Cutscenes in 60fps, they weird

I'm playing kingdom hearts 2 final mix on ps4 and the game is 60fps, that's all cool and everything, but most cutscenes are 30fps which I believe for this kind of content works better since you don't have that soap opera effect or fake like sensation.

Then it came a cutscenes on 30fps and was terrible, everything seemed to look out of place.

So I really believe that higher framerate is great for playable content, but not so much for cutscenes.

What are your thoughts?

I think the soap opera claim is baloney. I wanna see a good movie at 48 frames per second. 24 fps often looks horrid when the camera is moving.

with the XB1X being able to deliver on 4K, what stands out as butt ugly are pre-rendered cutscenes, compressed as hell

I've seen movies at 48 frames/sec and they're horrible

What movies? Anyway, I'm not gonna believe you until I see it for myself. I've seen porn at 48 fps and never found it ugly.

@lamprey263: I hate pre rendered cutscenes as well, but a lot of games have real time cutscenes locked at 30fps and it's much better than the 60fps ones.

I really can't stand watching stuff at higher framerate.

But of course, gaming is better.

@ezekiel43: porn is highly different, it's meant to be real, it's meant to make you feel like you're there, whereas normal movies and cutscenes aren't. when you have these kind of stuff played at higher framerate, it makes you know that the stuff is fake, that it's an act, it's not believable, that's why most people don't like it.

I found uncharted Nathan Drake collection cutscenes terrible as well because of the higher framerate, everything moved jerkier and faker, it was not cool.

They're not fakers you ignorant buffoons. You're just used to seeing movies in 24fps because that's what you've been fed all your life. The reason they're 24fps was also made decades ago mostly to cut costs.

On topic, I hate 30fps cut scenes. I want the frame rate of the game and cut scenes to be the same. 30fps cinematics are fine because they're like a movie.

You're just saying that because it's all you've ever known.

@ezekiel43: don't assume things you don't know. I've seen movies and TV shows at higher framerate, it simply doesn't work.

And you'd think I'd like 60fps by now if they were really good.

Higher framerate work for talk shows or sports, where everything have to seem real. But for cutscenes and movies? Nah.

@Juub1990: lol, you just contradicted yourself so hard.

@calvincfb: Please point where I did?

@Juub1990: if cinematics are fine because they're like a movie, cutscenes should be too, because, you know, most cutscenes aim to be cinematics.

@calvincfb: No most cut scenes don’t aim to be cinematics. There’s a distinct difference between them.

The Hobbit, and take the general public reaction to it...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hobbit_(film_series)#Reaction_to_high_frame_rate

I've seen countless, innumerable scenes in famous movies that look like dogshit because the camera is moving or rotating too fast. REALLY choppy movement. 24 fps was just a limitation of the time that became accepted.

Everything said in that first paragraph was stupid. Why do they feel the need to compare it to sports programs and daytime TV? Why can't they just judge it on its own? That's their problem.

48 FPS movies are terrible. It looks fake.

I have seen TV’s that increase the frame rate of every show and it looks so strange. I never could get used to it despite spending many hours trying to.

24FPS is much better.

you'll understand when you try it for yourself one day

there's a reason this hasn't taken off in film

anyhow, you can mimic the effects at home by doubling the refresh rate of your TV, it's disorienting

CoD WW2 on XboneX, ****** 30 fps (or lower) cutscenes with screen tearing. Whoever thought that looked good should be fired.

I'd prefer that devs keep it consistent.

If the game is 30, keep the cutscenes at 30.

Same for 60.

The change back and forth is jarring.

And motion looks unnatural? Seriously?

You realize that real life moves faster than 24/30 fps right?

Just because you are used to watching movies at 24 doesn't mean that its the unwavering standard.

I prefer my cutscenes to play at 60.

You're conditioned to think it looks off. (By TV / movies.) If you watch a couple cutscenes in 60 you'll get used to it in no time.

@stuff238: Fake isn’t the word you’re looking for. Unusual is.

^ this.

The Hobbits Trilogy comes to mind. The 48fps thing is one of the reasons why The Hobbit films failed to live up to the standards of LOTR, it was way too real and defined, nowhere near LOTR's visuals which were softer and more befitting of the fantasy genre. The music wasn't as good either and The Hobbit Trilogy just felt a whole lot more rushed. Peter Jackson went way too far.

The reason for 48fps being hated (myself included) has nothing to do with "not being used to it". It has to do with how we view motion. 24fps is the closest we have to natural motion that our eyes see when it comes to movies only.

@KungfuKitten: Ive played uncharted collection and it never looked good.

@navyguy21: false, since camera has real motion blur.

my first question is

'Most TVs dont go beyond 30fps, does yours?'

That's the whole point of my argument.

Higher framerate means more real and lifelike, hence why it doesn't work for movies, cutscenes, cinematics and TV shows, it makes you notice stuff isn't real, that it's all an act.

That's why it's used on talk shows and sports and not on movies.

Higher framerate works on games because it makes response times better and since ther game is reacting to your inputs, that's all good.

@tryit: are you serious?

I mean, you do know that most TV's display 60fps since the industry standard is 60Hz, right?

I think it jarring because we’re not used to it. If movies had always been shot at 60fps and you saw one at 30 it would look weird as well.

no actually I thought it was 30fps.

but I admit I am not very knowledgable in those things

Game cut scenes at high frame rates are fine as it matches the game.

Films are a bit different, a camera can't replicate what the eye does with fast moving action, with a bit of post processing to put in things like object blur and image stabilasation it should be good.

"24fps is the closest we have to natural motion". Where did you pull that from lol? 24fps was chosen as the standard decades ago mainly for cost reasons. They didn't just magically get the best number right. If you had never seen a 24fps movie in your life but had only seen 48fps movies, you'd be complaining about 24fps being too slow and feeling fake.

I been going to theaters for years now, when I saw Hobbits for the first time at 48fps, it wasn't normal on my part.

You could say I'm a movie fan, I enjoy heading to the theaters.

Who here hasn't been going to theaters for years? 48fps is not the standard, 24fps is. You honestly think you're the only one who complained about that? It has nothing to do with it being closest to the motion we perceive. Same reason sports are shot at 60fps. If you saw a sports game broadcasted at 24 fps, you'd hear complaints too. It's simply a question of habit. Our eyes don't perceive real life in frames simply because there aren't frames in the real world. Ideally, the more frames you have, the closer you are to real motion that do not feature ANY kind of stoppage in the movements. Nothing to do with 24fps being more real.

What a load of bull. Next y’all are gonna try to sell us on the reasons film grain is good in the era of huge 4K TVs.

Uhhh... film grain *is* good. At least if you are watching something that was originally actually shot on film. If you are watching something that was shot on film and see zero grain then it was probably digitally scrubbed out or is poorly compressed, there should be a very fine layer of film visible and higher resolution should make that grain look natural.

If something was shot digitally and you see "film grain", it's not film grain, it's noise (or the director for some reason wanted to add "fake" grain to give it a film-like look).

Nah, 30FPS is shit and looks more blurry in motion.

But it does.. you don't have to make up things, it's okay to be wrong some times. lol

But your eyes do send the information to your brain in "frames". The world as we perceive(see) it is just manufactured by our brain based on various static images from slightly different angles, since even when you think that you are staring directly at something what your eyes are actually doing is moving a little to the left of the object, a little on top, a little bit to the right, an so on and obviously we also have two eyes so even their natural position gives them another extra slightly different angle. Also not everything you are seeing is necessarily real time since your brain is also capable of using old images from memory to reuse on parts of the image you are currently seeing that aren't changing. These principles are used in magic tricks/visual illusions, and even have inspired technologies like TV broadcasting that repeats information that doesn't change to save bandwidth. When you hear a story that a jet pilot could identify the silhouette of another plane when he was going at XXX speed and presumably the other other at a similar speed, it doesn't mean that he can see at XXX gazillion frames it means that his brain managed to isolate one of the frames and achieved such definition that it could be compared to his memory of how the other planes silhouettes looks like and reached a conclusion. Seeing XXX gazillion frames implies that you can isolate every single one of those frames and analyze them accordingly, which is impossible for the human senses and brain. That is why in real life when things move relatively fast we see them as a blur, because you are just isolating a few frames and the rest is just a mixed giberish of what was previously there with what your eye could actually capture and in some cases completely made up stuff from your brain with things from memory that might be appropriate for that image. Also take into consideration that there is your consciousnesses and your subconsciousness, so obviously the pilot will reach that isolation to a conscious level, while the natural level will be the subconscious, so most people wont be able to tell right away what that blur is since the isolation of the image was just subconscious, but it also shows that it is something that should be trainable to a certain degree. So while it's not the exact same method it is similar to the frames method that monitors use. That said this 24fps movie feel the purists claim is real since it could enter the visual illusion category but it is also probably combined with the fact that they are simply used to it.

@paradocs: Wrong about what?

When I saw the High frame rate Hobbit in theaters, I at first thought it was weird. But then I got used to it and kinda liked it. I am not sure why 24 fps is the standard but get that away from my games.

Cutscenes in 30 FPS also annoys me because me FreeSync monitor only goes as low as 40 FPS so it's jarring to see no screen tearing during game play then then tearing cutscenes that have no right to be a much lower frame rate.