L.A. Noire. Fantastic game, but we need new consoles bad.

I love this game, but that's not what this blog post is about. I'll just cut to the chase. After playing games on the PC almost exclusively for the last 4 months, coming back to the consoles was incredibly jarring. L.A. Noire looks fantastic, but DEAR. LORD. The framerate. I've gotten used to playing games with AA cranked all the way up and still getting a solid 60 FPS. I'm not what you'd call a graphics whore, but when I'm playing a game, poor framerate can really destroy the experience. Mind blowing graphics don't always make things better, but high framerates DO. 


We need new consoles not because graphical fidelity needs a huge generational leap, but because current hardware cannot handle the kinds of big games developers want to make while delivering the kind of smooth framerate necessary for a seamless, immersive experience. I'm sorry. 20 to 30 FPS just doesn't cut it. If you don't believe me, try playing Mass Effect 2 or Batman: Arkham Asylum on a modern gaming rig, then go play them on 360. I dare you. It's now very obvious to me that this generation of consoles needs to be replaced and soon.

Note: I am not knocking L.A. Noire. It is fantastic. Just a realization I came to and I needed to air my grievances.
57 Comments
58 Comments
  • 58 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by Dtat

I love this game, but that's not what this blog post is about. I'll just cut to the chase. After playing games on the PC almost exclusively for the last 4 months, coming back to the consoles was incredibly jarring. L.A. Noire looks fantastic, but DEAR. LORD. The framerate. I've gotten used to playing games with AA cranked all the way up and still getting a solid 60 FPS. I'm not what you'd call a graphics whore, but when I'm playing a game, poor framerate can really destroy the experience. Mind blowing graphics don't always make things better, but high framerates DO. 


We need new consoles not because graphical fidelity needs a huge generational leap, but because current hardware cannot handle the kinds of big games developers want to make while delivering the kind of smooth framerate necessary for a seamless, immersive experience. I'm sorry. 20 to 30 FPS just doesn't cut it. If you don't believe me, try playing Mass Effect 2 or Batman: Arkham Asylum on a modern gaming rig, then go play them on 360. I dare you. It's now very obvious to me that this generation of consoles needs to be replaced and soon.

Note: I am not knocking L.A. Noire. It is fantastic. Just a realization I came to and I needed to air my grievances.
Posted by sins_of_mosin

My theory is that people who say they aren't whores are the ones who always complain about fps. Honestly, I swear some people can't just play a game, they have to inspect every technical detail.  ZOMG it went from 40fps to 20fps for 2 seconds during a huge event.. zomggggggggg

Posted by LordXavierBritish

I didn't even notice it had an FPS problem.

Does it have an FPS problem?

Also I can't tell the difference between different rates of FPS.

Edited by Wuddel

I haven't gotten the game yet. So I speak in general but I hear you. Haven gotten a decent PC recently, after a 15 years on mid-range stuff and work-laptops, I currently enjoy the spoils of PC gaming. But most games I rather play relaxed on my armchair in front of my tv. So yeah the framerate and the loading times are not helping the immersion. Problem is that a console giving 60 fps is still to expensive to make. Especially because we need basically 120 fps (or at least 60+) because of 3D TVs.

Edited by protomessiah

Im sure that pc games run better and all that, but honestly I cant tell the difference when Im playing the vast majority of games. For my hard earned cash Im very happy with the current consoles and don't want to buy a new generation of them for at least a few years.

Posted by DystopiaX
@sins_of_mosin said:
My theory is that people who say they aren't whores are the ones who always complain about fps. Honestly, I swear some people can't just play a game, they have to inspect every technical detail.  ZOMG it went from 40fps to 20fps for 2 seconds during a huge event.. zomggggggggg
theres a difference between whoring and wanting a great technical experience. You dont need to be a graphics whore to notice <60 fps.
Posted by Wrighteous86

Shhh.... the more people say we need new consoles, the more people will start believing that.


I don't wanna buy new shit until 2014 at the earliest. Not counting replacing the Wii of course... I still haven't gotten a PS3 yet!
Posted by Dtat
@sins_of_mosin said:
My theory is that people who say they aren't whores are the ones who always complain about fps. Honestly, I swear some people can't just play a game, they have to inspect every technical detail.  ZOMG it went from 40fps to 20fps for 2 seconds during a huge event.. zomggggggggg

Yes I inspected every technical detail by saying the choppy framerate slightly impacted my experience. Well done sir.
@LordXavierBritish said:
I didn't even notice it had an FPS problem.Does it have an FPS problem?Also I can't tell the difference between different rates of FPS.
I've just really gotten used to silky smooth framerates. I wouldn't say it's a huge problem, but the realism in the faces and the performances are really hampered by the framerate at times. When people move quickly they sort of sputter across the screen. I found it jarring.
Posted by benjaebe

I totally agree with what you're saying, but just out of curiosity which console were you playing on? I've had friends who play the 360 version complain about the frame rate though I haven't really experienced many drops on the PS3.

Posted by Tebbit

Uncharted 2 laughs at your concerns.

Also, what the heck are you talking about with Arkham Asylum? That game had a fantastic framerate on the consoles, I don't remember a single dip when I played it on the 360.

Posted by canucks23
@sins_of_mosin said:
My theory is that people who say they aren't whores are the ones who always complain about fps. Honestly, I swear some people can't just play a game, they have to inspect every technical detail.  ZOMG it went from 40fps to 20fps for 2 seconds during a huge event.. zomggggggggg
It's not just a 40 to 20 drop in this game, it has really noticable drops every now and again and it can get annoying. On the 360 version at least.
Posted by Daveyo520

I think we are fine. We are good enough and good enough is good enough.

Posted by Afroman269

Ya I'm noticing the drops on the PS3 version. Kinda annoying.

Posted by Animasta

it's too bad LA noire doesn't have a PC version huh, but I've given up on rockstar and if they don't want any of my money than that's their business

Posted by Dtat

I'm playing it on PS3 by the way. It's not so much drops in FPS as it is just a consistent low FPS. As I walk along, I can literally see the edges of the screen jerking as they move forward.


@Tebbit said:
Uncharted 2 laughs at your concerns.Also, what the heck are you talking about with Arkham Asylum? That game had a fantastic framerate on the consoles, I don't remember a single dip when I played it on the 360.
I've played it both on the 360 and on my PC. It has decent framerate on 360, but it doesn't compare with 60 FPS. So smooth...
Edited by NTM

While I'm ready for new systems, I'm not ready to put away current gen systems, which I inevitably do when newer systems come along. And L.A. Noire looks great and I may get it sometime very soon. By the way, I've been thinking about upgrading the PC. I've never done it before, but I'd like to at some point since there's a lot of newer games coming out like Battlefield 3.
Posted by playastation

Have you ever went back to the original mario kart on the snes? you can literally count the frames of animation on the track

Posted by Slaker117

This is something I realized when playing AC2. I thought the game looked great, but the frame rate was unsteady and people took forever to spawn into the world. There is only so much you can do with asset fidelity, but simply putting more power into a similar architecture would help problems like these.

Posted by Claude

I wouldn't be surprised to see new consoles in this order. Nintendo 2012, Microsoft 2013 and Sony 2014.

Microsoft and Sony will announce E3 2012.

With that speculation out of the way, Nintendo is the card holder with their hardware. If it's nothing more than a small upgrade over MS and Sony's current generation, I think MS will go harder the next year. If you've noticed, Microsoft's first two consoles have been closer to a PC than the other consoles. Microsoft's next console will be even more of a PC based TV type console with lots and lots of interactivity with Windows based products.

Posted by President_Barackbar
@Wrighteous86 said:
Shhh.... the more people say we need new consoles, the more people will start believing that.

I don't wanna buy new shit until 2014 at the earliest. Not counting replacing the Wii of course... I still haven't gotten a PS3 yet!
When LA Noire needed to be on 3 discs on the 360, its time to start thinking about new consoles.
Posted by kingzetta

no

Posted by Dtat
@playastation said:
Have you ever went back to the original mario kart on the snes? you can literally count the frames of animation on the track
And your point?
Posted by louiedog
@playastation said:
Have you ever went back to the original mario kart on the snes? you can literally count the frames of animation on the track
Frame counters ruined competitive Mario Kart.
Posted by Andorski

I'd rather have developers push for other graphics styles other than realism.  Current Robert Zemeckis animated movies aren't able to pass to the other side of the uncanney valley, so I'd imagine video games are far away from hitting such an achievement.  Create an art style that the consoles can actually render well and that can age well.  Even PC games like Crysis 2 on it's highest settings will look like outdated in a decade.  Yet Wind Waker still looks awesome.

Posted by Jeust

Personally I think a new generation despite the new techs that will bring will be bad for consumers. If the graphical prowess continues to climb so do the development costs for the software houses, and that means less high profile games, heavier prices, and less variety and number of releases. And probably a more accentuated bet on the DLC and indie games. 


Also I don't want to fork a heavy sum of money for a new console, despite liking the possibility of buying a PS3 at bargain price.

So no, I don't look forward to it.
Posted by Kjellm87

They could, but I doubt they want. At least for now.

Posted by Dtat
@Andorski said:
I'd rather have developers push for other graphics styles other than realism.  Current Robert Zemeckis animated movies aren't able to pass to the other side of the uncanney valley, so I'd imagine video games are far away from hitting such an achievement.  Create an art style that the consoles can actually render well and that can age well.  Even PC games like Crysis 2 on it's highest settings will look like outdated in a decade.  Yet Wind Waker still looks awesome.
But better hardware will enable those creative graphics styles to be more beautiful. Super Mario Galaxy is a good example of that. Wouldn't it look better on an HD console? If you read what I wrote in my original post, I expressly stated that graphical fidelity doesn't necessarily need another generational leap, but I do feel that current hardware restricts what developers can do especially visually. Graphical horsepower enables artistic vision to flourish. Smoother framerates and higher resolutions are always a good thing. They are not an end unto themselves; they are tools.
Posted by PrivateIronTFU
@Andorski said:
Current Robert Zemeckis animated movies aren't able to pass to the other side of the uncanney valley, so I'd imagine video games are far away from hitting such an achievement.
I don't know. LA Noire faces are way less creepy and way more emotive than any Robert Zemeckis film I've seen.
Posted by vinone

I notice a lot of pop in, that's about it, but I still play GTA IV, so that was expected for me.

Posted by dragonzord

Really, LA Noire is the thing that made you think we need new consoles? Not how insane Witcher 2 looks?

Posted by Dtat
@zoner said:
Really, LA Noire is the thing that made you think we need new consoles? Not how insane Witcher 2 looks?
First game I've played on a console in months. That's why.
Posted by captain_clayman

i agree dude. after getting a PC, consoles look like crap.  its not usually the graphical fidelity, it's those framerates.  it used to not bug me but after playing PC games, it bugs the hell out of me.

Posted by PooffBallzZzZ

noticed some FPS issues on the xbox for sure.  Thought it was just cuz my xbox is old.

Posted by Fjordson

I haven't experienced the framerate issues you mentioned, but I'm not going to disagree that the current consoles are getting a bit long in the tooth.

Posted by FesteringNeon

Right as I got into this gen of consoles from PC, the biggest thing that stood out to me was the lack of good AA. The jaggies took awhile to adjust to, but all is history at this point.

Posted by SomeDeliCook
@Dtat said:
I love this game, but that's not what this blog post is about. I'll just cut to the chase. After playing games on the PC almost exclusively for the last 4 months, coming back to the consoles was incredibly jarring. L.A. Noire looks fantastic, but DEAR. LORD. The framerate. I've gotten used to playing games with AA cranked all the way up and still getting a solid 60 FPS. I'm not what you'd call a graphics whore, but when I'm playing a game, poor framerate can really destroy the experience. Mind blowing graphics don't always make things better, but high framerates DO. 

We need new consoles not because graphical fidelity needs a huge generational leap, but because current hardware cannot handle the kinds of big games developers want to make while delivering the kind of smooth framerate necessary for a seamless, immersive experience. I'm sorry. 20 to 30 FPS just doesn't cut it. If you don't believe me, try playing Mass Effect 2 or Batman: Arkham Asylum on a modern gaming rig, then go play them on 360. I dare you. It's now very obvious to me that this generation of consoles needs to be replaced and soon.

Note: I am not knocking L.A. Noire. It is fantastic. Just a realization I came to and I needed to air my grievances.
Rage will run at 60 FPS on both consoles. Whats the point of me saying this? Simple.
Optimization needs to improve. I've seen shitty looking games run at low FPS on consoles but good looking games with a higher framerate.
Posted by Dtat
@SomeDeliCook: There's a reason it's rare to see games with great visuals running at high framerates on consoles. Putting the onus on developers to optimize their games for 6 year old hardware is a little unreasonable. You really limit what they can do that way.
Posted by DonPixel

I was playing a lot in my ps3 a couple of months back.. and I didn't want to know anything about new consoles. Then I bough a new PC.. currently playing Witcher 2 at medium spec looks way better like WAY BETTER than anything in any consoles.. so yeah I think it's time 1080p full ass HD new consoles.. My body is ready. 

Posted by clstirens
@SomeDeliCook said:
@Dtat said:
snip
Rage will run at 60 FPS on both consoles. Whats the point of me saying this? Simple.
Optimization needs to improve. I've seen shitty looking games run at low FPS on consoles but good looking games with a higher framerate.
This.

Although, you can't optimize an Atari to run like an NES, you can still churn a bit more out of the current consoles.

Honestly, though, the biggest issue will be convincing gamers that the next gen is worth it, when the graphical gains are likely to be less apparent.
Posted by Napalm
@Dtat said:
@SomeDeliCook: There's a reason it's rare to see games with great visuals running at high framerates on consoles. Putting the onus on developers to optimize their games for 6 year old hardware is a little unreasonable. You really limit what they can do that way.
It's more the fact that not everybody is as fuckin' smart as John Carmack.
Posted by clstirens
@Napalm said:
@Dtat said:
@SomeDeliCook: There's a reason it's rare to see games with great visuals running at high framerates on consoles. Putting the onus on developers to optimize their games for 6 year old hardware is a little unreasonable. You really limit what they can do that way.
It's more the fact that not everybody is as fuckin' smart as John Carmack.
Not to say he isn't good at what he does, but we haven't actually SEEN most of what Rage has to offer.  For all we know, it could be the most boring technical achievement ever.
Posted by Napalm
@clstirens: Have you actually fucking seen how amazing Rage looks? Not only technically, but set design looks immensely wonderful, and all of the action running at sixty through-and-through will make for something awesome.
Posted by clstirens

.@Napalm
Hmm.. Perhaps I have not been up on rage. I'm pretty versed on some of the technology they've used in rage, but I haven't seen much footage I guess. Good to hear, actually.

Posted by Milkman

I have a confession to make. I can rarely ever tell when a game has a bad frame rate. I've gotten better at it over the last year or so but most of the time, I can't tell the difference if a game is running at 30 FPS or 60.

Posted by WillyLo

I've not noticed much of a frame rate issue on the PS3 version, I played my buddies 360 version first though and there definitely was some noticable drops there.

Posted by Getz
@DystopiaX said:
@sins_of_mosin said:
My theory is that people who say they aren't whores are the ones who always complain about fps. Honestly, I swear some people can't just play a game, they have to inspect every technical detail.  ZOMG it went from 40fps to 20fps for 2 seconds during a huge event.. zomggggggggg
theres a difference between whoring and wanting a great technical experience. You dont need to be a graphics whore to notice <60 fps.
There's gotta be some sort of nerd dictionary, the way people are arguing over the minutia of what being a "graphics whore" entails. I want references, damn it!
Posted by LiquidPrince

I still feel it's too early for new consoles. Should release by 2013.

Posted by DystopiaX
@Getz said:
@DystopiaX said:
@sins_of_mosin said:
My theory is that people who say they aren't whores are the ones who always complain about fps. Honestly, I swear some people can't just play a game, they have to inspect every technical detail.  ZOMG it went from 40fps to 20fps for 2 seconds during a huge event.. zomggggggggg
theres a difference between whoring and wanting a great technical experience. You dont need to be a graphics whore to notice <60 fps.
There's gotta be some sort of nerd dictionary, the way people are arguing over the minutia of what being a "graphics whore" entails. I want references, damn it!
Not sure what position you're taking, all I'm saying is that wanting decent performance isn't the same as graphics whoring.

And yeah that term is really ill defined.
Posted by Getz
@DystopiaX: So I gotta take a position now? I'm just content being a smart-ass from the side-lines.
Posted by RE_Player1

My PS3 still seems new to me. I can wait until for a holiday 2014 release for a PS4.

  • 58 results
  • 1
  • 2