I have a feeling all this chest beating will die down in a few years when more visually advanced games are 30 fps .
Not saying Andersons thread was intended as that. Just the opposite.
The difference between 30 and 60 fps
- Thread starter Andy
- Start date
- Status
I have a feeling all this chest beating will die down in a few years when more visually advanced games are 30 fps .
Not saying Andersons thread was intended as that. Just the opposite.
Come on now. We all now you're a Biased PS4 supporting MOD and can not help yourself when it comes to resolution and FPS
You're blowing my cover, man.
just bemused by it all. They have every right to expect and enjoy what they expect and enjoy. My expectations are more modest, so I'm not so easily displeased. Absolute virtual reality is a chimera at this stage of video game evolution, anyway.
The OP guy has a new set of comparisons, if you want to try another version:
http://hiresreset.tumblr.com/post/47381261678/frame-rate-comparison-by-genre-part-1
I found the Bioshock example a little harder to see. Took me a couple seconds. The racing and strategy examples were easy.
http://hiresreset.tumblr.com/post/47381261678/frame-rate-comparison-by-genre-part-1
I found the Bioshock example a little harder to see. Took me a couple seconds. The racing and strategy examples were easy.
just observing what a non issue it was for them when the shoe was on the other foot. Now it is they who pontificate on it, ad infinitum. Aside to the master race: yes, we know computers are bet-ter---but do tell us all about, again. Wouldn't want you to feel left out.I think you just answered your own question.
That example was a little more difficult to see. Truth of the matter is this: neither console is going to always manage 1080p @ 60FPS. Again, these games are all over the place but as PV stated, max res and max FPS will not be a standard for either console this gen. In fact, maybe there was a standard that Microsoft and Sony kept last gen for devs to make sure their games ran at a certain res or FR. That certainly isnt the case this gen. It seems the devs are making the decision themselves, versus Microsoft or Sony hovering over head to demand such things. Maybe the rules have changed....
Im only speculating of course. Im not a muffugin' dev...
just observing what a non issue it was for them when the shoe was on the other foot. Now it is they who pontificate on it, ad infinitum. Aside to the master race: yes, we know computers are bet-ter---but do tell us all about, again. Wouldn't want you to feel left out.
Well PC's are awesome, cause you can do 4K, 120 FPS. You also get all these mods and stuff that are, like, awesome and stuff. Have fun with With lame 1080P and 60FPS while the master race laughs at you
F-Zero GX, what a great game. Sega's arcade heritage combined with one of Nintendo's finest.
Come on Nintendo, where is the new F-Zero for Wii U?
All true. I'm typing on one, right now. Still, my first love is console gaming, even if it's backward and r******d--like preferring Camaros to Corvettes.Well PC's are awesome, cause you can do 4K, 120 FPS. You also get all these mods and stuff that are, like, awesome and stuff. Have fun with With lame 1080P and 60FPS while the master race laughs at you
All true. I'm typing on one, right now. Still, my first love is console gaming, even if it's backward and r******d--like preferring Camaros to Corvettes.
LOL....I was going to dis American Automotive's, but refrained.
That's true, but at the same time, it really isn't the point of the thread (although I understand it's how people automatically associate). I'm not intending this to be about the consoles. I'm just trying to see what, in reality, 30 vs. 60 fps looks like and what difference it makes. What are the actual, objective, visible differences?
And what I've learned is:
1) the differences are easy to see, at least for me -- the 60 fps images are smoother and less choppy; and
2) the main benefit is controller responsiveness, which naturally cannot be perceived in these gifs.
Funny h
Funny how a lot of the Fords look like snazzy foreign cars, now, and Toyotas, on the other hand, look like cheap Fords.
I think for a lot of games 30 fps works just fine so long as it is steady. I would say most single player/non-competitive games with a few exceptions can get away with a solid 30 without hindering the experience.
Well, I'd say it's about both (it's a visual medium, after all, and who wouldn't prefer smoother animations?), but I get what you're saying. It does seem as if responsiveness is the more important of the differences. That would pertain especially to fast-paced games like FPS and racing games, I imagine.
Can't see that on the screen, unfortunately. I guess you just have to play a 30 fps game and then play a 60 fps game (preferably the same game) and feel the difference in responsiveness for yourself.
Understood. What seems to be the surrounding arguments between both elements are that they have a huge effect on the visual splendor. At this stage (imho) the actual visuals themselves seem to be hyper detailed to the point that (again, to me) my mind essentially sees no relevant difference. I have to expend a bit of effort to really see them. Sure 60 FPS is great to have, but even in side-by-side comparisons, its still not as apparent as say looking at a PS4 and 360 comparison where I believe FPS would ultimately stand out more because of the clear visual disparity between both hardware architectures. When comparing two powerful systems like the X1 and PS4, those same comparisons essentially become mute as the detail in both are just staggering at this level, and it simply isnt worth the effort to attempt to draw a line in the sand as visually, they both look incredible. Again though, thats just me...
Last edited:
You know, all this talking of "feeling" is pretty funny, why, cause it is game dependant on what is or isn't responsive. Just cause a game is 60FPS it doesn't mean it is responsive. Similarly, just cause a game is 30FPS doesn't mean it is sluggish.
It's nothing new. We played 30 and sixty on the 360 all last gen and I never once gave it a thought. You guys act like you just discovered la difference.
It's nothing new. We played 30 and sixty on the 360 all last gen and I never once gave it a thought. You guys act like you just discovered la difference.
You keep talking about what the "other guys" are doing, but it seems to me that you're the one who keeps bringing console war dynamics into it over and over, despite my attempts to keep the thread away from that. You're coming across really patronizing to me. If you're so "above it all," why bother to read the thread? Feeling a need to ride on your high horse today?
That was uncalled for. Feeling thin-skinned, today? I'm expressing an honest opinion with which you have every right to disagree. But that was just rude.
Gotcha. I've heard you say that many times, and I understand that's your position. And that's cool. Again, though, I would like this not to become another console war discussion -- although that is probably a hopeless cause, given the history behind this question of 30 vs. 60 fps. I think it's probably too charged a topic for people to just take consoles off the table and discuss objectively.
Your "honest opinion" came across very condescending to me. I'm just letting you know about how it struck me.
just observing what a non issue it was for them when the shoe was on the other foot. Now it is they who pontificate on it, ad infinitum. Aside to the master race: yes, we know computers are bet-ter---but do tell us all about, again. Wouldn't want you to feel left out.
Name one example/person who is doing this. Please
Apparently I struck a raw nerve. I'll let you reflect on why and let you decide whether your response was appropriate. We are in the multi-platform section of the forums. Other than ruffling your feathers, is anything I have posted inappropriate in that context?
lol. A "raw nerve." You'll "let me reflect" (why thank you!) And "ruffling my feathers"? Can't you hear how patronizing that language is, even after I've just finished confronting you about it?
Listen... when people condescend and patronize, it does annoy me. Especially when it's directed at me, lol.
You shared your opinion, and I shared mine. I'm done, as far as I'm concerned. If you want to continue, let's do it PM so as not to derail things here.
Skyrim @ 30FPS: Sluggish
Skyrim @ 60FPS: Smooth and responsive
Batman Arkham Asylum/City/Origins @ 30FPS: Sluggish
Batman Arkham Asylum/City/Origins @ 60FPS: Smooth and responsive
Tomb Raider, Borderlands 2, Dark Souls, Bioshock, Fallout, Darksiders II, DMC Devil May Cry, etc, etc...
All of these games (sans DMC) I had and played on my OLD PC and if I maxed them out I would get roughly 30fps (sometimes 35ish) and they felt sluggish. On my new PC I can max them and hit 60 solid, not sluggish.
I'll give you this, if a game isn't developed well there's no framerate that will save it from feeling sluggish, but any game that feels "good" @30 will feel better @60.
Just go with it, dude. There's nothing you can say or do that will make any of the XB diehards think you're anything other than a PS fanboy. You've brought up a topic that has them butthurt these days so now you're the "other guys".
So do what I do, enjoy the ride and be a thorn in their side when you can. If they're going to be so narrow minded you may as well engage in some crazy making.
- Status