Frames per second

hargi

hargi

hargi

Associate
Joined
19 Jul 2006
Posts
1,847
been reading in a few forums on here about frames per seconds in games, people wanting daft amounts like 150fps, correct me if im wrong but i though our films were made to abuot 24 fps as this is about the limit what we can see.
so why the need for more:?
 
hargi said:
been reading in a few forums on here about frames per seconds in games, people wanting daft amounts like 150fps, correct me if im wrong but i though our films were made to abuot 24 fps as this is about the limit what we can see.
so why the need for more:?
Click to expand...



e-penis, mostly.
 
well, I like to have at least 40+ because it keeps the game play smooth, not just in visual terms, but how quick you are to reacting to situations etc. I agree that there doesn't seem much point to aim for 150 off frame rate, but some people do suffer from motion sickness where the frame rate drops below a certain amount.
 
The frame rate is related to but not identical to a physiological concept called the flicker fusion threshold or flicker fusion rate. Light that is pulsating below this rate is perceived by humans as flickering; light that is pulsating above this rate is perceived by humans as being continuous. The exact rate varies depending upon the person, their level of fatigue, the brightness of the light source, and the area of the retina that is being used to observe the light source. Few people perceive flicker above 75 hertz for CRT monitors.

While many film projects are made at higher frame rates (most notably television material, often filmed at 30 or 60 FPS), nearly all commercial films are principally recorded at 24fps to save on film stock, so the shutter in the projection devices is actually arranged to interrupt the light two or three times for every film frame. In this fashion, the common frame rate of 24 fps (frames per second) produces 48 or 72 pulses of light per second on screen, the latter rate being around the flicker fusion rate for most people most of the time.
Click to expand...

The threshold is different for everyone. However it does seem to be easier playing at a higher refresh rate. even if your already past the flicker threshold. But trying to squeeze an extra few fps out. Is only good for stat showing and has no real benefit.
 
I thought the human eye could see at 60fps? :confused: hence why some games like Doom 3 for example are limited to it.
 
24fps in a game isn't necessarily smooth, in the 1st half of the second the game may display 20 frames and in the 2nd half of the second there may only be 4 frames displayed.

150fps is a silly amount which no one needs, around 60fps usually guarantees smoothness for me.
 
hargi said:
been reading in a few forums on here about frames per seconds in games, people wanting daft amounts like 150fps, correct me if im wrong but i though our films were made to abuot 24 fps as this is about the limit what we can see.
so why the need for more:?
Click to expand...

Because films are a constant 24fps. The fps talked about in games is an average fps. If your average in a game was 24fps that means you would probably be going as low as 10fps and as high as 50fps - which would mean it would be very jerky and annoying. You want high average so that your lowest fps is never noticeable when suddenly dropping from its highest. If you can average 60fps then you're good. Anything over 100fps is pretty pointless, other than for benchmarking.
 
In previous games like Quake III (and other QIII engined games) being able to sustain frame rates of 93, 125 etc. meant you could exploit physics oddities and jump over walls etc. that ordinarily you couldn't.
 
Thorpy said:
125fps if you want to be a top gamer
Click to expand...

Cool! :D:p

pingnl3.jpg


Although it's very difficult to tell the difference between a constant and smooth 60fps and anything higher.
 
Phate said:
I thought the human eye could see at 60fps? :confused: hence why some games like Doom 3 for example are limited to it.
Click to expand...

IIRC Quake Wars is limited to 30 to sync with the animation framerate (player/vehicle movement etc).

It's a massive can of worms and there are some articles on it, although they aren't to be taken as gospel. All I know is that I can feel a difference between 30 and 60 when playing an first person shooter. Over 60 I can't tell.
 
IIRC it has been proven that the human eye can see above 100fps. I personally think about 85 is ideal, but 60 is fine and very smooth also. Anything below 60 and I can definitely tell that it's not perfectly smooth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom