it's so neat to see footage of it in its' earlier stages and see the leak come full circle. Hidetaka Miyazaki reiterated and revealed a lot of information this week, and this is what stood out for me:
-Takes place in the 19th Century, in a desolate mountain region called Yharnam
-Yharnam is renowned for its medicine, but is also a place of prejudice
-The 'plague of the beast' is ravaging the region, feeding prejudice and fear
-Every night, bleary-eyed and confused citizens take to the streets in a daily 'beast hunt' (shown in cgi and early alpha trailers). The streets reek of blood, death and beasts
-Level design will be like Dark Souls (1), with interconnecting areas with shortcuts in open-world
-Combat is faster with less reliance on blocking (blocking still exists but much less effective). Speed, agility, diversity through duel-wielding and timing, more then ever, will drive combat.
-Blood is everywhere. Your weapons and apparel get blood-soaked as you fight
-There is an entire class of transforming weapons, with secrets about them and special moves that can be performed only when they are transforming
-Miyazaki's goal is to make exploration terrifying, and exploration is a cornerstone of the game. There are secrets scattered everywhere, too. And loot.
-When asked if an easy mode will exist for new players, the only answer was "no".
-The games' penalty for dying is being adjusted and is a big focus currently. As it currently stands, the penalty for dying won't be as severe as Demon's/Dark Souls, but...you will die more. Difficulty is comparable to Demon's Souls if not slightly more challenging and Bloodborne is a direct spiritual successor to Demon's Souls
-Multiplayer is a massive focus and they want to add in fresh and new things to the innovative formula they already created in Souls. Big group discussions on the topic as devs and will be revealed soon to gamers
People whine so god damn much about 60 FPS, and 1080p. If the game is done right those things dont matter.
So, if a game is running at 30fps on X1, it's because the X1 system sucks. But, if a game runs at 30fps on PS4 it's because they chose it for artistic quality. Glad to have that clarified. lol.
Both systems are lacking in power and struggling to do 1080p/60fps. The thing is, you're better off running at a lower resolution and higher framerate. I'd much rather have smoothness over extra pixels. But, thanks to Sony's - we haven't got any games atm, so lets make resolution an issue since its currently all we have - BS, we get stuck with devs that have little choice but to lessen effects such as shadows, particle effects etc. to hit the holy grail of 1080p or face a mob with pitchforks.
I would prefer 900p or even 720p with 60fps over 1080p/30fps any day of the week. That's coming from a person with a 60 inch screen so, I don't buy into that "There is a huge difference" garbage. I have 20/20 vision and the difference isn't all that much. And who the heck cares. Like others have said, how much of the graphics quality do you really notice when you are truly immersed in a game?
I still have an N64, SNES and NES. The games look like crap but, they are all kinds of fun.
Honestly until current gen actually looks MUCH better then last gen which it currently dosent 1080p don't make much difference. So far all current gen games are last gen games that run on current gen systems more or less.
To anybody who says they can't tell a difference between 1080p and 720p, they are either lying or never went shopping for a tv.
I dont agree that 30fps sucks but I wish the console industry would focus more on 60fps rather than 1080p. When 60fps you can notice it and it looks so smooth. 900p and 1080p differences are undetectable by me so I'd rather have a game be 900p @ 60fps rather than 1080p @ 30fps...
get the html5 player and watch this in 60frames on YouTube ... its neet, but also realise how gross the graphics are aside from the mainchar ... less polys, 16.bit textures, small texture pattern repeating over and over again
an unscalable system like a console is a dead.end ... we should realise this, you simply cant generalise something complex like game development to cook it down to a simplyfied general purpose System like a home console ... maybe if you would replace a console every 6month, the development of the games would not be locked to a state, superficial and casual as it is now
most people also dont realise how much game gengres like shooters and Action adventaures got nerfed and casualised to make them possible to play with controllers instead of realising more advanced and nifty Input deviced ... I had high hopes for the wii-mote to solve some of those problems, but noone in the industry is interested in developing console tech any further then it was already 5 years ago ...
HD tech, 60 Frames are shoved down hour throughts without a real need or demand, customers acting like chicken every time a company throughs in some abstract technical term ... in the 90s it was 8.bit /16.bit/64.bit ... now its 30fps/60fps - 1080p/1440p
few studios are able to realy deliver outstanding tech ... codemasters racing engine, crytecks faceanmations, GTAs open world engine ... leave the high end stuff to those professionals ... all the rest should just simply make sure their games are fun, challenging, detailed and pretty and dont get involved in tech.speech only used to create marketing pionts ...
People say 60 fps should be easy to accomplish on next gen consoles like they can easily go in their room an make a game in 1080p 60fps like a developer. Sit your cry baby a $$ down.
Consoles will never prioritize 60 fps over the maximum visual fidelity possible, that's just the way the industry is. And there is a reason The Order 1866 is going to be 30 fps and one of those odd Killzone resolutions, and that is so it looks really pretty. The "close to film quality" excuse by Ready at Dawn is laughable and they should have just told the honest truth- the PS4 and X1 are weak by current gaming standards. And that's ok, consoles are about exclusives and fun foremost/not the best graphics anyway right? Right? Oh I see. In a related story, PC gamers are all confused about resolution gate.
Well, the 60fps @1080 benchmark should be the industry standard nowadays and if developers are falling short on that, then they really need to evaluate how they're going about their development process.
I for one. notice the difference between 30 and 60 frames - much in the same way I notice graphical fidelity from 640 X480 to 1920 X 1080 - how can you eyes not notice the difference? - That's just crazy talk.
Fact is, TV and monitor resolution is increasing & the sooner developers work towards that, the better and I'm sorry but saying you've developed your game to run at 30fps for ' artistic reasons' is total BS - who are you trying to convince here?
The Fps debate is kinda stupid but kinda relevant. On one hand you cant broad brush 1080p 60fps on every game. Games are different from each other and there are different factors involved like the artistic style of the game, the animations and intended movement. On the other side of things alot of developers DO make games which clearly call for higher frame rates but do not do it like its supposed to be done. Now is it an issue of hardware? Have the new consoles ALREADY hit their Ceiling? whats the deal? this opens up a can of worms Im not ready to dive into in a simple comment...
bloodborne looks good, but is it good enough to pay more then 600$ for 3 years you could play it ... PS4 is useless - no good exclusives yet ...
i live in the EU - so its more like 700-800$ - wouldn't you make yourself a fool to do that ...
Wow, what a horribly misleading headline. I'm fairly sure they said 30fps for virtual reality is a fail, not in general (but I'm too lazy to check)
Oculus has the nerve to speak about what is best for gaming when they just sold themselves out to Facebook??
I'll take 1080p and a rock-solid 30 fps over a jittery and dipping 60 fps with lower resolution, texture pop and something looking like ASS. Any day of the week :)
@youre_a_sheep Old footage of Project Beast was to be shown at TGS 2013, That the leaked video you shown.
Before it was named BloodBorne. The ps4 gameplay demo footage is the new Pre Alpha Stage one.
@Jugga101 Oh, so the halo games being released recently have been 30 fps? no they haven't....
@Jugga101 Halo, is that even 30 fps? It felt like 20 whenever I played, which was rarely
@JRD1912 I agree with you as someone who grew up with gaming the whole fps thing does and doesn't matter its all based on mechanics of the games and how the game engine performs. Sure sometimes yeah having a high fps is nice but not all games need it if you say otherwise your just naive imo anyways.
@JRD1912 1080p doesnt matter much but 60fps does a lot. if you think otherwise than you havent played enough games. the feel of control is just so different. in 60fps you have much better reaction time and actions feels natural, not sluggish and delayed as is with 30fps. rarely there are modern games that have 30fps and they dont feel bad.
@bdrtfm When Sunset Overdrive specs are revealed, that ADD Saints Row game, this X1 fangirl will and the entire vast minority will say 720p and 30fps don't matter. Lol just wait
@bdrtfm I agree with you that resolution is not end of the world. I have my PS4 connected to my "gaming room" TV (which is 720p) and I don't mind slight resolution downgrade after moving it from living room 1080p TV to this. Benefits of having console away from otherwise busy living room definitely beat disadvantage of lower res.
But however we dance around the issue, there is no way around this - whatever resolution and frame-rate developers decide to go for, XBO will have harder job to match. It might not be major today when most games are still being developed for last generation consoles in mind, but at some point in current generation's life, games complexity/visuals will go that far that even PS4 hardware will be working hard to achieve 720p/30fps. What will XBO do when those games start appearing? That will be my real concern when/if I decide to get XBO as well.
@eternal_napalm Or, maybe they just aren't Sony f@nboys like you. I have a 60 inch TV. I have a PS4 and an X1. I see very little difference between the 2 graphically. You can't just say, anyone who says you can't tell a difference is a liar. That's absurd. I bet if I put a guy in a room and let him watch 2 games side by side and said one was an X1 version and the other was a PS4 version but they were actually both X1 versions, he would swear on his mother's grave that the supposed PS4 version was superior in every way. People see what they want to see.
I've never popped in an X1 game and said, "Wow the graphics in this game sucks, maybe I'll play my PS4 instead." Believe what you want, the only one you are fooling is yourself.
@skiggy34 no, you need more then 60fps to make it look real good, you need a lot of good effects, dense particle systems and a lot of HD textures AND then 60fps to make it look real ... only smooth isnt mandatory ... and since HD Screens are 1080p, you cant go below that in games anymore
cryengine is most advanced with procedural textures (resolution less effects) ...
/watch?v=4qGK5lUyCwI [watch the last 40seconds]
the crux is however screen Resolution ... post proccessing wich is madatory for every advanced effect and shaders as well need copies of the rendered frame before it can be send to the Screen, so you need multiple copies of a 1080p frame in the ram for all the effects to be calculated ... 60 times a second ...
this is an unavoidable bottleneck of current tech ... this will Change with real time raytracing engines, those dont need pixel based copies of the output Image and different Scene states to calculate collision, lightening, animations and effects ... it only Needs to raytrace the Scene ones for every frame to calculate these operations, in more precision then we are used to with the current tech ...
real time raytracing still didnt made it ... there is ray casting only present in the x-ray engine
so either you will need absurd amounts of ram in the future or a new type of processors to make ray tracing possible for games
@ptown58 oh you pc gamers are funny Ptown massachusetts ?
@mark5225 yea going by ur logic,if i dont like the next superman movie,i should go and direct one myself...lmao
@rickphoenixxx What are current gaming standards? As a developer, you can take any hardware - ANY hardware - and keep boosting game visuals until that hardware cannot maintain 60fps any longer.
RaD could have reduced their game's IQ and get 60fps, They decided to go the other way. We cannot say if they are wrong or not until we see the game, and even then - we'd have to see both versions running to be able to see how much would game visuals have to suffer in order to provide 60fps, and decide if their choice was the right one.
The game seems to be slow pacing rather than of CoD-ish tempo, so for what we know, they might have made right choice to pursue fidelity at performance's expense.
X.bone's 720p is what's truly laughable...I guess that's why there is no interest in playing games on cable boxes :/
@eternal_napalm 1080p is nice but I disagree. I'll take 900p @ 60 fps easily over 1080p @ 30fps. The differences between 900p and 1080p are hardly detectable and if they were then we would have noticed these differences in multi plat games where the ps4 had 1080p and X1 had 900p. You can definitely see the differences between 60fps and 30fps.
@eternal_napalm Absolutely as long as the frame rate remains constant throughout. 30fps is absolutely playable and preferable to a game jumping up and down from 60 - 40 -50 -20 -60 every few minutes
@eternal_napalm 100% agree. 1080p at 30fps is a success. Anything else is simply a bonus.
@eternal_napalm You know, I think it may have even dropped down to 10 fps at some points, especially when throwing a grenade in cluster of Flood zombies, can't beleive I played that crap, I should have higher standards.
@bdrtfm For this one, I'm going to go with ‘never went shopping for a tv'. Not sure why you rambled like that, spewing funny insults and making wildly false claims. Just embarrassing yourself and must be a X1 fanboy who is still depressed
When an individual has a 1080p tv and a game has lower resolution, it may get upscaled, but the tv tries to compensate for the lower resolution and saturate the tv with pixels. This adds a nasty blur affect, not as bad when it's in Video Game mode if your tv has it but definitely noticeable.
Yeah it's 60 fps on minute, 45 the next, down to 30 and then up to 60. With lower resolution that is totally noticeable (I sometimes think lots of people just play on mom and dad's tv and never went shopping for a tv, the difference is massive hence the large market for 1080p Tvs), texture pop and the even worse asset pop-in.
@eternal_napalm I know ... personally, coming from PC, I dont see a problem with 1080p, achieving this resolution shouldnt be a problem in 2014
@rahulbond2002 @eternal_napalm @bdrtfm Well, my point was that not everyone who says they don't notice a difference or don't care is a liar. Can you notice a difference with two TV's side by side set at different resolutions and/or FPS? Sure, anyone could. Does it really truly matter? Is the slight difference really that important? Or is it the whole package that counts?
I love my PS4 but, every time I pick up the controller or use PSN, it feels like were back to Caveman days again. Pretty much anyone who has anything to do with gaming in a professional way agree Xbox Live and the Xbox controller are superior to that of the Playstation's. Ask a f@nboy though, he'll swear up and down the PS4 controller and PSN are the best thing on earth. "Oh, the Xbox controller doesn't fit well in my large hands" "Wow, Xbox Live is down again. It's down all the time." Yeah right.