If you are worried about GTA V fps and performance, read this.

[TheMostKnowledgable]

read the post right above yours.

 

And try it for yourself. Then decide. Because the game is smooth here, and it was designed for 30fps, and GTA V probably was too.

[mojito]

30 fps lock with p better than normal 55-60 fps v-sync this game really made for 30 fps i guess

u still get dips so it doesn't make a difference.

[rest1]

 

30 fps lock with p better than normal 55-60 fps v-sync this game really made for 30 fps i guess

u still get dips so it doesn't make a difference.

 

no fps is steady actually 29-30 but commandline not worked for me so i locked the fps with rivaturner and p effect makes game more smooth its weird when p off game little bit lagging but when p on everything solid idk why.

[Apopololo]

 

 

30 fps lock with p better than normal 55-60 fps v-sync this game really made for 30 fps i guess

u still get dips so it doesn't make a difference.

 

no fps is steady actually 29-30 but commandline not worked for me so i locked the fps with rivaturner and p effect makes game more smooth its weird when p off game little bit lagging but when p on everything solid idk why.

 

Yeah it`s true, in my pc i usually gets 40-50 fps but feels laggy and when i lock 30fps it feels really smooth.

[Antaxi]

firstly this game is on 64 bit only

gta v ''64 bit ''port'' will works faster than gta4 32bit port with no worries

Edited February 12, 2015 by Antaxi

[mojito]

 

 

30 fps lock with p better than normal 55-60 fps v-sync this game really made for 30 fps i guess

u still get dips so it doesn't make a difference.

 

no fps is steady actually 29-30 but commandline not worked for me so i locked the fps with rivaturner and p effect makes game more smooth its weird when p off game little bit lagging but when p on everything solid idk why.

 

I tried this when gta v 1st came out. I thot maybe the game is made to run at 30 fps so i tried it with gta iv and it made no difference still got the annoying fps dip or stutter.

[RedIndianRobin]

I need to give this a shot.

[1987_EC]

TL;DR anyone?

WTL;DR..

[Kampret]

My rig: Pentium G3258 3.2ghz (overclocked)

Gigabyte R9 270

8 gigs of 1600mhz ddr3 ram

 

could I run GTA V on low-medium settings at a good fps?

 

Don't even try to derail this thread.

[hunk41]

Why do the Console versions have an uncapped framerate then ? (The xbox 360 version runs above 30 fps most of the time).

What is your proof that the "traffic updates 25 times per second" (also, why 25? why not 30? Surely the old consoles have enough CPU horsepower), and what updates 25 per second exactly?The AI?

Cutscene Animations don't stutter AFAIK, it's just that the camera movement can be out of place at times.

There's no reason to bring the 3D universe games into this, since they run on a completely different engine.

 

edit: Also, aiming with a mouse at 30 fps is f*cking abysmal, and Rockstar lives in the stone age if they "designed" it to run at 30 fps. This isn't the sh*tty Gamebryo engine or Renderware

Edited February 12, 2015 by hunk41

[PlasmaFLOW]

The whole thing that the traffic and the aiming system works only well on 30 fps is, as hunk said, kind of dumb. The game was simply monkey coded and can't keep a steady 'flow' of 60fps with most cards as it should. If you can actually get to (somehow) sustain those 60fps, the traffic will work as good as it should on 30fps, 40fps, or whatever.

[IcePwrd]

read the post right above yours.

 

And try it for yourself. Then decide. Because the game is smooth here, and it was designed for 30fps, and GTA V probably was too.

>implying I haven't played at 30fps

 

I have, and it's terrible, input lag makes it unplayable, and the terrible motion blur is vomit inducing

[Kampret]

Why do the Console versions have an uncapped framerate then ? (The xbox 360 version runs above 30 fps most of the time).

What is your proof that the "traffic updates 25 times per second" (also, why 25? why not 30? Surely the old consoles have enough CPU horsepower), and what updates 25 per second exactly?The AI?

Cutscene Animations don't stutter AFAIK, it's just that the camera movement can be out of place at times.

There's no reason to bring the 3D universe games into this, since they run on a completely different engine.

 

edit: Also, aiming with a mouse at 30 fps is f*cking abysmal, and Rockstar lives in the stone age if they "designed" it to run at 30 fps. This isn't the sh*tty Gamebryo engine or Renderware

 

GTA V is V-synced on 30 FPS on all consoles. X360 sometimes drives above 30 FPS (usually 32 FPS) due to it's loose and weak V-sync.

[ViceCityStalker]

You can speculate until your balls deflate and your dick turns blue but no amount of speculation will be able to help you until the day of release when you run the damn game.

 

gawd,it`s really self explanatory.

[hunk41]

 

 

Why do the Console versions have an uncapped framerate then ? (The xbox 360 version runs above 30 fps most of the time).

What is your proof that the "traffic updates 25 times per second" (also, why 25? why not 30? Surely the old consoles have enough CPU horsepower), and what updates 25 per second exactly?The AI?

Cutscene Animations don't stutter AFAIK, it's just that the camera movement can be out of place at times.

There's no reason to bring the 3D universe games into this, since they run on a completely different engine.

 

edit: Also, aiming with a mouse at 30 fps is f*cking abysmal, and Rockstar lives in the stone age if they "designed" it to run at 30 fps. This isn't the sh*tty Gamebryo engine or Renderware

GTA V is V-synced on 30 FPS on all consoles. X360 sometimes drives above 30 FPS (usually 32 FPS) due to it's loose and weak V-sync.

I was talking about GTA 4

[Kampret]

 

 

Why do the Console versions have an uncapped framerate then ? (The xbox 360 version runs above 30 fps most of the time).

What is your proof that the "traffic updates 25 times per second" (also, why 25? why not 30? Surely the old consoles have enough CPU horsepower), and what updates 25 per second exactly?The AI?

Cutscene Animations don't stutter AFAIK, it's just that the camera movement can be out of place at times.

There's no reason to bring the 3D universe games into this, since they run on a completely different engine.

 

edit: Also, aiming with a mouse at 30 fps is f*cking abysmal, and Rockstar lives in the stone age if they "designed" it to run at 30 fps. This isn't the sh*tty Gamebryo engine or Renderware

GTA V is V-synced on 30 FPS on all consoles. X360 sometimes drives above 30 FPS (usually 32 FPS) due to it's loose and weak V-sync.

I was talking about GTA 4

 

 

Ah yes. But still I disagree with your point on IV running at above 30 FPS on X360 most of the time.

[Tez2]

Why do the Console versions have an uncapped framerate then ? (The xbox 360 version runs above 30 fps most of the time).

What is your proof that the "traffic updates 25 times per second" (also, why 25? why not 30? Surely the old consoles have enough CPU horsepower), and what updates 25 per second exactly?The AI?

Cutscene Animations don't stutter AFAIK, it's just that the camera movement can be out of place at times.

There's no reason to bring the 3D universe games into this, since they run on a completely different engine.

 

edit: Also, aiming with a mouse at 30 fps is f*cking abysmal, and Rockstar lives in the stone age if they "designed" it to run at 30 fps. This isn't the sh*tty Gamebryo engine or Renderware

GTA V traffic updates is also limited to 25 times per second (not sure about next-gen), as most of GTA V functions is same as IV with few additions.

<Item><PoolName>VehiclePopulationFrameRate</PoolName><PoolSize value="25"/></Item><Item><PoolName>VehiclePopulationCyclesPerFrame</PoolName><PoolSize value="1"/></Item>

Extracted from gameconfig.xml ( Pools..etc )

Edited February 13, 2015 by funmw2

[Russian Mafia]

Good idea m8 i will lock my PC version on 728p and 18 fps for better cinematic.

Anyway human eye cant see more than 6 fps, but w8 human only get 2 eyes? U m8 forgot about 3rd eye that budda give us?

6*3=3*6 illuminati confirmed in PC version!

 

But if seriously lock fps in PC version its just stupid. I prefer 60 with drops to 45 than 30 stable.

[RedIndianRobin]

GTA V is V-synced on 30 FPS on all consoles. X360 sometimes drives above 30 FPS (usually 32 FPS) due to it's loose and weak V-sync.

Locked 30? That's highly impossible. The OG consoles version struggles to maintain constant 24, let alone 30. Drops usually to 18 all the time. Can you link me to a video on constant 30? Edited February 13, 2015 by RedIndianRobin

[Kampret]

 

GTA V is V-synced on 30 FPS on all consoles. X360 sometimes drives above 30 FPS (usually 32 FPS) due to it's loose and weak V-sync.

Locked 30? That's highly impossible. The OG consoles version struggles to maintain constant 24, let alone 30. Drops usually to 18 all the time. Can you link me to a video on constant 30?

 

 

In what part did I say that LG consoles are locked to 30 FPS? Anyway, I've played the PS3 version. It never drops below 22 FPS, unless you went full retard and decided to blow up a huge bunch of cars.

[Xerukal]

Excuse him for wanting to play a Grand Theft Auto game and blow up some cars, lol...

 

Anyway, I remember ending up with 22 FPS during the day by just driving around the Vinewood Hills in Franklin's Buffalo. This was on 360. Pretty pathetic, if you ask me.

[S1LV3R_W0LF]

After reading your suggestions, I only have one thing to say... you better get a new nickname the one you have, its out of your league.

The only reason why IV looked like that was because it was made in low quality to an inferior platform and then upscaled to look better on a more technologically advanced platform, missing a lot of features needed, it's not a matter of filters or movie effects, it was just a quick buck without much effort. I wasn't able to reach 60fps back then, but it usually was around 48-50 with some drops to 28, the difference was noticeable. V should be scalable in quality out of the box without needing any tricks or rhetorics.

One of the important things right now is this: if a game is made on PC and then ported into CG consoles it will look nice for all platforms if downscaled right, if it's made for CG consoles and then ported to PC it will look nice visually but will run awkwardly in many situations. That is why a lot of games that were never expected to be on PC, are coming to CG consoles and also PC.

Edited February 14, 2015 by S1LV3R_W0LF

[Phorkz]

30fps, yuck, why would we want to bring console cancer over to the master race?

[V8VANTAGE]

Am I right in saying the animations were re-done for the current gen release, and thousands were added? If they were captured at 60 frames per second, then they could easily be re-encoded to 30fps for the consoles which means we could see proper time coded 60fps animations for the PC version of GTA V. Maybe, that's one of the reasons why we're waiting all of this additional time for the PC version to be released. Max Payne 3 was great, and GTA V is built on that stepping stone, so I have high hopes.

 

If however the animations and timers are STILL timecoded for 30fps in mind, that is some proper laziness that takes me back to the PC version of Halo Combat Evolved. Yes you can play the game at 60 fps (and above) but the animations still jittered about, yuck!

[TheMostKnowledgable]

There is a likelihood, I suppose, that the reworked animations could go further than just the FPS mode and be frame independent (more procedurally blended). It's possible, but I'm not sure.

 

A note: If you are using the steam version, you either need to launch it from the LaunchGTAIV.exe (to get your commandline.txt to work - which can come with problems!) OR, you can add it to the launch properties of the game in steam (right click the game in library to access) and add them there instead, no commas, - (dashes) can be considered your commas, just add a space between commands if you choose to try more than just the one command.

[fefenc]

Pure bullsh*t into the spoiler tag

 

 

There's a lot of talk around about performance and fps, including a lot saying that "if it's better than iv was, it's fine" or "hopefully it's not godawful like iv was"

 

I'd like you to try something and there is good reason for it. This is a preemptive performance demonstration that will hopefully prime some of you for helping others if they are looking for ways to make GTA V run better when it comes out.

 

Now, firstly, let's remember that GTA III, VC, and SA all targeted 25fps. Actually, I'm not sure the framerate limiter setting in III and VC, but in SA, if you turn on the frame limiter, it is 25 fps and runs smooth. If the limiter is off, a lot of strange things happen. That won't be covered here to keep the opening post short, but just know, there are effects and even mission critical timers that are effected by fps in SA.

 

Now, onto the demonstration (you will demo for yourself):

 

In GTA IV, you may notice if you have high fps that the traffic stutters and so do cutscenes. That is because the traffic in GTA IV, no matter what FPS you get, is ticking at 25 updates per second. That is, the traffic is 25fps and independent of the actual framerate of the game. This is important to convey the differences you are about to see.

 

Now, go ahead and load up your GTA IV without any commandline.txt. Let it run from 35 to 60 to 90 fps depending where you are. Drive around some areas and notice that sometimes it is smooth and sometimes it feels like it is becoming sluggish. Drive around for like 5 minutes like this.

 

Now, exit the game and put commandline.txt into the folder where launchgtaiv.exe (or launcheflc.exe) is. For me, it is;

 

C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\SteamApps\common\Grand Theft Auto IV\GTAIV

 

or

 

C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\SteamApps\common\Grand Theft Auto IV Episodes from Liberty City\EFLC

 

Put the file commandline.txt in and use ONLY this command:

 

-frameLimit 30

 

Exactly as it is there.

 

 

Turn the P filter ON. Many believe that all P filter does is turn on a blur. That is wrong. It is depth of field and motion blur in one. When you drive fast, this effect makes things blur more and it looks like you are really driving fast. If you turn it off, you can't see any blurring at high speeds, and it looks bad and jaggy in the mid and far clip range. The blur fixes that. It also makes the game look like a real film on a TV.

 

GTA IV looks like a cinema, as if it was recorded on actual film stock while you play it with the filter enabled. It is a crucial part of the game's aesthetic, to seem like you are in a real classic NYC movie. Without it, you're just in a game. Personal preference respected, I suggest using it and seeing the differences at least.

 

If your FPS are too high, the effect will look bad. Even the trees are designed with this effect in mind, and if you have too high fps, the places you can see through the trees (where there are no leaves), stands out too much. But at 30 fps and motion, it looks more like a real tree (in the way that everything looks real in GTA if you don't focus on it directly)

 

Anyway, type that command above into your commandline.txt and Save it, and launch the game. Play again for 5 or 10 minutes driving and running around.

 

Notice how smooth everything is. Notice how less often you see slowdown. Notice how everything is more snappy and responsive and less erratic in terms of - look, just play 10 minutes of GTA IV with -frameLimit 30 and notice how solid it is.

 

You won't feel like it is 30 fps, because it is steady and throttled. IE, you won't notice it is going up and down in frames per second because it's not anymore.

 

Just try it. Because knowing this, and SEEING it for yourself how well the presentation becomes when it is steady fps, will help to prepare for this in GTA V.

 

Yes, there is a rumor GTA V already runs 60fps. Meaning, they have made it all work correctly at 60, if true, which is fine. But who will run it at 60 maxed? Not many. I hope we can limit it to 30 fps in GTA V, because that means double the time to draw frames, which means that settings can be turned higher without causing massive dips in framerate and such.

 

Try 30 fps GTA IV as I wrote here, and tell back what you think. It may shock you. And may help you to feel okay with GTA V no matter what, knowing you can probably limit it like we can limit IV as well.

 

The game targets 30 fps on console, and it achieves it the exact same way. Actually, it might be 24, I can't remember for IV. Anyhow, try this game at 30 fps. And watch some cutscenes and notice the characters shake around less (you know, that cutscene jutter in IV) they will still do it, because the cutscene animations are actually 24 or 25 fps and not 30, but it does it way less than if you were rendering those cutscenes 60fps with 25fps animations.

 

Try it this way, and be amazed. If you already do this, let people know how good the game runs and how 30fps is just fine and actually works better. If we could limit it or vsync it to 60 without dips, that would be great, too. I'm saying it is fine and works better steady than non-steady. I myself float between 40 and 60 fps give or take. That is bad for me because I can SEE and FEEL the changes occurring in FPS. But when I limit it to 30 fps, it is butter smooth and everything works correctly.

 

Just try it! What do you think?

 

 

The "Just try this" word was used on this wall text more often than the max fps I get on GTA IV with my rig.

 

M8, you should understand that if I wanted to play GTA V at "good looking" 30 fps, I'd have bought a console.

 

I didn't bought a monster rig (r9 290, FX 8350, 6GB RAM, 1TB HD) to content myself with GTA V at 30 fps, I demand perfect looking 60 fps. Your wall text is not an excuse to forgive a poor optimization on the PC version of GTA V because "30 fps lolks gud inóf" for you.

 

Do you work for Ubisoft?

It doesn't matter how you spin it, 30fps is not good (barely acceptable would be more accurate), and it definitely isn't smooth

You sir deserves a dookie.

Edited February 17, 2015 by fefenc

[TheMostKnowledgable]

Unfortunately, m8, your cookie is rotten. But let's stop any of that kind of childishness there.

 

And a few others along with yourself seem to be confused

 

GTA IV was designed to look filmic. That is a fact, and the things I wrote have been true about GTA since GTA3.

 

30fps is a choice. People are not respectful of verifiable things, then I will give them other sources of the same kind of discussion.

 

Here, read this, or take a film class and then make a game that you want to mimic film stock as much as possible. But reading this will be simpler and faster for you.

 

http://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2015/02/the-framerate-debate-why-videogames-need-to-take-a.html

 

Now, you really can't pull this kind of target off at 24 fps. You just can't. The input lag does become horrible there and it doesn't feel good.

 

But 30fps and using that to your advantage with post process motion blur that is variable to the speed of the camera moving is an excellent and intelligent, fully intentional design decision, and nowhere has this ever been truer or better realized that in the GTA Series who did it well in the old era with the matrix trails and motion blur, depending on which title you look at. SA had worse with a radial blur. GTA III and VC looked excellent on 640x480 played on the tubes it targeted. GTA IV pushed it all to a whole new level, and I share the disdain of the writer above for those who do not realize it in the first place to even begin to respect the design decision - the successful and unnoticed achievement that overall ignorant masses don't even realize was produced.

 

"But it's a video game not a movie" - you are all who haven't seen the others confirm this works and looks great to them entitled to your subjective tastes, preferences, and opinions. But in an objective and fact based discussion, your opinions are as much out of place as they are inconsiderate of myself, others [the developers who do this on purpose and it goes unnoticed by the mass-type-minds], and the facts.

 

Here's some more reading that is faster than gaining experience such that I, for example, do have:

 

http://kotaku.com/a-developers-defense-of-30-frames-per-second-1580194683

 

And I assure that you will very much enjoy GTA V and you will want to use the snazzy features and tesselation and ssao. And many of you will very much enjoy it locked to 30fps, if the case ends up in the favor that you must do so to maintain a steady, non-variable framerate, on your rig. If your rig is variable, dipping between 30 and 60 or more fps, you will either complain about it and live with it, or you will set it to thirty fps and have a proper experience.

 

30fps on a game designed to be played at 30 fps is not only fine and proper, it is also way effing better experience than that constant, visually jarring dipping up and down can give you. To boot, locking to 30fps greatly reduces the flickering of buildings switching from LOD to full and back again in IV. (Can't really judge V yet, especially if the PC targets 60fps while the console targeted 30, but we know it runs at about that on consoles... soooo.... it was designed on consoles for that, otherwise it would have been higher and completely different including different post processing techniques.... sooooo.... yea... if the target has been doubled on PC, great. But the modest specs suggest otherwise, at the very least - that could be, potentially at least, why the specs will raise later).

 

Thanks for your time, even if you haven't yet appreciated mine.

Edited February 17, 2015 by TheMostKnowledgable

[utack]

 

http://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2015/02/the-framerate-debate-why-videogames-need-to-take-a.html

 

The whole article reads somewhere between a Einstein publication and the doctrine of a sect trying to capture light in a crystal: some facts but the author did not understand them and ended in wrong conclusions

 

If the game industry wanted to copy movies they have to do this:

• Render the game at infinite FPS
• Take the time frame of 1/24 second and blend all the Images in that time frime into one single Image, thus generting the perfect motion blur.
• Use freesync/gsync to display the game at 24fps exactly or switch the TV the 24Hz mode.

So maybe, or absolutely f**king surely, they are limited by the poor console technology and are lucky enough that the people buying a console deal with it because they never learned that there is a better game experience.

 

 

 

Videogames, particularly AAA videogames, have been pre-occupied with Hollywood

Since when? Saying no to this also invalidates many other parts of the article following. They just came up with that as an excuse for their low framerate. "Hey, let's just say it is like a movie"

 

The fact that cinema is 24 frames per second is important. This is how our eyes have learned to read a moving image.

Our eye gets infinite FPS in nature, been that way for many thousand years.

 

 

If you took a photocopy of a painting and hung it up in a museum, trying to pass it off as a real painting, it would look cheap and lack texture.

It is digital. Any copy is a good as the original. If you want to go into the details of motion interpolation, mention it can make mistakes and focus on this.

 

 

higher framerate also affects the way that their stories are being told.

 

AAA is going to need to choose which framerate would best suit the story they want to tell,

30fps: "and then he died". 60fps: "and then he died". Oh my god, completely different story!!!

 

 

 

Please take your article and go back to the console section, or apply at Sony/MS/Ubi because you do their brainwashing and marketing.

Edited February 17, 2015 by utack

[TheMostKnowledgable]

Nah, the post processing motion blur (to simulate what you're talking about there) and the depth of field (for simulating focus) in GTA IV does just fine and the higher the resolution the better - and getting a higher resolution tends to lower FPS, and so limiting it becomes a key performance tweak for many, especially in a game which draws detail as far into the middle clip as GTA IV does.

 

People who lower their resolution to increase fps, view and detail distance, and texture sizes, for example, are, in the least offensive way I can say it, being retarded. Because they are just jamming more jagged sh*t into the distance away from the camera that can't support that added detail.

 

A lower resolution causes larger textures to not even render, because they can only render if the space they are in is bigger than the texture itself. If the screen is only 640x480 wide, driving down the road, you're only going to see a 256 or smaller version of the texture, because that's all that can fit mirrored on the 640 width.

 

A 512x512 texture needs more space than 512x512 on the screen to be shown on said screen. Zoomed out any further than that and it is filtered down to a mipmap that does fit into the remaining space.

 

You can have 2048x2048 textures, but unless you're zoomed in close, you're not seeing that texture. You're seeing a mipmap.

 

The further the detail draws, the more pixels the far clip needs to render those details without being shaky, flickery (edge flicker, not lod flicker), and jaggy. The view distance and detail distances you should use are directly related to the resolution you are running at.

 

See how the bridge jutters? That's intentional:

 

 

 

Those two things I said about texture spaces and resolutions then become an issue intertwined with your FPS:

 

You want steady FPS. You want 60 fps. You want high textures and far view distance. Perhaps you lower resolution to get all of those - then you simply lose it all - and add graphical artifacts in the near clip, let alone the far clip - just to achieve the setting, you lose what it even does, and just waste the memory.

 

The same video and system memory that you could instead be using on a larger resolution that would allow you to see those high settings at all, and in many cases, a locked framerate is going to be needed to do it. Without some kind of capping, unless you run steadily ABOVE the hz/refresh rate of your monitor, you're going to feel variable frames and it's hurting the experience and causing people who think every game should run at 60fps to talk lies without even realizing it. Saying "bad port" - um, play at the 30fps that it was designed to play at, and then tell me it's a bad port. And then show me your specs. Just an example.

 

Variable frame rates of 40 to 60 or wider (without even going below 40) are worse than 30fps STEADY, and that is because you can feel it changing and it is visually jarring. 60fps is suited for a sports or fps or racing title. They are not suitable for a game like, for example, every gta on pc so far, because they are designed to look like, mimic, feel like, play like, and seem like you are controlling a movie.

 

"Since When?" - ummm, Rockstar, and many others, have sought to bring film quality real time rendering to games for their entire existence as a studio. And that is not just about a single frame looking like it was shot on a camera that takes film. It's not a single frame issue. It is about the motion of it. Movies are a series images. So are games. The way to make them look filmic, is to get some blur in there and run as close to the 24 fps as you can. And 29.97 is the standard for 30fps video. So doing 30fps and motion blur helps to mimic video, and there are other techniques used to mimic FILM. FILM and VIDEO are completely different things, as well.

 

And let me make clear that I love 60, 75hz gaming. I love that, for example, CoD modern games update 90 times a second on PC and render at the hz my monitor is set to up until that point. But GTA is designed, like many other games, to look like a movie and play like a interactive action film.

 

People have seen the 60fps videos, I'm sure, of GTA being rendered with slo-mo cheat at 0.5 speed and then sped up (so at full speed it's true 60fps) and have said it looks too cartoony - what they REALLY mean is that it looks "Like a discovery channel show - some 60fps non filmic sh*t" Which would be perfectly fine in FPS or sports games - because sports and discovery channel and stuff are 60fps. And FPS is intensely framerate dependent anyway, even if your monitor doesn't even show all the frames, you want the game updating as fast and often as possible to get the kill. Not Important Anywhere Else In Gaming.

 

Facts! Just respect it!

 

 

Edited February 17, 2015 by TheMostKnowledgable

[Njale]

^^

Do you work for Ubisoft by any chance?