|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
DildoMcnutz
Science For Death
391
   |
Posted - 2014.01.02 10:51:00 -
[1] - Quote
Assuming the game is going to ps4/makes it to its next platform id say we are more likely to see 60 frames then than 30 frames now. Im no tech head but i would really like to know what is in this game that is stressing the ps3 enough to not be getting atleast 30 frames, there are countless other ps3 games that have better texture quality, more things happening at once, further draw distance etc and they have a way better frame rate than here. I am guessing poor optimization?
I remember reading the human eye wont really be able to see a choppiness of the frame rate until your getting lower than 22 frames, you basically can't even walk around without it stuttering so the current frame rate generally has to be below that. I would easily accept a downgrade of visuals or whatever for a stable 30 FPS. |
DildoMcnutz
Science For Death
391
|
Posted - 2014.01.02 11:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
Rei Shepard wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote:We shouldn't have to accept any kind of downgrade in visuals. The game already frankly looks really bad in a lot of areas. Though maybe the graphic slider options could downgrade things a bit further? I don't know, but I would use it a lot for PC. Try playing the game in 576p, takes me right back to 1995 graphics, but it at least gets me the minimum framerate i need to play this game at.
I might actually try this, it is already the worst looking ps3 game i own but if it helps with the frame rate and i can still see everything then why not. |
DildoMcnutz
Science For Death
391
|
Posted - 2014.01.02 11:59:00 -
[3] - Quote
Rei Shepard wrote:DildoMcnutz wrote:Rei Shepard wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote:We shouldn't have to accept any kind of downgrade in visuals. The game already frankly looks really bad in a lot of areas. Though maybe the graphic slider options could downgrade things a bit further? I don't know, but I would use it a lot for PC. Try playing the game in 576p, takes me right back to 1995 graphics, but it at least gets me the minimum framerate i need to play this game at. I might actually try this, it is already the worst looking ps3 game i own but if it helps with the frame rate and i can still see everything then why not. I specialise in cqc up to mid range, so it doesnt affect me that much but at long range youll be firing at moving pixels, but i am used to that aswell as in all competetive FPS games on PC since CounterStrike we turned down graphics to get stable framerates. Friend of mine tried it, he couldnt hit anything anymore, just because he couldnt see it, it's like the chevron change if you rely on scanners and squad vision, when it goes away, all of a sudden, yer blind.
+1 man, i mean it should be common sense that it would help but i have never really been arsed to try it, i didn't real feel ranged combat was much harder at all it was actually still really clear and definitely WAY smoother than it normally is. If it needs to look like the early resident evil games to get a good frame rate then so be it  |
|
|
| |
|