30 fps how is that bad?

[revealer99]

I just don't get it, sorry if I sound like a noob, but honestly i don't care. I have played hundreds of PC games...
my current pc is a double GTX 295 cards, core i7, 12 gb of ram, sound cards, 1920x1200 dual monitors, etc etc etc and all that good stuff...................ive played ALL the mmo's, all the fps, rpgs...etc etc I just do not understand why people are complaining about 30 fps.........

The only problem I have noticed with games is when frames fluctuate from any fps to another fps constantly with big gains and drops.......But a persistent 30fps is not a problem at all......for me at least.........

I thought the human EYE cannot even see beyond 30 fps, rather it can see the fluctuations of a split second drop below 30 fps........
*****
Can someone post a Youtube video showing 30 fps vs 60 fps? ?? ? ?? ?

[Sabster]

You can't see more than 24-32 fps (depending on the person - what you're looking at - etc...) - BUT - you can tell the difference in some circumstances. If you're only getting 30 fps in a game; that generally means your system is working harder than normal - so you will feel sluggish.

You can't SEE the difference, but you can FEEL the difference.

[ernest.]

You can't see more than 24-32 fps (depending on the person - what you're looking at - etc...) - BUT - you can tell the difference in some circumstances.

You're wrong and I hate whoever made that ♥♥♥♥ up in the first place because it's been proven false a million times

our eyes are not a computer. we do not see fps. end of story.

[Sabster]

You're wrong and I hate whoever made that ♥♥♥♥ up in the first place because it's been proven false a million times

our eyes are not a computer. we do not see fps. end of story.

Are you a moron? I can't tell.

The eyes being a computer has nothing to do with it; it has to do with picking up after images as the display is changed. You can also get headaches from watching bad FPS simply because motion isn't properly done and your brain has a hard time understanding it.

32 fps is what your TV broadcasts at. There's a reason they're set at 32 and not say 12. Having it go at 60 isn't going to make a damn bit of difference.

[crosswire]

I have been playing DKS for hours with no problems and if you have graphics like this at 30 fps then I wish all games ran at 30 fps.

I think it must be a man thing, my fps is bigger than your fps. :D

[altruizm]

Do a test, play quakelive, set com_maxfps to 30 and play for a bit. Come back and set com_maxfps to 60 and tell me it doesn't make any difference. You can't say that, I'll tell you now. I can even tell the difference from 60fps to 120fps with my 120hz monitor so this "mind can only interpret xx fps" garbage is bull.

[Orange Ninja]

You can't see more than 24-32 fps (depending on the person - what you're looking at - etc...) - BUT - you can tell the difference in some circumstances. If you're only getting 30 fps in a game; that generally means your system is working harder than normal - so you will feel sluggish.

You can't SEE the difference, but you can FEEL the difference.

Wrong, you can see more than 32FPS, perhaps more than 100FPS (where did you get that range from anyway?).

AND BEFORE YOU SAY FILMS DISPLAY AT 24FPS:

Please read this (http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm). Or search the many equivalent websites on Google.

[DiceDuP]

Being an old timer I find it such a sad thing to see how the latest generation of internet gamers are so uninformed and uneducated. Really, you think that you cannot tell the difference between 30 and 60fps on a pc monitor?

/sigh

[eetcheez]

http://www.boallen.com/fps-compare.html

/thread

[Hi2u! Tw1TcH]

http://www.opthamologistpages.info/

If you admittedly cannot tell the difference, please get checked out.

[madmarten]

Why would you play games in 1920x1200? Human eye can't see more than 640x480 pixels.

[TheOD]

ive played ALL the mmo's, all the fps, rpgs...

My gods, you have played ALL of them?! Thousands upon thousands of games and you have played all of them! Holy bajillius!

[revealer99]

Being an old timer I find it such a sad thing to see how the latest generation of internet gamers are so uninformed and uneducated. Really, you think that you cannot tell the difference between 30 and 60fps on a pc monitor?

/sigh
Your sad because we are not graphics zealots? and you should be ashamed being an old time gamer and being so spoiled.....

[revealer99]

My gods, you have played ALL of them?! Thousands upon thousands of games and you have played all of them! Holy bajillius!You really do not have something called common sense, and do not understand concepts of being general. All the MAJOR and many MINOR games out here I have played, of course not every single on of them, but I have hundreds.

[Chronomaly]

You can't SEE the difference, but you can FEEL the difference.

True, I personally start feeling seasick if the fps goes below 30. I also get that from motion blur not that that's relevant.

[revealer99]

Why would you play games in 1920x1200? Human eye can't see more than 640x480 pixels.The human Eye can capture Light. Light moves at a rate of 186,300 miles per second. If you eye can capture Light, and send a copy impression of that to the brain, than you can see all sorts of things. What is typically understood, is that the AVERAGE person does not "NOTICE" the difference between 30fps and 60 fps when it is kept from fluctuating its frames. However, I feel BAD for you people that you have desensitized your self playing games to the point where you won't even buy an awesome game because of a 30fps cap.......its actually unfortunate for you people. It is being spoiled, and numbed, I know because it happened to me with "sound" i have trouble playing games with poor speakers, but I am working on un-desensitizing myself

[Chronomaly]

The human Eye can capture Light. Light moves at a rate of 186,300 miles per second. If you eye can capture Light, and send a copy impression of that to the brain, than you can see all sorts of things. What is typically understood, is that the AVERAGE person does not "NOTICE" the difference between 30fps and 60 fps when it is kept from fluctuating its frames. However, I feel BAD for you people that you have desensitized your self playing games to the point where you won't even buy an awesome game because of a 30fps cap.......its actually unfortunate for you people. It is being spoiled, and numbed, I know because it happened to me with "sound" i have trouble playing games with poor speakers, but I am working on un-desensitizing myself

I'm pretty sure madmarten was being sarcastic.

[madmarten]

The human Eye can capture Light. Light moves at a rate of 186,300 miles per second. If you eye can capture Light, and send a copy impression of that to the brain, than you can see all sorts of things. What is typically understood, is that the AVERAGE person does not "NOTICE" the difference between 30fps and 60 fps when it is kept from fluctuating its frames. However, I feel BAD for you people that you have desensitized your self playing games to the point where you won't even buy an awesome game because of a 30fps cap.......its actually unfortunate for you people. It is being spoiled, and numbed, I know because it happened to me with "sound" i have trouble playing games with poor speakers, but I am working on un-desensitizing myself
Agreed. Damn spoiled PC gamers, how dare they take full advantage of their high-end gaming systems.

I remember when Modern Warfare 2 came out and people whined about how it didn't have dedicated servers. I feel bad for people who can't enjoy a good game with 350 ping.

[TheOD]

You really do not have something called common sense, and do not understand concepts of being general. All the MAJOR and many MINOR games out here I have played, of course not every single on of them, but I have hundreds.

Generalizing is one concept, not many, and the way you formulated your sentence indicated that you have played all of them, not just the major and minor releases, those hundreds of games you have do not constitute enough to use the word all.

[DiceDuP]

Your sad because we are not graphics zealots? and you should be ashamed being an old time gamer and being so spoiled.....

Should've gone to Specsavers.

Spoiled? lol - i'm not the one who has played every RPG blah blah in existence. Hmm, actually I probably have :D

[AeonGrey]

http://www.boallen.com/fps-compare.html

/thread

Now if someone could make this into some kind of random quiz where you randomly see either the 15, 30 or 60 fps version but it doesn't tell you which one you're looking at. As it is it's telling you right out of the gate which one "should" look better. Needs to be blinded and repeated a lot for it to be scientifically sound.

[AeonGrey]

The problem is a lot of the pages people link to to prove that you can't tell a difference over 30fps show steady-frame-rate things like videos/flash animations.

I think it's important to remember that a videogame, unlike a video or animation, has a fluctuating framerate. This is just a hypothesis, but maybe if a game is capped at 30 it is more likely to dip lower than it would if it were uncapped on certain systems.

Just, you know...instead of flaming each other we could try to be mature and rational about the discussion.

[SLIGUY]

Now if someone could make this into some kind of random quiz where you randomly see either the 15, 30 or 60 fps version but it doesn't tell you which one you're looking at. As it is it's telling you right out of the gate which one "should" look better. Needs to be blinded and repeated a lot for it to be scientifically sound.

What are you talking about? Are you implying that if it was not labeled how many FPS each one of those are that we would not know the difference?

I am willing to wager my 2008 GT500 Super Snake (worth about $90,000) that I would tell you what one of those were running at 60 FPS 100% of the time. You can randomize them all you want.

Heck, I have a similar program and I can still see differences in the 100+ FPS range. Over a 100 is starts to get tricky, but 60 FPS is a piece of cake.

[Goatman455]

Are you a moron? I can't tell.

The eyes being a computer has nothing to do with it; it has to do with picking up after images as the display is changed. You can also get headaches from watching bad FPS simply because motion isn't properly done and your brain has a hard time understanding it.

32 fps is what your TV broadcasts at. There's a reason they're set at 32 and not say 12. Having it go at 60 isn't going to make a damn bit of difference.



Yeah, that's not true though. It does make a difference up to about 60 or higher. This is due to the refresh rate difference of your eye and the screen updating.

Even if you have 30 FPS, it isn't going to match your eye perfectly. So you perceive this as choppiness, when you move the scene, especially quickly, you notice things don't update as fast as they should because your eye and the screen are not in sync.

When you get to 60 and above, this effect diminishes to the point of being nonexistent and you tend to see things smoothly no matter what.


So the point is, above 30 fps DOES matter, and your eye CAN perceive it. It is an improper assumption to assume since your eye can not perceive above 30 fps, that your eye can not perceive a computer game running above 30 fps, it can.

[UMS]

I also think the eye is not doing a full frame refresh every frame, so you might have portions of your visual field exhibiting variable framerates, e.g. very high where there is perceived need (detected movement/change) surrounded by potentially large fields of infrequent updates.

Consider how old (old) RealVideo did it's magic when that first came out and we were able to watch (hideous) video over dialup for the first time.

So the really high-end gfx processors are able to get ultra-high fps at ultra-high resolution by way of, primarily, brute force refresh of the entire screen - leaving it up to the engine developers to optimize the data they churn. Whereas a parallel leap in technology might be to use some kind of localized field compression at the gpu level, akin to what is being optimized in the 3d data (e.g., in 3d/gpu = don't render hidden things, duh... therefore in rendered frame = refresh changing parts more frequently).

Am I wrong on this? Are the video cards already doing this? Just curious. I prefer ~60fps if possible but if the game is good, and it isn't heavy action, it won't be that disturbing to me.

[Spaceweed10]

I just don't get it, sorry if I sound like a noob, but honestly i don't care. I have played hundreds of PC games...
my current pc is a double GTX 295 cards, core i7, 12 gb of ram, sound cards, 1920x1200 dual monitors, etc etc etc and all that good stuff...................ive played ALL the mmo's, all the fps, rpgs...etc etc I just do not understand why people are complaining about 30 fps.........

The only problem I have noticed with games is when frames fluctuate from any fps to another fps constantly with big gains and drops.......But a persistent 30fps is not a problem at all......for me at least.........

I thought the human EYE cannot even see beyond 30 fps, rather it can see the fluctuations of a split second drop below 30 fps........
*****
Can someone post a Youtube video showing 30 fps vs 60 fps? ?? ? ?? ?

You sound like a noob. Don't apologise though :).

[Baresark]

You can notice a slight difference between 30 and 60 FPS. It mostly has to do with the fact your monitor is most likely running at 60Hz, so really it's a s frame every 2 refreshes. The game will scale smoother, animations will feel more complete and you won't get that feeling like you blinked halfway through the animation. That being said, I hate when people whine about the frames. The hotfix will be on Steam soon so everyone who has problems like a "headaches" or their "eyes hurt" can finally shut up. I have 20 hours on this game so far and I haven't had a single problem.

Most framerate problems (in my experience) are a little misunderstood. The current generation of consoles for instance displays every game at 30 FPS. Now, watching and playing these, it is all very smooth feeling. The issue isn't having only 30 FPS, the issue would be more like sudden drops in frame rates causing visual issues.

[bes]

I dont really care about the FPS ..just annoyed by the severe jaggies im getting with MAXED out graphics settings..both in-game and im my video cards control panel..

But im dealing with it...

Some games I cant tell that its running at 20-34FPS ..its so smooth ...other games just dont do well with a 30FPS cap .. this game for example .. probably depends on the engine optimizations..

[AlaCarcuss]

Do a test, play quakelive, set com_maxfps to 30 and play for a bit. Come back and set com_maxfps to 60 and tell me it doesn't make any difference. You can't say that, I'll tell you now. I can even tell the difference from 60fps to 120fps with my 120hz monitor so this "mind can only interpret xx fps" garbage is bull.

This is correct. I bought a 120hz monitor originally for 3D, but when I saw what a croc that was - I still think it's the best monitor purchase I ever made. Why? Because @ 120hz and my rig, I can VSync most games and get a solid 120FPS maxed out - and BOY!, it makes and incredible difference! Everything is so much smoother and responsive than when games are running @ 30/60 FPS.

So yeah, FPS above 30 you can definately notice, as I said even the difference between 60 and 120fps is huge. ;)

[teioh]

look at any old digital watch that showed the ms and you easily see that yours eyes can see way more than 30 fps per second

[alexvda]

I suggest that this article be read before the discussion continues :D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate

30 fps is more than enough, if I'm reading this correctly :)

[Goatman455]

I suggest that this article be read before the discussion continues :D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate

30 fps is more than enough, if I'm reading this correctly :)


You aren't really, sorry:

"In modern action-oriented games where players must visually track animated objects and react quickly, frame rates of between 30 to 100+ FPS are considered acceptable by most, though this can vary significantly from game to game."


What they are saying is some people can perceive up to 100+FPS, as we have been trying to tell everyone here for awhile.


Just trust me, I can tell the difference, so that proves that 'some' people can tell past 30fps.

I think the issue is, when a character (let's say in a 3rd person) is running forward and the camera is not turning from side to side, in situations like those it becomes difficult to tell over 30, because things aren't moving fast enough for it to matter.

Jerk the mouse or move the camera once (even just to turn a character), and all the sudden it becomes obvious whether the game is pushing 60+ or below 60.

This is the best way I can describe it.


"A certain amount of discarded “headroom” frames are beneficial for the elimination of uneven (“choppy” or “jumpy”) output, and to prevent FPS from plummeting during the intense sequences when players need smooth feedback most."


There is also a section titled:
"How many frames per second can the human eye see?"


Where they state that "Although human vision has no “frame rate”, it may be possible to investigate the consequences of changes in frame rate for human observers."

Basically saying that human vision and FPS do not easily line up, but that it is perceivable in certain situations.


The key reason we are arguing is that 60fps is only perceivable in certain situations.

This means everyone can hold onto their 'proof' without looking at the other side.

Those who say 60fps is a waste, they can prove it because they played a game at above 30 and noticed nothing.


Those who say 60fps is real, they can prove it because they played a game at above 30 and noticed smoother gameplay.

In reality, above 30fps IS perceivable, otherwise the developers would not have gone to any lengths to have a hotfix patch.

It's all personal preference, I notice these things, but I also notice CRT monitors on 60hz, it drives me crazy, maybe my eye just notices these things because I am used to dealing with them, but for me, 60fps is completely different than 30fps.

[StabbyStabStab]

I suggest that this article be read before the discussion continues :D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate

30 fps is more than enough, if I'm reading this correctly :)

You're reading it incorrectly.

edit: ninja'd

[DiceDuP]

So now that the dirty fix is out, all those condemning the people who fought for it should try it and then come here to explain how stupid they were for saying there would be no difference.

I don't care however many links to frame rate theory webpages people post, the fact of the matter is, there is a difference, always has and always will be when playing a game in which the engine cannot produce a level of motion blur to cover up it's lack of frames.

It's got nothing to do with how the eye percieves frame rate. If it is lower than your refresh rate then it will always look worse because it is skipping frames (30 = 1 skip per every 2 frames on a 60hz monitor).

[M4nkoRid3r]

So now that the dirty fix is out, all those condemning the people who fought for it should try it and then come here to explain how stupid they were for saying there would be no difference.

I don't care however many links to frame rate theory webpages people post, the fact of the matter is, there is a difference, always has and always will be when playing a game in which the engine cannot produce a level of motion blur to cover up it's lack of frames.

It's got nothing to do with how the eye percieves frame rate. If it is lower than your refresh rate then it will always look worse because it is skipping frames (30 = 1 skip per every 2 frames on a 60hz monitor).

I myself had more of an issue with the way some people went about arguing it.

[Goatman455]

So now that the dirty fix is out, all those condemning the people who fought for it should try it and then come here to explain how stupid they were for saying there would be no difference.

I don't care however many links to frame rate theory webpages people post, the fact of the matter is, there is a difference, always has and always will be when playing a game in which the engine cannot produce a level of motion blur to cover up it's lack of frames.

It's got nothing to do with how the eye percieves frame rate. If it is lower than your refresh rate then it will always look worse because it is skipping frames (30 = 1 skip per every 2 frames on a 60hz monitor).



Yeah, that's gonna happen. I've paid a lot for making statements that were not true, and have had to apologize countless times. Yet, the times I was right, rarely has anyone approached me and said so. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but I think it's a defense mechanism, a survival instinct that humans just don't like to admit outwardly when they are wrong.

That's why what the developer did here was a brave and honorable thing. To get the patch out this quickly, and to commit to working on the problem showed a courage few larger companies ever display. Let's hope they never lose that sense of customer service, and if they don't, they are sure to have more of my business.

[alexvda]

I must admit that I should've read the article more thoroughly. I was basing my '30 fps is enough' statement on the fact that film cameras have that fps.
It's actual true what DiceDup says, motion blur, if applied correctly, would remove the feeling of non-smoothies.
It's the same thing that AA does for the lack of pixels on your monitor.