LOL. Mafia III is a 30FPS locked POS

[bystander36]

Don't see the problem with games at 30fps. 'Tis what I cap me games at, and it ain't bad at all. Hell, Dark Souls has a 30fps cap and that game's pretty damn legit.

I just have to assume you have not spent much time gaming at 60 FPS for this to be acceptable to you. For myself, and many others, 30 FPS is vomit inducing. If I played a 1st person/over the shoulder view game at 30 FPS, within 30 mins, I'll be laid out on my bed trying not to vomit. It's pretty much like motion sickness to me and some others. Not to mention it's simply hard to use a mouse at such low FPS.

 

[MajinCry]

I just have to assume you have not spent much time gaming at 60 FPS for this to be acceptable to you. For myself, and many others, 30 FPS is vomit inducing. If I played a 1st person/over the shoulder view game at 30 FPS, within 30 mins, I'll be laid out on my bed trying not to vomit. It's pretty much like motion sickness to me and some others. Not to mention it's simply hard to use a mouse at such low FPS.

No trouble with that on my end. Like, if I had a super clocked i7 2600, yeah alright I'd be playing on 60fps. But eh, 30fps just ain't that bad. I think you might have a mucked up monitor or somethin'.

 

[Thinker_145]

I don't know how the first point leads to the second. I play quite a few games with a PC hooked up to my TV and with a gamepad and I much prefer 60fps to 30fps 😛

I never said that 60FPS isn't better! But if I have no option but 30FPS and I like the game then I will play it.

Sent from my HTC One M9

 

[Thinker_145]

I just have to assume you have not spent much time gaming at 60 FPS for this to be acceptable to you. For myself, and many others, 30 FPS is vomit inducing. If I played a 1st person/over the shoulder view game at 30 FPS, within 30 mins, I'll be laid out on my bed trying not to vomit. It's pretty much like motion sickness to me and some others. Not to mention it's simply hard to use a mouse at such low FPS.

You assume wrong. I can't say anything about your medical condition.

I assume you either weren't part of PC gaming back then or you never played the original Crysis for several years. We all played it at 30FPS mostly.

Sent from my HTC One M9

 

[psolord]

patience my friends

http://kotaku.com/mafia-iiis-framerate-is-capped-on-pc-but-devs-say-that-1787498660

 

[bystander36]

You assume wrong. I can't say anything about your medical condition.

I assume you either weren't part of PC gaming back then or you never played the original Crysis for several years. We all played it at 30FPS mostly.

Sent from my HTC One M9

I did play in those days and I didn't play many FPS games. I did play Far Cry and Crysis. Both games required me to play in short spurts. Crysis wasn't as bad as Far Cry, as tech was getting faster then, and with lowered settings, Crysis gave me better FPS. It wasn't until I started playing at higher FPS, that I realized that low FPS was the cause of this issue. I also knew quite a lot of gamers in MMORPG's that never played FPS, because they too had nausea issues when playing them. I wonder just how many people won't play first person shooters due to nausea, who could play them with higher FPS. I know a few that can after learning that it helped a ton.

I'm sure you are aware of VR now, and the near requirement for 90 FPS. It's the same thing for many people with any 1st person experience, VR or not.

 

[Thinker_145]

I did play in those days and I didn't play many FPS games. I did play Far Cry and Crysis. Both games required me to play in short spurts. Crysis wasn't as bad as Far Cry, as tech was getting faster then, and with lowered settings, Crysis gave me better FPS. It wasn't until I started playing at higher FPS, that I realized that low FPS was the cause of this issue. I also knew quite a lot of gamers in MMORPG's that never played FPS, because they too had nausea issues when playing them. I wonder just how many people won't play first person shooters due to nausea, who could play them with higher FPS. I know a few that can after learning that it helped a ton.

I used to have issues with headaches from certain first person games. Fortunately they disappeared all by themselve.

Mafia 3 is not a first person game and you absolutely don't need to and should actually not be playing it with a keyboard mouse.

Sent from my HTC One M9

 

[bystander36]

I used to have issues with headaches from certain first person games. Fortunately they disappeared all by themselve.

Mafia 3 is not a first person game and you absolutely don't need to and should actually not be playing it with a keyboard mouse.

Sent from my HTC One M9

As I said in my first post, 1st person and over the shoulder view games cause the issue. Though over the shoulder games aren't as bad. It's just difficult to write "1st person and over the shoulder view games", over and over, so I just stick to first person view when talking about it.

And while you may have grown up on playing with controllers, I did not, and much prefer a mouse and keyboard(G13 game pad actually). I like the mouse for my primary aiming device. That's one of the reasons I prefer a PC and not a console.

Edit: Out of curiosity, about those headaches that cleared up on their own...have you considered that they cleared up due to a hardware change? Perhaps because you have higher FPS now, or started using a controller instead of a mouse, or perhaps some other change?

 

[IllogicalGlory]

When will devs figure this s*t out? It's such a basic thing, 60 FPS and real resolutions for the PC version is all you need. They could have saved themselves from so much rabid controversy, which I'm also getting tired of, if they just delayed the PC version by a couple of weeks to get that stuff sorted out. People would be miffed about the delay, but the backlash would be like 1/100th of the backlash for this.

 

[escrow4]

I posted a thread on the so-so at best graphics that had few responses. Now this. This spent YEARS in production and Day 1 its stuffed. There isn't a single PC gamer on this planet who chooses 30FPS by choice unless they are running a potato and somehow ain't buying a console.

 

[Raduque]

When will devs figure this s*t out? It's such a basic thing, 60 FPS and real resolutions for the PC version is all you need. They could have saved themselves from so much rabid controversy, which I'm also getting tired of, if they just delayed the PC version by a couple of weeks to get that stuff sorted out. People would be miffed about the delay, but the backlash would be like 1/100th of the backlash for this.

The biggest issue is that devs are targeting the Consoles and then doing the PC as a port or afterthought. If PCs were the target platform, these type of problems wouldn't exist.

 

[IllogicalGlory]

The biggest issue is that devs are targeting the Consoles and then doing the PC as a port or afterthought. If PCs were the target platform, these type of problems wouldn't exist.

My observation is that it appears the industry will never learn that if you mess up the PC version, everyone on the internet mercilessly rips the game apart, permanently damaging the game's image. Once you get those mixed reviews on Steam, you're in trouble. Targeting consoles is not a suitable reason for this sort of screwup, because doing something like this harms the company far more than either delaying it/not putting it on PC/making it a timed console exclusive. I simply don't understand how studios let this happen.

"Targeting consoles" doesn't suitably explain how this release slips through the cracks. It's a pretty important version of the game and almost literally doing anything else is a better choice.

 

[Raduque]

Most likely the developer wants to do a PC-centric release, but are told by the publisher: Make it for the consoles first. "They sell more copies" "People will just pirate on PC". Etc, etc.

 

[AtenRa]

30 fps is crap. Maybe in Civ 5 it is okay. I can't play console games, because 30 fps is crap.

I have put countless hours with countless different hardware to Civ (ALL CIVs) and i can tell you you need at least 45fps to get a free stuttering gameplay(for larger maps). But i have played other games like Formula 1 that 30fps is fine.

For late 2016 PC game it is unreasonable to have a 30fps cap or any fps cap in the game. Lately im starting to believe that devs deliberately sabotage PC ports in order to sell more copies in Consoles.
Also, and this goes for any PC game, I refuse to pay the same price for the same game as Consoles. PC games used to be cheaper than the Console equivalent, simple because Consoles cost far less. So lately I find it not worthy to buy a PC game at the same price as the Console when i have spent 2-3 times the price over the Console hardware to build a nice Gaming PC, just to have the same Game experience as the Consoles 30-60fps caps etc etc.

 

[SPBHM]

I really don't have a problem with 30FPS, I think having the lock as an option is great, as long as it's well paced it feels fine and help with not so great hardware, but releasing a major title with 30FPS being mandatory is really puzzling, it's crazy to think that they thought it was good enough and people wouldn't complain and affect their sales significantly.
even if hitting 60FPS consistently is hard, you still benefit people with freesync and gsync by allowing them to run at 40-50 or whatever...

and I have a hard time believing their engine is just limited to 30FPS refresh and it would take major work to go beyond, it's possible, but unlikely at this point.

 

[finbarqs]

and 21:9 support is kind of there... Not really... The menus are totally fucked up...

 

[railven]

It is dreadful. Especially galling on PC where we are supposed to have a choice. As for DS, lol, playing that at 60FPS with the resolution turned up was a revelation. It was a completely different game. And yes, the framerate in that game hurt the gameplay. You can't tell me you didn't find Blighttown to be a near disaster running at or below 30FPS at times with the hostile enemies and environment. It would have been so much more enjoyable to play that section of the game at 60FPS+.

As someone who got to Dark Souls 1 on PC long after the mods, and patches, the frame limit remover actually did change the game. It made it worse, for me. It reduces your weapon durability, it changes the timing for evasion and reduces your invincibility frames, it shortens the length of your roll and jump, and worse by changing the animation and hit detection you get nailed by swings/actions you aren't even in the line of anymore.

I'm glad you mentioned Blighttown because there is a short cut there that requires a jump. I missed the jump 9/10 with 60 FPS, at 30 FPS I nailed it every single time. Same with trying to get up to the bird to get back to the asylum. The expletives I screamed when I'd watch some youtuber "just roll onto the platform" and I'd fall every single time not understanding why.

TL;DR:
DS1 actually benefits more from 30 FPS. At least if you don't want to get frustrated with random deaths at attacks you could have sworn you dodged.

I'd take DS1 30FPS over 60FPS any day. Resolution mod, you got that right. 720p native is HORRENDOUS and DS1 is actually beautiful when not restricted to such a low resolution.

However, to your actual stance - I'd take 60 FPS any day of the week if it doesn't break game mechanics (NFS, I'm looking at you!)

(but now with G-sync, I find 32 FPS more than acceptable haha).

 

[jpiniero]

My observation is that it appears the industry will never learn that if you mess up the PC version, everyone on the internet mercilessly rips the game apart, permanently damaging the game's image. Once you get those mixed reviews on Steam, you're in trouble. Targeting consoles is not a suitable reason for this sort of screwup, because doing something like this harms the company far more than either delaying it/not putting it on PC/making it a timed console exclusive. I simply don't understand how studios let this happen.

Contractually obligated? Same thing with Arkham Knight.

 

[DamZe]

I am quite frankly shocked at what I read around here, 30FPS acceptable? I thought this was supposed to be an enthusiast PC forum? 60FPS in PC land is widely recognized as the bare minimum for an enjoyable experience, and if you can't hit that, then you lower your settings, but 60+FPS is the standard here. You cut that in half and you have a slideshow. 30FPS on PC is sacrilege unless you play in 4K with everything maxed out, but even then you would lower your settings to get more responsible gameplay. 2K messed up here big time.

 

[Arachnotronic]

I am quite frankly shocked at what I read around here, 30FPS acceptable? I thought this was supposed to be an enthusiast forum? 60FPS in PC land is widely recognized as the bare minimum for an enjoyable experience, and if you can't hit that, then you lower your settings, but 60+FPS is the standard here. You cut that in half and you have a slideshow. 30FPS on PC is sacrilege unless you play in 4K with everything maxed out, but even then you would lover your settings to get more responsible gameplay. 2K messed up here big time.

60fps really is the bare minimum. I would turn down settings/resolution to ensure smooth 60fps+.

 

[bystander36]

As someone who got to Dark Souls 1 on PC long after the mods, and patches, the frame limit remover actually did change the game. It made it worse, for me. It reduces your weapon durability, it changes the timing for evasion and reduces your invincibility frames, it shortens the length of your roll and jump, and worse by changing the animation and hit detection you get nailed by swings/actions you aren't even in the line of anymore.

I'm glad you mentioned Blighttown because there is a short cut there that requires a jump. I missed the jump 9/10 with 60 FPS, at 30 FPS I nailed it every single time. Same with trying to get up to the bird to get back to the asylum. The expletives I screamed when I'd watch some youtuber "just roll onto the platform" and I'd fall every single time not understanding why.

TL;DR:
DS1 actually benefits more from 30 FPS. At least if you don't want to get frustrated with random deaths at attacks you could have sworn you dodged.

I'd take DS1 30FPS over 60FPS any day. Resolution mod, you got that right. 720p native is HORRENDOUS and DS1 is actually beautiful when not restricted to such a low resolution.

However, to your actual stance - I'd take 60 FPS any day of the week if it doesn't break game mechanics (NFS, I'm looking at you!)

(but now with G-sync, I find 32 FPS more than acceptable haha).

Your post is about poor coding problems, rather than the benefits of 60 FPS on its own. Assuming the games engine performed properly at 60 FPS, I have a hard time imagining 60 FPS wouldn't be much better in every aspect.

 

[2is]

Nope. If I had an i7 2600k, I might try for 60fps, but man, 30fps ain't anywhere near as dreadful as people keep talking about.

'Course, there are a couple games that use an awful timer in their renderer, making 30fps feel janky, but they're exceptions. Most notable one would be Mount And Blade.

It's just as dreadful as people make it seem when you know better.

There are exceptions, slower paced games are livable with 30fps but still nice to have the fluidity of 60+

 

[MajinCry]

It's just as dreadful as people make it seem when you know better.

There are exceptions, slower paced games are livable with 30fps but still nice to have the fluidity of 60+

Been playing New Vegas, Skyrim, Fallout 4 'n' Dark Souls with a 30fps cap just fine. Emulators do fine with that as well, so I can't say I understand all the hubbub.

Edit: Brain fart, me Dolphin games were running at 60, not 30.

 

[2is]

Been playing New Vegas, Skyrim, Fallout 4 'n' Dark Souls with a 30fps cap just fine. Emulators do fine with that as well, so I can't say I understand all the hubbub.

Edit: Brain fart, me Dolphin games were running at 60, not 30.

That was my point

 

[DeathReborn]

I got the game for less than £15 on the 7th and the graphics reflect that price. I wouldn't have paid full price for it anyway based on pre-release footage. It's all washed out, blurry & fairly low res textures.