Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Gaming Discussion' started by leafeon34, Jan 31, 2018.
For one, the movement's smoothness is really pleasant for my eyes.
I used to play at 10fps
but now even though I can do upto 65 I lock my stuff at 30
gives more time for the system to do math properly so I get less glitches
even though a glitch is still rare at 60fps speed running super meat boy and getting the fucking pause menu softlock is hell
you have to close and restart
but it never happens for me at 30fps
60 frames is the max a human eye can see, anything over looks, and plays like 60 frames.
30 is playable but you do notice it, so anyone that doesn't like lights flickering or something like that, wouldn't like it. But in some cases games like cup head was animated in 16 frames and used a skip frame method ( not sure the exact name) made it possible for 30-60 fps
That's complete bullshit. The eye doesn't even see in frames to begin with.
That's right, but people can see a period between frames... mainly a studer
dunno where you got the idea that 60 is the limit the human eye can see but there's a reason as to why high refresh rate monitors are popular lmao
"60Hz monitor will always show 60 FPS, no matter how much FPS your game is able to provide. - High refresh rates are noticeable only in dynamic scenes; in slow or static scenes you rarely will seeany difference beyond 30"
But most third party switch games runs at 30 or lower...
Personally, I don't mind if my games run at 60 or 30 fps as long as it has no frame drops then it does not matter though 30 of my games run at 60, 7 runs at 30 and oddly one game runs at 48 fps which is odd due to the fact my old dell laptop could run it at 60 while my current dell gaming laptop runs it at 48.
NO WAY IF THAT WASN'T OBVIOUS! Lmao, slow/static scenes in 15FPS could be acceptable, hell, in static scenes even 2FPS seems acceptable, like no way dude.
A scene without motion won't have smoother motion at 60FPS? Could it be because it lacks motion? /s
Depends on the genre of the game. For something like JRPGs or less fast-paced platformers 30 fps is okay. For fighting games 60 FPS is required and online shooting games for pleasant experience need as much fps as possible.
True, you don't see people complain that their desktop is actually running at less than 14 FPS (and most of the time at just 1-3), as there's nothing moving besides the mouse, so how do people think you have to clarify such an obvious thing?
Personally I wouldn't want to go back to 60Hz monitors again. There's not as big of a gap between 120-144fps and 60fps as there is between 60fps and 30fps, but the increased framerate does help smooth out motions making for a better experience overall.
Part of the reason I prefer the N64 Ocarina of Time over the 3DS version is because frame rate. The choppier frame rate gives it a creepier feel and atmosphere to it. Think of silent films in the early 1900's running at 16 fps and human movement looks unnatural and creepy. The dark and creepy atmosphere is one the reasons I like the N64 Ocarina of Time and Majoras Mask. I can see developers using lower frame rates as an artistic choice. You can run the game at 60fps but have an enemy run at a lower frame rate so that its movement looks creepy.
One of the things people like about more frames!!! Is that depending on how the game is made, some games use frames as well umm frames of reference lol
I am guessing here, but I think some games do like Draw Frame > Accept user input > calculate result > Draw frame. In a loop with AI and other things thrown into that but the basic concept is like that I think... I know some games are independent of frame rate and the engine is different but I am sure there is some sort of link to performance even in those type of games.
On a 60hz monitor those rounding's are called 3:2 pull down when displaying 24fps content. In Movie Theaters most film is projected at 48 or 72 fps or more to reduce flicker to make it watchable. The human eye can distinguish spaces between frames if you display film at 24fps as is.
I never said anything against that, but the fact remains that unless the monitor is displaying the same FPS or an integer multiple of it, the image shown will be at least a tiny bit distorted because of the round ups/downs. To properly compare something like 24 and 30, you need either a 120FPS monitor or two separate ones running at 24 and 30 individually.
No it doesn't. You probably don't notice that because you are using a 60hz monitor and a 60hz monitor can't show anything above 60fps anyway. Ofcourse when you use riviatuner or fraps it will show more but on a 60hz monitor you are limited to 60fps even when it is going higher. Get a 144hz or higher monitor and then see if you will still say the same
Like 60 fps so much? That's the bare minimum in my book. 100+ fps is a must for me since counter-strike 1.6 like 15 years ago.