• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

FUD: 30fps is enough

I guess this is why bullet time became so overused.

We as a people have no self-awareness, movies are all influenced at a low level by the tech used. Higher framerates is an artistic boon. In the future we will all look back at everything from the 60s or so as an entire "genre" with a certain look and feel due to the 24fps.
 
Last edited:
Orangey said:
Speaking of funny effects, try running Wolfenstein New Order with uncapped framerate and full ultra. The difference in speed is comical between 30fps and >60. It's like the Benny Hill music starts playing... how iD of all people screwed up that engine so badly I do not know.
Click to expand...

I literally can't play WNO though its amusing for a moment to run around with uncapped framerate and silly game time speed. Just feels too horrid limited to 60fps with crazy amounts of tearing with vsync off and stupid lag with it on.
 
30fps is jerky as hell when the screen pans fast, the reason films/tv aren't 50fps or more is primarily down to saving bandwidth (TV), saving storage space (DVD) etc. and historically due to interlacing there was a blurring between frames anyway.

So, 30fps games which are now progressive (full frames) tend to have an artifical blurring to make frame transitions smoother and then there's the fact that when you are interacting with a game any controller input will take place on screen 16.66ms faster (30fps 33.3ms per frame, 60fps 16.66ms per frame) so it feels less responsive than 60fps.

The reason games are 30fps is because most deveopers choose to focus on graphics and don't want to put in the effort optimising for 60fps, plus in fairness 60fps will be tricky this generation due to the rubbish CPU's in PS4/Xbone.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't matter how many people write it as fact, opinion, quote or whatever - 30fps is not high enough for frame rate to not seriously detract from the experience.
 
africanos23 said:
The game automatically detected my 4K resolution and set the high preset so I jumped straight into the game.

It feels to "boxed" to me, like its a reskinned GTA V. People seem to be overrating the visuals a tad bit to much. I bumped the settings to Ultra high which looks better but nothing other than the main character looks like any of the newer AAA game releases.

In terms of performance I didn't run fraps, but it feels like sub 20fps and is unplayable. Going up to Ultra high is a heavy slideshow.

Controls are clunky and unresponsive and moving around in the game feels weird with the way the camera swings around and the objects pop in.

I lasted exactly 12 minutes and thats forced because Im going to write an article about this game. I don't know where Im going to find the will power to sit down and test different setups on this game.

I dont want the cinematic feel forced on me, sorry I cant take it .

I hope Ubisoft dies already.
Click to expand...

The game autodetected settings for me , lets just say its a slideshowmatic feeling and Ubisoft deserves to go bankrupt
 
Apparently that VA FORIS FG2421 gaming screen has best black and shadow details yet.

I could not handle the Rog Swifts washed out colour and poor blacks esp in a dark room at night, was not as bad during daylight.
 
Size I assume, not see any under 42" (possibly 37") myself.

OLED is here but only industrial monitors so far and they are £££.

Someone on this forum said his company just replaced the old CRT's with them (tells you how poor LCD really is).
 
Last edited:
jh30uk said:
Apparently that VA FORIS FG2421 gaming screen has best black and shadow details yet.

I could not handle the Rog Swifts washed out colour and poor blacks esp in a dark room at night, was not as bad during daylight.
Click to expand...


Will let you know Vega has one and swears by it and the motion blur is second to none. So much so were now getting to point you can photograph the mouse trail difference between 125/500/1000/2000hz on them.


I hope its as good as it sounds, I literally spent most of the night doing a cabling job on my new rig for it specifically. This weekend there should be a lot of testing going on hopefully. But your right in that all the other options sort of suck. Unless of course silver blacks is your thing, Foris can 4K DSR and 240HZ strobe but Swift cannot do blacks no matter what. ;)
 
The reviews on that good site TFTCentral or the other main site are glowing.

Pity is only 24" and 1080p here's hoping they do a 27" 1440p soon.
 
in some films 24 fps is fine specially in slow pace films in action and fast moving camera movies 48 fps is better , as drunkenmaster said .

when i moved from 60 hz to 120 in games huge difference the smoothness the output lag no tearing and etc it just pleasure to play and most people will agree . also games are rendered real time not like movies so there would be a difference.
 
Orangey said:
European TVs operate at 25FPS, but many gamers claim they need more.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Ignoring the fact that European TV's haven't been limited to 25FPS in well over a decade, Sonic the hedgehog was released in 1991, it ran at 30 FPS, the European version only being 25 FPS due to PAL limits* was very noticeable.

*PAL was higher definition than NTSC but ran 5FPS/10Hz lower, this is why games in the UK had black borders for a long time, because they were originally designed for the lower resolution TV's of America/Japan.
 
Like somebody said earlier once you're used to 30 FPS it becomes normalised. I played games on my PS3 which ran at 30 FPS and lower and over time you don't notice it. And that's from somebody who has had a 120 Hz TFT monitor to play with higher FPS as far back as the 1680x1050 days.

But is having 60 FPS or higher better? Damn right it is. Just because something becomes normalised doesn't mean that in the case of frame rate, real tangible improvements can't be had.
 
Last edited:
Rusty0611 said:
Like somebody said earlier once you're used to 30 FPS it becomes normalised. I played games on my PS3 which ran at 30 FPS and lower and over time you don't notice it. And that's from somebody who has had a 120 Hz TFT monitor to play with higher FPS as far back as the 1680x1050 days.
Click to expand...

/\

Locked 30fps with games designed to be. I completely agree.

But is having 60 FPS or higher better? Damn right it is. Just because something becomes normalised doesn't mean that in the case if frame rate, real tangible improvements can't be had.
Click to expand...

Halo Master Chief collection on Xbox one is pretty much 60fps whereas all the old games were 30 fps and the difference is very noticable.
 
the argument that people are used to 24hz etc is stupid, best example is youtube, only recently they added 60fps support and having to watch everything in 30hz, now when you watch a video in 60, you can REALLY see and feel the difference. people just need to stop bitching about headaches of some random woman in her mid 40's and let directors record in w/e hz they want
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom