Silky Smooth Frame Rates

DAIR

DAIR

DAIR

Soldato
Joined
23 Jul 2009
Posts
8,920
Location
Cayman Islands
I've recently became me obsessed with watching iracing races on YouTube. And each time I'm amazed at how high the FPS is. So it go me thinking...

Why are todays console games capped at 60fps? Surely there should be a huge improvement by now?

Until now I always thought arguments about FPS were utter nonsense.
 
Lots of genres don't require 60fps. Lots of pc's that would be considered high spec won't run a constant 60fps at 1080p. I'm aware of Titans and so on before you start. I'm talking about the general PC gamer and not the enthusiast. Ultimately it comes down to preference in some cases.
 
Many games when using controller input don't require more than 60fps to "feel" perfectly fluid and responsive (a different story when using a 500-1000Hz polling mouse with 1:1 pixel mapping and freelook on a PC).
 
because 60hz is the standard of most TVs, even 600hz plasmas.


60fps is great if the game runs at that 95+% of the time. I'd sooner play a game capped at 30 than one that bounces anywhere between 40 and 60
 
They could make console games run at 120fps if they wanted, but they would have to sacrifice how it looks, and to (what i can only assume is) most people, it looking pretty is more important than a higher frame rate.
 
anticonscience said:
Watch Driveclub when it's out, then come and tell me frame rate matters.
Click to expand...

I played forza horizon 2 demo in Game the other day and its only 30fps but it felt very smooth and looked it to. the driveclub vids look amazing too will be picking both up
 
Last edited:
DAIR said:
I've recently became me obsessed with watching iracing races on YouTube. And each time I'm amazed at how high the FPS is. So it go me thinking...

Why are todays console games capped at 60fps? Surely there should be a huge improvement by now?

Until now I always thought arguments about FPS were utter nonsense.
Click to expand...


Lots of console games are locked at 30fps still.
Most ppl play consoles on TV's, most TV's can't display over 60fps, so anything over 60 is pointless.
Higher frame rates = more processing power needed.
Current consoles are designed to offer best price : performance ratio.
They are nowhere near powerful enough to run >60fps at 1080p this generation.
Next gen will probably be 30fps at 4k resolution (for consoles).
 
Depends on the game, with sim racers like iracing it's very important to have a high, smooth frame rate. For the more arcade style racers it's not so important.
 
mame said:
because 60hz is the standard of most TVs, even 600hz plasmas.


60fps is great if the game runs at that 95+% of the time. I'd sooner play a game capped at 30 than one that bounces anywhere between 40 and 60
Click to expand...

I dunno about that.

On the vessel I am 'working' on (am beginning to feel more like a 'pro gamer' than anything else, which is something that I amn't complaining about, there is a PS4. On that PS4, is cracking sci-fi shooter known as Killzone, Shadow Fall. Graphics are lovely with some very creative and artistically stunning environments. The game however does run in mostly somewhere in between 30-60fps. At times, it runs just at a fixed 30fps, and I am glad of the times when it hovers 40-60 fps.

Crucially though, with the new gen consoles, there is no screen tearing. The gfx are very nice and the games never go below 30fps, and are mostly aiming at 60fps.

I couldn't ever tolerate the ugliness of the perpetual screen tearing and sub 30 fps on the previous gen of consoles. So for the first time since the PS2 on a low res crt, I have been able to enjoy 'first person' perspective games on a console. I think that console manufactures and games developers have to realise that smooth frame rate should be a much higher concern than high resolution or even higher eye candy. With that said, there is absolutely no need to go over 60FPS imo.

In the 'gaming room' next door where the PS4 is, I also set up my MSI GTO 2 gaming laptop (with GTX 780M). On that, I am getting a full 60 fps on the same TV and in some of the same titles that the PS4 struggles with. I find that the PS4 performance is still acceptable, but the full 60fps of my laptop is ideal! (the catch being my laptop cost me over £2K just 18 months ago, the PS4 cost just £300). Main point is that more frames than 60 FPS is totally surplus to requirements as far as I am concerned. The present state of the next gen console games peformance is good, even when the golden 60 fps isn't hit, but I feel that developers should focus on 60 fps 95% of time as a priority, sacrificing what they must in other areas in order to acheive this.
 
I sometimes think FPS is a bit of a psychological thing too... With consoles you just accept what you are given so forget about it and just enjoy the game safe in the knowledge that it is playing as best it ever will.... With PC games it is easy to become too focused on settings, resolution, tweaking .INI files etc. and the fact that if you spent £X00 upgrading your graphics cards the game would be soo much better... I know I have fallen foul to this in the past on PC.
 
rubberduck said:
I sometimes think FPS is a bit of a psychological thing too... With consoles you just accept what you are given so forget about it and just enjoy the game safe in the knowledge that it is playing as best it ever will.... With PC games it is easy to become too focused on settings, resolution, tweaking .INI files etc. and the fact that if you spent £X00 upgrading your graphics cards the game would be soo much better... I know I have fallen foul to this in the past on PC.
Click to expand...

I would generally agree with this sentiment in regards to eye candy, in that I can enjoy the lower level textures and details of Wolfenstein New Order on PS4 running at 60 FPS just as much as I can enjoy the higher level eye candy of the PC running at 60 FPS. But of course, with the PS4 version you just take what you are given whilst with the PC version, the end user invariably spends time dicking around trying to squeeze the best visuals out of the gfx settings that he can. I experienced that 'dicking around phase' when running Wolfenstein on my laptop (but playing on big TV with gamepad console style)

But if you are talking about running a console game on for arguments 'the same' eye candy settings as its PC counterpart, but at 30-60 fps, whilst the PC version is running at a solid 60 FPS, then I would definitely argue that the PC version with a solid 60 FPS is so much more easier to enjoy.

Solid 60 fps on a 60Hz TV = fluid silky experience = enhanced immersion

I firmly believe that a big part of COD's success right through the 360 era was their decision to sacrifice textures/resolution in order to maintain as close to a solid 60 fps as possible. I could never bring myself to sit and play COD on the PC when I had the choice of Battlefield (any of them), but on the 360 console I wouldn't be able to bring myself to play any shooter except COD. It ran at 60 fps, it felt smooth and it felt good to play. BF Bad Company or BF3 on consoles on the otherhand was all stuttery, with screen tearing, etc.....it felt rough. It did not feel good to play and staring at it would give me a headache in a relatively short space of time.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom