#1 Posted by 617_jbug (343 posts) -
#2 Posted by AlexGlass (688 posts) -

Excellent and never doubted it. The builds we have been seeing were from E3, so optimization, spec bumps, improved software tools. More than enough to get the game running smooth.

#3 Posted by Klei (1768 posts) -

What? 30 frames? Why not 60? We're talking next-gen, for fuck's sake.

#4 Posted by Animasta (14650 posts) -

@klei said:

What? 30 frames? Why not 60? We're talking next-gen, for fuck's sake.

there are a lot of zombies in that game yo. They all have AI, reasonably high def graphics... and it's a launch game.

#5 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -

To be expected with the amount of stuff going on "behind the scenes" in that game.
As long as it doesn't drop any it should be fine really, especially for a game like this.

#6 Posted by Blu3V3nom07 (4164 posts) -

Its an open-world game. Not a bro shooter.

#7 Posted by Yummylee (21295 posts) -
@animasta said:

@klei said:

What? 30 frames? Why not 60? We're talking next-gen, for fuck's sake.

there are a lot of zombies in that game yo. They all have AI, reasonably high def graphics... and it's a launch game.

Thisssssssssss. Plus there's no loading times within the world at that, so... give it a break.

#8 Posted by bigjeffrey (4809 posts) -

@klei said:

What? 30 frames? Why not 60? We're talking next-gen, for fuck's sake.

I know, if it's not 60 i dont even touch it.

#9 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -

@klei said:

What? 30 frames? Why not 60? We're talking next-gen, for fuck's sake.

I know, if it's not 60 i dont even touch it.

You missed out on a bunch of awesome PS1 and PS2 games that's for sure.

#10 Posted by Missacre (566 posts) -

Ew, 30 fps! A game like this should be at 60 precisely because of all the action.

#11 Posted by theveej (812 posts) -

I saw a stage demo of this at PAX and it looked really sharp (and amazing!). I would want 60 fps ideally, but it being a launch game combined with what they showed during that demo makes it almost impossible for them to pull off 60fps this early into next gen.

Honestly after that demo I went from never caring about any dead rising games, to being kind of excited for dead rising 3 and it being a potential game that might switch me over to xbox one (if its reviewed well).

#12 Posted by John1912 (1833 posts) -

I really fucking hate frame rate snobs. I can never take any of them seriously. I have never looked at a game running at 30 fps and lost my shit over it.

#13 Posted by KittyVonDoom (445 posts) -

Disappointing, expected more frames. 2/5

#14 Posted by pause422 (6172 posts) -

don't be a moron, some people actually can't stand 30 FPS much, and it really gets in the way of their gameplay. While plenty can, and some people can't even tell when it dips below that, your comment is completely ignorant of anything. Also, get over yourself.

#15 Posted by Krullban (1023 posts) -

Don't care.

#16 Posted by skelington_ (292 posts) -

Wow, they totally Xboned this one up.

Did you hear that, Micro$oft? Xboned. Because Xbone!

*guffaw*

#17 Posted by AlexW00d (6191 posts) -

@bigjeffrey said:

@klei said:

What? 30 frames? Why not 60? We're talking next-gen, for fuck's sake.

I know, if it's not 60 i dont even touch it.

You missed out on a bunch of awesome PS1 and PS2 games that's for sure.

As someone who can't help but post the most passive aggressive stuff, you sure missed out on the sarcasm there.

#18 Edited by AlexGlass (688 posts) -

@klei said:

What? 30 frames? Why not 60? We're talking next-gen, for fuck's sake.

We're talking current gen PC hardware actually, and 1.3/1.8 Tflops. That's half the TFLOPs of a GTX780 or 7970. They're console, not miracle machines. Just what do you expect out of these next generation consoles? I accepted it a long time ago. They're not that hot.

Don't get me wrong, devs will still get great looking games out of it, console development environment will help, and DR3 has a ton of enemies on screen and is basically an open world game but they're modest machines at best.

In addition, I just highly doubt you're going to see too many open world games running at 60fps. Even, next next-generation. 10 years from now, you'll still have 30fps games just because some games benefit more from graphics, physics, or more enemies on screen than frame rate. So unless we ever get to the point where developers have so much power they barely use up 50% of it, this trade-off will always be made(i.e. Probably never).

If you want 60fps as a baseline your best bet is cloud gaming. Turns out 60fps is beneficial to latency, so there devs might have a reason to shoot for 60 more consistently.

#19 Posted by iAmJohn (6110 posts) -

Yo guys, whether it's 30 or 60 fps is not the reason to worry about this game, I'm just saying.

#20 Edited by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -

@alexw00d said:

@zeforgotten said:

@bigjeffrey said:

@klei said:

What? 30 frames? Why not 60? We're talking next-gen, for fuck's sake.

I know, if it's not 60 i dont even touch it.

You missed out on a bunch of awesome PS1 and PS2 games that's for sure.

As someone who can't help but post the most passive aggressive stuff, you sure missed out on the sarcasm there.

You sure did

#21 Edited by bigjeffrey (4809 posts) -

@iamjohn said:

Yo guys, whether it's 30 or 60 fps is not the reason to worry about this game, I'm just saying.

What is there to worry about? Look like the past dead rising without the dumb timer. GOTY

#22 Posted by Hunter5024 (5553 posts) -

@klei said:

What? 30 frames? Why not 60? We're talking next-gen, for fuck's sake.

Developers will almost always choose pretty graphics over fps. I wouldn't expect 60 to be standard this generation.

#23 Edited by audioBusting (1481 posts) -

30FPS looks and plays fine with the motion blur and slow-ish gameplay the Dead Rising games have, in my opinion. Somewhat doubtful that they can maintain even that, though.

#24 Posted by tourgen (4432 posts) -

Well that's unfortunate but given Dead Rising's gameplay it doesn't really matter.

#25 Posted by benpicko (2001 posts) -

@klei said:

What? 30 frames? Why not 60? We're talking next-gen, for fuck's sake.

lel

#26 Edited by Darji (5294 posts) -

Looks like it is not locked at all and pretty rushed.

It's also unfortunate that the game runs at far from the promised locked 30fps - rather a chugging 20fps during the zombie action while out in the big city. Compared to the shaky E3 build seen just months ago this is still a respectable step forward, and of course many of the game's technical shortcomings come with the unique circumstances of meeting a hardware launch. All this amounts to an intriguing first attempt, then, but needless to say we're eager to see how Capcom Vancouver follows up on its sandbox survival-horror formula when it's given more breathing room with the deadline, more experience with the hardware, and factoring in the next-gen platform's strengths from the very start.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-dead-rising-3

If someone wants to open a Digital foundry thread you are welcome to do so.

#27 Posted by Nekroskop (2786 posts) -

@darji: Oh my god...This looks terrible. The frames drop to 16 at a point.

#28 Edited by Darji (5294 posts) -

@nekroskop: Yeah maybe it would have been better to delay this game a few months. This is really not a good showcase for MS or Capcom.

#29 Posted by SomeJerk (3158 posts) -

DriveClub ate the delay and that was a first party Sony deal, in order to give players a better, more complete game.

Capcom, here's looking at you.

#30 Edited by kagato (898 posts) -

I dont think this games problem is going to be the 30fps cap, what ive saw so far look uninspired, very grey and just plain ugly and this is coming from a fan of the genre and the series. Maybe it will suprise me but if that was number one reason for getting the Xbox One id be bummed right now.

#31 Edited by AMyggen (2605 posts) -

@darji:

Thank you based Capcom? Sigh...

I sure hope two of my all time favourite dev companies, Konami and Capcom, get their shit together this gen. Gen 7 has largely been a embarrassment for both, with some exceptions. This isn't a good start for Capcom though...

If it runs this bad, they should've delayed it. It ran like absolute shit at E3, and it doesn't seem like they've been able to fix that completely. I'm gonna give the Xbone the benefit of the doubt here, and blame it on the game coming in way too hot.

#34 Edited by Darji (5294 posts) -

@amyggen said:

@darji:

Thank you based Capcom? Sigh...

I sure hope two of my all time favourite dev companies, Konami and Capcom, get their shit together this gen. Gen 7 has largely been a embarrassment for both, with some exceptions. This isn't a good start for Capcom though...

If it runs this bad, they should've delayed it. It ran like absolute shit at E3, and it doesn't seem like they've been able to fix that completely. I'm gonna give the Xbone the benefit of the doubt here, and blame it on the game coming in way too hot.

Oh I am pretty sure this has not much to do with the power of the One but rather with a launch title being rushed out. I mean this frame rate is really terrible and there is no real reason for it to drop normally.

#35 Edited by AMyggen (2605 posts) -

@agnosticjesus: Chill, why shouldn't he post that Digital Foundry link?

#36 Posted by RecSpec (3766 posts) -

I'm sure a lot of sacrifices were made to get this out at launch, so I'm disappointed, but not surprised.

#37 Posted by RoarImaDinosaur (191 posts) -

I don't think this is a retail build but I'm not surprised by what I'm seeing in those screenshots.

#38 Posted by Vanick (318 posts) -

That looks a bit rough. Hopefully they got things running a little better for the retail version. It's kind of a shame about some of the technical problems because the game looks like a ton of fun.

#39 Posted by Icemo (642 posts) -

Frame rate locked at 30 is okay, but if it's just capped at 30 and it drops down to 15 sometimes then that's pretty bad. They might be able to fix it with a patch couple of weeks after the release, or hopefully sooner.

#40 Posted by Funkydupe (3312 posts) -

I can't wait for PS5, its going to be the best thing ever. 720p, 60fps at least!

#41 Edited by Chaser324 (6342 posts) -

I don't think this is a retail build but I'm not surprised by what I'm seeing in those screenshots.

Yeah, the article isn't clear about what build this is that they tested. Although, I wouldn't be all that surprised by this game being a bit shaky. Ideally, it probably would've been pushed back six months, but this has too much "launch day" pressure behind it.

Moderator
#42 Edited by Yummylee (21295 posts) -

Man, I really hope this game is given the polish it deserves, if not by launch then at least sometime after. I plan to buy a PS4 first, but even then I'm going to wait a few months, so the idea of getting an XB1 is still pretty far off. Nonetheless, I certainly hope that by the time I (most likely) get around to it, there'll be a great Dead Rising game awaiting me.

Dead Rising 2 (and Off The Record) was certainly rather framey on PS3, though, and I generally had no problem with it. So, hopefully the same might carry true for Dead Rising 3... It's such a slow-paced series after all, with a heavy emphasis on animation-priority and the like, so a sub-par framerate doesn't quite hamper it as much as it would other games.

#43 Edited by Berserker976 (324 posts) -

I can't wait for PS5, its going to be the best thing ever. 720p, 60fps at least!

Pretty sure every PS4 game barring BF4 (900p) is confirmed to be 1080p native. And quite a few of them are 60fps.

#44 Posted by Hunkulese (2656 posts) -

The game still looks fantastic to me.

#45 Edited by Chaser324 (6342 posts) -

@hunkulese said:

The game still looks fantastic to me.

Yeah. Aside from some of those screens that DF posted, most of the stuff I've seen has looked pretty good. I'm not doubting there are problems, but I haven't seen anything that's looked bad enough that it dissuaded me from being really excited to play the game.

The previous Dead Rising games had performance issues, and that didn't stop me from enjoying the hell out of them.

Moderator
#46 Edited by ProfessorEss (7281 posts) -

@hunkulese said:

The game still looks fantastic to me.

Me too. I went over to Digital Foundry to see the bad frame rates and left thinking about how badly I want to play this game!

#47 Edited by ArtisanBreads (3758 posts) -

Game looks awesome. Basically they have fixed all the issues I had with the series before and made it even whackier with weapons and vehicles and stuff.

#48 Posted by I_Stay_Puft (3058 posts) -

@chaser324: Are you referring to the PC or Xbox 360 version? I played the PC version and that seemed alright.

Online
#49 Posted by Chaser324 (6342 posts) -

@i_stay_puft: The 360 versions of Dead Rising and Dead Rising 2 both could get a little shaky when you were really pushing it, primarily just when using vehicles or in some of the larger areas with a ton of enemies.

Moderator
#50 Posted by Residentrevil2 (437 posts) -

Eh, I'm still getting it.