The elephant in the room: bad frame rate

[SlipZtrEm]

Gt5 has a subtle frame rate lost...

You consider a game that manages to lose 50% or more of its frame rate at any time "subtle"?

GT5 NEVER TRIED to achieve 60 FPS in the rain

Source?

it was a STABLE 25-35 FPS.

How can it be stable when it's fluctuating, just in this example you've provided, by well over 30%?

Now imagine the Frame rate fluctuating between 25 and 60 every second.

I don't have to imagine fluctuations. I can just load up a full field of competitors at the N24 layout in the rain in GT5 to see it.

 

[HuskyGT]

I honestly never found GT's frame rate issues a real problem. If you've played Shift or any other half-backed NFS title then you'll notice what frame rate drop really is.

I previously played in 1080p back in the GT5P times. I only noticed a slight vibration in the screen, but it almost didn't seem like a frame rate drop. I've been playing at 720p since GT5 and except in some situations like being at the back of a full grid at the Nurburgring with heavy rain and semi-dark conditions, the game runs smoother than anything else I've played.

 

[huskeR32]

The only time I ever noticed issues on GT5 was using the X2010 at Nurburgring. And even though I noticed it, I can't say it really bothered me too much.

I should also add that I'm nowhere near a videophile. I could still pop GT3 in and be amazed at how good it looks to me (not to say I can't see a difference between GT3 and GT5 ). I'm sure that to people who are much more attuned to such things, frame rate drops can be very bothersome. I just personally don't really ever notice it.

 

[elston87]

My Daewoo is immune to this stuff.

#CRTFTW

P.S. I don't really notice.

Nice. I use a CRT myself capable of HD resolutions. As for the frames dropping, it only seemed to happen to me during a race with nothing but premium cars, me playing on 720p of course. It didn't really hamper my experience. The GTA2013 demo played fine also. I hope that GT6 remains consistent.

 

[ICEMAN_ZIDANE]

It runs at 60fps in nearly all situations of a single car on a non-weather, non-adjustable-time track. Throw a field of cars in there, or weather, and it will usually fall, though not nearly as much as if you combine all of those, obviously.

It's fine that some people don't notice frame rate issues - but that doesn't mean they somehow don't exist. As appealing as the idea is that not seeing a problem means there isn't one...

I personally never noticed a Frame Rate drop. But watching these Videos , i can definetly say that it runs nearly in all situations between 55-60fpf , despite if with cars/weather or not!

But the Thread owner explains it like there would be constantly Frame Drops between 20 and 60. Thats how i think if i read his post.

I think that these Videos + my experience of playing GT 5 every day can't be wrong.

 

[tomkat492]

+1

Never even really noticed a frame rate problem in GT5 either. Maybe I pay too much attention to my driving.

I've been gaming since the 90s and I've never had these problems with frames that people always seem to bring up. If it's a framerate drop it's either due to my hardware (on PC), latency, or something that EVERYONE is experiencing because it's easy for something like a massive wreck to be a little more than these consoles are ready for. If everyone gets it equally it's just like, "Lolol, someone ate a massive amount of shxt."

Then again, I could just be an idiot. Who knows.

 

[azeeza]

youtube video locks at 30fps
but we can clearly see that the Framerate is bad at some point ( drop to 20-25fps ), the cause can be the video encoding. GT5 never had this framerate, unless in rain condition ( 30fps average ) but in good condition, it never drops bottom 55 or 50fps.

 

[HKS racer]

For a game that focuses on physics, it's certainly important to have a stable framerate, though. If PD wanted to lock it at 30, 45, 60, or any other FPS, that'd be another matter. But a framerate that varies wildly, from 60 down to the 20's, can be quite a problem for a racing game.

The final build must now certainly be done, so we'll likely see from the reviews in the coming weeks if the issue has been fixed compared to GT5, or made even worse.

Exactly. Locking the frame rate is the KEY in racing games.

I've experimented this in rFactor a month ago, you can lock frames to desidered rate so I've tested different fps and come to the conclusion that a 45 locked frame rate is way WAY better and more consistent than a flutuating 45 to 60 frames per second, or even worse 35 to 60.

Because human eyes can immediately recognize the change in the sense of speed, the frame drop or stutter ruins the experience and immersion.

Instead locked frame rate increase it, even if they are not 60 fps your eyes get used to that sense of speed and consistency. You have to try yourself to understand.

 

[BrandonW77]

So wait....I spent 3 years playing a game that did not meet Proud_God's frame-rate desires? Even though GT has a far better frame-rate than any other console game....I find this to be wholly unacceptable and have cancelled all 3 of my GT6 pre-orders. In fact I think I will sell my wheel and my PS3's in protest.....that'll teach 'em!! Thanks a lot Obama Kaz.

 

[dr_slump]

In my experience, the frame rate is not that different when using 720p instead of 1080p. Presumably because 720p adds extra anti aliasing. I would gladly take a 720p mode with no AA and 60 fps. But I haven't seen that being announced for GT6.

You think that that will be cure for this? Hmmm I hope you´re right but I don´t think so...

Analysis of the demo version showed quite an improvement framerate wise in comparison to 1080p.

Can't remember where exactly I saw it, but I think it was another eurogamer video.

 

[azeeza]

Cancelling you preorder after seing a bad video encoding ? are you serious ? lol

 

[Bhowe83]

Cancelling you preorder after seing a bad video encoding ? are you serious ? lol

I'll fix it for you

<sarcasm> So wait....I spent 3 years playing a game that did not meet Proud_God's frame-rate desires? Even though GT has a far better frame-rate than any other console game....I find this to be wholly unacceptable and have cancelled all 3 of my GT6 pre-orders. In fact I think I will sell my wheel and my PS3's in protest.....that'll teach 'em!! Thanks a lot Obama Kaz. </sarcasm>

 

[nickg07]

I have seen slowdown on GTA 2013 mainly using the interior view. But certainly nothing that made me think twice about buying GT6.

 

[HKS racer]

So wait....I spent 3 years playing a game that did not meet Proud_God's frame-rate desires? Even though GT has a far better frame-rate than any other console game....I find this to be wholly unacceptable and have cancelled all 3 of my GT6 pre-orders. In fact I think I will sell my wheel and my PS3's in protest.....that'll teach 'em!! Thanks a lot Obama Kaz.

Unnecessary childish sarcasm. The frame rate stability is one of the most important things in ANY racing game/simulator. We can discuss this in the forum, can we?
We all have slightly different eyes, and visual acuity.

 

[FRoSTeD]

Unless the frame rate affects input or just completely slows to a crawl, I have no problems with it dipping a bit below 60fps.

That being said, GT5 has never dropped like that for me, and I hope GT6 doesn't either.

 

[SaulWolfden]

Unless the FPS is as obvious as the horrific frame rate in Blighttown *shudders* that was on the console version of Dark Souls, I won't have any issues.

 

[Sum1s2pid]

I wonder if PD will drop 1080p back down to 1280x1080 to eke out something more stable and call it a day. Longest. Two weeks. Ever.

 

[MX5Racer69]

I have not had any frame rate issues with GT5. There, I said it. As such, I don't expect to have frame rate issues with GT6. There, I said it again. If/when the game comes out and I have frame rate issues, I will share your angst.

 

[Proud_God]

To all the people saying they are not bothered by frame drops (and yeah, there are frame drops in GT5): maybe you have just gotten used to the situation, or you are bothered by them, but you can't pinpoint the issue? To put it in other words: I bet that if you could now play a hypothetical GT5 version with rock-steady 60 fps, you would probably say something like : 'whoa, can't put my finger on it, but it just feels better/smoother/more responsive,... than before'.
Well, I just hope my fears are not grounded and we can all play GT6 in glorious 60 fps.

 

[BrandonW77]

To all the people saying they are not bothered by frame drops (and yeah, there are frame drops in GT5): you are bothered by them on some level, you just can't pinpoint it. To put it in other words: if you could now play a GT5 version with rock-steady 60 fps, you would probably say something like : 'whoa, can't put my finger on it, but it just feels better/smoother/more responsive,... than before'.
Well, I just hope my fears are not grounded and we can all play GT6 in glorious 60 fps.

In three years of playing GT5 almost daily I noticed frame drops maybe a handful of times, it lasted a couple seconds and had no effect on my enjoyment of the game and it won't have any effect on my enjoyment of GT6. To expect a console with a measly 200mb of RAM (a small fraction of what my cell phone has) and 16 cars on track to be able to always hold a steady 60fps is a bit unreasonable in my opinion. Even if it has a momentary 30-40% frame rate drop it's still running at more FPS than other console racers. If this was on a high-end PC and it was experiencing less than 60fps then it would be an issue. If I was looking for any little thing to nitpick and complain about then it would be an issue. But considering I rarely notice it and it almost always exceeds my expectations of what's possible with this weak hardware, I'm really not bothered by it, even if some stranger on the Internet insists that I actually am bothered by it and just don't know it.

Now if you want to complain about the idiotic chase-the-rabbit racing format I will jump on that bandwagon with pitchfork and torch in hand!

 

[Proud_God]

In three years of playing GT5 almost daily I noticed frame drops maybe a handful of times, it lasted a couple seconds and had no effect on my enjoyment of the game and it won't have any effect on my enjoyment of GT6. To expect a console with a measly 200mb of RAM (a small fraction of what my cell phone has) and 16 cars on track to be able to always hold a steady 60fps is a bit unreasonable in my opinion. Even if it has a momentary 30-40% frame rate drop it's still running at more FPS than other console racers. If this was on a high-end PC and it was experiencing less than 60fps then it would be an issue. If I was looking for any little thing to nitpick and complain about then it would be an issue. But considering I rarely notice it and it almost always exceeds my expectations of what's possible with this weak hardware, I'm really not bothered by it, even if some stranger on the Internet insists that I actually am bothered by it and just don't know it.

Now if you want to complain about the idiotic chase-the-rabbit racing format I will jump on that bandwagon with pitchfork and torch in hand!

Yeah, I know, PD is pushing the limits of the now-ancient-hardware, we've all heard it before, we all know it. It's just that for me, PD was/is unrealistic in what they want to do with the PS3. Their starting point should be: 60 FPS (or hell, even a steady 30 fps would be better than what we have now), and then see what graphical enhancements they can add while maintaining that. If that means lower detailed car models, then so be it.

Note: the above is a sentiment I have towards a lot of game developers, not just PD: wanting too much from your hardware, in the end making a worse product (rockstar, anyone?)

 

[BrandonW77]

^ I fully agree with that and have made the same complaints myself many times. They set their goals too high, found themselves beyond the limits and then had to scale back. That's never the best way to do things. I'm sure the game would have still looked great at 30-40fps and would have allowed more flexibility with the rest of the game. The shortcuts/compromises they had to make due to their 60fps addiction have much more of a negative effect on the game than lesser frame rates would. They had to take away standing starts for Pete's sake, that means limits have been exceeded and the gameplay has been negatively effected.

I'd like to hope they freed up some resources by learning how optimize the game better for this edition, but I know even if they did they would find new ways to push it back to the limit and cause frame rate drops. Oh well, I'm really just in it to race the new circuits with my friends online and I'm sure it will manage that just fine.

 

[Imari]

So wait....I spent 3 years playing a game that did not meet Proud_God's frame-rate desires? Even though GT has a far better frame-rate than any other console game....I find this to be wholly unacceptable and have cancelled all 3 of my GT6 pre-orders. In fact I think I will sell my wheel and my PS3's in protest.....that'll teach 'em!! Thanks a lot Obama Kaz.

No. It doesn't. There are other games out there, racing games even, that are capable of holding 60fps.

GT has a lot of graphically challenging conditions in it, but those are a design choice. PD chose to sacrifice graphical stability for eye candy.

Some people prefer that. That's fine. But you can't claim that GT has a great frame rate, even compared to other games, because it just doesn't.

 

[Foxiol]

No. It doesn't. There are other games out there, racing games even, that are capable of holding 60fps.

GT has a lot of graphically challenging conditions in it, but those are a design choice. PD chose to sacrifice graphical stability for eye candy.

Some people prefer that. That's fine. But you can't claim that GT has a great frame rate, even compared to other games, because it just doesn't.

Remember that he said "console games"...now tell me racing games on consoles apart from Forza 4 or Gran Turismo 5 that runs nearly at 1080p with steady or close to 60FPS.

I´ll reply for you saying that "NONE" of them. All racing games and almost every other game on CONSOLES runs at 30FPS, all NFS from Most Wanted to Shift, Motor Storm, Nascar The Game, etc...Games are locked at 30FPS and if we talk about multi-platform the games looks horrible and perform as bad as they look, on PC you can max out any of them and have double the frames.

The number of games that runs at 60FPS are counted with the fingers of one hand on consoles...CoD for example (all of them count as one), Forza, GT, and maybe some 2D platformers which are not so graphically demanding?
So having in mind that, if you say that PD "sacrificed graphical stability for eye candy"...it shows that they made a great job having in mind that most of the other games can´t do that.

And compared to other games having in mind how the game is structured and that still there are people comparing GT5 graphics with newer games such as pCARS and Assetto Corsa (that looks quite impressive, I own both), I think they made a remarkable job.
There are a lot of CPU demanding stuff in the game such as day/night/weather cycles, the car physics even if they are not perfect, a lot of variables in the tyres (temperatures, when it gets dirt, etc), AI´s, when you have the car with damage ON and something breaks...etc. We got and we´ll get too much having in mind the hardware of the PS3.

They also probably tried to go way too far "for the eye candy"...yet they managed to achieve the goal...even with its flaws.

And for the last bit that you said about GT not having better frame rate compared to other games...for me it has better frame rates...above 30´s is always better.


The truth is that PD needs more power...PS4 hopefully will be the answer...hope they won´t go too far again because if you know something about PC hardware...the APU is not that powerful...they need to balance things up starting from simulation, game-play, features and graphics/sound.
I expect photorealism coming from them without a doubt at 60FPS 1920x1080p, but I will also love to see a 24 car starting grid at least, day/night/weather in all tracks, better physics and new content not recycled from the PS2 era.

Let´s see what happens...by now I´ll enjoy GT6 if the frame rate issues of the cockpit view from GT Academy were addressed.

 

[BrandonW77]

^that. No other console racer, save Forza, runs higher than 30fps. I never claimed GT has great, stable frame rate, just that they get a lot from underpowered hardware.

 

[Cosbuster]

The truth is that PD needs more power...

I would replace more power with more sense in that sentence. Nothing is stopping them from going all-out on the visuals again and neglecting other aspects even with 50x times the power. The PS3 has so much more power than the PS2 yet the performance actually decreased from previous games. Power alone means nothing.

 

[PepeMickey]

Forza 4 is as smooth as it gets on console. GT5 performed rather well but the GT6 demo was a complete disaster and the aliasing was almost obscene.

 

[Imari]

Remember that he said "console games"...now tell me racing games on consoles apart from Forza 4 or Gran Turismo 5 that runs nearly at 1080p with steady or close to 60FPS.

I´ll reply for you saying that "NONE" of them. All racing games and almost every other game on CONSOLES runs at 30FPS, all NFS from Most Wanted to Shift, Motor Storm, Nascar The Game, etc...Games are locked at 30FPS and if we talk about multi-platform the games looks horrible and perform as bad as they look, on PC you can max out any of them and have double the frames.

The number of games that runs at 60FPS are counted with the fingers of one hand on consoles...CoD for example (all of them count as one), Forza, GT, and maybe some 2D platformers which are not so graphically demanding?
So having in mind that, if you say that PD "sacrificed graphical stability for eye candy"...it shows that they made a great job having in mind that most of the other games can´t do that.

And compared to other games having in mind how the game is structured and that still there are people comparing GT5 graphics with newer games such as pCARS and Assetto Corsa (that looks quite impressive, I own both), I think they made a remarkable job.
There are a lot of CPU demanding stuff in the game such as day/night/weather cycles, the car physics even if they are not perfect, a lot of variables in the tyres (temperatures, when it gets dirt, etc), AI´s, when you have the car with damage ON and something breaks...etc. We got and we´ll get too much having in mind the hardware of the PS3.

They also probably tried to go way too far "for the eye candy"...yet they managed to achieve the goal...even with its flaws.

And for the last bit that you said about GT not having better frame rate compared to other games...for me it has better frame rates...above 30´s is always better.


The truth is that PD needs more power...PS4 hopefully will be the answer...hope they won´t go too far again because if you know something about PC hardware...the APU is not that powerful...they need to balance things up starting from simulation, game-play, features and graphics/sound.
I expect photorealism coming from them without a doubt at 60FPS 1920x1080p, but I will also love to see a 24 car starting grid at least, day/night/weather in all tracks, better physics and new content not recycled from the PS2 era.

Let´s see what happens...by now I´ll enjoy GT6 if the frame rate issues of the cockpit view from GT Academy were addressed.

You made my point for me by saying Forza. What did you think I was referring to? I see nothing where anyone said "except Forza". Therefore, GT does not have a "far better frame rate than any other console racing game".

If you want to be technical then Wipeout HD is also a racing game.

...if you say that PD "sacrificed graphical stability for eye candy"...it shows that they made a great job having in mind that most of the other games can´t do that.

Are you serious? EVERYONE can do that. But you don't see it because consoles don't have user tweakable settings like PC. Console games have their settings tuned to meet whatever target the developers deem acceptable. If they wanted the world's prettiest game that ran at 3 frames per second they could absolutely do it.

The truth is that PD needs more power

The truth is that PD have no idea how to work to targets, instead of just maxing everything. The PS3 isn't capable of doing what they want it to do. This likely isn't news to PD.

If you're them do you do your best to work around the limitations that you have to produce the best game possible on PS3? Or do you just throw everything and the kitchen sink in, and when people point out that it looks a bit dodgy complain that the hardware isn't good enough?

The hardware is a known factor. Smart devs work around it, bad devs blame it.

 

[avens]

Remember that he said "console games"...now tell me racing games on consoles apart from Forza 4 or Gran Turismo 5 that runs nearly at 1080p with steady or close to 60FPS.

I´ll reply for you saying that "NONE" of them.

All racing games and almost every other game on CONSOLES runs at 30FPS, all NFS from Most Wanted to Shift, Motor Storm, Nascar The Game, etc...Games are locked at 30FPS and if we talk about multi-platform the games looks horrible and perform as bad as they look, on PC you can max out any of them and have double the frames.

I immediately thought about Wipeout, which runs at 1920x1080 (what people refer to when saying "1080p") at rock solid 60fps. GT5 doesn't run at that resolution by any means whatsoever and isn't stable 60fps, especially GT5 1.00 (the one that counts, as it is the release date version) that had severe drops.

People really should stop thinking the GT series is the only franchise out there. Most probably there's at least three more examples of that on the very same genre and console generation that best GT5 smoothness-wise. Right now thought not researching I'm thinking about Mario Kart Wii (way inferior HW) and the Sonic racing games, both with solid looking graphics.

The number of games that runs at 60FPS are counted with the fingers of one hand on consoles...CoD for example (all of them count as one), Forza, GT, and maybe some 2D platformers which are not so graphically demanding?
So having in mind that, if you say that PD "sacrificed graphical stability for eye candy"...it shows that they made a great job having in mind that most of the other games can´t do that.

Following the previous line, it is not a good idea to make such general assumptions. If I had the time I could name 50, though you could be right - depending on how many fingers do you have.

Now, the thing is all consoles have their limits and all developers know that. While we all know PD did a great job, in the end the game could run at steady 60 fps if they sacrifice graphics, which isn't what they chose to do. I believe PD made the correct choice, but it is farfetched to say the not flawless fps is the PS3's (Sony's) fault because it is not.

Finally, PD did not release the most graphically impressive game on the PS3. Saying this just so the myth is (finally) debunked.


And to express my opinion, I'm not that much picky about fps rates on consoles -to me GT5 is more than fine- and I know the whole experience isn't optimal considering TV, input lag especially on consoles, game responsiveness and others; therefore there's no point in being picky in first place. 60 to 50 is acceptable; 60 to 30 isn't.

 

[Mr P510]

I really think the best thing we can do is wait to play the game for ourselves and make an Educated decision then as to weather the frame rate is satisfactory or not.

Till then...it's all speculation.