goddamnit, Bizarre Creations has done it AGAIN....PGR4 only 30 FPS

but I suppose with THIS level of detail, 60fps would've been friggin
impossible

http://www.enregistrersous.com/image...0423104238.jpg



.................................................. ....................................
-in career you choose event from a large map similar to "tree" in
Ridge Racer
-driving model doesn't change fundamentally, but drifting is a little
easier
-it's more difficult to spin opponent's car with hitting his back
-you can create online cups
-200 courses
-Shanghai has the longest straights in MSR/PGR series plus wide roads
and loose corners
-puddles on the road while raining, ruts when it snow
-menus aren't static as in PGR3, now they're red-white and SSX-style
-intro is short, but very dynamic
-after finish cars doing donuts
-when you're doing good drifts on screen appears status like Sweet,
Dude, Awesome
-720p, 30fps, better textures and dynamic lighting
-every car is build-up with 70k-100k polygons
-in-car camera is hanging a bit lower than in PGR3
-more polygons on drivers, because of... it's secret for a while
-more spectators on tracks, they're more interactive, better animated,
and waving national flags
-up to now series had bad luck, PGR was a launch title on Xbox, PGR2
was developing while Xbox Live debuted, PGR3 was a X360's launch title
but now with PGR4 Bizarre could focus on gameplay, not on the
technical aspects and new technologies
.................................................. .................................................. ......

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=152222


I don't blame I the Xbox 360 hardware. I blame the programmers.
they're not on par with
DICE (RalliSport Challenge 1, 2) or Sega Driving Studio (upcoming
Sega Rally Revo).

60fps with highly detailed graphics is possible. it was possible
LAST gen, and it's possible THIS gen.

but for most developers and most gamers 30fps seems to be "good
enough".


it does irritate me.

how come nearly every (99%) Namco & SEGA arcade game, from 1993-1994's
Ridge Racer and Daytona, upto the present, were 60 FPS ?

"AirRaid" <AirRaid1500@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177351287.976770.105450@n59g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
> but I suppose with THIS level of detail, 60fps would've been friggin
> impossible

Yeah because we all graphics is more important than gameplay.
Disappointing.

didnt make that much odds with the last one
"boodybandit" <allaboutgamez@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:zY2dnQoZHeYRl7DbnZ2dnUVZ_s-rnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> "AirRaid" <AirRaid1500@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1177351287.976770.105450@n59g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>> but I suppose with THIS level of detail, 60fps would've been friggin
>> impossible
>
> Yeah because we all graphics is more important than gameplay.
> Disappointing.
>
>

On Apr 23, 5:35 pm, "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote:
> "AirRaid" <AirRaid1...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1177351287.976770.105450@n59g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>
> > but I suppose with THIS level of detail, 60fps would've been friggin
> > impossible
>
> Yeah because we all graphics is more important than gameplay.
> Disappointing.



wrong. framerate ties into gameplay.

they're going for prettier graphics over better framerate / control /
gameplay.

"AirRaid 1500" <AirRaid1500@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177370686.087461.320720@e65g2000hsc.googlegr oups.com...
> On Apr 23, 5:35 pm, "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> "AirRaid" <AirRaid1...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1177351287.976770.105450@n59g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>>
>> > but I suppose with THIS level of detail, 60fps would've been friggin
>> > impossible
>>
>> Yeah because we all graphics is more important than gameplay.
>> Disappointing.
>
>
>
> wrong. framerate ties into gameplay.
>
> they're going for prettier graphics over better framerate / control /
> gameplay.

You have no clue what you're talking about. How is control and gameplay
harmed by framerate unless the framerate is jerky or below a tolerable
threshold? You're clueless if you think that a game with 60fps somehow has
better gameplay than if the game was 30fps.

On 23 Apr 2007 16:24:46 -0700, AirRaid 1500 <AirRaid1500@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 23, 5:35 pm, "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> "AirRaid" <AirRaid1...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1177351287.976770.105450@n59g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>>
>> > but I suppose with THIS level of detail, 60fps would've been friggin
>> > impossible
>>
>> Yeah because we all graphics is more important than gameplay.
>> Disappointing.
>
>
>
>wrong. framerate ties into gameplay.
>
>they're going for prettier graphics over better framerate / control /
>gameplay.

rubbish, it didn't affect PGR3 in the slightest, why would it affect
4?

the motion blur effect they utilised did a pretty good job of hiding
any framerate stutter that may have been evident, you'd imagine they'd
be employing the same technique in the new game too.
--

gamertag: Chrisflynnuk
http://live.xbox.com/member/Chrisflynnuk
Current eBay auctions: http://tinyurl.com/hutcb
360, DS, PS2 and Saturn Games For Auction.

I know when I'm playing Civ IV, I'm concerned about frame rate.

"John J" <this@isafake.email> wrote in message
news:%vbXh.27468$PV3.286694@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
>
> "AirRaid 1500" <AirRaid1500@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1177370686.087461.320720@e65g2000hsc.googlegr oups.com...
>> On Apr 23, 5:35 pm, "boodybandit" <allaboutga...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> "AirRaid" <AirRaid1...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:1177351287.976770.105450@n59g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>>>
>>> > but I suppose with THIS level of detail, 60fps would've been friggin
>>> > impossible
>>>
>>> Yeah because we all graphics is more important than gameplay.
>>> Disappointing.
>>
>>
>>
>> wrong. framerate ties into gameplay.
>>
>> they're going for prettier graphics over better framerate / control /
>> gameplay.
>
> You have no clue what you're talking about. How is control and gameplay
> harmed by framerate unless the framerate is jerky or below a tolerable
> threshold? You're clueless if you think that a game with 60fps somehow
> has better gameplay than if the game was 30fps.
>

In article <zY2dnQoZHeYRl7DbnZ2dnUVZ_s-rnZ2d@comcast.com>,
allaboutgamez@comcast.net says...
>
> "AirRaid" <AirRaid1500@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1177351287.976770.105450@n59g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
> > but I suppose with THIS level of detail, 60fps would've been friggin
> > impossible
>
> Yeah because we all graphics is more important than gameplay.
> Disappointing.
>
>
>

I'm sorry, but locked at 30fps works AWESOME. They proved it in PGR3. QQ
somewhere else, please.

> You have no clue what you're talking about. How is control and gameplay
> harmed by framerate unless the framerate is jerky or below a tolerable
> threshold? You're clueless if you think that a game with 60fps somehow has
> better gameplay than if the game was 30fps.- Hide quoted text -
>

In fairness games look smoother and are more responsive to input at
higher framerates (providing that the input devices are polled at a
higher framerate also).

id found what Quake input was more responsive up to 60Hz (I think it
was 60Hz anyway), but beyond that it became less responsive! This was
because the mouse / keyboard were polled at 60Hz and the game was
running at 70Hz (for example). This meant that sometimes a user would
give some input but the game would poll for input whilst the keyboard
was inbetween polling for input from the user!

I'm fairly sure that's right. It was a long time ago...

Kulgan.

On 25 Apr 2007 03:52:49 -0700, Kulgan <nickamckenna@gmail.com> wrote:

>id found what Quake input was more responsive up to 60Hz (I think it
>was 60Hz anyway), but beyond that it became less responsive! This was
>because the mouse / keyboard were polled at 60Hz and the game was
>running at 70Hz (for example). This meant that sometimes a user would
>give some input but the game would poll for input whilst the keyboard
>was inbetween polling for input from the user!
>
>I'm fairly sure that's right. It was a long time ago...

Mouse technology has moved on considerably since Quake.
--
Andrew, contact via http://interpleb.googlepages.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.