Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

Hoping for 30 fps campaign

OP darknikolas

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 4
If a game is good and works, it can be a PowerPoint as far as I'm concerned. The problem is all games need to hold a stable (and clean) frame rate, and hold up standards. 343 already said that they will be keeping 60fps as a standard from now on, so expect single player to be that.

split-screen might even get the same treatment, with this engine who knows what it'll be able to do right now. Don't set the bar high though with that, at least split-screen will happen.
I prefer 60 fps over 30, like many people. However, if the full game came out at 30 fps I would still probably get it. However, doing this:
I hope the campaign runs at 30 fps while the multiplayer runs at 60 fps.
Would be a no-sale for me. I don't want different FPS in the same game- I just can't adjust to that. I hope the final product stays consistent. Best case scenario for me is all 60 fps.
Well, it's a trade off, I prefer larger maps and prettier graphics over smooth gameplay as far as the campaign is concerned. But of course people will have their own opinions. I think multiplayer-wise it's pretty clear that we all want 60 fps. If they decide to do the entire game in 60 fps they have a lot of experience now, it's probably a lot more optimized than in halo 5. I'm very curious about the new engine, hope they do a sprint series about it. Still I'm glad they did it because halo 5 engine felt a little outdated to be honest. Specially in regard to realistic materials and effects.
You know at first I read the title and thought "-Yoink- no". But you might have a point here. If they brought down the FPS they could make other areas of the campaign better. I'd be cool with 30fps if it's locked silky smooth, multiplayer absolutely has to be 60fps.
If the game comes out on PC, I really hope it has an uncapped framerate like Destiny 2. On Xbox, I don't see a reason for it to not run at 60 FPS all the time. If the Xbox One X, which is "the most powerful console ever," can't run the Slipspace engine at 60 FPS I'm going to be very concerned.
As a PC gamer i prefer fps > graphics, it's a but sad that consoles you dont get to chose your graphics if you wanted a little higher framerate, even if it was just limited to (60FPS High / 30FPS / Ultra)
tsassi wrote:
Naqser wrote:
How about a more niche and stylistic look on the visual department which doesn't require too much from the hardware.
Allowing the large maps, more AI and whatever else you wanted.

I don't feel like what we need is to push the graphics all the time. It's time to advance other stuff.
Yes, I notice the difference between 30 and 60 fps. I never thought I'd do, and that people exaggerated when they said going to 30 after being used to 60 is sickening / jarring. I'm not too far off from those experiences.
I would be inclined to agree, but if the announcement trailer is anything to go by, looks like that's not going to to happen. I'm fairly certain that trailer was in-engine, though probably not representative of the final graphical fidelity. I'd expect the final game to look like a somewhat toned down version of that.

EDIT: I wouldn't ditch 60 fps for better campaign graphics. Frankly, graphical fidelity in games is at the point for me where I put game responsiveness even in single player ahead of graphics. Heck, if this game was everything I wanted, but hadn't advanced graphically from Halo 5, I wouldn't have the slightest problem with that.
Something to keep in consideration is that this will be a play anywhere title. For those who want the best graphics can head over to pc and pump up the power over the console. Thoughts?
tsassi wrote:
Naqser wrote:
How about a more niche and stylistic look on the visual department which doesn't require too much from the hardware.
Allowing the large maps, more AI and whatever else you wanted.

I don't feel like what we need is to push the graphics all the time. It's time to advance other stuff.
Yes, I notice the difference between 30 and 60 fps. I never thought I'd do, and that people exaggerated when they said going to 30 after being used to 60 is sickening / jarring. I'm not too far off from those experiences.
I would be inclined to agree, but if the announcement trailer is anything to go by, looks like that's not going to to happen. I'm fairly certain that trailer was in-engine, though probably not representative of the final graphical fidelity. I'd expect the final game to look like a somewhat toned down version of that.

EDIT: I wouldn't ditch 60 fps for better campaign graphics. Frankly, graphical fidelity in games is at the point for me where I put game responsiveness even in single player ahead of graphics. Heck, if this game was everything I wanted, but hadn't advanced graphically from Halo 5, I wouldn't have the slightest problem with that.
Something to keep in consideration is that this will be a play anywhere title. For those who want the best graphics can head over to pc and pump up the power over the console. Thoughts?
I realized quickly after writing the post that I don't really need to care about what happens on consoles, as long as the PC version has good graphics options and an unlocked framerate, as any PC game should.
tsassi wrote:
tsassi wrote:
Naqser wrote:
How about a more niche and stylistic look on the visual department which doesn't require too much from the hardware.
Allowing the large maps, more AI and whatever else you wanted.

I don't feel like what we need is to push the graphics all the time. It's time to advance other stuff.
Yes, I notice the difference between 30 and 60 fps. I never thought I'd do, and that people exaggerated when they said going to 30 after being used to 60 is sickening / jarring. I'm not too far off from those experiences.
I would be inclined to agree, but if the announcement trailer is anything to go by, looks like that's not going to to happen. I'm fairly certain that trailer was in-engine, though probably not representative of the final graphical fidelity. I'd expect the final game to look like a somewhat toned down version of that.

EDIT: I wouldn't ditch 60 fps for better campaign graphics. Frankly, graphical fidelity in games is at the point for me where I put game responsiveness even in single player ahead of graphics. Heck, if this game was everything I wanted, but hadn't advanced graphically from Halo 5, I wouldn't have the slightest problem with that.
Something to keep in consideration is that this will be a play anywhere title. For those who want the best graphics can head over to pc and pump up the power over the console. Thoughts?
I realized quickly after writing the post that I don't really need to care about what happens on consoles, as long as the PC version has good graphics options and an unlocked framerate, as any PC game should.
Oh yeah, totally forgot about it being play-anywhere.
Now then, let's hope i343 doesn't mess it up for ridiculous reasons.

"We've chosen to lock all versions of the game to 30 FPS in the campaign to make everyone have the same experience"
Or
"There won't be cross-platform for Halo 6, in any mode because secrets". It took quite a while for HW2, and by the time it got Crossplay, it was faaaaaaaaar too late.
tsassi wrote:
I would be inclined to agree, but if the announcement trailer is anything to go by, looks like that's not going to to happen. I'm fairly certain that trailer was in-engine, though probably not representative of the final graphical fidelity. I'd expect the final game to look like a somewhat toned down version of that.

EDIT: I wouldn't ditch 60 fps for better campaign graphics. Frankly, graphical fidelity in games is at the point for me where I put game responsiveness even in single player ahead of graphics. Heck, if this game was everything I wanted, but hadn't advanced graphically from Halo 5, I wouldn't have the slightest problem with that.
Something to keep in consideration is that this will be a play anywhere title. For those who want the best graphics can head over to pc and pump up the power over the console. Thoughts?
Yeah, if the Campaign is 30fps I won't even bother with an Xbox install. I'll buy a digital edition straight onto PC (after it launched, cause Win 10 games are buggy af). If it has the smart install feature that MCC will soon have, I will install campaign on PC and Multiplayer on console since that's probably where the majority of players will be.

Although, you do have to consider the fact that a lot of players cannot afford a PC. They are pretty darn expensive. The price of Win 10 alone could buy you a 500GB Original Xbox One in Australia, it'd be crazy for them to even consider PC. Maybe a decent compromise would be following what Forza Horizon 4 has done and have a performance and a quality mode on the One X?
Never heard of someone wanting 30 before. I don't see any benefits to that. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Never heard of someone wanting 30 before. I don't see any benefits to that. Correct me if I'm wrong.
You are wrong xD. Benefits include double the rendering time between frames. That could mean larger maps, better visuals (textures, materials, ilumination and effects), better rendering distance. Frame rate always comes at the cost of visuals, because the higher the frame rate, the less time you have to render the image.
Uhm, acktually, flipbooks are the superior cinematic storytelling experience
I hope the campaign runs at 30 fps while the multiplayer runs at 60 fps. I know it's a lot of work, but halo 5 campaign felt somewhat limited. An extra time delta would allow for larger maps and better AI and functional split-scren. Even maybe experimental stuff, what about a reinforcement learning based AI?
if its PC it better not be below 90 for either aspect.

I have a roaring machine here, i dont want to hear it pur over 60 fps. I want to hear it scream pushing 300. Hopefully thanks to engine slipspace we will be able to too.
In my opinion, for Halo at least, 30 FPS felt great, especially on a controller. I know it sounds weird, but for me it does. Could be because that is what we grew up with. When it comes to PC and the Mouse and Keyboard, I need 60, but a console using a controller, for some reason it feels easier to aim. I know it probably makes no sense, but that is how the game "feels" to me.
You guys crazy, 60>30, always.
In the worse scenario I see Halo Infinite running at 30 FPS on Xbox One family and 60 FPS on Project Scarlett (and pc obviously) because of how much big the environment will be. Jaguar has limits, maybe Ryzen will solve them
Never heard of someone wanting 30 before. I don't see any benefits to that. Correct me if I'm wrong.
You are wrong xD. Benefits include double the rendering time between frames. That could mean larger maps, better visuals (textures, materials, ilumination and effects), better rendering distance. Frame rate always comes at the cost of visuals, because the higher the frame rate, the less time you have to render the image.
Do you put better visuals ahead of gameplay? I don't
I'd be fine with campaign at 30. It would feel jarring going from multiplayer to campaign but if it meant a better campaign in general I think that's worth it. Multiplayer must be 60fps though. I've tasted the sacred fruit and can't go back lol
as long as that is only limited to console, I hope PC version can have uncapped (or sort of) fps, so it will be super smooth.
60 FPS was the best thing to happen to Halo. Night and day difference for all aspects of the game. Please never, ever, go back to 30 FPS.
30 fps are a bit jarring to me frankly. The PC world has influenced me way too much I guess. I don't even remember a game that got under 45 frames for a few seconds... But if it is the price to pay for more complex AI routines (for instance) or a world filled with more life, I gladly get 30 fps in single player!

Multi needs to be 60 though. ☺
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 4