If you've played the FFXV platinum demo you have seen that it plays at 30FPS which is just horrendous in my opinion. FFXV is a fast paced action RPG game and the whole time i played the demo it felt like i was bogged down by the 30FPS gameplay; i am not blaming Square Enix or the development team for this, i am blaming sony and Microsoft for choosing low-end hardware on their flagship consoles. FFXV and games like it (KH3) should play at a steady 60FPS in 2016 for a smooth gameplay experience. I understand why the community wants a PC release so bad for FFXV; a 60FPS version would be perfect. I am still buying the game in September when it release because i have been waiting 10 years for it but 30FPS nowadays in an ARPG is just unacceptable. At least sony is making an attempt to rectify this with the release of the PS4.5. I really hope KH3 isn't bogged down by this problem either; just imagine how slow KH3 would feel if it played at 30FPS instead of 60FPS like the previous games  

No Kingdom Hearts game has ever been 60 fps.

PC release for XV is a real must tho.

I will double dip for sure.

30fps has always been the standard for games. Even if these consoles were twice as powerful the framerate would still likely be 30fps for most games. The extra power would be put towards improving the graphics even more. The only study to be done about graphics, frame-rate, sales, and review scores was done by Insomniac and their conclusions were:

 

- A higher framerate does not significantly affect sales of a game.

- A higher framerate does not significantly affect the reviews of a game.

 

Graphics, on the other hand, does affect review scores.

 

 

I think that what Square Enix should do is make sure the game runs at a stable 30fps. At least this way when the game releases on PC it will have better graphics than it would have had if their target was 60fps.

 

30fps has always been the standard for games. Even if these consoles were twice as powerful the framerate would still likely be 30fps for most games. The extra power would be put towards improving the graphics even more. The only study to be done about graphics, frame-rate, sales, and review scores was done by Insomniac and their conclusions were:

 

- A higher framerate does not significantly affect sales of a game.

- A higher framerate does not significantly affect the reviews of a game.

 

Graphics, on the other hand, does affect review scores.

 

 

I think that what Square Enix should do is make sure the game runs at a stable 30fps. At least this way when the game releases on PC it will have better graphics than it would have had if their target was 60fps.

 

I dont think developers should sacrifice FPS in favor of better graphics. There should be a balance. A game will almost always feel better to play at 60FPS compared to 30FPS, especially for ARPG titles like FFXV 

KH has never gone above 30 FPS; you'll live if it doesn't hit 60 FPS.

I dont think developers should sacrifice FPS in favor of better graphics. There should be a balance. A game will almost always feel better to play at 60FPS compared to 30FPS, especially for ARPG titles like FFXV 

 

Developers care about sales and critical reception: some of the most well receieved games run at 30fps. Eg: GTAV, TLOU, Witcher 3, etc. 30fps games also sell just as well as their 60fps counterparts.

 

They have no reason to aim for 60fps but every reason to stick to 30fps. It's sad but true.

KH has never gone above 30 FPS; you'll live if it doesn't hit 60 FPS.

 

I think what is most important is a consistent 30fps. OP didn't even know that the KH games are 30fps so obviously he isn't too observant. Most people only notice when the game staggers, suffers frame rate drops, or runs at sub-30fps framerates.

Edited April 4, 20169 yr by atheist123

Developers care about sales and critical reception: some of the most well receieved games run at 30fps. Eg: GTAV, TLOU, Witcher 3, etc. 30fps games also sell just as well as their 60fps counterparts.

 

They have no reason to aim for 60fps but every reason to stick to 30fps. It's sad but true.

 

I think what is most important is a consistent 30fps. OP didn't even know that the KH games are 30fps so obviously he isn't too observant. Most people only notice when the game staggers, suffers frame rate drops, or runs at sub-30fps framerates.

theres actually a big difference between 30fps and 60fps and you can notice it right away. Try playing Fallout 4 on PS4 which is locked at 30FPS and then play it on PC where its at 60fps; i guarantee you you'll be able to notice a difference. Just moving the camera along feels sluggish and slow on PS4

Edited April 4, 20169 yr by sagman12PC

theres actually a big difference between 30fps and 60fps and you can notice it right away. Try playing Fallout 4 on PS4 which is locked at 30FPS and then play it on PC where its at 60fps; i guarantee you you'll be able to notice a difference. Just moving the camera along feels sluggish and slow on PS4

 

I'm not denying there is a difference between 30fps and 60fps just that the previous KH games were 30fps and no-one complained about it. Maybe your original statement was poorly worded and you were complained about the 30fps gameplay of the previous KH games.

theres actually a big difference between 30fps and 60fps and you can notice it right away. Try playing Fallout 4 on PS4 which is locked at 30FPS and then play it on PC where its at 60fps; i guarantee you you'll be able to notice a difference. Just moving the camera along feels sluggish and slow on PS4

Well yeah if you try and look for it, but if the game can keep your attention on things other than that then that is what makes a game great in my book. I don't really care about frame rate unless it critically affects the experience of the game, like in shooters, multiplayer, etc. imo it shouldn't really bother people.

I'm not denying there is a difference between 30fps and 60fps just that the previous KH games were 30fps and no-one complained about it. Maybe your original statement was poorly worded and you were complained about the 30fps gameplay of the previous KH games.

my main issue is that both the PS4 and Xbox One are weak hardware-wise for home consoles in 2016

my main issue is that both the PS4 and Xbox One are weak hardware-wise for home consoles in 2016

If a game runs smoothly, it doesn't matter what it's FPS is. Anything below 30, sure that's pretty poor now a days, but 30 FPS is pretty much the standard that everyone is used to these days, it's pretty rare when something hits 60 and stays there. I think it's a bit much to expect the the still relatively new 8th gen consoles should always hit 60fps with every game, no excuses. 60 FPS is a nice goal to aim for, sure, but 30 FPS should always be the bare minimum, and I think you should focus on being stable on that first before you try to overwork your hardware like that.

 

And again, like everyone is saying, KINGDOM HEARTS NEVER RAN BEYOND 30 FRAMES PER SECOND (well, except for maybe the 100 Acre Woods minigames in Re:Chain of Memories, those things just moved too quickly and fluidly compared to the rest of the game, it has me suspicious...), IT WAS NEVER A BIG DEAL TO ANYONE BEFORE AND IT WON'T BECOME A BIG DEAL EITHER IF KH3 ISN'T IN 60 FPS. Honestly the whole 60 FPS thing is kind of an overrated cherry on top. If you don't build the whole sundae to be able to hold itself up, there's almost no point in putting the cherry on top, unless you're fine with having it there for a few seconds before it inevitably drops.

my main issue is that both the PS4 and Xbox One are weak hardware-wise for home consoles in 2016

Well, they are three year old consoles and of course we've had improvements in computing power since then, but that does not mean they should have it at 60FPS. Like Hero of Light said, as long as the game runs smoothly, it should be fine.

No offense to anyone, but I'm so sick of people crying about frame rate all the time.

 

Instead of people saying something like "I hope the game has a good story, interesting characters, fun gameplay, good music, etc.".

 

Most of the time they say somehing like "What's the FPS? Less than 60? NOOO!!!"

Yes, but a PS4/Xbone will run you about $400. An Nvidia GTX970 will cost you about $350 alone, not counting a friggin core and mobo...

No offense to anyone, but I'm so sick of people crying about frame rate all the time.

 

Instead of people saying something like "I hope the game has a good story, interesting characters, fun gameplay, good music, etc.".

 

Most of the time they say somehing like "What's the FPS? Less than 60? NOOO!!!"

The point im trying to make is that the current gen consoles are too weak for what they claim to be; both the PS4 and XB1 are using a modified AMD APU, with the GPU component based on the HD 7000 series (first released in 2012). Rather than using an APU, Sony/Microsoft should have used a dedicated processor and graphics card, like in a gaming laptop. This would have increased performance in games. Im hoping sony does this with the PS4.5 later this year

Yes, but a PS4/Xbone will run you about $400. An Nvidia GTX970 will cost you about $350 alone, not counting a friggin core and mobo...

Sony is going to use a GTX 970 or AMD equivalent in their new PS4.5 if the rumors are true; you need a 970 or higher to run games at 4K in 30FPS. What im saying is that sony should have done this initially; the PS4 should have had its own dedicated GPU instead of the APU they used

No offense to anyone, but I'm so sick of people crying about frame rate all the time.

 

Instead of people saying something like "I hope the game has a good story, interesting characters, fun gameplay, good music, etc.".

 

Most of the time they say somehing like "What's the FPS? Less than 60? NOOO!!!"

Same. Now adays its a miracle that some games can even run 30 FPS let alone 60. FFXV is going to be a massive game so I don't think that really helps either and they are having frame rate issues that they have tried to contract outside help for.

 

Sony is going to use a GTX 970 or AMD equivalent in their new PS4.5 if the rumors are true; you need a 970 or higher to run games at 4K in 30FPS. What im saying is that sony should have done this initially; the PS4 should have had its own dedicated GPU instead of the APU they used

My assumption is that Sony at the time was trying to go for what was going to try to give them the most power and what was most affordable for producing the console. Decide hardware for consoles is kind of a crap shoot anyway.Then again not everyone can afford a high end pc. I have a GeForce GT610 and my motherboard is about 13 years old for crying out loud. If I could upgrade so I could play more pc games I would. lol 

The point im trying to make is that the current gen consoles are too weak for what they claim to be; both the PS4 and XB1 are using a modified AMD APU, with the GPU component based on the HD 7000 series (first released in 2012). Rather than using an APU, Sony/Microsoft should have used a dedicated processor and graphics card, like in a gaming laptop. This would have increased performance in games. Im hoping sony does this with the PS4.5 later this yearSony is going to use a GTX 970 or AMD equivalent in their new PS4.5 if the rumors are true; you need a 970 or higher to run games at 4K in 30FPS. What im saying is that sony should have done this initially; the PS4 should have had its own dedicated GPU instead of the APU they used

Regardless of whether they are weak or not, I don't think it warrants a new console already, especially one mid-cycle. You've got to remember we aren't even 3 years in yet, and the traditional console cycle is 5-7 years. I don't think a console releasing anytime soon would be of great benefit to anyone, but instead it would lead to a divide between console players; one that should not exist by the way. For the sake of PC gaming, while it is more powerful, you have got to realise that there is more to games than graphics. Now, that said, if this whole console mid-cycle bullshit occurs, then that is when I will turn to PC gaming.

Same. Now adays its a miracle that some games can even run 30 FPS let alone 60. FFXV is going to be a massive game so I don't think that really helps either and they are having frame rate issues that they have tried to contract outside help for.

 

My assumption is that Sony at the time was trying to go for what was going to try to give them the most power and what was most affordable for producing the console. Decide hardware for consoles is kind of a crap shoot anyway.Then again not everyone can afford a high end pc. I have a GeForce GT610 and my motherboard is about 13 years old for crying out loud. If I could upgrade so I could play more pc games I would. lol 

Exactly! And the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS is barely casually noticeable. It's stupid how people worry more about that than if the game is actually GOOD or not.

Exactly! And the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS is barely casually noticeable. It's stupid how people worry more about that than if the game is actually GOOD or not.

I play Kingdom Hearts 2 Final Mix at 60FPS with PCSX2 and I will tell you right now, it is damn well noticeable, 60FPS is alot smoother than 30FPS, don't even get me started with 120FPS.

After playing Kingdom Hearts 2 Final Mix on the PC at 60FPS, I juust gotta say I want Kingdom Hearts 3 on the PC, I'm sorry but 30FPS is just not as smooth in comparison, and if the frame rate dips below 30  good luck playing that crap at 15FPS yeah not fun is it.

 

Gameplay and framerate go hand in hand, the better the framerate the better the gameplay experience will be.

 

Also you don't need a GTX 970 to play 1080p 60FPS maybe on Ultra but a R9 380 will beat any console and you can even game at 1440p which the console can't even handle and be able to play games at 60FPS on high settings, get yourself a good CPU and your golden, not to mention the prices of Steam games in comparison to consoles.

 

Honestly at this point I refuse to play Kingdom Hearts 3 and Final Fantasy XV if they aren't on the PC, because there both games can run at a better framerate giving me a better overall gameplay experience, and there is litterally no good reason these games shouldn't be on PC.

 

 

Steam gives developers more money overall ala Alan Wake

The consoles are basically PCs so programming should be easier than the Cell(PS3)/PowerPC(Xbox 360)

The PCs can do everything the consoles can do except well better and more

Mods upon Mods upon Mods don't like them don't use them.

With Steam you don't have to bother with disturbing costs, because lets face it digital download on a console, yeah considering with what happened to Far Cry 4 on the Xbox One where people were locked out of a game they purchased because it was delisted from the store, pull that crap on PC and you get a boot the head, we will crack your game, so that we can play something we purchased on a console yeah good luck with that. 

 

 

I just find it hard to justify consoles as they currently are now even as a Wii U owner, but hey at least Nintendo doesn't try to make PCs and make a console with at least some good value with it's price, game lineup and has free online, as well as backwards compatitblity. 

 

 

Honestly I don't the current console buisness model can stand much on it's feet any longer, it's become more about locking people out of games holding them hostage which in fact hurts the game due to it's limited hardware instead of offering a better service, or being a system that can only output these games, it's more about hey if you don't buy this limited system you can't play this game, even though you have a much better system to play it on, I also have to call Nintendo out on this to with Bayonetta 2, but they at least get some leway because that game wouldn't have happened, but sometimes especially with this timed exclusivity nonsensical bull****, oh yes because I'm going to buy an inferior 400 dollar system with a GPU that can run games at 1080p, but is bottleneck by a weak sauce Jaguar CPU, because they wanted to go cheap when I already have a system that can destroy both consoles combined might I add, doesn't seem worth it to me, I'm fine with waiting for a better version of a game that has the exact same gameplay, but is objectively better, and I'm talking third party titles like Final Fantasy XV, Final Fantasy VII Remake and Kingdom Hearts 3 that have so far not been confirmed for PC, and I'm sorry the gameplay over technicals  argument doesn't apply here, both games can have the same gameplay, and nothing is stopping them from having better graphics and framerate it's not like the PS3 era where games were a pain in the ass to port from cell to x86 and costly too, that died with this gen, and in fact even with PS3 games like Valkyria Chronicles that game got ported to the PC, and a  title like that did very well on PC, that argument only applies to good looking, but boring games. 

I mean it's proven the PC makes money, it's proven to be easy to access, and might I add better for games, I mean I just don't like it when games get held back because consoles can't take the hardware, and are sadly not scale-able, you can't throw in a new GPU in your console and have it run games better, no you have to wait for the HD Remaster for your next console, I just I just find it hard to even want a PS4 or Xbox One at this point in time, and with the rumors of a PlayStation 4K disgusts me even more. 

I play Kingdom Hearts 2 Final Mix at 60FPS with PCSX2 and I will tell you right now, it is damn well noticeable, 60FPS is alot smoother than 30FPS, don't even get me started with 120FPS.

Yes well you had to play KH2 before you put it on pc and you were just fine. Games can break at a higher frame rate than the one that was put in, FF dissidia is one of them.

I mean PC and Console are practically the same experience sit on a couch and play a game, except the PC can do a lot more.

Yes well you had to play KH2 before you put it on pc and you were just fine. Games can break at a higher frame rate than the one that was put in, FF dissidia is one of them.

Why would have had to play KH2 before I could play it on PC, I'm a fairly new person to the series even though I have beaten all the games, and I will tell you DDD has horrible framerate issues.

I mean PC and Console are practically the same experience sit on a couch and play a game, except the PC can do a lot more.

Why would have had to play KH2 before I could play it on PC, I'm a fairly new person to the series even though I have beaten all the games, and I will tell you DDD has horrible framerate issues.

Because that is what happens one way or another; everybody plays it on ps2 or ps3 and they don't notice it or complain unless it is 2.5. BBS and 3D had bad frames at times, 3D being the worst but that is the only game the you will hear people complain about the frame rate a lot. Although, people need to realize that it was on a 3ds, one of the weakest handhelds on the market; hopefully 2.8 will fix this problem since it will be on a ps4.

Edited April 4, 20169 yr by Keyblade master26

Because that is what happens one way or another; everybody plays it on ps2 or ps3 and they don't notice it or complain unless it is 2.5. BBS and 3D had bad frames at times, 3D being the worst but that is the only game the you will hear people complain about the frame rate a lot. Although, people need to realize that it was on a 3ds, one of the weakest handhelds on the market; hopefully 2.8 will fix this problem since it will be on a ps4.

Actually I noticed when playing 2.5, and KH2 that it wasn't the smoothest, but it was playable, then playing it at 60FPS it's an eye opener, it would definitely benefit from the higher framerate. 

I'm not a PC gamer or something (still saving up money to buy a decent one) and I don't really care THAT MUCH about framerate, but people who are saying there is (almost) no difference between 30FPS and 60FPS are lying to themselves.

Edited April 4, 20169 yr by Aile

From what I've heard the 30FPS is just for the platinum demo. I've heard that they're still going to make the full game 60FPS.

Right, I'm gonna have to disagree. I raly don't think 60 FPS is that important. 30 FPS has always been perfectly fine for me. (Plus 60 FPS makes me feel a little dizzy sometimes so there's that I suppose.)