Killzone SF 30 fps comparison

Crichton

Commented on 2014-02-07 10:18:04

For me locked 30 fps is also so much better then unlocked 30-40.

In reply to

andrewsqual

Commented on 2014-02-07 11:07:07

Hmm but with a 400hz display, I didn't really notice a difference since the game never goes below 30fps anyway :)

In reply to

BlimBlim

Commented on 2014-02-07 11:20:34

Well if you are using motionflow or whatever option, then yeah you won't notice it I guess. If you don't use that, you could have a 1000hz display and you would still have judder, since whatever happens you will only display 60 "unique" frames per second.
Motionflow and other things like that are evil though, terrible terrible stuff.

In reply to

prodygee

Commented on 2014-02-07 11:32:34

12893872109837 hz I don't care. Games on console don't go above 100 fps. That refreshrate only works if you, like BlimBlim says, use terrible motionplus stuff. Lag, ew.. lag
Don't say it's not there. Because it is.

In reply to

ebola9717

Commented on 2014-02-07 12:08:06

It's nice that they are giving console games more options. What I'd really like is to be able to set the resolution. My TV is only 720 and would get a boost in FPS if I could actually play them in 720.

In reply to

SplitTongue

Commented on 2014-02-07 12:42:40 In reply to prodygee

Posted by prodygee

That refreshrate only works if you, like BlimBlim says, use terrible motionplus stuff. Lag, ew.. lag
Don't say it's not there. Because it is.

Negletible if you're using a gamepad...
PC shooters with mouse on the other hand insn't.

In reply to

This message and account have been deleted at the user's request

KORNdog

Commented on 2014-02-07 13:26:41

Posted by droezelke

It's good that the option is there, but I didn't notice any problems while playing the game. It all looked very smooth to me.

same...didn't notice the judder in NFS rivals either tbh.

In reply to

r3tr0gam3r1337

Commented on 2014-02-07 14:57:30 In reply to BlimBlim

Posted by BlimBlim

Well if you are using motionflow or whatever option, then yeah you won't notice it I guess. If you don't use that, you could have a 1000hz display and you would still have judder, since whatever happens you will only display 60 "unique" frames per second.
Motionflow and other things like that are evil though, terrible terrible stuff.

ive started noticing stuff like that happen on GT6 but my monitor has a thing called overdrive, i don't quite know the science for it but it basically makes the frame rate drops less noticeable and less laggy.

In reply to

This message and account have been deleted at the user's request

r3tr0gam3r1337

Commented on 2014-02-07 21:17:43

Posted by droezelke

Overdrive means that the monitor try to produce a lower response time. This is to avoid ghosting. Has nothing to do with framerate.

donit know if i can post links but this explains overdrive a lot better than i did,

http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/3136/2/17-gaming-m...

my monitor is an iiyama prolite g2773hs, link to the review and part about response time and overdrive,

http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/3047/6/iiyama-prol...

In reply to

moroboshi

Commented on 2014-02-07 23:59:53

An uneven frame rate is the least of this turgid game's problems. It's a perfect example of a launch title - a pretty graphics demo with masses of bugs and gameplay so formulaic and dull it was difficult to stay awake when playing it.

In reply to

spacemanjupiter

Commented on 2014-02-08 01:32:19

Wow, this is really awesome of the devs to do. The micro stutter is exactly what I've been complaining about with this game since I bought it. This should take care of that. A consistent framerate is better than a high framerate. You can get an average of 100fps but if it isn't consistent you're going to see jumps and stutters, and that is less desirable than a consistent 30 or 60. That is why I hate playing games with vsync disabled. Non-vsynced games annoy the shit out of me with screen tears and inconsistency. Out of 100 games I probably only play 2 or 3 without vsync. Well, this is good news, although it's really unfortunate that this game was obviously rushed and incomplete. I don't even know if I would consider it a beta. Assets and graphics are mostly complete but the glitches and lower quality than normal gameplay and lack of polish from such a great Dev really stands out like a sore thumb. To be fair, I don't blame the devs for this. They may not have had a choice but to rush the game out for the console launch.

In reply to

Wow, this is really awesome of the devs to do. The micro stutter is exactly what I've been complaining about with this game since I bought it. This should take care of that. A consistent framerate is better than a high framerate. You can get an average of 100fps but if it isn't consistent you're going to see jumps and stutters, and that is less desirable than a consistent 30 or 60. That is why I hate playing games with vsync disabled. Non-vsynced games annoy the shit out of me with screen tears and inconsistency. Out of 100 games I probably only play 2 or 3 without vsync. Well, this is good news, although it's really unfortunate that this game was obviously rushed and incomplete. I don't even know if I would consider it a beta. Assets and graphics are mostly complete but the glitches and lower quality than normal gameplay and lack of polish from such a great Dev really stands out like a sore thumb. To be fair, I don't blame the devs for this. They may not have had a choice but to rush the game out for the console launch.

newbielives

Commented on 2014-02-08 02:48:56

I will always choose unlock when ever available

In reply to

marklola

Commented on 2014-02-08 12:11:38

i dont know what the writer of the article is on about when he did not like the fps of killzone

i never once saw any problems in fps in this game and ive played it and completed it loads of times now.

also why would it be a problem if it goes from 30fps to 45 fps, the developers said it dips to 30fps when the action is not strong so higher fps is not needed

sooo surely having it locked at 30fps all the time will judder it a bit when the actiion gets hot?

there is no point in doing a video comparison on a scene that has no action in it.

i will leave it as it is because there are no problems with it when i play

In reply to

marklola

Commented on 2014-02-08 12:16:47

its good they are giving the options though BUT personally i would rather they do a big texture update, there are way too many bad textures in the game that should be good textures

The forest scenes the rocks look amazing BUT the trees look horrid, from afar they look ok but when u get near the wood/bark is a big jelly bioshock texture mess this should not be the case...if you can get as close as you can to rocks etc and they still look great then why not trees? specially since you go near trees more than u do rocks i this level

Leaves on the rocks look ok but nothing special, and i do not like how on every level the leaves and things all sway the same even when there is no wind.

when you get close to crates and boxes and any other items in the levels they do not look good texture wise, i think the worst levels are the very start and the ones that are inside buildings, the outside parts look great for the most part.

looking at the early gameplay from E3 parts looked way way better, the blue material was better textured also smoke effects and the steam that coems from those vent/chimneys when you land on the building in the city looked very real just like in those devision game clips BUT the final version looks like smoke effects from the ps3

In reply to

its good they are giving the options though BUT personally i would rather they do a big texture update, there are way too many bad textures in the game that should be good textures

The forest scenes the rocks look amazing BUT the trees look horrid, from afar they look ok but when u get near the wood/bark is a big jelly bioshock texture mess this should not be the case...if you can get as close as you can to rocks etc and they still look great then why not trees? specially since you go near trees more than u do rocks i this level

Leaves on the rocks look ok but nothing special, and i do not like how on every level the leaves and things all sway the same even when there is no wind.

when you get close to crates and boxes and any other items in the levels they do not look good texture wise, i think the worst levels are the very start and the ones that are inside buildings, the outside parts look great for the most part.

looking at the early gameplay from E3 parts looked way way better, the blue material was better textured also smoke effects and the steam that coems from those vent/chimneys when you land on the building in the city looked very real just like in those devision game clips BUT the final version looks like smoke effects from the ps3

spacemanjupiter

Commented on 2014-02-09 11:27:14 In reply to marklola

Posted by marklola

its good they are giving the options though BUT personally i would rather they do a big texture update, there are way too many bad textures in the game that should be good textures

The forest scenes the rocks look amazing BUT the trees look horrid, from afar they look ok but when u get near the wood/bark is a big jelly bioshock texture mess this should not be the case...if you can get as close as you can to rocks etc and they still look great then why not trees? specially since you go near trees more than u do rocks i this level

Leaves on the rocks look ok but nothing special, and i do not like how on every level the leaves and things all sway the same even when there is no wind.

when you get close to crates and boxes and any other items in the levels they do not look good texture wise, i think the worst levels are the very start and the ones that are inside buildings, the outside parts look great for the most part.

looking at the early gameplay from E3 parts looked way way better, the blue material was better textured also smoke effects and the steam that coems from those vent/chimneys when you land on the building in the city looked very real just like in those devision game clips BUT the final version looks like smoke effects from the ps3

This game does not have a problem with textures in general... Go play Crysis 3 on Ultra and complain about the textures. Even on Ultra there are less than perfect textures. Killzone looks fantastic for a console game, and overall, it probably looks better than Crysis 3. I've been playing that on a GTX780 HOF at higher than Titan speeds. If you're going to be that picky about about a console game then you should fork out the cash for an Ultra PC and quit playing console games. I found plenty of imperfect textures in Crysis 3 Ultra.

In reply to

[quote=marklola]its good they are giving the options though BUT personally i would rather they do a big texture update, there are way too many bad textures in the game that should be good textures

The forest scenes the rocks look amazing BUT the trees look horrid, from afar they look ok but when u get near the wood/bark is a big jelly bioshock texture mess this should not be the case...if you can get as close as you can to rocks etc and they still look great then why not trees? specially since you go near trees more than u do rocks i this level

Leaves on the rocks look ok but nothing special, and i do not like how on every level the leaves and things all sway the same even when there is no wind.

when you get close to crates and boxes and any other items in the levels they do not look good texture wise, i think the worst levels are the very start and the ones that are inside buildings, the outside parts look great for the most part.

looking at the early gameplay from E3 parts looked way way better, the blue material was better textured also smoke effects and the steam that coems from those vent/chimneys when you land on the building in the city looked very real just like in those devision game clips BUT the final version looks like smoke effects from the ps3[/quote]

This game does not have a problem with textures in general... Go play Crysis 3 on Ultra and complain about the textures. Even on Ultra there are less than perfect textures. Killzone looks fantastic for a console game, and overall, it probably looks better than Crysis 3. I've been playing that on a GTX780 HOF at higher than Titan speeds. If you're going to be that picky about about a console game then you should fork out the cash for an Ultra PC and quit playing console games. I found plenty of imperfect textures in Crysis 3 Ultra.

spacemanjupiter

Commented on 2014-02-09 11:32:25

I'm torn.. first time really. Consistent 30fps is just that. Never drops from what i have seen. But, I may actually be willing to deal with the micro stutter and higher FPS. It's most certainly higher than 30, and the beautiful detail of this game is more easily noticeable at higher frame rates, even if it is inconsistent. It's hard to choose really. FOCK. I'm thankful that the devs were caring enough to provide this option though. They really are determined to provide a high fidelity visual experience for us. I respect that greatly

In reply to

Arendhil

Commented on 2014-02-09 16:12:16

When will they release this for tomb raider aswell? or are we still in a pissing contest and happy that the ps4 is unlocked and running at more fps than the xbox one while ignoring the fact that it was a stupid decision and the frame drops are awful?

In reply to

raina

Commented on 2014-02-10 19:00:36 In reply to Arendhil

Posted by Arendhil

When will they release this for tomb raider aswell? or are we still in a pissing contest and happy that the ps4 is unlocked and running at more fps than the xbox one while ignoring the fact that it was a stupid decision and the frame drops are awful?

I would take 1080p 30fps with better gfx any day. They did not any extra gfx affect on PS4 but by default PS4 version runs the game so easily compared to XO. The difference is more than xbox to PS2. 60 fps in games is overrated I will take better gfx at fixed 30fps like last gen. Only Gow games where more than 30fps is good and variable fps works fine. They always do great job with fixed cam, gfx and fps.

In reply to

Akumajo

Commented on 2014-02-11 02:26:42

Its a launch title...eventually as both consoles mature...or at least in theory I would say this is just trivial.

In reply to

alucard0712

Commented on 2014-02-11 12:30:50

I think most people don't understand why you need to lock frame-rate on ether 30 or 60fps.

That's because otherwise you are displaying variable frame-rate on FIXED refresh rate (60, 120hz etc). So motion on screen become varied and your brain constantly tries to adopt. Not a good thing. If you notice it once that's never be a turning back. Especially on consoles. Developers are not stupid, that's why they choose 30 fps, and not 35 or 45 fps as main target. Most of TV's and monitors are 60hz (or multiply of that)

So if it's under 35-45 fps it will be always better to fix it to 30. Until G-SYNC or same technology will built in on every TV, monitor at least.

In reply to

raina

Commented on 2014-02-12 12:41:04 In reply to Akumajo

The fact of the matter. Is KZ:SF was always meant for 30fps like most games. However due to cod and bf they decided to run the. Game lot higher so late in dev because they could. PS4 has so much left in it. Same with tomb raider I guess. 1080p 30fps should be the norm

Posted by Akumajo

Its a launch title...eventually as both consoles mature...or at least in theory I would say this is just trivial.

The difference is considerable not only on paper but in games too. In fact more than what people expected.

In reply to

rob_316

Commented on 2014-02-12 13:45:00

Its true what Marklola said about the textures in Killzone. The graphics are great, but the textures dont look sharp enought. I have here also the new Tomb Raider Game, Definitive Edition for PS 4, and the textures looks much better compared to Killzone. A lot sharper and more details. Everyone who compared the textures from both games, will see the big difference.

In reply to

hijab

Commented on 2014-02-12 20:55:25

Good and bad textures are there in every game. I wonder if there will be a gta5 PC and next gen version version announced soon like tomb raider. That would be cool even if locked at30. Bump in res and textures should be good. I have not even played it so far.

In reply to