Roronaa_chan said:
Running at 30fps with rare drops to 20 is not running comparetively to "constant" 20fps (or less). Why would you expect more when games were already played at 60fps in the 90s and some of them with controls that would cause envy to some of the biggest games today. Nothing changed, we won't be demanding 120fps in 10 years and 240fps in 20 years, that's not how it works. You also don't need to go that far back, I already mentioned the Souls games. For being some of the most influential and critically acclaimed games today they performed poorly (Demon's souls dropped to sub 20 in the worse scenes, Dark Souls at least on 360 hovered around 20-25 most of the time even when nothing was going on) and the camera during boss fights is problematic as well. But who cares about these things when what they do right they do better than every single other game. It's negligble. |
It's because of a mentality like yours that game designers keep getting away with games that are poorly optimized. It's not negligble. Ueda needs to pay more attention to controls, camera and framerate and his games would be much better for it. Why settle for less? Dark Souls can be incredibly frustrating to deal with because of the framerate, so that's not a good example. Critics should become harsher, that's my whole point. I don't think Dark Souls deserves to be critically acclaimed at all.
Ocarina of Time was never this bad by the way:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQINg_uAGzE
"The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must" - Thoukydides