Ninjamander Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Both look the same to me. Both look the same to me. keep in mind that not every browser will play the video at 60 fps, you need a browser that is capable to do so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CelticMoss Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 60 fps anything lower i freak the f out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-CM-Tiffany Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miginimana Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 There is a obvious difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheErebus. Posted June 28, 2015 Author Share Posted June 28, 2015 There is a obvious difference. As I've said to others, I cannot tell the difference. Throw forth whatever video showing the differences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)MakoPriest Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Pretty immune to the whole 30fps thing the moment someone is like but motion sickness i immediately get the feeling someone is a pansy. I do hop between consoles at 30 fps and my pc at 60fps .Decided to get witcher 3 on consoles that was a mistake then i was like ill get batman on pc....that was a mistake. Only reason i play warframe on ps4 is the fact i started playing it on console when the ps4 came out then by the time i got a good pc i did not feel like getting to mr14 again. I can tell the difference between 30 and 60fps i just do not have a preference. Now keyboard and mouse....thats another story very few games i play with them...smite being one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arolust Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 This argument was already won the moment Youtube decided it was important to allow 60FPS videos and people could tell the difference. Period, end of discussion, one, two, or 10 people against the majority of youtube means nothing. now HZ is worth a look, but also proved by linus a real gamer can tell the difference. average gamer --> seasoned gamer --> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katakuna Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 I can't (or won't) play games at 30fps. It just looks terrible compared to 60. The difference is night and day to me. 30fps is just.. ugh. There is not a single game in existence that would look better in 30fps than it would in 60, and I wish certain developers would realize that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninjamander Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 This argument was already won the moment Youtube decided it was important to allow 60FPS videos and people could tell the difference. Period, end of discussion, one, two, or 10 people against the majority of youtube means nothing. now HZ is worth a look, but also proved by linus a real gamer can tell the difference. average gamer --> seasoned gamer --> thanks you for that information, I found this very interesting o.o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[DE]Grzegorz Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 I can't (or won't) play games at 30fps. It just looks terrible compared to 60. The difference is night and day to me. 30fps is just.. ugh. There is not a single game in existence that would look better in 30fps than it would in 60, and I wish certain developers would realize that. Stick of Truth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stouty22 Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 60 fps or I won't play the game. It bugs my eyes out way to much. by the way did this argument stem from the new Batman game that just recently came out for the PC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaysInc Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 I honestly dgaf if the game is 30fps or 60fps since I'm not able to tell the difference. If the game runs smooth enough for me to play then it's fair game in my book. But let me tell you this, if you're willing to bash someone or tell them they need to get their eyes checked because they can't tell the difference, even if it's graphical smoothness, then you're not worth my time to talk to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHIR0B0N Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 By now, 60fps should be the standard. Movements are much more fluid and life like. However 30fps is acceptable (even 24fps it's the cinema standard, but not for racing games). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheErebus. Posted June 28, 2015 Author Share Posted June 28, 2015 But let me tell you this, if you're willing to bash someone or tell them they need to get their eyes checked because they can't tell the difference, even if it's graphical smoothness, then you're not worth my time to talk to. I honestly couldn't care if they tell me to get my eyes checked. It's like the least insulting thing I've ever heard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 If the game runs at a solid 30 and -stays- there it doesn't bother me. When it drops below that and lags, etc. it really bugs me. On a side note I noticed on the first Dark Souls for the PC when you unlock the framerate there are a couple jumps that suddenly become MUCH harder to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nero9937 Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 I can easily tell the difference between 30, 60 and 120 FPS. Higher than that (i.e. 144 or 240) i can't tell. games should always leave all options available to players, but generally, 60 FPS is the rule of thumb for gaming, since monitors tend to have a similar refresh rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notlamprey Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 (edited) As usual, the Biscuit is correct. It isn't about "being able to see" a difference, as if some of us were objectively superior specimens of humanity. Oh, honey. The real issue has more to do with the limitations of current industry standard hardware, and how static versus variable framerates are processed by the eyes/brain. At some point, display output hardware became standardized to use framerates that are multiples of 30. The engineers did a whole lot of complicated science, and we wound up on hardware that plays nicely with our eyes/brains at multiples of 30. That's the end result of a huge wadload of late nights and number-crunching and hair-pulling and general hard work, so far be it from me to think I know better. Anyone who insists he or she can tell the difference between display locked at 30 and display locked at 60 is, at best, guilty of a harmless self-deception. Ask the people who developed the hardware - they both look fine because they're both multiples of 30, which is the whole flippin' point. Now, on the other side of this are variable framerates. Anyone and everyone will be able to spot variability in framerate, even if it's relatively minor. A practiced eye could probably spot surprisingly tiny differences, provided the framerate is variable. edit: I didn't even touch on the whole "input lag" business, but let's TL;DR it and say that higher framerates to allow for less theoretical input lag. That actually does make a difference for everybody, which is a good reason to push for a 60FPS standard wherever possible. Edited June 28, 2015 by notlamprey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBugII Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 60FPS. Anything less than 48 is unacceptable for interactive media (especially action-based games). There is no reason any game shouldn't be running 60FPS with the recommended hardware. There are games which can get away with it for aesthetic reasons, mostly 2D pixel games. However, a Triple A title really has no excuse to be running poorly on modern hardware. They have the funding, development teams, and communities necessary to properly test and optimize games for this level of performance. The only reason some don't is to cut development time and cost, which more or less ends with refunds and patches for what should have been a perfectly good game out of the box. In some cases, consumers don't even get that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kthal Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Anyone who insists he or she can tell the difference between display locked at 30 and display locked at 60 is, at best, guilty of a harmless self-deception. Ask the people who developed the hardware - they both look fine because they're both multiples of 30, which is the whole flippin' point. Almost everyone here reports being able to tell the difference, and I absolutely can see the difference. Just because you can't tel the difference, is not grounds to tell everyone else that they are wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snydrex Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 #240fpswhen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notlamprey Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Almost everyone here reports being able to tell the difference, and I absolutely can see the difference. Just because you can't tel the difference, is not grounds to tell everyone else that they are wrong. Maybe you didn't understand what I was saying. You aren't seeing a difference, because there isn't a difference to see. When the framerate is constant, the your eyes and brain read 30fps exactly the same as they read 60fps. That is how the current standard hardware is designed. Outputting frames in multiples of 30 (or very near exact multiples of 30) so that the human body is happy to handle it. This is completely different from conventional Cinema, IMAX, and all those other sundry formats. We're talking about display devices designed to accept a standardized output from personal computer hardware. I don't know exactly what it is you're seeing, but if you want to insist that your body is better and smarter than armies of scientists and budgets the size of small national GDPs, be my guest. I'm going to suggest something that I think might be helpful to you in the future. When you want to contribute your opinion on a hotly contested topic, try spending some time looking for evidence that might refute the claim you're trying to make. It really helps to show you any weak spots in your thinking, and you might even change your opinion short of having to get involved in an internet dust-up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kthal Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) -snip- Thank you for devolving the argument into personal insults. I have investigated this thoroughly, and when watching a 30fps and a 60fps clip, there are several distinct differences. The most notable, is that objects moving at very high speeds, or the entire scene when moving quickly, will appear to stutter much more significantly, as it is being drawn at half as many locations. And most importantly, while I openly acknowledge that this may not stand true for everyone, I can see the difference, which refutes any argument or article you can produce. A while back now, Youtube suddenly felt strange, with the videos seeming to have a much higher quality despite the upper limit of resolution not being increased, and this even retroactively applied to some videos. Curious, I dug out an old monitor, but the change was still clear. After a little research, turns out, I had picked up on Youtube enabling 60fps, and I had done this without being prompted by an update or a change or any news posts on the subject. You are also failing to understand that even if the brain processes images at 30fps (a claim I find highly dubious), that the eyes, as an analogue system, process continuously. - Incidentally, television and cinema have operated at 24fps for a long time. Edited June 29, 2015 by Kthal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)Pharen Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 30 FPS isn't noticable in terms of graphics, it's still smooth. 60 FPS is noticeable in terms of control response time. The human eye cannot notice the difference of anything higher than 60 FPS. Higher frame rates are used in displays in backgrounds of video recordings because a camera lens can get interference at 60 FPS (usually a line that scrolls downwards.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esapto Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Maybe you didn't understand what I was saying. You aren't seeing a difference, because there isn't a difference to see. When the framerate is constant, the your eyes and brain read 30fps exactly the same as they read 60fps. No they dont, i'm not sure where are you getting all that but the difference between 30, 60 and 120 is clearly visible and not "exactly the same". 30 FPS isn't noticable in terms of graphics, it's still smooth. 60 FPS is noticeable in terms of control response time. The human eye cannot notice the difference of anything higher than 60 FPS. Higher frame rates are used in displays in backgrounds of video recordings because a camera lens can get interference at 60 FPS (usually a line that scrolls downwards.) thats wrong. You should watch some John Carmack's videos where he talks about VR screens. Like this one: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
izzatuw Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) As a person who has spent a good amount of time in BL2 on PS3 and than moved to the PC version a few years later there is a huge difference. It feels and looks a lot smoother. But I don't really mind 30 FPS IF it's locked. I don't wanna play a game where it's 30 FPS than it moves to 15-25 every few seconds, horrendous experience. In my experience, I'm just a lot better aim with a mouse and keyboard than a controller, I've recently been playing FO3 on PS3 again and FPS never really effected my aim, it was just my lack of control with a controller. I seriously don't know what games you guys play where locked FPS effects your gaming performance excluding sudden freezes that is. Edit: I'd prefer 60FPS though when I play a game. Edited June 29, 2015 by izzatuw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts