Skip to main content
Inspiring
December 22, 2016

[Gear VR] Apps with 59fps get rejected - why?!

So, I thought this was all behind me and sorted out, but apparently not. Here is the original post on UE4's AnswerHub: https://answers.unrealengine.com/questions/389782/gear-vr-unable-to-reach-60-fps-on-empty-scene.html

The issue is that phone screen doesn't run at 60 Hz and since UE4 is vsync locked, it won't ever run at 60 fps. If i make a totally empty scene, with a single cube on which player can stand, I would not be able to have 60 fps in Gear VR.

Also, I am very sensitive to motion sickness and I can tell you that 58 fps with occasional dips doesn't make me sick at all. There are plenty of games on Oculus Store that maybe run at 60 fps, but make me sick instantly. 

I hope you guys have people running these app compliance tests who understand all that and not robots (software) that rejects any app that doesn't reach 60 fps (in that link above last post indicates that the person's app was rejected due to fps being 59.90 and not 60)

All that being said, maybe that dev misunderstood the rejection reason, which might have been different from fps issue. 

What I would like to know if that's the case. Because if that's the case, not only I am not surprised there are only a few UE4 games on Oculus Store for Gear VR, but I also don't see a reason to continue my development and wasting my time/effort/money for a platform that deals in absolutes :(

Also, is there a way to submit a raw copy of the game to Oculus for preliminary certification pass? I just made a small performance test that yields the usual 59 fps frame rate and it would be nice to know if that will be a reason for rejection. I've invested too much time and money into developing for Gear VR and testing/reporting these endless issues between UE4 and Gear VR to just simply give up on this platform due to some bogus reason for 1-2fps deviation from target documented requirement of unachivable 60 fps.

Thanks beforehand

P.S. Note that an empty project (nothing in it but a cube player stands on) runs at less than 60 fps on Gear VR.
This topic has been closed for replies.

14 replies

Participant
December 27, 2016
Still no answer? Many people need to release their apps! 
Participant
December 28, 2016
Sorry if im being annoying but i need this to be solved... I know there might be a robot or an especific program validating the apks but i just need one single person to look at the debug files so you can make sure what i'm talking is real... Our apk is literally 59.90 fps and this cannot be a problem to be in your store...

PLEASE take a look at the app our company tried to submit
Up and Coming
January 5, 2017
Hi folks!
Sorry for the slow response: as you surmised, we were all out for winter holidays and New Years over the last two weeks.

To answer the high-level question here: we do not reject applications that are running at 58 or 59 FPS.

The purpose of the 60 FPS frame rate target is to ensure that the experience is smooth and low latency throughout.  Levels of sensitivity vary across users, and it's exceptionally important that your app maintain a high frame rate at all times.  That said, the practical reality is that game engines are not perfectly consistent from frame to frame and most frame rate counters are actually averages across  period of time.  We're looking for very high performance applications, but we won't fail an app that is 1 or 2 fps away from that target.

When we reject a application on performance grounds, it’s usually because it experiences a very significant drop (which results in a visual hitch in head tracking), or because it is consistently running way below the target for a sustained period of time.  Often this is the result of a specific area of an app that needs improvement, even if the rest of the application is performant.  There’s no hard line here, but if you are running significantly below 60 or you experience performance spikes, we may ask you to do further optimization.  If you look at the rejection report you receive it usually outlines the exact area that was affected by the performance issue.

So, TL;DR: We’re concerned about significant performance drops, not minor variance that is within a frame or two of 60 fps.

Cheers,
Chris
Participant
January 7, 2017
Okay... in my case our APK did passed the tests FINALLY! but... we fell down into "approved(keys only)"...

There is no further explanation because you wrote in an email "Due to the volume of
submissions, we can't offer specific feedback at this time."

I took a look to every line in "best practices" and "publishing requirements" and i didnt get any clue on whats going on... why our APK is still not being "fit" for oculus store... 

I know there might be a huge number of submissions but it would be appreciated to know what is going on here...

Thanks!