Support NeoGAF

[4lejandro]

Got all right until Max Payne, my connection crapped out before I could choose one, ARMA was easy

Spoiler

just look at the rotor

.

 

[mtodavk]

11/11

60fps vs 30fps is like night and day. I pretty much only play games at 60fps these days. Obviously, some concessions have to be made for consoles, but anything on PC is 60 or bust.

 

[keram]

Your Score:9/11

I was wrong on "7 Days" and "Arma 3"

So in 9 out of 11 I guess I can tell the difference

 

[backbreaker65]

No, I can't tell and I don't care.

 

[nym]

11/11. That was kind of fun. I like those exercises because, for me, they really highlight the difference between the two.

 

[uomoartificiale]

Yes. Especially in this side-by-side test the difference is clear. Now, if the test constructed so that you have to tell if a game is running at 60 without comparison, maybe it wouldn't be that easy.

 

[Csr]

Imo the side by side comparison,the small screens, jerky movement in some of those vids (perhaps also browser issues) are making the difference a lot less pronounced than when playing the game.

Also perhaps some people are not exposed to a lot of 60fps games and it is harder to tell the difference? Maybe i am way off but I can't explain how else some people don't see a difference especially when playing for example a fast fps or racing game.

 

[SkeptiMism]

8/11 (on PC with chrome as my browser).

Honestly, had a lot of trouble with it, but could see most of them when I really focused on them. A few of them were pretty obvious right from the start.

I generally see the difference in various tests, but when I play I usually have very hard time seeing it. I have a 120hz screen on which I play my games, but I have hard time even seeing the difference with that and 60 fps or even 30 fps.

However, I do feel the difference when I play. 120 fps feels really amazing.

-------------------

Had a lot of trouble with Skyrim at first, but it was pretty clear after looking at it for some time.

With 7 Days To Die had a lot of trouble for a while too. When it got out of the case it got a bit easier to see.

Counter Strike was pretty clear from the start.

Arma I got wrong actually. Looked very similar to me.

Trackmania Nations was very hard, looked very similar. Only after a while noticed a little choppyness on the wrong one. Got it right.

Max Payne 3 I got wrong. Looked very similar but it seemed there was some very little choppyness on the right one, so didn't choose that and got it wrong.

Portal I got right. Looked very similar at first but then became very clear.

Urban Trial Freestyle I got right and it was pretty clear right from the start.

Fallout: New Vegas got wrong. The other screen went dark and I didn't resync as I thought the wrong one that was still visible didn't look like 30 fps.

TMNT looked very similar at start, but soon became very obvious.

Race The Sun was fairly clear right from the start.

is this a joke thread? How can anyone get one wrong?

Yup, obviously. It's such a clear difference and I'm not blind, soo

Edit: 11/11

I really wish we could get rid of condescending attitudes like that.

I'd expect better from you especially Amir0x.

Drive-by "i don't care lol" gaffers please go away.

Yup that's annoying too.

 

[bennywhatever]

Imo the side by side comparison,the small screens, jerky movement in some of those vids (perhaps also browser issues) are making the difference a lot less pronounced than when playing the game.

Also perhaps some people are not exposed to a lot of 60fps games and it is harder to tell the difference? Maybe i am way off but I can't explain how else some people don't see a difference especially when playing for example a fast fps or racing game.

I think that's the case for me, too. I don't think there's a game out there that I play on 60 fps... I don't own a 360, PS3, XBone, or PS4, and I don't really play any PC games except LoL that would run on 60fps or higher.

 

[Waveset]

10/11
Got it wrong with Arma and wasn't too sure about TMNT, otherwise silky smoothness is pretty apparant.

 

[Abdiel]

7/11 and I guessed almost all of them.

 

[Teremap]

11/11.

Seriously tho, it is extremely easy to tell the difference, at least for me. The only time it becomes more difficult is when a game has really good per-object motion blur.

It's also worth noting that the difference in input latency between 30 and 60 FPS is enormous but is something that cannot be properly represented in a video.

 

[Mass Effect]

11/11? Where are you guys seeing multiple tests? I only see the Skyrim one in the OP.

Anyway, the difference is very obvious.

 

[brobban]

11/11, the difference is big, even though the images are quite small.

 

[ZombieNapoleon]

Similar to a few, it is really apparent to me on a few games and not so much on others.
I've never noticed a difference with most games on the console (240 hz tv usually smooths things out for me).
7/11 then 8/11 on the retry.
Great link btw, always fun to go through these tests and discussions.

 

[random25]

11/11. Easy to see 30fps when you are used to 60fps.

 

[BPoole]

I can't take the test right now on my phone, but it's much easier for me to tell when I am actually controlling the game. I don't just want the look of 60fps, I need dat feeeeel of 60fps as well

 

[Ziffles]

11/11? Where are you guys seeing multiple tests? I only see the Skyrim one in the OP.

Anyway, the difference is very obvious.

You need to click on the screen which is showing 60fps.

11/11 here.

 

[LilJoka]

11/11
CS was the easiest one to identify.

 

[Faith]

I am even able to see a difference between 60fps and 75fps, so I overclocked my monitor to 75Hz.

 

[Thrakier]

Sorry, but the test is maybe a fun way to pass time, but that's where it ends. 60FPS is much more about how a game feels then it looks. First and foremost. Next thing is that the perception on the small monitor is completly different then seeing the real thing.

 

[jem0208]

They are not the same game. They are not even the same type of game.

That's my point, obviously they're not the same game. If a game is made for 30 it's fine.

And yes they are the same type of game. They're both racers. They both have simulation style handling. Horizon has a tinge of arcade which allows you to drift a bit more easily. However they both feel extremely similar, yet one of them is 30 FPS, and the other is 60.

If Horizon has been 60 it wouldn't have looked anywhere near as good as it does. And I'm glad it's 30.

 

[Seanspeed]

Sorry, but the test is maybe a fun way to pass time, but that's where it ends. 60FPS is much more about how a game feels then it looks. First and foremost. Next thing is that the perception on the small monitor is completly different then seeing the real thing.

Baby steps, man.

 

[Nordicus]

11/11, Race the Sun was really hard though.

It was a bit trickier since the camera angle didn't change much, 30fps kinda stutters during that. Needed to use a little "If my eyes lose track of an object for even split second, it's 30" rule that seems to apply to me

 

[Thrakier]

Baby steps, man.

Sure. 11/11. The only one where I had to look closely was the one with the copper. The rest of us...within the first two seconds. It's so obvious once you got used to 60FPS, 30FPS really is a stuttering mess.

 

[Yoshichan]

11/11

embarrassingly easy

 

[Madn]

First time I tried one of these comparisons test and I was surprisd at how much it's obvious

 

[Dr. Black Jack]

Yes, and I still don't care.

 

[Seanspeed]

That's my point, obviously they're not the same game. If a game is made for 30 it's fine.

And yes they are the same type of game. They're both racers. They both have simulation style handling. Horizon has a tinge of arcade which allows you to drift a bit more easily. However they both feel extremely similar, yet one of them is 30 FPS, and the other is 60.

If Horizon has been 60 it wouldn't have looked anywhere near as good as it does. And I'm glad it's 30.

But you missed *my* point about Destiny at 60fps vs 30fps and frames of reference. :/

Horizon and Motorsport are not the same type of game, either. They are both racing games, but Dark Souls and Skyrim are both RPG's. Doesn't make them the same type of game, does it? Sim racers(Horizon is not a sim racer) are 60fps for a *reason*. Your logic implies that if they just designed Forza Motorsport to run at 30fps, they'd get a game that felt just as smooth as it does at 60fps. But this isn't the case. I'm sure they'd love to run the game at 30fps and make the gamer prettier(as pretty sells), but 30fps just isn't responsive enough for a sim racer.

Your idea that games that are 'designed' for 30fps are just as smooth as 60fps games is just plain wrong. You think they are smooth by a lack of frame of reference. Destiny at 60fps would feel and look miles better than it does currently, I have zero doubt.

 

[Vinc]

Your Score:11/11

Took me less than 2 seconds per game.

 

[martino]

10/11 for me
Had difficulty to tell on skyrim was immediate for the 9 others but fail on the last one

 

[rjc571]

Got 11/11. Only one I couldn't tell instantly was the helicopter one, since it moved so slowly.

 

[AmyS]

 

[HabeeNo]

11/11 would see it again

 

[Thrakier]

But you missed *my* point about Destiny at 60fps vs 30fps and frames of reference. :/

Horizon and Motorsport are not the same type of game, either. They are both racing games, but Dark Souls and Skyrim are both RPG's. Doesn't make them the same type of game, does it? Sim racers(Horizon is not a sim racer) are 60fps for a *reason*. Your logic implies that if they just designed Forza Motorsport to run at 30fps, they'd get a game that felt just as smooth as it does at 60fps. But this isn't the case. I'm sure they'd love to run the game at 30fps and make the gamer prettier(as pretty sells), but 30fps just isn't responsive enough for a sim racer.

Your idea that games that are 'designed' for 30fps are just as smooth as 60fps games is just plain wrong. You think they are smooth by a lack of frame of reference. Destiny at 60fps would feel and look miles better than it does currently, I have zero doubt.

But that is something only PC gamers will know, people who can compare framerates, especially to console counterparts. How should people know if they never experience it? They can't and so they are happy.

I'm 100% sure that there are games I wouldn't enjoy on consoles but loved to death on PC because of the framerate differences. Sleeping Dogs comes to my mind, I played the PS3 demo and though "OMG WHAT IS THAT". People highly underestimate how much snappier, life-like and "direct" games feel at 60FPS.

 

[Mixed2k]

10/11 , missed race the sun.

Honestly didn't really see a huge difference in a lot of the examples without focusing hard.
Some like the ninja turtles are really obvious as you see that fluid motion.

This comes from a guy that doesn't have a pc capable of playing post 2006 games.

 

[Window]

10/11. Usually not very good at this but it got easier as it went along (got the first one wrong).

 

[ElTopo]

Definitely notice a difference. Only time I thought a game might be running at 60FPS but was running at 30 was Starfox 64. That game ran really really well even at 30FPS.

 

[MHWilliams]

9/11.

Doesn't bother me most of the time.

 

[rjc571]

Sorry, but the test is maybe a fun way to pass time, but that's where it ends. 60FPS is much more about how a game feels then it looks. First and foremost. Next thing is that the perception on the small monitor is completly different then seeing the real thing.

I don't agree with this. Most games are "technically" still "playable" at 30 fps, but I tend to avoid them simply because their low framerate makes them extremely unpleasant to look at it, while 60 fps is so much more beautiful and life-like. The extra input lag is still a factor, but a much smaller one overall At least imo.

 

[TheAdmiester]

I got 11/11 and can tell the difference in any scenario, but the difference between 30 and 60 doesn't matter anywhere near as much as locked vs unsteady.

 

[Thrakier]

I don't agree with this. Most games are "technically" still "playable" at 30 fps, but I tend to avoid them simply because their low framerate makes them extremely unpleasant to look at it, while 60 fps is so much more beautiful and life-like. The extra input lag is still a factor, but a much smaller one overall At least imo.

Well, for me it's all about how the game feels. 30FPS, most of them, feel like wading through mud. KZ2 would be the only game I can single out that felt good ALBEIT like feeling like wading through mud because...well, it was intenionally...kinda.

 

[link4117]

Easy to tell when they are side by side. I'd probably have a harder time with a bunch of them if it was one video at a time asking you if it was 30 or 60 though.

 

[I Stalk Alone]

Seeing a difference is not the most important part, it is feeling the difference when you play and that is a lot more noticeable.

 

[jem0208]

But you missed *my* point about Destiny at 60fps vs 30fps and frames of reference. :/

Horizon and Motorsport are not the same type of game, either. They are both racing games, but Dark Souls and Skyrim are both RPG's. Doesn't make them the same type of game, does it? Sim racers(Horizon is not a sim racer) are 60fps for a *reason*. Your logic implies that if they just designed Forza Motorsport to run at 30fps, they'd get a game that felt just as smooth as it does at 60fps. But this isn't the case. I'm sure they'd love to run the game at 30fps and make the gamer prettier(as pretty sells), but 30fps just isn't responsive enough for a sim racer.

Your idea that games that are 'designed' for 30fps are just as smooth as 60fps games is just plain wrong. You think they are smooth by a lack of frame of reference. Destiny at 60fps would feel and look miles better than it does currently, I have zero doubt.

I never said that 30fps games designed as such are just as smooth. I'm saying they are adequately smooth for the game. Making Horizon 60fps and massively cutting back the graphical quality wouldn't be good for the game. It's fine at 30fps.


And yes, Horizon and Motorsport are very similar. They have the same physics engine and handling system. What Horizon does with this system isn't very simulation however if you were to stick entirely to the roads it is very similar to the Motorsport series.

Horizon's handling and physics are just as sim-like as Motorsport's. And they work perfectly fine at 30fps.

 

[Thrakier]

I never said that 30fps games designed as such are just as smooth. I'm saying they are adequately smooth for the game. Making Horizon 60fps and massively cutting back the graphical quality wouldn't be good for the game. It's fine at 30fps.


And yes, Horizon and Motorsport are very similar. They have the same physics engine and handling system. What Horizon does with this system isn't very simulation however if you were to stick entirely to the roads it is very similar to the Motorsport series.

Horizon's handling and physics are just as sim-like as Motorsport's. And they work perfectly fine at 30fps.

Well, you are just one of these guys who value graphics more than gameplay. Nothing wrong with that. Well, ultimately this attitude let us to a situation where even Triple A game ran at miserable framerates last gen and 30FPS are now some sort of "gold standard" and devs are applauded by users and gaming media if they manage to lock down that amazing framerate....but nothing wrong with that.

 

[gasb0705]

Yes, in a fraction of a second.

 

[xbgamer]

No and I don't care, as long as it is above 30 and doesn't dip.

Same.

Unless the framerate is AWFUL I do not notice. For example I did not notice the framerate dips in oblivion 360 until someone pointed it out.

 

[Tidus_Great]

sometimes.

I prefer a solid 30 over variable 60 though.

 

[LeleSocho]

11/11
I had to watch the Arma video entirely though