FyreWulff said:
Digital Foundry does good work sometimes, but the other half of the time they're making shit up. And now they're starting to inject subjective opinions into objective technical breakdowns, so I'd rather not give them any more hits.
The first article, the one not from Digital Foundry, is written by the co-founder of Neversoft, the Guitar Hero/Tony Hawk guys:
When a player presses a button, the game can take up to three frames (in the best case) to create visual feedback and programming problems can introduce additional frames of lag. The actual lag time is multiplied by the length of a single game frame.
...
So if we are running at 30fps, then the lag is 3/30th or one-tenth of a second. If we are running at 60fps, then the lag will be 3/60th or 1/20th of a second.
i.e. when a game runs at 30fps, the best you can hope for is 100ms. There may well be 67ms of latency inherent in a 360 controller, but my understanding is that's irrelevant when a game running at 30fps cannot do things 'faster' than 100ms; the time it takes to process what's happening and update the screen (after which different displays tack on a varying amount of latency, too, of course) is even more sluggish than the controller.
If what you are saying were true, then it would be possible for my 360 to do its thinking and output frames in no time at all (i.e.
literally zero milliseconds), and everything is the fault of the controller. But surely the logic of the game is directly tied into how often it updates/renders frames.
