The Framerate Debate: Why Videogames Need To Take A Film Theory Class

Videogames, particularly AAA videogames, have been pre-occupied with Hollywood and its conventions in a way that has been detrimental to the form.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
SpiralTear1342d ago

This article manages to do very involved research into something that ultimately doesn't mean much in the context of games.

Games these days don't have 30fps because it's cinematic. It's not a creative choice; it's an excuse. They couldn't make 60fps, so gamers have to settle for 30fps. I don't think anyone in the community would openly desire 30fps over 60fps, even in a creative preference. Games are based around involving the player and the framerate discrepancies are noticeable because they impede the player's tactile actions, not because of cinematic direction. Also:

"if AAA games are going to continue to be half-movie and half-mechanics, this higher framerate also affects the way that their stories are being told"

We don't want that. We want games to be games. I took a class on media criticism, so yes, I know that various film techniques can affect how a story is told, but the "cinematic" aspect of games these days has been widely criticized, and it really has nothing to do with the story itself. A game like The Walking Dead had a fantastic story, but its framerate really didn't matter when compared to its stylized art or tight camera shots. If framerate meant anything, it's because it was consistent, not because it was super-smooth or "cinematic."

I commend this article for going deep in this subject, but the talking point of what framerate is more acceptable in games isn't even a debate at all.

Enemy1342d ago (Edited 1342d ago )

"Games these days don't have 30fps because it's cinematic. It's not a creative choice; it's an excuse. They couldn't make 60fps, so gamers have to settle for 30fps."

They very well could made a 60fps game, hence creative choice. They have the choice of either making a highly detailed AAA game, which will go down as one of the best looking games of the generation. Or they could make a 60fps game, which won't look anywhere near as good. The question is: Would you prefer graphics or frame rate? Most of the time, it boils down to having to choose one. It is a choice they make.

It will be an issue every generation. There will always be limitations in hardware.

IrisHeart1342d ago

"It will be an issue on every generation". You do know Tekken 3 on the PS1 ran at 60fps right? And that PC games for the last 8 years have mostly run at 60fps and looked great as well? Or that most of the exclusive WiiU games also run at 60fps and look pretty damn good?

The_KELRaTH1342d ago

A good choice would be one the consumer makes:

Click 1 for 30fps with more special effects
Click 2 for 60fps with less special effects

My choice would depend on the game but ultimately I'd opt with 60fps as I enjoy fps games.

Tibbers1342d ago

"Would you prefer graphics or frame rate?"
Frame rate.

WizzroSupreme1342d ago

Games with 30 fps are fine either way. It may not be as "cinematic" without the cinematography to back it up, but it doesn't crash as long as it's stable. It's 20 and below that creates problems. In my experience, 60 fps is more relevant if you're dealing with online multiplayer lag.

Minute Man 7211342d ago

As long as framerate is stable it doesn't bother me

landorb1342d ago ShowReplies(2)
Tibbers1342d ago

From her (the author's) twitter: "I think the ppl wanting to talk to me abt FOV sliders will benefit from knowing that I am talking abt games as art and not tech product"

"games as art and not tech product"

There's the problem. Game's aren't "just art". They're games, which are PLAYED by the player.

Spotie1342d ago

They're not static art, to only be experienced, but interactive.

Still art.

Show all comments (14)