Reality Check - Do we need 60 FPS on PS4 and Xbox One?

[Sgt. Napalm]

[QUOTE=Str4fe;42796641]If i remember correctly, some research said people can only see difference in framerates below ~70 or so FPS. Above that, people cant notice the difference.[/QUOTE]

There's probably going to be diminishing returns at some point. You can tell the difference between 20 and 60 FPS, but you might not so easily be able to tell the difference between 520 and 560.

[editline]8th November 2013[/editline]

[QUOTE=iLife_Aftermath;42803736][URL="http://www.svp-team.com/"]SmoothVideo Project[/URL][/QUOTE]

ty babe <3

[A_Pigeon]

My PC can't even 60fps

On NFS:Carbon

[haloguy234]

Something interesting that I've noticed about FPS and Refresh Rate is that the extra frames being pushed out by your GPU aren't totally pointless. My monitor is 60hz, and when I play games with vsync disabled, my FPS can increase to well above 100.

Conversely, with vsync enabled, it's either locked at 30 or 60 (depending on the game or where I decide to enable it). If I run something like Fraps with vsync disabled, my FPS while recording dives down, but it stays above 50-60. If I record while vsync is on and my FPS is capped at 30 or 60, there's an [I]incredible[/I] and noticeable dip in performance.

It's as if the extra frames just act as buffer, so really, they aren't pointless or redundant.

[Janus Vesta]

[QUOTE=haloguy234;42804261]Something interesting that I've noticed about FPS and Refresh Rate is that the extra frames being pushed out by your GPU aren't totally pointless. My monitor is 60hz, and when I play games with vsync disabled, my FPS can increase to well above 100.

Conversely, with vsync enabled, it's either locked at 30 or 60 (depending on the game or where I decide to enable it). If I run something like Fraps with vsync disabled, my FPS while recording dives down, but it stays above 50-60. If I record while vsync is on and my FPS is capped at 30 or 60, there's an [I]incredible[/I] and noticeable dip in performance.

It's as if the extra frames just act as buffer, so really, they aren't pointless or redundant.[/QUOTE]

Many games also register input on a per frame basis so having a higher FPS than your refresh rate wont look any different but will make your inputs more accurate.

[JerryK]

[QUOTE=Str4fe;42796641]If i remember correctly, some research said people can only see difference in framerates below ~70 or so FPS. Above that, people cant notice the difference.[/QUOTE]

ah yes i know the research you're talking about

i believe it was done by Your Ass?

[agentgamma]

[QUOTE=Rapist;42797990]Why wasn't the Hobbit released at 48fps on blu-ray?
I don't have IMAX anywhere near me, 150km to the nearest one.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Antimuffin;42798689]Blu Ray players can't play movies in 48 fps. I don't remember everything but I think it's the limited power/technology that Blu Ray players have.
And I think it's also not so easy by just making the movie run in 48 fps than in 24. There is a little bit more technical problems behind it, that's why it wasn't possible to release it in 48 fps.

The movie itself was amazing in 3D and 48 fps. Both effects have worked so well together, it was the best cinema experience I ever had.[/QUOTE]

There's also the issue of disc space. To take a high quality Blu-Ray movie and double the frame rate would likely make it too large for a standard disc, so there would need to be multiple discs or lower picture quality to cram it onto one disc.

[Mitsuma]

There is a good test for this.
Go on twitch.tv and search for a stream with 30fps with good quality.
Now find the same game and quality with 60fps.
It's just so much smoother and I myself won't ever go back to stream with less than 60 FPS.

[Paul-Simon]

[QUOTE=Lazore;42798787]Yay for an unbiased video

The fact that almost every console game is 30fps, is the sole reason i preffer PC, only beaten by the fact that i think that mouse is a much better navigation tool than a joystick[/QUOTE]

Some games are outright better with a gamepad than mouse and keyboard though.

[Str4fe]

[QUOTE=TheTalon;42796665]Except signals from your eye are transmitted 800 to 1000 times a second, so theoretically, the human eye can see up to 1000 frames per second. Obviously after a certain point you can't tell, but I think that point is closer to 100fps. Those people that argue as if it's religion "Oh you can't see more than 30" need to shoot themselves, though

I prefer about 50+. 50 leaves a small cushion for drops that won't affect you too much, but 30 gives me a headache after a while, and when the framerate drops when you pull 30, it's extremely noticeable and really affects the gameplay[/QUOTE]

I never said anything otherwise. Im just saying you probably aren't able to tell the difference between 80fps and 150fps. Which is probably true.

[editline]9th November 2013[/editline]

[QUOTE=FlubberNugget;42799406]show me a 60Hz and 120Hz monitor in a blind test and i'll be glad to point out the difference almost instantly[/QUOTE]

How about between 70fps footage and 120fps footage on 120HZ monitor? Have you ever tried it?
FPS =/= Hz

[Fawkes]

[QUOTE=iLife_Aftermath;42803736][URL="http://www.svp-team.com/"]SmoothVideo Project[/URL][/QUOTE]

Never watching anything without that plugin.

[Starship]

[QUOTE=agentgamma;42805453]There's also the issue of disc space. To take a high quality Blu-Ray movie and double the frame rate would likely make it too large for a standard disc, [b]so there would need to be multiple discs or lower picture quality to cram it onto one disc.[/b][/QUOTE]

The Lord of the rings trilogy on Blu-ray is multiple discs, and not just for behind the scenes but for the actual movie. The first one has 2 discs for blu-ray (for the movie itself) cant remember what the rest had.

[Paul-Simon]

[QUOTE=Str4fe;42808240]
How about between 70fps footage and 120fps footage on 120HZ monitor? Have you ever tried it?
FPS =/= Hz[/QUOTE]

Yes, I can easily tell the difference between those two.

[haloguy234]

[QUOTE=paul simon;42806618]Some games are outright better with a gamepad than mouse and keyboard though.[/QUOTE]

Fucking Dark Souls

[cdr248]

FPS doesn't matter at all to me unless I notice it and notice it [I]a lot[/I].

[Funky Mummy]

60 fps sure is preferred but you won't see me crying over a game being locked to 30 fps and how it makes it unplayable.

[.Lain]

[QUOTE=Str4fe;42808240]I never said anything otherwise. Im just saying you probably aren't able to tell the difference between 80fps and 150fps. Which is probably true.

[editline]9th November 2013[/editline]

How about between 70fps footage and 120fps footage on 120HZ monitor? Have you ever tried it?
FPS =/= Hz[/QUOTE]
semantics are cool
yes by the way if you actually thought of the context for a second i did mean a 120hz monitor displaying the max amount of frames it can compared to a 60hz monitor doing the same

[editline]10th November 2013[/editline]

[QUOTE=CommanderPT;42811585]60 fps sure is preferred but you won't see me crying over a game being locked to 30 fps and how it makes it unplayable.[/QUOTE]
i think it depends on the game sometimes. i can play gta 4/5 at 30fps with no worries, but having to play battlefield 3 or counterstrike at that framerate irks me

[editline]10th November 2013[/editline]

a good example of framerate actually affecting performance is in [url=http://osu.ppy.sh]osu![/url]. playing with a 60fps cap makes the game legitimately harder to play if you're playing faster maps

[editline]10th November 2013[/editline]

[QUOTE=Kert97;42808468]Never watching anything without that plugin.[/QUOTE]
svp is great for animation, but it looks awful on live action clips because of how it affects the image quality. it's better with large solid planes of colour rather than real life representations

[Massaki]

As much as I enjoy my games being 60fps, I do not want movies to adapt to the 48fps format.

There's a sort of magic that's lost within the transition to 24fps to 48 in movies, to me it looks a lot more like a live tv show (The Hobbit did anyway) I know there's no loss in frames, but with every movie being in 24fps to this point and having not noticed it til now, it's kind of scary and un-comforting to think that 48fps could soon be the norm.

Sorry if this sounds dumb to people who enjoy 48fps in movies, but I just can't.

[Cloak_Raider]

I challenge everyone to play dark souls on PC with DSFix, with the uncap FPS bound to backspace

play a bit in 30fps then uncap
if you cannot tell the difference, you are either legally blind, or running on a monitor from the 70's

[genyus]

[QUOTE=Super Muffin;42798325]The sad part is that even though he specifically stated there's no evidence people "Can't see above 30", the people who believe that won't watch the whole video.

I'm running 120hz and I wouldn't trade it for anything.[/QUOTE]

Agreed
Im using an acer gd235hz at 120hz and Im loving it.
Im a huge FPS fan and If I can cap my games at 120hz it feels so much smoother.

[Fr3ddi3]

We don't need it, but there's hardly any legitimate reason why it shouldn't be the norm.

I quiet easily play any game at any FPS (but not an actual slideshow), I know there's a delay but i can honestly say I've never felt the disadvantage.

[assassin_Raptor]

[QUOTE=SatansSin;42797285]Ugh, I remember when I played games with 20-30 fps. It always gave me a disadvantage. I don't know how console players can play repeatedly for so long, when that's happening.

A crystal clear 60fps at all times is wonderful, everything is smooth(when the game has smooth animations and such..), it's crisp.. Yeah.[/QUOTE]

Well console players are all playing like that, where as on PC you might have 30, someone else might have 60, another 10.

[Yogkog]

[QUOTE=massaki;42818320]As much as I enjoy my games being 60fps, I do not want movies to adapt to the 48fps format.

There's a sort of magic that's lost within the transition to 24fps to 48 in movies, to me it looks a lot more like a live tv show (The Hobbit did anyway) I know there's no loss in frames, but with every movie being in 24fps to this point and having not noticed it til now, it's kind of scary and un-comforting to think that 48fps could soon be the norm.

Sorry if this sounds dumb to people who enjoy 48fps in movies, but I just can't.[/QUOTE]

The "Soap Opera Effect". I agree completely, when movies raise the framerate it, in fact, losing the cinematic feel that 24 fps has.

Part of me wants it to become the norm because of its clear advantages, but I know that I would not be able to get used to it for a while, and it would probably ruin the experience for me for the first movies I would watch.

[Teeteegone]

as somebody's who's been playing games on a console or terrible PC for most of their life i'm used to 30fps and i don't see why people find it 'unplayable'
i'd kill for 60fps though, and 30fps might explain why i'm so awful at games

[haloguy234]

[QUOTE=Yogkog;42821150]The "Soap Opera Effect". I agree completely, when movies raise the framerate it, in fact, losing the cinematic feel that 24 fps has.

Part of me wants it to become the norm because of its clear advantages, but I know that I would not be able to get used to it for a while, and it would probably ruin the experience for me for the first movies I would watch.[/QUOTE]

A huge reason why movies look so weird in anything higher than 24 fps is because of interlacing. AFAIK, movies (even those in theaters) rely on frame interlacing for compression. One single frame is basically a combination of the frame before it. Games don't have that, since each frame is rendered on the spot, in its entirety.

Even though interlacing has hit a point where it's nowhere near as visible as it used to be, it's still there, and if there's enough frames, our eyes [I]can[/I] perceive it, which just makes me feel disoriented.