Killzone 2 is only 30 FPS!!!!!

  • 161 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for jackle2071
jackle2071

5477

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#51 jackle2071
Member since 2004 • 5477 Posts

a solid 30fps is JUST FINE. Man all this technical lingo thrown around these days. People think that anything not 60fps+ is no good

Miguel16
Exsactly! it's like 5.1 sound VS 6.1. just cuz the number is higer or lower doesn't really make a bit of diffrence! atleast at the moment!
Avatar image for vip3r666
vip3r666

1398

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#52 vip3r666
Member since 2005 • 1398 Posts
who cares? do you play a game just because it runs at 60fps? i dont think super mario bros. or donkey kong, or super mario 64, or san andreas, or gears of war, or god of war, or TAKE YOUR PICK ran at 30fps. stop the bashing and the fudging around because i guarantee you that if GG (Guerilla Games) didn't tell anyone it was 30 fps, no one would have known
Avatar image for lennygundam14
lennygundam14

827

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#53 lennygundam14
Member since 2004 • 827 Posts
whats so bad about 30fps, it keeps the cinamatic feel of a game, dont you think so?
Avatar image for NADeSilva
NADeSilva

151

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#54 NADeSilva
Member since 2007 • 151 Posts
Isn't Resistance 30fps? Resistance runs fine! I've never seen any slowdown, so if Killzone2 is locked at 30fps whats the big deal? Go play COD4 if u want your 60fps fix.
Avatar image for CyanX73
CyanX73

3389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#55 CyanX73
Member since 2004 • 3389 Posts

I am shocked. To my knowlege I never knew that Killzone 2 is only 30 FPS. With the PS3s power Killzone 2 should definetly be 60 FPS. I found this out from Game Informer earlier today. Plz comment.

coolguy681

UMmmm....30 fps is not bad. In fact, 30 can look very smooth. Considering the amount of detail on screen at once, 30 will be fine. Now it's a problem when the game dips below 30 ala Madden.

Avatar image for XprimeX
XprimeX

1148

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#56 XprimeX
Member since 2006 • 1148 Posts
Well the footage I saw looked very promising, Ive been trying to decide on wether or not to get a ps3 or 360 for the holidays and I have to say that the article definetly changed my view on the blu ray disc and killzone2. The fact that the demo they displayed took up 2gb of the ps3 bluray dics really shows how much they can pack into a disc, and trust me, with 30fps- that meens there will most likely be no hitchups or long load times with silky graphics and beutiful physics. I say 30 FPS was the smart choice and it just goes to show that the devs for this game are thinking about the gamers and our experience instead of just grafix grafix grafix. In the end, it will look, play, and run amazingly well im willing to bet.
Avatar image for darkjounin
darkjounin

714

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#57 darkjounin
Member since 2005 • 714 Posts
Maybe it will reach 60 later on!?? If it doesnt than it is blasphemy this is madness!!?
Avatar image for JordanKid
JordanKid

1231

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#58 JordanKid
Member since 2005 • 1231 Posts
Movies are filmed in 24fps.They look real and have no slowdown. Film a movie in 60fps or whatever, it would be too fast and look stupid.....you could make a game not lagg at 24fps if you kept it solid there..30fps, i dont care
Avatar image for AlMar12345
AlMar12345

749

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#59 AlMar12345
Member since 2005 • 749 Posts
I agree, 30 FPS is fine with me, R:FoM was 30 fps and it looked damn near 60 to me, and with all this FPS talk going around does anyone know what MGS4 will run at?? It looks like 30 to me but the guys that make MGS are REALLY good at what they do so, just wandering
Avatar image for RahKayne
RahKayne

3436

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#60 RahKayne
Member since 2003 • 3436 Posts

To my knowledge the human eye cannot distinguish anythign above 30fps,

the only reason why 60fps is good in games is because it gives more lee-way if the fps drop because of a graphics intensive scene

(60fps does have some more benefits)

As long as the game doesn't dip down from 30fps at all you should have smooth gameplay.

Also to some people please do not get this mixed with AA as some have in here, smoothing and blur does not help fps or cover it up, they do cover up AA problems. REMEMBER Killzone will have AA also, so all of this sounds good, i bet if they took a longer time they could've made it 60fps.

Avatar image for Dogswithguns
Dogswithguns

11359

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#61 Dogswithguns
Member since 2007 • 11359 Posts
I've learned something new today from youguys. so 30FPS is good. ....I think becuz developers know 30FPS is the best way to make great games..... so dont triped out.
Avatar image for coolguy681
coolguy681

1353

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#62 coolguy681
Member since 2006 • 1353 Posts

a solid 30fps is JUST FINE. Man all this technical lingo thrown around these days. People think that anything not 60fps+ is no good

Miguel16

Well a lot of people made it a big deal when Madden was only 30 FPS

Avatar image for Miguel16
Miguel16

6065

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#63 Miguel16
Member since 2004 • 6065 Posts
well not me. And its not so much the amount of fps, but more so the reasoning behind the lack of 60fps when the 360 is doing it on the exact same game. MAkes the ps3 seem inferior, which it is not.
Avatar image for teebeenz
teebeenz

4362

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#64 teebeenz
Member since 2006 • 4362 Posts
To my knowledge the human eye cannot distinguish anythign above 30fpsRahKayne
It can actually.
Avatar image for coolguy681
coolguy681

1353

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#65 coolguy681
Member since 2006 • 1353 Posts

[QUOTE="RahKayne"]To my knowledge the human eye cannot distinguish anythign above 30fpsteebeenz
It can actually.

Agreed

Avatar image for _AsasN_
_AsasN_

3646

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#66 _AsasN_
Member since 2003 • 3646 Posts

I am shocked. To my knowlege I never knew that Killzone 2 is only 30 FPS. With the PS3s power Killzone 2 should definetly be 60 FPS. I found this out from Game Informer earlier today. Plz comment.

coolguy681


I wouldn't look at as ONLY 30 FPS. A locked 30 FPS is nice and smooth, and not surprising considering the graphical quality of Killzone 2.
Avatar image for MGSFan27285
MGSFan27285

850

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#67 MGSFan27285
Member since 2004 • 850 Posts
30 fpsis fine with me, i mean RFOM ran at 30fps and it looks fine. now if it were unstable fps rating i'd be pissed cause then you get choppyness. besides this MIGHT change but im fine with it not. ive never distinguished anything besides 30. i can play 2 games as long as they are stable and not jumping from 30 to 1 i will never know which one runs with a faster fps. besides look how good this game is, the visuals surpass anything else, and will for some time. although, makes me wonder, how long before we discover the systems limits? i mean we are pushing the limit with each game, gears was technically astounding and ran smoothly, but how much farther can we go?
Avatar image for dimebag667
dimebag667

3100

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#68 dimebag667
Member since 2003 • 3100 Posts
halo 3 is only 30fps
Avatar image for Liquid-Prince
Liquid-Prince

2277

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#69 Liquid-Prince
Member since 2007 • 2277 Posts
[QUOTE="Liquid-Prince"][QUOTE="pettman1970"]

[QUOTE="Liquid-Prince"]Do people even know what the FPS means... Our eyes can't even see as fast as 24 FPS, and besides the game is a shooter not some sort of extremly fast paced racing game. pettman1970

This argument never ceases to amaze and amuse me. My eyes must have never gotten the memo on this whole "The eyes can't see more than bla bla bla".

A human eye can not pick up the anything after 24 frames/second. Example: You have 24 pictures and you play them in a slideshow at 24 FPS, you can just about see every image flash in that second even if you can't comprehend the given shapes and such, but anymore then that and our eyes just glue a bunch of blurs together.

I'm not talking flashing pictures in front of your face. I'm saying when playing computer games to console games; I can see the difference in a locked in 30 fps and a stable 60 fps. Thats it plain and simple.

Oh really...so your telling me that after you saw the gameplay demo you realized that Killzone 2 was running at 30FPS...

Avatar image for bizzy420
bizzy420

2730

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#70 bizzy420
Member since 2005 • 2730 Posts
[QUOTE="pettman1970"]

[QUOTE="Liquid-Prince"]Do people even know what the FPS means... Our eyes can't even see as fast as 24 FPS, and besides the game is a shooter not some sort of extremly fast paced racing game. Liquid-Prince

This argument never ceases to amaze and amuse me. My eyes must have never gotten the memo on this whole "The eyes can't see more than bla bla bla".

A human eye can not pick up the anything after 24 frames/second. Example: You have 24 pictures and you play them in a slideshow at 24 FPS, you can just about see every image flash in that second even if you can't comprehend the given shapes and such, but anymore then that and our eyes just glue a bunch of blurs together.

dude u CAN see more than 24 fps. theresa DIFFERENCE when comparing the 24fps standard of film to games.

Avatar image for bizzy420
bizzy420

2730

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#71 bizzy420
Member since 2005 • 2730 Posts

[QUOTE="Lo_Rising"]30 frames is fine for shooters people, it can still be a great game, just look at the halo series 30 frames and its silky smoothpettman1970

I will respectfully dissagree that Halo is silky smooth. When I used to PC game if a game didn't run at 60 to 80 frames per second; it was time for me to upgrade. Halo is locked at 30 fps and is for the most part tolarable to me as is every first person shooter that is locked at 30.I just prefer the more realistic movements of 60 fps.

thats what im saying man, console gamers have been playing games at 30fps since forever, and Pc gamers usually play at 60-100fps, thats why pc gamers can easily tell the difference, but console gamers cant.

Avatar image for bizzy420
bizzy420

2730

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#72 bizzy420
Member since 2005 • 2730 Posts

Movies are filmed in 24fps.They look real and have no slowdown. Film a movie in 60fps or whatever, it would be too fast and look stupid.....you could make a game not lagg at 24fps if you kept it solid there..30fps, i dont careJordanKid

movies are FILMED, not PLAYED. if you did any movie editing at all you would know this, anyone that has used tmpeg knows why films are shot at 24fps. if you were right then why play games at 30fps? why not lower them down to 24fps?

Movies run at 24 fps and they look perfectly smooth so surely 24 fps is enough for moving imagery to be perceived by the eye, right?

Ever had someone shine a bright light into your eyes? When they take the light away, you can still see an afterimage of that light for a bit. As the light surrounding you deepens the more the afterimage makes an impression on your retina. The same effect happens in the Cinema so that you perceive an afterimage of the previous frame, which to your mind is blended in with the next frame.

On the big screen, the image is projected in its entirety, one complete frame at a time, which in turn gives us an afterimage effect.

Films also have motion blur, so that much like the Visual Cortex, motion blur can help maintain the illusion of smooth moving imagery.

Let's talk TV. PAL runs at about 25 frames per second, whereas NTSC runs at about 30 frames per second. Now regardless of which format we choose here, neither of these is actually at a high enough frame rate to give us the perception of smooth moving imagery. What's that you say? Your TV looks fine? Of course it does, because the moving imagery you are looking at is also displayed at a higher refresh rate. Unlike the big screen, TV's don't display one image after another, but draw the image line by line horizontally, which relates to 60 drawing's or refreshes every second. For NTSC, you have 30 fps but 60 refreshes of the screen per second. This amounts to each frame being drawn twice and therefore we have a higher frame rate.

Again, like the big screen, Motion Blur makes its presence known. Want to see this? Go get an action DVD, anything with fast moving objects. Now pause it whilst that object is moving. Looks blurred doesn't it, yet the DVD has frozen that point of the film on one singular frame.

Using a succession of moving images, the two refreshes per frame fool us into believing there is two frames for every one frame. With the motion blur the eye believes we are watching a smoothly flowing picture.

I'm sure some of you out there are thinking, well I'm happy playing games at 30 fps, who are you to turn around and say different? Frankly I'm not. What I am saying is there are people out there who are not happy with 30 fps, and now hopefully you can understand why. CRT Monitors are considered 'Flicker Free' at about 72Hz for a reason, and simply put it's to compensate for the lack of motion blur, afterimages and other trickery we live with every day in TV and Films. The Human Eye is a marvellous, complex and very clever thing indeed, but even that needs a little help now and then. At the end of the day, it's all down to end user preference, but for me personally I prefer a flicker free display and flicker free gaming.

Avatar image for barom
barom

243

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#73 barom
Member since 2004 • 243 Posts

UT3 IS ALSO 30 FPS

OH NOES IT"S THE END OF THE WORLD

*kills myself*

Avatar image for linkin_guy109
linkin_guy109

8864

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#74 linkin_guy109
Member since 2005 • 8864 Posts
oh for the love of god, this fps issue had gotten blown out of hand since madden 08, can every body go back to the day when 30fps was considered good? probably not, idc if this game is 30fps im still getting it and it will still be amazing, and fyi this info is so old, like e3 old
Avatar image for beckoflight
beckoflight

848

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 63

User Lists: 0

#75 beckoflight
Member since 2006 • 848 Posts
Well i like the SP3 so much because of Heavenly Sword , Motorstorm & resssitence that i'm buying 1one for christmas .... & ofcccourse for Killzone 2 + others .... but offcourse welll i'm pretty pissed about the RSX that Nvidia buit ... I have a PC with a 2900 XT & if you see the bioshock test it runs much more great than the GTX the only problem with ATI on the PC are the drivers because the arhitecture is far more superior .... so you evan cnn compare the graphics with the X360 ... & because the Xenos from Ati alll the multiplatfrom games look better ... Till now whn it comes to consoles ATi is the leader but the 2nd place on PC .... anyway i don't care about what graphi chipset the PS3 has as long as a game have over 30 FPS but in comparison to the X360 ... the Xenos is superrior ! And another thing no game in the world can runt with 60 FPS constantly ...it all depends on how many effects are on screen & things like that for instance the most demanding effect will foreever be the smoke effect it will allways slow down the machine because smoke is a multitude of faded textures with particle technology in now days that it willl make it interactive with the enviroment !
Avatar image for istylee
istylee

1117

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#76 istylee
Member since 2007 • 1117 Posts
no big deal
Avatar image for w7w7w7w7w7
w7w7w7w7w7

4891

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#77 w7w7w7w7w7
Member since 2006 • 4891 Posts

[QUOTE="rogerjak"]I prefer a steady 30 FPS then a crappy and unstable 60 .FPSColdplay07



If it's "crappy and unstable" then it's not 60FPS... -_-

dude, if you frames move to fast you get and effect called screen tearing, and it's worse than pore frame rates.
Avatar image for wreak
wreak

4645

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#78 wreak
Member since 2005 • 4645 Posts
honestly, all this frames per seconed bull plop is well....bull plop. can any of you tell me what clasical animation runs at? 24 frames per seconed, and no one realy knoticed or cared. now games are a lil different and they slow down at times so it's nice to have a buffer on there so that ppl don't knotice so much when it does, but like honestly, has the video game industry gotten so caught up w/ hypeing games rather then making games that they have to plug the consumer w/ how many frames per seconed the game runs at as if we are suposed to care?! calm down no one seemed to have a problem w/ games running at 30 fps before so they shouldn't now, what ppl should be more concerned about is weather nor not games are ACTUALLY innovating, caus realy almost no one has actually innovated in this industry in probably about 10 years, thats 2 console generations pretty much, now thats a problem. games have almost gotten to the point where they are now just a seconed job, while some pr douche bag tells you that you are having fun.
Avatar image for firstpicktaken
firstpicktaken

260

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#79 firstpicktaken
Member since 2006 • 260 Posts
I am shocked. 30 frames per sec is like 20 fcp and 20 fpc is unaceptable (sarcasam) 20 fpc sucks
Avatar image for firstpicktaken
firstpicktaken

260

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#80 firstpicktaken
Member since 2006 • 260 Posts

UT3 IS ALSO 30 FPS

OH NOES IT"S THE END OF THE WORLD

*kills myself*

barom
I think epic said UT3 is 60 fpc
Avatar image for Ravi_1900
Ravi_1900

977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#81 Ravi_1900
Member since 2006 • 977 Posts
I read the interview Gureilla said that Killzone would be 30 fps and 720p native only. But anyways 30 fps is still a good count, one will only encounter problems unless when they move the camera too fast and frequently.
Avatar image for Velric
Velric

3842

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#82 Velric
Member since 2003 • 3842 Posts

I am shocked. To my knowlege I never knew that Killzone 2 is only 30 FPS. With the PS3s power Killzone 2 should definetly be 60 FPS. I found this out from Game Informer earlier today. Plz comment.

coolguy681

OH NO! So is Unreal Tournament 3 and Gears of War! For that matter, so is nearly FPS and major action game ever made! OH NO!

Games that have tons of textures and large amounts of action tend to go for 30FPS. It is the standard and you've been playing it pretty much all your life.

Avatar image for firstpicktaken
firstpicktaken

260

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#83 firstpicktaken
Member since 2006 • 260 Posts
plus it doesnt matter for a game like killzone2. You see, low fcp is noticable the faster something is moving, Thats why poliphony is making a big deal out of GT running at 60 fpc 30 fpc might be a problem for UT3 or nex gen time splitters but most fps games are playable with 30 fpc
Avatar image for Ravi_1900
Ravi_1900

977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#84 Ravi_1900
Member since 2006 • 977 Posts

halo 3 is only 30fpsdimebag667

I have never heard this, Halo has graphics near about the quality of GRAW 2, (I mean qauility level) and its not a technical marvel, and its a 360 exclusive so it would definetly would have framerate higher than 30.

Avatar image for Velric
Velric

3842

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#85 Velric
Member since 2003 • 3842 Posts

[QUOTE="dimebag667"]halo 3 is only 30fpsRavi_1900

I have never heard this, Halo has graphics near about the quality of GRAW 2, (I mean qauility level) and its not a technical marvel, and its a 360 exclusive so it would definetly would have framerate higher than 30.

Wow, that is some solid reasoning if I have ever heard it. It looks like GRAW2 and it is on the 360, therefore it must be higher than 30FPS. I hate to break it to you, but I highly doubt it is. As I have said previously. Fast paced games with tons of textures and huge amounts of action rarely run higher than 30FPS.

Avatar image for lawlessx
lawlessx

48753

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#86 lawlessx
Member since 2004 • 48753 Posts

[QUOTE="dimebag667"]halo 3 is only 30fpsRavi_1900

I have never heard this, Halo has graphics near about the quality of GRAW 2, (I mean qauility level) and its not a technical marvel, and its a 360 exclusive so it would definetly would have framerate higher than 30.

you clearly have no idea how it works. some video games are better off locked at 30 FPS

60FPS framerate=/= better game.

Avatar image for stygiansanity
stygiansanity

3183

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#87 stygiansanity
Member since 2005 • 3183 Posts

I prefer a steady 30 FPS then a crappy and unstable 60 .FPSrogerjak

unstable 60 fps as in it deeps into the 40s? what's the problem there? it's still above30 fps.

Avatar image for longhorn7
longhorn7

4637

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#88 longhorn7
Member since 2007 • 4637 Posts

[QUOTE="rogerjak"]I prefer a steady 30 FPS then a crappy and unstable 60 .FPSstygiansanity

unstable 60 fps as in it deeps into the 40s? what's the problem there? it's still above30 fps.

because it will still look choppy as hell no matter what value it drops
Avatar image for bizzy420
bizzy420

2730

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#89 bizzy420
Member since 2005 • 2730 Posts
[QUOTE="Coldplay07"]

[QUOTE="rogerjak"]I prefer a steady 30 FPS then a crappy and unstable 60 .FPSw7w7w7w7w7



If it's "crappy and unstable" then it's not 60FPS... -_-

dude, if you frames move to fast you get and effect called screen tearing, and it's worse than pore frame rates.

WRONG you only get tearing if you monitor is crappy and cant handle the refresh rate.

honestly, all this frames per seconed bull plop is well....bull plop. can any of you tell me what clasical animation runs at? 24 frames per seconed, and no one realy knoticed or cared. now games are a lil different and they slow down at times so it's nice to have a buffer on there so that ppl don't knotice so much when it does, but like honestly, has the video game industry gotten so caught up w/ hypeing games rather then making games that they have to plug the consumer w/ how many frames per seconed the game runs at as if we are suposed to care?! calm down no one seemed to have a problem w/ games running at 30 fps before so they shouldn't now, what ppl should be more concerned about is weather nor not games are ACTUALLY innovating, caus realy almost no one has actually innovated in this industry in probably about 10 years, thats 2 console generations pretty much, now thats a problem. games have almost gotten to the point where they are now just a seconed job, while some pr douche bag tells you that you are having fun.wreak

obviously you didnt read anything. film is totally different than a game. anyways there actually were people who complained about the 30fps, and this is way before madden. after madden came out, it just made it more obvious how 30fps vs 60fps was.

Avatar image for furtherfan
furtherfan

3699

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#90 furtherfan
Member since 2007 • 3699 Posts

30 fps can still be very good, as long as it's a steady 30 fps.

don't get caught up with new words you learned. "30fps" is not a disease, nor is "linear".

Avatar image for pnizz
pnizz

232

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#91 pnizz
Member since 2007 • 232 Posts
who cares?? its not madden ppl...its aFPS..and if it runs smooth...why care??
Avatar image for Chutebox
Chutebox

50634

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#92 Chutebox
Member since 2007 • 50634 Posts

UT3 IS ALSO 30 FPS

OH NOES IT"S THE END OF THE WORLD

*kills myself*

barom

I thought they said that UT3 is actually 60FPS?

Anyways, I don't care if it's at 30 as long as it's stable. I am though upset that it's not in 1080p. This game is one of Sony's huge games to show off the ps3 and it's capabilities, and it doesn't run at 1080p?

Avatar image for gamer26690
gamer26690

715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#93 gamer26690
Member since 2004 • 715 Posts
i feel tempted to make a topic called 'Gamers are only 25FPS!?!'
Avatar image for bluntiss
bluntiss

462

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#94 bluntiss
Member since 2005 • 462 Posts
it's only running in 720P. wow, what a waste of a good game. PS3 runs at 1080P, why would they lower the quality? Sony, step up or step out.
Avatar image for daveg1
daveg1

20405

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#95 daveg1
Member since 2005 • 20405 Posts

with all the stuff going on in that game it wold have to be at 720p at 30fps...

any console game with that level of graphics would be no different..

you wont even notice any of this when your playing it anyway..

Avatar image for stygiansanity
stygiansanity

3183

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#96 stygiansanity
Member since 2005 • 3183 Posts
[QUOTE="w7w7w7w7w7"][QUOTE="Coldplay07"]

[QUOTE="rogerjak"]I prefer a steady 30 FPS then a crappy and unstable 60 .FPSbizzy420



If it's "crappy and unstable" then it's not 60FPS... -_-

dude, if you frames move to fast you get and effect called screen tearing, and it's worse than pore frame rates.

WRONG you only get tearing if you monitor is crappy and cant handle the refresh rate.

honestly, all this frames per seconed bull plop is well....bull plop. can any of you tell me what clasical animation runs at? 24 frames per seconed, and no one realy knoticed or cared. now games are a lil different and they slow down at times so it's nice to have a buffer on there so that ppl don't knotice so much when it does, but like honestly, has the video game industry gotten so caught up w/ hypeing games rather then making games that they have to plug the consumer w/ how many frames per seconed the game runs at as if we are suposed to care?! calm down no one seemed to have a problem w/ games running at 30 fps before so they shouldn't now, what ppl should be more concerned about is weather nor not games are ACTUALLY innovating, caus realy almost no one has actually innovated in this industry in probably about 10 years, thats 2 console generations pretty much, now thats a problem. games have almost gotten to the point where they are now just a seconed job, while some pr douche bag tells you that you are having fun.wreak

obviously you didnt read anything. film is totally different than a game. anyways there actually were people who complained about the 30fps, and this is way before madden. after madden came out, it just made it more obvious how 30fps vs 60fps was.

yeah, you said it for me

Avatar image for tryfe_lyn
tryfe_lyn

4122

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 41

User Lists: 0

#97 tryfe_lyn
Member since 2005 • 4122 Posts
As long as the game looks and plays smoothly, what does it matter if the frame rate is 30 fps...can you distinguish the difference between 30 and 60 fps after 5-10 beers???
Avatar image for FireFalkon
FireFalkon

866

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#98 FireFalkon
Member since 2004 • 866 Posts
so is GeoW, you do know that you can't possibly see the difference betwen a stable 30fps or 60fps.
Avatar image for swordfish_64
swordfish_64

571

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#99 swordfish_64
Member since 2007 • 571 Posts

I am shocked. To my knowlege I never knew that Killzone 2 is only 30 FPS. With the PS3s power Killzone 2 should definetly be 60 FPS. I found this out from Game Informer earlier today. Plz comment.

coolguy681

And, so what?

Avatar image for Clever_NYC
Clever_NYC

64

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#100 Clever_NYC
Member since 2002 • 64 Posts

I say cut the BS already! Dammitit betterbe at 60 fps with no drop and at 1080p! It's high time Sony put their boot heel on the throats of the other consoles and prove what the PS3 can do! I say no more excuses, just do it dammit and and make it snappy or heads will role. For petes sake ppl stop making excuses and saying that 30 fps and 720p is ok causes other games do it that way, get some back bones and demand quality for all the money you plunked down on the system!