WereKitten said:
First: this thread -and CGI's comments in the specific- was about visual technical prowess. That's why I said that you either bring the 60fps issue in the field of how it improves the visuals, or you accept that it went in the way of more sophisticated graphic effects. Saying that it's necessary for the MP experience is a red herring in this context, and I point to my previous post for the issue about its PC roots and its design goals. Second: no, that's not how it works. I don't have to disprove your theory about low latency being the key to better gameplay and then to sale success, you have the burden to prove it. And no, I don't even consider Halo and CoD and Trials HD proofs in this sense. GTAIV is culprit of 30fps -and not rock steady at that- and a high latency when shooting. So what? It was a blockbuster anyway. R&C always boasted a smooth 60fps action, and it sold ok but not in the same league. And more importantly, when you want to advance correlation hypothesis you should at least start by defining the terms you're using. The "latency" word you're touting as if it clearly meant something is actually quite devoid of a well defined value. Latency in what? The Gamasutra measurements and the DF ones were about the latency of some very easy "discrete" actions, such as shooting and jumping. That doesn't say much about the latency of other actions or more importantly the "feel" of movement and aiming. Which is much more about inertia and acceleration curves than the difference between shooting in 100ms (3 frames) in Halo 3 vs shooting in 133ms (4 frames) in KZ2 vs shooting in about 67ms in CoD. Frankly, the 1/30th of a second difference in shooting time between Halo and KZ2 isn't even close in my mind to what any reasonable person will find as a necessity for "good gameplay". Halo, CoD, KZ2 have very different gameplay styles differing in speed, immediatness, aim assist, matchmaking, multiplayer modes, weaponry, progression and ranking... I can find much more poignant commonalities between the gameplay of the two most successful franchises than being "low latency". |
He said technology. Furthermore what a lot of people ascribe to better technology is actually better artistry in games.
Just because the series has roots in the PC gaming space where framerate is more defined by the end user rather than by the developer, doesn't imply an automatic transition to 60fps. Most games which transition onto consoles, transition onto a 30fps framerate. Call of Duty is one of the only series which springs to mind which doesn't run at 30fps.
I don't have time to finish writing but as it stands its 70ms vs 150+ms. Then you add 2-3 frames for the TV's latency and you can have a difference of over 150ms. A lot of people will notice that and latency was one very importaint reason why Killzone 2's controls were panned.
Tease.