60FPS vs. 30FPS vs. 20FPS difference shown w/ the help of F1 2013(pcgameshardware.de)
- Thread starter ekim
- Start date
because things being more responsive and having higher temporal resolution is always better without exception
also most people can tell the difference, they just don't know the words for it.
nogoodnamesleft
Banned
Stable 30fps is playable, but is never preferable. Ever. "Cinematic" is a hilarious excuse. 60fps stable always trumps 30.
60fps games feel better because movement is smoother and there is far less input lag. It's twice as much visual information as is present in 30fps games.
Since when did the human eye capture frames? Our eyes and ears can capture a lot of information but it's up to the brain whether it can process it effectively to tell the difference.
Some of us can definitely tell the difference between 30,60,120 and over and some can not. This argument is the same when it comes to lossless audio, some can tell the difference between a 128bitrate/44kHz MP3 and a 2023bitrate/96kHz FLAC/WAV and some can not.
Informative article about FramesPerSecond and the eye
and heres another
Some of us can definitely tell the difference between 30,60,120 and over and some can not. This argument is the same when it comes to lossless audio, some can tell the difference between a 128bitrate/44kHz MP3 and a 2023bitrate/96kHz FLAC/WAV and some can not.
Informative article about FramesPerSecond and the eye
and heres another
Hip Hop
Member
When I made a jump into PC gaming late last year, I also saw the majority of people saying that refresh rate matters very little and there is no difference between a 60Hz and 120Hz monitor. I was never a PC gamer until late 2012 and noticed how crucial refresh rate is, and I was never technical about this stuff. Before getting the monitor and knowing that it was the refresh rate was the problem, I literally though there was something wrong with my CPU or GPU whenever I played game. It looked like straight crap. I can't see how people can't tell the difference between this stuff like refresh rates and framerates.
at the same time, 30fps can 'feel' better as far as aesthetics are concerned as well. i thought skate 1 felt and looked great, once i played skate 2 which was 60fps i was so bummed because it felt a lot more weightless and less cinematic. they wouldn't have given the option of switching between 30 and 60 fps in skate 3 if there wasn't a valid reason for both.
framerate depends on the game and it's intention. tf2 is a perfect game for high fps because not only does it call for faster input as a competitive first person game but the style of it compliments the higher framerate. it creates it's own cohesive art direction i think.
when someone chooses to use 30fps, especially now, i think greater care should be taken to make sure the framerate doesn't detract from the experience. things like blur and making sure things that constantly move don't strobe (like moving backgrounds in sidescrollers)
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Skate 2 is not a solid 60fps. It's running at an unlocked framerate.
30fps isn't a "cinematic" framerate this gen because the motion blur isn't good enough to hide the judder. So it has all the flaws of cinema and none of the benefits. It's literally the worst of both worlds.
IncandescentPrecept
Banned
Yeah, quite hard to tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps.
VanillaCakeIsBurning
Member
This thread is the first time I have ever seen someone refer to low framerates as cinematic instead of hardware being too weak to render everything on screen at high rates.
Considering the tone of quite a few posts here I can only assume that the people doing so are being sarcastic.
Considering the tone of quite a few posts here I can only assume that the people doing so are being sarcastic.
Metal Gear?!
Member
I think the meme started with Castlevania Lords of Shadow
i agree with you that 30fps games aren't taking full advantage of the visual quality the framerate can bring, but i have to say that even poor motion blur allows the visual quality of 30fps to be present. especially when, in the grand scheme of things, you are generally focusing on the center of the screen while playing. i wouldn't call 30fps (and more often than not its 24fps) a flaw in cinema though. i think you are exaggerating things a bit here.
i would imagine in the future when developers have the tech to do whatever they please, people will still be choosing to use 30fps for the effect it gives. there are animators out there that animate a drawing every 6 frames, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're technical abilities are shit because of that choice, but it most certainly creates it's own effect.
Hip Hop
Member
I really hope 60FPS becomes a standard sometime in future, although by looking at things right now, I'd say we are far from it.
My favorite one is when people say that 60fps is a must for fighters and racers only, as they need it but not other genres.
No, 60FPS should be a must for every single game out there and every type of game gains from it.
SneakyStephan
Banned
Is it just me or does the video only play at 40fps?
I turned on fraps cos it didn't look like 60 fps and it's only playing the video at 38-43 ish.
Also as always with these comparisons, it's not mainly about the visuals (though smooth animations and smooth framerates are more pleasant to look at and a high framerate is important to track movement in fps games)
It's about the feedback (input lag)
you see the result of your adjustement , button press, turn or w/e much faster with the higher framerate.
That is why 60 fps is so incredibly important in racing games (probably most of all genres), since you are changing your inputs and relying on the feedback frame by frame by frame.
If you try to countersteer or choose a racing line you need your input to register RIGHT NOW, not with a delay as then you have to adjust again for the adjustements, while waiting to see the results until it's too late, and it's kind of a vicious circle and it'll be shitty.
Even if something is wrong with the wiring of your brain and you can't see 20 fps vs 60 fps, you should still be able to feel it clear as day.
I turned on fraps cos it didn't look like 60 fps and it's only playing the video at 38-43 ish.
Also as always with these comparisons, it's not mainly about the visuals (though smooth animations and smooth framerates are more pleasant to look at and a high framerate is important to track movement in fps games)
It's about the feedback (input lag)
you see the result of your adjustement , button press, turn or w/e much faster with the higher framerate.
That is why 60 fps is so incredibly important in racing games (probably most of all genres), since you are changing your inputs and relying on the feedback frame by frame by frame.
If you try to countersteer or choose a racing line you need your input to register RIGHT NOW, not with a delay as then you have to adjust again for the adjustements, while waiting to see the results until it's too late, and it's kind of a vicious circle and it'll be shitty.
Even if something is wrong with the wiring of your brain and you can't see 20 fps vs 60 fps, you should still be able to feel it clear as day.
I don't think that 24fps in movies is a flaw, but I do think that 48 (or even 60fps - juicy) could be a really nice benefit.
I understand that it feels weird to some people but I think that that is in large part due to the familiarity of 24fps. If for some reason 48fps were to become the standard for movies, I think a person born in an era with prominent 48fps movies might look back on a 24fps movie and find that it looks choppy.
Standards change over time. I had a lot of fun playing games like CS and TFC at 25fps or less back in the day and now I wouldn't be able to put up with it.
These people have something wrong with their vision I'm guessing. The difference is VERY obvious.
That said, I don't mind when a racing game is 30 fps... Same with third person games. FPS is the only genre for me where 60 fps is essential imo.
EDIT: Conversely, anyone saying 30fps is unplayable = fucking lol.
SneakyStephan
Banned
Older pc games? older pc games could run at 60-100 fps as well back in the day ...
I stopped playing new pc games between 2006 and 2009 because I could only get about 35 fps in new games with my old pc and old cpu. (didn't upgrade from 2002 till 2009)
I don't enjoy games nearly as much if the controls aren't responsive and they aren't smooth.
(enough for me to stop buying new games and heavily reduce my gaming time for 3 years...)
I'm used to responsive controls and high framerates, why play games in a watered down way that compromises the gameplay and get a lot less enjoyment out of them.
The only time I've ever put up with 30 fps is during the psx era, and only because I had no choice (no gaming pc at the time)
during the nes/snes era the vast majority of games were 60 hz (50 here because I live in PAL land) so it wasn't an issue then, games were smooth and felt great
Bought witcher2 and didn't play it till I got a new gpu months later because it ran poorly, quit saint's row 4 after a few hours due to poor framerate (my cpu is aging again , nearly 5 years old now
) bought shadow warrior but it doesn't run too well (framedrops and some stutter even at lowered settings) so I played it for 2 hours then shelved it until they patch it or I upgrade my pc. I love the weapons and game mechanics but I couldn't enjoy it like this.I have a ps3 this gen but none of the games I bought on it got much playtime, a few hours before I gave up each time (lots of buyer's remorse this gen which is reflected in my posting on gaf)
I think the only game that is 30 fps (and less ,ugh) that I put any real time in this gen is dragon's dogma.
Never played anything like it (amazing open world action combat rpg with great combat and music), it's not on pc so I played all the way through it.
It's a shame knowing I would have enjoyed the combat a whole lot more with a good framerate
still hoping for a pc release.the ps2 era was awesome for me because so many console games were 60 fps
I have fond memories of playing SSX, extreme g3, mgs2 , ZOE, tekken tag, devil may cry, gt3 etc
I still vividly remember when I saw sega rally2 for the dreamcast for the first time during the psx era (on a demo unit in a store). It was smooth as glass , blew me away.
The best part of going to the beach during summer when I was a kid in the mid 90s was spending an hour in the arcades and playing and drooling over the incredibly smooth sega arcade games.
I didn't even know what fps was back then , I just knew I loved it when I saw high fps.
Cause it gets ignored like people telling other gamers that using lower fps kills their motion details. It's not just movies and games but anything media based that is fixed in timing and not interactive. We could also mention the ways our eyes are made create a lot of issues no game is going to fix in the near future, but facts in threads like these doesn't make the thread grow it kills it.
That's not entirely true. Using this formula,you will find the eye actually peaks at the magical 24FPS thus making movies the perfect display of the eye's capabilities. Anything above that is really just "Hey, look at what I can do".
Human eye simply can't register above 24fps.
I like how you applied Einstein's Field Equations for this.
Even with perfect pitch, slightly out of tune has a melodic quality. Like a piano where some of the strings aren't perfectly tuned. It adds warmth.
But what I can tell you is that if you know the basics of music theory, you'd absolutely hate Rihanna's "Only Girl In The World". I feel like the musician in me is violated every time I hear it.
No it's not required for every type of a game. In games where motion and response dictate the player it necessary. Rather better fps is better response. Until we get to an exceptionally high value it's never a waste of power to let a player interact better with the game they environment they are manipulating.
Is in a console heavy world devs should not be telling their customers what is good for them. Devs lose plenty of sales for a lot of dumb reasons but on this issue they are shooting themselves in the foot not leaving performance options for those sensitive to the issue. Not every game sells like gta, and cod and in industry that needs as many as sales as possible it's just another aspect the console industry is stuck literally in the 90's 3d console warp and costing them customers. A colossal waste of power is the amount of power concerns given to resolution over the benefits it's bringing.
Conor_Fool
Banned
Cool video, thanks for sharing.
I always said I couldn't tell the difference of FPS in video games until I played Pokemon X in 3D. Also, I'm not sure I've ever played a game that runs at 60 FPS
I always said I couldn't tell the difference of FPS in video games until I played Pokemon X in 3D. Also, I'm not sure I've ever played a game that runs at 60 FPS
the hobbit was displayed in 3d in 48 frames per second. it becomes a different experience when viewed that way, and you can find out yourself that some people thought it was awesome and others thought it was shit. films presented in a higher framerate reap their own benefits but also lose the benefits 24/30fps provides in that medium.
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57569102-221/what-is-the-soap-opera-effect/
That's pure hyperbole or you don't play games all that much. 60fps like 30fps is quite common and easy to find in any generation. Only 2 3d console generations have had fps problems the last one that just ended and the the first.
ultra facepalm.gif
TyrantGuardian
Member
Fixed for my tastes. PC gaming really makes you spoiled in this sense... playing games on consoles when you're used to being able to tweak settings to heighten framerates feels really frustrating. But obviously some people just don't enjoying tinkering with settings, so it's a tradeoff in that sense.
Still, I'm having a really hard to playing at 60fps sometimes, depending on game. Doing stuff in Windows after intentionally setting my monitor to 60Hz? Gives me a headache, ugh.
Even after all these years it's still slightly odd to read this kind of stuff as there was a time when the inverse was true. If you wanted 60 fps you went console while the PC rarely managed to deliver it.
Perspective and history on neogaf you must be crazy.
UltraGunner
Banned
I wonder how much Youtube has contributed to people's inability to tell the difference between 30 and 60 fps. When people look up videos of gameplay they see it in 30 fps so when they go actually play it it will look exactly as they expected. My casual gamer friends always ask why I am such as stickler for framerate since they tell me they can't tell the difference. I tell them the difference between 30 fps and 60 fps is like the difference between red and green.
Nizz
Member
I haven't seen the video but I can't grasp the fact that people can't tell the difference between 30 and 60fps. Not trying to be a smartass but I don't get how that's possible. As far as framerates though, 60 would always be preferable especially with certain genres like racing, fighting and FPS games. But a locked and I mean locked 30 is fine. It's the sub 30fps that bothers me...
That's only half the story, unfortunately. The mains frequency adopted by the various nations is a consequence of electromagnetic ocean effects. Because North America is situated directly between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, it was necessary to adopt a higher mains frequency to compensate for the more pronounced effects of the Lienard-Wiechert phenomenon. The European continent, meanwhile, was able to adopt a lower main frequency due to the continent's relative proximity to the African and Asian continents.
Now, it is from this disparity that the aforementioned genetic differences arose and this is borne out by multiple epidemiological studies which have identified differential exposure to low level electromagnetic fields as the most probable means by which this might have occurred.
If you can get being colorblind or not having 20/20 (or any good vision) why is this a problem?
Contrary to popular belief, standards change over time.
Are you playing all your games at 480p because it used to be acceptable?
Exactly there is a slow push towards higher frame rate video content as well. The Hobbit was the first film to bring 48fps to the theatres and James Cameron is allegedly planning to shoot Avatar 2 in 60fps. Most flat panels these days ship with some kind of 24fps motion smoothing that mimics the feeling of 60fps. Most DSLR cameras and even phones allow you to now shoot at 60fps or higher.
SneakyStephan
Banned
Yeah they change down...
again, 16 bit games were pretty much all 60fps
Anything under 40 fps is useless, and 40 fps is already pretty damned bad.
I lower settings till I can keep my framerate at my refresh rate 90 percent of the time(75hz atm), so that the drops don't go below 50 fps.
travisbickle
Member
It's more priorities are different. 60fps is a technical achievement which can be accomplished if the developers concentrate on it over other areas like graphics.
I am more pissed off by the revelation (for me) from a FIFA developer that they restrict the numbers of players jumping for a header down to 2 because they don't have "enough power" for more .... f'ing bullshit, they should be reducing shiny graphics before reducing elements that help actually create the game of football.
Priorities are messed up!!
In a generation we are already dediciding between 1080p and other resolutions it's even harder to deal with fps considering it requires more resources.
Though my main beef is FPS is part of graphics in fact without the motion of it other aspects graphics would really not make an impact at all considering you'd be viewing a slideshow. You need to balance this and resolution against the rest of the resources. Always been an issue but as of late seems to be bullshit pr point for we don't spend enough time making the game as polished as it should be.
i prefer an even 10fps for the ultra cinematic slow motion look.
You don't see 60fps, but you certainly feel it. Controls, especially the mouse (or thumb sticks), are so much more responsive. When you're at 60 or more fps, there is a good chance you won't see a huge dip when there is a ton of explosions and effects on your screen. In recent console 1st person games I've had a hard time aiming in hectic situations with low fps, BF3 is my probably best example. A big reason why CoD is so popular is because how smooth and good it feels to play at a solid 60fps.
TV is quite the compromise when it comes to how we perceive things. You can do a lot but considering how much movie or tv gets mentioned you figured someone would've mentioned the work that goes in to the right camera position or not panning too fast. The work be it done live or post production is something that a real time video game can't ever touch. Yet gaf is gonna gaf go soap oprea mode max.