Do you think The Order: 1886's resolution at 1920x800 30 fps is a technical limitation or an aesthetic choice?

dumb thread because there's only a single legit answer

lmao "cinematic feel". What a horseshit excuse.

Obviously a limitation. It's like saying you prefer not to have two legs because you can hop with just one.

I think its a shitty aesthetic either way

Thank you for your vote, and for your meaningful and insightful contribution to this topic.

Why not both?

thank you for contributing to the trollbait of this forum

@wis3boi: no problem!

They want it to be cinematic! Duh!

^^ This.

Although, It still looks like how Gears of War 4 SHOULD look.

I think the aspect ratio is an art direction choice they made very early in the development so everything was developed around that. It just so happens that requires less pixels.

As for the 30fps thing? It was most likely their original tech goal as they were building their engine on the PS4 for the first time. Instead of setting the bar too high with framerate, they decided to go all in on graphical fidelity instead of trying to balance 60fps while pushing their rendering. It's easier to push rendering when you don't have that goal.

That said the guy should just shut his mouth about 24, 30, and 60 fps. Higher FPS will always be better for games no matter what.

It's clearly a technical limitation.

this^

the framrate is still bad which is why we haven't seen any gameplay yet or live demos and why it got delayed

I think it's both.

The Order 800p.

people have been fed 24-30fps for so long in film and tv, anything higher freaks them out

Of course it's an aesthetic choice just like Titanfall's 792p and Driveclub's 30 fps. Devs want those games to look/run that way. Duh!

lol at people thinking its technical limitation, just wait until u see uc4 graphics blow the order out the water

You don't have input into watching a film. It's purely pushing you video. You do not interact with it. Since we're interacting with video games, the higher framerate the more natural and responsive it feels.

Basically people are ignorant and a lot choose to stay ignorant if given the option.

PR bullshit that cows will eat up

Of course there's no way to prove this either way, but reducing the number of pixels to render is an easy and common trick to get games to run better without lowering the graphical fidelity. Adding black bars is the same concept as reducing the locked FOV in console games. If you take it from 75 to 65, you just reduced the number of pixels you have to render by almost 15% and it's not a change people will ever know about or notice in exclusive titles.

It's the way they want us to see it and by golly, that's ok!

FoV has nothing to do with the amount of pixels being rendered. Actually FoV doesn't change performance much if at all because of this. The amount of pixels stays the same if your FoV is at 55 or 110. Console games have lower FoV just because console devs build their games with the general rule that the person is 10 feet from the screen.

Black bars does mean less pixels they have to render though without having to use any up scaling. This means no artifact and image quality less that you get with up scaling.

Don't know and don't care. I only care that the game looks good, runs good, and is fun to play. If I cared about such trivial crap, I wouldn't even be considering a console at all and would stick to just PC.

i think their 1920x800 21:9 aspect ration was an aesthetic choice.
but this aesthetic choice yields a change to the rendering pipeline by dropping the size of the rendering res a bit, which would make rendering 'easier'. hence they can up the detail in the scene a bit relative to a full 1080p render.

-- iron mike tyson

Just look at the game and ask yourself honestly can the ps4 run that at 1080p and 60fps? Exactly.

Obviously a technical limitation, if they wanted to make it "cinematic" they would have made it 24fps.

Limitation.

You are quite mistaken on the technical aspects of FOV. Here'a a visual aid:

The performance impact of changing FOV can easily be noticed in PC games. Frame rate will start to decrease as FOV increases - it's not due to some dark magic at work, it's because the system is rendering more data. Go fire up a first or third person shooter on PC, crank everything up to maximum and set it to something like a 70 FOV. Now increase your FOV to 110 and see what happens.

The same effect can be noticed if you zoom way out in a strategy game like Total War. You just effectively increased your FOV.

exactly, and films have motion blur the smoosh the frames together.

I hear these new consoles are kind of shader limited. Removing half a million pixels probably helps.

@scottpsfan14: Yeah thanks I was editing my post when you were posting that, I misspoke.

@scottpsfan14 said:

@mikhail said:

@Wasdie said:

@mikhail said:

@Wasdie said:

I think the aspect ratio is an art direction choice they made very early in the development so everything was developed around that. It just so happens that requires less pixels.

Of course there's no way to prove this either way, but reducing the number of pixels to render is an easy and common trick to get games to run better without lowering the graphical fidelity. Adding black bars is the same concept as reducing the locked FOV in console games. If you take it from 75 to 65, you just reduced the number of pixels you have to render by almost 15% and it's not a change people will ever know about or notice in exclusive titles.

FoV has nothing to do with the amount of pixels being rendered. Actually FoV doesn't change performance much if at all because of this. The amount of pixels stays the same if your FoV is at 55 or 110. Console games have lower FoV just because console devs build their games with the general rule that the person is 10 feet from the screen.

Black bars does mean less pixels they have to render though without having to use any up scaling. This means no artifact and image quality less that you get with up scaling.

You are quite mistaken on the technical aspects of FOV. Here'a a visual aid:

The performance impact of changing FOV can easily be noticed in PC games. Frame rate will start to decrease as FOV increases - it's not due to some dark magic at work, it's because the system is rendering more pixels. Go fire up a first or third person shooter on PC, crank everything up to maximum and set it to something like a 70 FOV. Now increase your FOV to 110 and see what happens.

Actually it's due to more geometry on screen not pixels.

This. It's more geometry, more effects, more particles to render, more lighting and shadow calculations, etc.

Even for 10 feet, I feel the 65 degrees (sometimes less!!) on consoles is pretty weak sauce, and it's the performance hit that prevents devs from putting it higher.

@Kinthalis: Thanks for helping me put that into words! You put it a lot better than I did.

In the case of The Order, in my opinion the black "cinematic effect bars" are serving exactly the purpose as lowering the FOV - it's less taxing on the system.

It's obliviously a technical limitation with bullshit being spouted in the hope you are some sort of fucking moron.

If people seriously don't understand the difference between something running at 30 and 60 fps when it comes to the whole "cinematic" thing, I have no idea what to tell you. That's like way beyond what I can be bothered to explain to anyone, since it should be common sense to anyone with eyes in their head.

Ever watched those Hobbit movies at 60 fps or whatever they were running in? Looked like a fucking soap opera. That's what 60 fps does to the "cinematic feel".

interesting talk about fov. never really thought about it tbh.

Limitation. If you believe into pr aesthetic 'choice' you should google PR. Nothing including 100% of the movies is better in 1920x800 over 1920x1080

Movies ARE NOT the same as games...you watch movies, and interact with games, Frame rate has a huge impact on how responsive a game is and how smooth it feels, not to mention immersion. Higher FPS in games is always preferable to lower FPS.

@mikhail said:

You are quite mistaken on the technical aspects of FOV. Here'a a visual aid:

The performance impact of changing FOV can easily be noticed in PC games. Frame rate will start to decrease as FOV increases - it's not due to some dark magic at work, it's because the system is rendering more data. Go fire up a first or third person shooter on PC, crank everything up to maximum and set it to something like a 70 FOV. Now increase your FOV to 110 and see what happens.

The same effect can be noticed if you zoom way out in a strategy game like Total War. You just effectively increased your FOV.

Actually that's mitigated by changing LoD at various FoV's, not really an issue. You don't need to render as much detail on distant objects at a higher FoV as they would be too small to see unless you cranked up the resolution. Also the impact is minimal even in BF4, maybe 1-5 FPS going between extreme FoVs at high resolutions. Something like a change between 60 to something reasonable like 90 doesn't affect framerate at all. The actual shading of the pixels is the most intensive part of rendering. I understand how FoV works, but it's not nearly the performance hit that increasing resolution is.

Games usually don't use that aggressive of culling where the processing stops rendering exactly at the edge of the FoV. So even console games are doing the work on pixels they don't show. Aggressive culling can end up with a lot of issues and a lot of its own performance problems with the CPU. This is why FoV doesn't hurt framerate that much. The system is already doing the calculations on the geometry.

yeah, absolutely man. definitely worth quoting so it shows up in the thread again.

Yup that must be it...

Yes i know it's sarcasm :P

I have no doubt its due to technical limitations.

Why is it you guys can't understand, it's BOTH? Just like the devs have said.

They chose the resolution they did because of the look they were going for. Because of that aspect ratio, they were able to push the performance of the game further than if it were a full 1920x1080 frame.

The devs have said all of this. Yet some here can't wrap their heads around such a simple matter. Their argument (I guess?) is that they tried to make the game full 1080p, failed, and decided to cut the aspect ratio to make up for it. Now THAT's stupid, and it's a moronic assertion. It's like you're all 12...

Which would matter in a game like Unreal Tournament or any other online-centered shooter. That's (clearly) not what this game is. And even if that was the case, plenty, if not most, games in the past have been running at 30 fps without it being impossible to play on the harder difficulty levels. The game is going for a cinematic feel so the whole game vs. movie thing you're trying to set up there doesn't apply. This is obviously not a game where split-second reflexes will matter that much.

Also, movies aim for immersion too but that doesn't mean that something like 60 fps is something they use, simply because it makes stuff look downright cheap (again, just look at the Hobbit). A game does not become more "immersive" simply by turning the framerate up and it definitely doesn't become anymore cinematic feeling.

@001011000101101: When you have some time, please watch the video I linked. If you can open your mind to the possibility that you're wrong, you may actually learn something.

@001011000101101: You're wrong.

You aren't watching games, you're playing them and they do not have any natural motion blur based on a scattering of photons hitting the film while the shutter is open like in real cinema. You're inputting and getting a response back in the from of a fully rendered frame based upon your inputs. The closer they get that 1:1, the better. Even 60fps isn't 1:1 and one day we'll be playing standard at 120hz or 240hz. Anywhere closer to 1:1 from input to render is better.

"Cinematic" feel doesn't mean the game has to feel sluggish. Running at 30fps a game feels sluggish and has a noticeable disconnect between input and render. This can be mitigated in a few ways but is never fully removed. The only way to make it feel proper is to get that 60 fps or higher.