Useless gaming news & chatter

[MisterNoisy]

So it looks like the PC version of Mafia III may be locked to 30FPS.  Why this is so is anyone's guess, but they saved me $60 by doing it.  

You seriously think that won't be patched pretty quickly?

Those comments are pretty funny though, so thanks for a few minutes of chuckling at Internet retards.

Apparently the physics and animations are locked to framerate, so I don't know how quick/easy a patch to fix it will be.  On the bright side, by the time they do fix it it might be a bit cheaper.

[Sky]

I'll be surprised if I notice at all, honestly.

[Soulflame]

What's the problem with 30 FPS?  Isn't that at the edge of what the human eye can even notice?

[Sky]

UPDATE [10/6 / 6PM PT]: We currently have a patch running here at the studio that includes 30, 60, and unlimited frames-per-second options in the video menu, among other improvements for the PC version of Mafia III. We’re verifying the patch now to ensure everything is working as expected. If everything goes well, we expect the update to go live this weekend. We will be keeping the PC community up-to-date on the status of the patch throughout the weekend and thank you for all the feedback!

https://mafiagame.com/en/news/view/en-mafia-3-a-message-to-our-pc-players/

I wish the Internet could calm their goddamned tits.  

[MahrinSkel]

What's the problem with 30 FPS?  Isn't that at the edge of what the human eye can even notice?

No, 60fps is the minimum for that. 30fps is just above what the human visual cortex can consciously register, but still low enough that it will feel slow and chunky for the typical gamer in any kind of FPS.

--Dave

[MisterNoisy]

S'good that they've got a patch ready to go fairly quickly.  I'd imagine they didn't want to be the second 'Arkham Knight on PC' story and the Steam buyers were letting 'em have it with both barrels in the reviews.

I still don't know why they didn't delay the PC release for the couple of days it would have apparently taken to fix it - surely that would have gone over better than this did.

[Sky]

Sure, it's nice it's being patched. But the way it went down couldn't have been worse. A simple 'hey, it would really be nice if this was 60fps/unlocked like modern pc titles' would've been fine.

I'm really fed up with this whiny, irrational nonsense that seems to be getting worse thanks to these ever-present forums for commentary.

[apocrypha]

What's the problem with 30 FPS?  Isn't that at the edge of what the human eye can even notice?

No, 60fps is the minimum for that. 30fps is just above what the human visual cortex can consciously register, but still low enough that it will feel slow and chunky for the typical gamer in any kind of FPS.

--Dave

Argh, guys, this is just not how human eyes & brains work, there aren't limits like that. Around 60 fps things mostly look fluid to us, but we can still see differences between 60 and 120 fps for instance. Think of an object moving horizontally across your screen fast enough that it takes 1/6th of a second to cross. At 60 fps you'd get 10 frames of it which on a 24" monitor would put them about 2" apart spatially. At 120 fps there'd be 20 frames 1" apart, a difference our visual systems can spot, although the difference between 30 and 60 fps is much more noticable than between 60 and 120, especially if you're older.

This is why motion blur has become such a thing - it tricks our brain/eyes into not noticing the gaps between frames of fast moving objects and makes even high framerates look even smoother (if it's done well).

The whole 'we can only see up to x fps' myth is one that just won't die, and it irks me greatly that one of the top search results for it is a Nerdist piece that is terribly, awfully wrong and uses examples from film and things filmed with strobes to illustrate it's grossly erroneous suppositions.

</knee-jerk rant> 

[KallDrexx]

This is why motion blur has become such a thing - it tricks our brain/eyes into not noticing the gaps between frames of fast moving objects and makes even high framerates look even smoother (if it's done well).

With zero knowledge what so ever I'd be surprised if our eyes even work in frames.  I was under the impression it was just a literally constant stream of optical data with no pauses or breaks that we typically consider for frames, and the reason low framerates are noticable was because we are not used to having stuttered movement.

Also the funny thing about the myth that people can't see more than 30fps is laughable just if you think about how VR under 90fps makes people sick.

[koro]

I have a friend who was one of those staunch "FPS arguments are bullshit, 30 FPS is perfectly fine, you don't need 60" folks, until I sat her down in front of Dark Souls 1 with DSFix enabled, where you can swap from 30 to 60 FPS on the fly with the push of a button and let her see the difference.

"I had no idea" were the first words out of her mouth after a couple minutes of silence.

[Sky]

On the other hand, I played Mafia III for 2 hours last night and it was awesome.

Don't waste energy bitching about inconsequential things. I'm beginning to suspect everyone's favorite game is complaining.

[rattran]

Complaining about all the complaining is the meta-game.

[apocrypha]

With zero knowledge what so ever I'd be surprised if our eyes even work in frames.  I was under the impression it was just a literally constant stream of optical data with no pauses or breaks that we typically consider for frames, and the reason low framerates are noticable was because we are not used to having stuttered movement.

It's actually interestingly more complex than that, if you want a read there's a good section here, but for all practical purposes regarding gaming and watching films/TV then yes, that's pretty much how it works.

Of course something to remember is that most LCD/LED monitors and TVs are capped at 60 Hz anyway, although that's changing. And of course NTSC/PAL standards are 25/30 fps (and cinema film is 24 fps), but TVs have much greater persistence of image than monitors do which reduces the stutter effect you see at <60 fps in games.

FPS is something that we, as gamers, treat as a fundamental metric and yet it's incredibly poorly understood in general.

Aaaaaanyway, the Mafia III devs say there's a fix coming for PC.

[Sky]

Complaining about all the complaining is the meta-game.

I'm not unaware of this 

[Rasix]

On the other hand, I played Mafia III for 2 hours last night and it was awesome.

Don't waste energy bitching about inconsequential things. I'm beginning to suspect everyone's favorite game is complaining.

This is kind of a repeat of your No Man's Sky performance. People have a right to bitch. Your enjoyment of the game is not dependent on their acceptance of bullshit from devs.

Games can have problems, their devs can do shitty things, and you can still enjoy the game regardless. The bitching is fine and you're just white knighting another one of your game crushes.



edit: And yes, you can bitch about bitching. The great ouroboros of internet bitching lives on.

[Sky]

Honestly, it doesn't bother me that people complain about things, as you're correct, I can ignore that just fine.

But when they get out of hand and start downvoting the game and it has repercussions on game development, it bugs me. Rather than wait for a fix, they downvote a review. Will they later remove the bad kneejerk review? Give it a good review? Possibly, but I doubt it. And that's long-term worse for gaming than releasing a game that a small but vocal percentage of gamers has to wait a couple days to play 'properly'. Especially when it has monetary repercussions for folks who made a pretty darn good game.

Mafia III is a good game with a minor technical flaw that's already been patched internally. The outrage is unwarranted at the scale it's being unleashed at. This is a bad trend for gaming, because it's now being seen as the way to enact change.

Look at the tons of steam bad reviews with almost no playtime and citing 30fps. Which will be fixed in a couple days. Invalidating the bad review. You can't seriously think this is a good thing?

[Rasix]

It's the game they released. It's the game they gave for review and public consumption. It's on them.

[apocrypha]

Isn't the Steam change to showing recent reviews as a separate rating specifically meant to address that issue?

And if people don't complain in ways that affect developers about shit they don't like then how are developers ever going to try not doing shit that people don't like? Voting with your wallet and your review rating are the only options gamers have.

[MahrinSkel]

Apocrypha, I am fully aware that it isn't as simple as "Above magic number X you can't tell", and depending on what aspect of the process we call "vision" you focus on, FPS (and for that matter, pixel density and color depth) can have totally different attributes.

Point is, 30 FPS is way too damned low.

--Dave

[apocrypha]

Apocrypha, I am fully aware that it isn't as simple as "Above magic number X you can't tell", and depending on what aspect of the process we call "vision" you focus on, FPS (and for that matter, pixel density and color depth) can have totally different attributes.

Point is, 30 FPS is way too damned low.

--Dave

Sorry, it is a bit of a knee-jerk response with me because I've had so many arguments with people before who had read all kinds of utterly wrong shit off the internet.

And yes, a 30 FPS lock is not acceptable on a PC version, agree entirely.

[Ginaz]

So it looks like the PC version of Mafia III may be locked to 30FPS.  Why this is so is anyone's guess, but they saved me $60 by doing it.  

You seriously think that won't be patched pretty quickly?

Those comments are pretty funny though, so thanks for a few minutes of chuckling at Internet retards.

It is being patched this weekend to bring it to 60 fps but it would have been swell if they had mentioned it was capped at 30 fps beforehand, you know, when they were getting people to pre-order.  It's kind of shady not to mention it at all.

[HaemishM]

It is being patched this weekend to bring it to 60 fps but it would have been swell if they had mentioned it was capped at 30 fps beforehand, you know, when they were getting people to pre-order.  It's kind of shady not to mention it at all.

So much this. Outrage happens because devs aren't open with customers about shit that should be pretty easy to communicate and also important for a good portion of the player base.

[Kail]

Point is, 30 FPS is way too damned low.

It's fine.  It's what we played games at for decades, it's what consoles STILL typically run games at TODAY.  30 FPS is noticeable, but it doesn't make the game unplayable.  It's just what PC players latch on to as their "BETRAYAL" metric because stuff like polycount and texture resolution is hard to measure and we need SOMETHING to show we're better than the console plebs even though we get 95% of the same games.

If you prefer games at 60 FPS that's fine and I'm not saying you're wrong or anything, but let's not pretend that it's the ONE THING that defines these games as being worth buying or not.  It's getting silly.  Like half the reviews are just these masturbatory recitals of the make and model of the reviewer's video card, like we're supposed to be impressed at what a great guy he is to have such a PC and at the same time also outraged that his game is not living up to the exacting standards that such a superman deservedly holds.  I don't care about your computer, I want to know if the game is good, please.

[MisterNoisy]

Some reviewers definitely spend way too much time blathering about their hardware, but it's still nice to know what stuff they're using if they're talking about technical performance so I can roughly gauge what to expect on my own machines.

[apocrypha]

Mafia III patch 1.01 unlocks framerate. 60 FPS and unlimited options available. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

[CaptainNapkin]

Mafia 3 vs Mafia 2. Folks raging that this shows 3 is a downgrade from 2. 

[tmp]

Point is, 30 FPS is way too damned low.

I'll go out on a limb and admit in some/lot/most cases I actually prefer ~30 fps than 60+ because the latter I have hopelessly, unconsciously paired with the 'cheap, fake-looking tv-only show' vs cinematic feel of the 'real' movie shot with actual movie camera. Similar to how plenty people reacted to the 60 fps Hobbit.

But there's no denying the difference between 30 and 60 fps is easily noticeable.

[Sky]

Mafia 3 vs Mafia 2. Folks raging that this shows 3 is a downgrade from 2.  

No, those are honestly my list of gripes about the game (in fact, they missed a couple big ones like no garage). It's a good game and I'm loving it right now, but it's lost a lot of what made Mafia unique. I happen to love games with all those little touches, to me it all aids verisimilitude, which is important to me.

I felt Mafia 2 > GTA IV by a wide margin, but GTA wins this round with GTA V > Mafia 3.

I'm certainly not going to thumbs down a good game for that, but it's sad because I doubt those little touches will return to the series.

[MisterNoisy]

Mafia 3 vs Mafia 2. Folks raging that this shows 3 is a downgrade from 2.  

No, those are honestly my list of gripes about the game (in fact, they missed a couple big ones like no garage). It's a good game and I'm loving it right now, but it's lost a lot of what made Mafia unique. I happen to love games with all those little touches, to me it all aids verisimilitude, which is important to me.

I felt Mafia 2 > GTA IV by a wide margin, but GTA wins this round with GTA V > Mafia 3.

I'm certainly not going to thumbs down a good game for that, but it's sad because I doubt those little touches will return to the series.

This is a different studio than the one that made the first two, I think, so those things may be gone for good.

[Megrim]

So what's some good stuff to play on a tablet pc? I have come into possession of an older samsung something or other running windows 7, stylus, all the jazz, etc...

So far I have Darkest Dungeon. What else is good for this sort of device?

[apocrypha]

So what's some good stuff to play on a tablet pc? I have come into possession of an older samsung something or other running windows 7, stylus, all the jazz, etc...

So far I have Darkest Dungeon. What else is good for this sort of device?

Invisible Inc. works well, can be a bit clunky with right-clicking though.
X-Com: The Enemy Within is good, but hard work unless your tablet is a fucking monster.
Apparently Civ 5 also has a touchscreen mode but I had issues getting it to run at all, didn't like the high resolution of the SP3.
Guild of Dungeoneers works perfectly, kinda lightweight game though, but fun.

There's a list here of games that run on Surface tablets that might be useful.

[Ginaz]

So what's some good stuff to play on a tablet pc? I have come into possession of an older samsung something or other running windows 7, stylus, all the jazz, etc...

So far I have Darkest Dungeon. What else is good for this sort of device?

The new Shadowrun games work well on a tablet.  The first 2 are available, not sure about Hong Kong.

[Fabricated]

I'm playing through XCOM2 again with the DLC and Long War Studio mods.

The Alien Hunters DLC can eat a dick- holy shit are the Alien Rulers and their gimmick annoying. Basically forces you to run an A-team every mission until you kill them all, along with a grenadier-class rocking the Frost Bomb they're nice enough to give you. Basically you pray you can spot the fuckers early and bait them into a wall of overwatch fire, then freeze them and stack DOTs on them while hoping they waste their unfrozen rounds doing dumb stuff.

Shen's Last Gift has a cool mission and gives you a questionably useful SHIV replacement that is hilarious if you give it a specific voicepack (that is legit part of the DLC).

[Yegolev]

Everybody Loves Shen

[patience]

Point is, 30 FPS is way too damned low.

It's fine.  It's what we played games at for decades, it's what consoles STILL typically run games at TODAY.  30 FPS is noticeable, but it doesn't make the game unplayable.  It's just what PC players latch on to as their "BETRAYAL" metric because stuff like polycount and texture resolution is hard to measure and we need SOMETHING to show we're better than the console plebs even though we get 95% of the same games.

If you prefer games at 60 FPS that's fine and I'm not saying you're wrong or anything, but let's not pretend that it's the ONE THING that defines these games as being worth buying or not.  It's getting silly.  Like half the reviews are just these masturbatory recitals of the make and model of the reviewer's video card, like we're supposed to be impressed at what a great guy he is to have such a PC and at the same time also outraged that his game is not living up to the exacting standards that such a superman deservedly holds.  I don't care about your computer, I want to know if the game is good, please.

What we played for decades? Before 3D most games were 60 FPS. Even when 3D started to develop in the 90s the standard bearers of the best games were 60 FPS. It's during the middle of 2000 did games see a huge shift towards sacrificing performance for visual fidelity and even then graphic devs couldn't get it right. I remember a ton of people complaining about Bloom and now people complain about chromatic aberration.