GT5 @ 240FPS

rp2000 · 25 Nov 2008 at 13:36

wush said:
Dunno - official source?

Will have a look later, but I thought it was in same interview from GT makers that talked about GT5

features, GT5 release date (vague) and GT5: Mobile update/cancellation.

rp2000

Streeteh · 25 Nov 2008 at 13:36

Kainz said:
"So what is it?"

It's a time hole.

Demon · 25 Nov 2008 at 13:41

Streeteh said:
It's a time hole.

LOL, Red Dwarf rulez..

Oh, and as for GT5,

I keeping swaying from loving the attention they've lavished on the graphics, to finding it lacks the gameplay. I've sold my PS3, so keep popping on my brothers complete wheel/chair setup for my GT5 fix, and am always impressed by the graphics initially.

I think they've got to the point that it looks good enough, and need to just finish it!

Sheff · 25 Nov 2008 at 14:20

Streeteh said:
It's a time hole.

It's a white hole.

Tetsu · 25 Nov 2008 at 14:24

The human eye can only see 7 frames per second so this is pointless.

PiKe · 25 Nov 2008 at 14:34

Tetsu said:
The human eye can only see 7 frames per second so this is pointless.

lol what?

dirtydog · 25 Nov 2008 at 14:40

Presumably a pee take of those people who always pop up in framerate threads and say stuff like the human eye can't see more than 25 frames a second (it always happens).

Tetsu · 25 Nov 2008 at 14:40

PiKe said:
lol what?

Sorry I misread, its 5 frames a second tops. Anymore than that its a waste.

Tetsu · 25 Nov 2008 at 14:40

dirtydog said:
Presumably a pee take of those people who always pop up in framerate threads and say stuff like the human eye can't see more than 25 frames a second (it always happens).

Kainz · 25 Nov 2008 at 14:49

Sheff said:
It's a white hole.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. A black hole sucks time and matter out of the Universe; a white hole returns it!

Memphis · 25 Nov 2008 at 15:02

dirtydog said:
Presumably a pee take of those people who always pop up in framerate threads and say stuff like the human eye can't see more than 25 frames a second (it always happens).

Bit like yourself really. Framerate threads = you.

dirtydog · 25 Nov 2008 at 15:06

Memphis said:
Bit like yourself really. Framerate threads = you.

The stuff I say in framerate threads makes sense though

orderoftheflame · 25 Nov 2008 at 15:13

Tetsu said:
The human eye can only see 7 frames per second so this is pointless.

Have you seen something running at 7fps? I can certainly notice it.

I thought it was between 25-40 fps depending on the person.

dirtydog · 25 Nov 2008 at 15:14

orderoftheflame said:
Have you seen something running at 7fps? I can certainly notice it.

I thought it was between 25-40 fps depending on the person.

wwwebber · 25 Nov 2008 at 15:20

Dutch Guy said:
I think they are way too perfectionistic and keep on changing stuff when they need to bring it out now.

Nah, they need to enhance the multiplayer and implement damage first

Spyhop · 25 Nov 2008 at 15:25

And the only worthwhile answer is that it depends what you're looking at. There's no one figure.

Tetsu · 25 Nov 2008 at 15:26

orderoftheflame said:
Have you seen something running at 7fps? I can certainly notice it.

I thought it was between 25-40 fps depending on the person.

The human eye can't see more then 7 fps that's a fact. Even less depending on IQ. Its been proven countless times.

orderoftheflame · 25 Nov 2008 at 15:42

Tetsu said:
The human eye can't see more then 7 fps that's a fact. Even less depending on IQ. Its been proven countless times.

I'm calling bull**** I'm afraid!

Got a link? Maybe your onto something with this IQ thing if you still can't see more than 7 though.

http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

apparently 18fps is the minimum required for the human eye to perceive "the typical cinema film motion as being fluid".

If that's minimum, I'd assume you can see higher than that.

dirtydog · 25 Nov 2008 at 15:47

orderoftheflame said:
I'm calling bull**** I'm afraid! Got a link? Maybe your onto something with this IQ thing if you still can't see more than 7 though.

http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

apparently 18fps is the minimum required for the human eye to perceive "the typical cinema film motion as being fluid".

If that's minimum, I'd assume you can see higher than that.

Whoosh!

Tetsu · 25 Nov 2008 at 15:48

orderoftheflame said:
I'm calling bull**** I'm afraid! Got a link? Maybe your onto something with this IQ thing if you still can't see more than 7 though.

http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

apparently 18fps is the minimum required for the human eye to perceive "the typical cinema film motion as being fluid".

If that's minimum, I'd assume you can see higher than that.

Personally I can see 999fps (it tops outs there) purely due to my large brain. The figures I was quoting was for the average man.