Someone on Reddit made a 30fps vs 60fps site.
- Thread starter scytheavatar
- Start date
Devilgunman
Member
I can see the difference very easily and tbh, other than racing scenes, I prefer how 30 fps looks. 60 fps looks like a movies on tv with "Motion Flow" turned on.
Yaphett Kotto
Member
lol
TheLegendOfMart
Banned
I play 30fps console games and 100fps+ PC games and I don't have any problems switching, it's all the performance snobs who make it out to be a massive deal.
If you wanna spend £400-500 on a GPU and same again on a 144hz monitor then knock your socks off, don't start threads and tell people they must be blind or have genetic defects if they don't give a flying fuck about it.
I can see the difference, the best way I can describe it is that the 60fps samples look more fluid, in terms of motion, or more... "move"-y. It's much easier to notice it when the camera or view is shifting. I'm not sure whether I prefer it though. It reminds me of what some people call the "Soap Opera Effect" caused by frame interpolation on some HDTVs with "MotionFlow wow!PlusSuper TruSmoother" capabilities enabled.
What I don't see are differences that would detract from my gaming experience. If the game looks good to me, and plays well, then I don't care.
What I don't see are differences that would detract from my gaming experience. If the game looks good to me, and plays well, then I don't care.
In cinema the DoP knows not to whip the camera around in a circle really fast. Quick angular movements are what shows the limitations of low framerates. If you watch any film moments where the camera is turning really fast you can see judder - I find it really unpleasant.
This is why a lot of the comparisons at the site kind of suck - the camera just isn't moving all that much. When it's just going forward and backwards, with really gentle looks sideways, you dont have as many egregious judder points. it needs to pan a lot to feel the difference.
In the Sleeping Dogs vid there's a moment right at the end of the loop where the camera pans 90 degrees sideways (with a weird correction, eh) - it's really clear there. If he was doing that even faster - like, say, an FPS player would - the higher framerate would be even more beneficial.
Just to make the point less clear with math, think of it like this: there's an apple in the middle of the screen, otherwise white. The camera whips 90 degrees right in 1/10th of a second. The 30fps video has 3 frames to show the movement of the apple. If the camera has a 90degree FoV, you only see the apple in the 1st frame, and maybe 1/2 of the apple in the second frame (+blur depending on shutter speed...), then nothing in the 3rd frame. The 60fps shot has 6 frames for the same movement. The relative position of the apple on each frame will be MUCH closer together, thus the movement will be perceived as smoother. The apple is on more frames.
Hope that helps.
What a dumb criticism. Is it only "resolution snobs" who prefer 1080p to 720p?
Where exactly are you getting this from? Who says that to someone who doesn't care about it? If anything, it's said to people who claim they can't see the difference which isn't remotely the same thing.
All around terrible post, fella.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Same. In fact, if the game 'works' at 30FPS (something like Resogun clearly doesn't, something like TLOU does) I forget about framerate probably after five minutes of play time.
TheLegendOfMart
Banned
Can you put my post review on Yelp, I don't want people thinking I make good posts or anything.
I forgot that the latest feature of gaf is reviewing how people post, can you make sure to note my spelling and use of punctuation?
I forgot that the latest feature of gaf is reviewing how people post, can you make sure to note my spelling and use of punctuation?
mutatedwombat
Member
Thanks. And to be honest, I did go back and stare at the examples for a while longer and could eventually see a difference. Thing is though it took a while, and was far less noticeable than the increased resolution I can get by accepting 30 fps. I guess it depends on what matters most to each individual.
Garcia
Member
I really want this to happen. I honestly can't comprehend how anyone couldn't tell the difference between both when it is so abysmal to me (and plenty).
TheLegendOfMart
Banned
It's not that people can't tell, people just don't care. I can tell that 30fps is not as fluid but it doesn't matter to me, that's the reason why developers aim for 30fps rather than 60. The average consumer doesn't give a toss and graphics take precedent, it's easier to hit 30 with better graphics than it is to hit 60. People would also question why a next gen console is necessary if the games look sped up like something from Benny Hill and didn't have a large enough leap in graphics fidelity.
The only time it does matter is if it dips into sub 20s and even then it's hardly even a blip on my care-o-meter.
Both GTA5 and The Last of Us were 20odd fps average and I really enjoyed them.
Sure, but I'd like an actual response too. Otherwise your post above just seems belligerent for the sake of being belligerent.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
Because there exists so many horribly bad examples. I'm also pretty damned sure if this happened a solid portion would fail that test.
This is really important to note especially for laptop users. Battery mode usually drops the framerate down to 40hz.
s-bojan
Banned
You should have bought cheaper GPU then.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
Yah, because the fact that he can switch and it doesn't drive him crazy means he wouldn't want to play at 60fps.
Fbh
Member
Difference is quite obvious.
I really can't belive some people are being honest when they say they don't see a difference.
With that in mind. I don't see anything wrong with 30 fps as long as it's locked and not a 20-30 variation as in some last gen games on consoles.
Personally, if we are talking about consoles with limited hardware I preffer them going for 30 fps but trying to push other elements like graphics, effects, resolution, player/enemy count, physics, AI, etc instead of focusing on 60fps.
Looking at reactions to games like Infamous I don't think the general public would like the idea of a much worse looking version of that game, with less destruction, enemies, particles, etc just to get it to run at locked 60fps
I really can't belive some people are being honest when they say they don't see a difference.
With that in mind. I don't see anything wrong with 30 fps as long as it's locked and not a 20-30 variation as in some last gen games on consoles.
Personally, if we are talking about consoles with limited hardware I preffer them going for 30 fps but trying to push other elements like graphics, effects, resolution, player/enemy count, physics, AI, etc instead of focusing on 60fps.
Looking at reactions to games like Infamous I don't think the general public would like the idea of a much worse looking version of that game, with less destruction, enemies, particles, etc just to get it to run at locked 60fps
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
The difference is quite obvious in the examples in the OP, really? Lol, ok.
Hyperbole, whats that.
phxxBullet
Banned
:facepalm:
1080p vs 720p is something completely different than 30fps+ vs 100fps+.
And he was clearly talking abt. FPs, not resolution.
Same here. But I don't mind running at 30fps, I even preffer it over the 60fps+, at least for 1st/3rd Person shooter and racing games.
Also, those who do NOT see a different, are most likely looking at both at once, or didn't cover the one side while watching the other. When you put a window over the left side while watching the right side, and switch after 4-6 Loops, you can easily spot the difference.
copelandmaster
Member
Alo's post reminded me that I love this example, so Imma post it again.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
When I look at these gifs I can barely tell, but I don't play gifs. And when I play on my PC I can definitely tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps when at 1080p. Some games it matters, some it doesn't (turn based games mostly).
Also, the above goes for a 22inch monitor OR a 42 inch HDTV, both at 1080p with the same refresh rate.
Also, the above goes for a 22inch monitor OR a 42 inch HDTV, both at 1080p with the same refresh rate.
Gee, you think?
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
Sorry GAF card revoked, you cannot tell by looking at some tiny ass gif. HAHA.
Morphine_OD
Banned
30 fps looks more cinematic and that's a good thing in my book. 60fps looks like amateurish, very weightless.
I don't see much difference at a quick first glance.
<edit> If I study and look really closely, I can tell the top one is 30 fps. But really... if someone has to study it super close, what's the big deal anyway. But I'm the furthest thing from a competitive fighting game fan, so I don't really care about that scene.
PdotMichael
Banned
I'm getting the impressions that video games boards slowly becoming like audio boards where you can read hundreds of pages of rant about the lack dynamic ranges in modern audio cd releases for example.
A lot of hyperbole and the main target groups don't care about it.
A lot of hyperbole and the main target groups don't care about it.
hooijdonk17
Member
I've shown it to about a dozen people in the office and not a single one could see a difference.
Honestly, I can tell a difference because I know what to look for. But while playing the game, I couldn't give a flying damn.
(Lack of dynamic range in Audio CDs is a HUGE issue compared to this, btw.)
Honestly, I can tell a difference because I know what to look for. But while playing the game, I couldn't give a flying damn.
(Lack of dynamic range in Audio CDs is a HUGE issue compared to this, btw.)
Exactly!
Those audiophiles can be fucking crazy. The casual masses (the majority of people making the purchases, whether in music or games) don't give a shit.
Rogue_Ledr
Banned
You absolutely can see the difference.
It is not jarringly different, but it is definitely ostensible and can be perceived very easily.
Plus, this is just in videos, which don't even properly convey the difference even closely.
When playing a game the difference is VERY evident. The smoothness of the movement and gameplay is immediately noticable.
It is not jarringly different, but it is definitely ostensible and can be perceived very easily.
Plus, this is just in videos, which don't even properly convey the difference even closely.
When playing a game the difference is VERY evident. The smoothness of the movement and gameplay is immediately noticable.
Professor Beef
Banned
Honestly you could probably tell me that some of the games I own are 60 when they're 30, and vice versa, and I'd believe you. I truly can't tell the difference unless it's side-by-side. And even then, it's not immediately noticeable.
copelandmaster
Member
Ok, so I got an example for those who may have a problem with the "half the frames removed" method of comparison.
The following clips have two different master files. They are natively captured at their respective framerates. You can see each one starts and ends slightly differently.
http://a.pomf.se/zrvgrn.webm
http://a.pomf.se/ychkrc.webm
Can't really get more obvious than this.
The following clips have two different master files. They are natively captured at their respective framerates. You can see each one starts and ends slightly differently.
http://a.pomf.se/zrvgrn.webm
http://a.pomf.se/ychkrc.webm
Can't really get more obvious than this.
Fattony12000
Member
60fps is also about how the controls feel compared to what we see on the screen. With some games it's a biggie, with some games it's not.
ScepticMatt
Member
The reason: Temporal anti-aliasing ("Motion Blur")
Works better for movies than for games, until we get eye-tracking.
Because movies generally maintain pan-speed limits, which isn't the case for e.g. FPS games.
Also games are often played with higher field of view, which makes motion blur without accounting for eye rotation less effective.
Saintguine
Member
60fps for life.
Those are truly two different gameplays recorded in different sessions? How did they turn out so identical in a fighting game like that?
Professor Beef
Banned
They won't load.
VVV Mars VG
Member
There's a huge difference for me and I'm glad many arcade developers have been using 60 for years.
As for the links comparing 30 and 60, they don't look right at all to me.
As for the links comparing 30 and 60, they don't look right at all to me.
ZackieChan
Member
I can tell the difference, but I really don't like the "look" of 60 fps in some situations. It's like those HFR movies. It just looks odd to me. Maybe I actually do prefer the "cinematic" look of lower fps?
There's nothing cinematic about lower fps in games. Games do not use light like cameras do and they do not keep constant frames.
Sir Blaming
Member
Due to spending too much time in 30 fps, I can tell the difference immediately.
I don't really know if that is a good thing or not......
I don't really know if that is a good thing or not......
copelandmaster
Member
No, the gameplay is the same SSB Project M replay data. The video capture method is what is different.
Instead of recording a 60fps file and then halving the frames, like in all the previous examples, this one was captured once at 60fps and again at 30fps.
These aren't gifs, they are Webm's. Do you have the neogaf webm extension for your respective browser? Here's a thread all about Webm's and how to play them on GAF.