-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Do you think the general game consuming public even know what frame rate is?
- Thread starter oni-link
- Start date
Kor of Memory
Member
To me, it's like an acquired taste situation.
I've never been a technophile. FPS, Surround Sound, Response time... all those things just sounded like crap to me that didn't matter.
Then I got a 52" LCD TV with crazy good response time. All of a sudden my head shot skills in Halo 3 were getting really good. Didn't think anything of it at the time. Then a friend sold me a cheap 5.1 surround sound system, so I hooked it up out of boredom.
All of a sudden I could actually hear the direction combat was going on, which increased my reaction time even more.
I never thought anything of it until one day my Surround Sound died. I loaded up Halo 3 and all of a sudden the AR sounded like straight static coming out of the regular TV. I couldn't believe it. I was in shock trying to understand that this was the default sound this game was making. Then it downed on me that I had because an audio snob.
The same thing applies with most of these high end specs. One you have it, and it becomes your standard, it's hard to take a step down. But so many people don't have it, that they wouldn't know the difference.
It's like trying to get someone to make an omelet when they're perfectly happy making scrambled eggs.
I've never been a technophile. FPS, Surround Sound, Response time... all those things just sounded like crap to me that didn't matter.
Then I got a 52" LCD TV with crazy good response time. All of a sudden my head shot skills in Halo 3 were getting really good. Didn't think anything of it at the time. Then a friend sold me a cheap 5.1 surround sound system, so I hooked it up out of boredom.
All of a sudden I could actually hear the direction combat was going on, which increased my reaction time even more.
I never thought anything of it until one day my Surround Sound died. I loaded up Halo 3 and all of a sudden the AR sounded like straight static coming out of the regular TV. I couldn't believe it. I was in shock trying to understand that this was the default sound this game was making. Then it downed on me that I had because an audio snob.
The same thing applies with most of these high end specs. One you have it, and it becomes your standard, it's hard to take a step down. But so many people don't have it, that they wouldn't know the difference.
It's like trying to get someone to make an omelet when they're perfectly happy making scrambled eggs.
When I say they don't care, I mean they don't care about the term "framerate" not they don't fail to notice a good or bad framerate, more so because they don't know what it is, or how it effects games
I like graphics but I also like performance, though I've not found anything unplayable, I played GTA5, Dragons Dogma, Dark Souls on PS3 and even though I was aware of the framerate issues the games were fine and I loved all 3 of them
That said, if they were locked at 30fps that would have nice too
how do we know this isnt just an effect of the 3d, which is known to have this sort of effect?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/8272497/3D-films-TV-and-video-games-cause-nausea-and-headaches.html
the higher framerate could have increased this effect of course.
I could also point out that motionflow and other similar tech hasn't had that effect on people. although that isnt true high ramerate media as the frames are faked.
Teletraan1
Banned
I prefer 60+ because that is what I play at on my PC for the most part. I will cut the graphics to stick men, turok fog etc if I can rather than lose it because 30 plays worse in comparison. It is not garbage or the worst thing ever that makes me want to puke out my eyes but simply a preference. The general game consuming public didn't get used to a steady 60. They probably started gaming in the last few generations on consoles where this is not a priority so why would they care. Take any person on this planet, feed them 60fps for years and then plop a 30fps game in front of them. No way in hell they don't notice. They have been conditioned not to care, I have been conditioned to care. Simple as that.
Why does everyone really care what the general or average person cares about? If you don't care, then don't care, if you care, then care. Why do we need to take sides, justify a position based on what average people (who are often a poor source of expertise) say/think/do?
Why does everyone really care what the general or average person cares about? If you don't care, then don't care, if you care, then care. Why do we need to take sides, justify a position based on what average people (who are often a poor source of expertise) say/think/do?
Mr. Bamboo
Member
Huh? People use/d the word lag in reference to frame rate? Living in Aus I always had crap connection with online CoD so I used it when people were popping all over the place.
It can't be distinguished but it is corollary evidence. I have experienced people getting sick watching 30fps vs. 60fps in the situation I previously described along with past examples. It wasn't like I setup controlled experiments but those individuals didn't know the frame rate they were watching. However, I also play on a large TV, no motionflow or crap.
It's interesting you bring up motionflow because while it does use interpolation, many see the soap opera effect. So wouldn't this apply easily to games as well? Maybe it is a mystery that stems from our consistent expectations in cinema or even what we grew up on. Not many people grew up on 60fps CoD, yet that's coming or growing. It could also be that video games don't have an industry standard like cinema. So with such varying experience, people don't have a baseline like cinema has. So maybe the skill to differentiate is sort of washed due to inconsistency. It's an interesting topic.
The point is that people seem to react to different frame-rates. Whether this is the 48hz Hobbit, interpolation on TVs, or CoD being smooth. It's just that people don't necessary have qualifiable labels for these experiences. It would be an interesting study but I certainly don't think this ignorance is bliss stuff holds water.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
From my anecdotal experiences I've never heard anyone outside enthusiast forums care about frame rates. If they do mention them then they're just using buzzwords without actually understanding them. For instance I've heard people think they play games at 600 FPS because they have a plasma.
Because it has a major effect on developer/publisher design decisions.
Depends on the person, my brother isn't much of a gamer and he knows what framerate is, he's just not that sensitive but familiar with stuttering and slowdowns, which are common with games with bad performance, some of my friends can tell when something is smooth, like fighting games, but they're not going to think a 30fps game is worse or bad, their eyes adapt to it unless played one right after another.
To them probably not too different than watching videos that have problem loading.
Another thing is that I loaded up SSF4AE last week when my brother came over and he notices the tearing (I like to play without vsync), although it's extremely noticeable he really only mentioned it once and moved on.
To them probably not too different than watching videos that have problem loading.
Another thing is that I loaded up SSF4AE last week when my brother came over and he notices the tearing (I like to play without vsync), although it's extremely noticeable he really only mentioned it once and moved on.
This is what my nephew used to describe battlefield to call of duty. Saying that it felt laggy and not as fast. Isn't BF 60 now on the new consoles to better match CoD?
Because games are targeted at the average person, if the average person didn't like or buy games that ran at under 30fps, no games would come out that ran at sub 30fps
I made the thread because most people don't know what framerate is, or what effect you get from a higher/stable one, they might be able to articulate why they like one game (it's smoother, slicker etc) over another (it's laggy, choppy) but they won't know its the framerate that is responsible for this
So a publisher won't see a reason to make that a priority, when they can just aim for 30fps and pump up the graphics and that will get the attention of more people
A publisher saying "this game runs at 60fps" might make people like us happy but for the vast majority of game consumers it won't mean anything
JayhawkerStL
Banned
One of the core reasons I gave up PC gaming was to embrace the ignorance. The amount of time I spent worrying about performance, because there were so many ways to affect it, just killed the fun I had.
But I also couldn't stop. I spent too much Tim worrying about maximizing my performance, and in the end, never really stopped. I was always looking at my games, wondering if I should upgrade, maybe drop settings for performance boost, maybe take the performance hit for better graphics. The problem was, it never stopped.
There was something refreshing about moving over to the Dreamcast, and then Gamecube and Xbox. It was fun to just play the games as they were.
And as long as you aren't trying to win a console war, it still doesn't matter. I like the XB1 for a host of reasons, and the games look awesome. I have no interest in giving up what I like for son P's. And frame rates have not been an issue at all.
Many people can't tell the difference between 8 megapixels and 16 megapixels. Within that group, next to none likely understand what a megapixel even is. That doesn't mean they won't shell out an extra 50 bucks for the higher number. It's not hard to imagine the same for people looking at game boxes. 60 is greater then 30, so I buy. 64bit is better then 32bit.
That's the true side of consumer ignorance. But it isn't that bad, since the underlying logic is true. I agree though, catering towards 60 > 30 isn't a good marketing focus for a user base. Graphics thrive, which is why we get only pre-rendered cut-scenes on commercials! Except it's not like advertising 60 > 30 hurts, it just isn't much of a reason to factor in a business plan.
Muchi Muchi Pink
Member
This. people even notice the difference between playing on CRT or LCD. But they can't say what is off, but that something is.
GeordieMark
Member
I don't believe that the general public know or care about frame rate by name, but do recognise that some games run 'smoother' than others. I honestly don't think the majority of people care whether a game is 30 or 60fps, so long as it runs smoothly and doesn't feel 'jerky'.
Spending too much time on GAF can seriously warp your sense of exactly what the average person knows about gaming, let alone the technical stuff. Just from anecdotal evidence alone, I know a guy who had no idea you could share a screenshot or gameplay video on PS4, and another who didn't realise they got free games with PS+ each month. They both use their consoles pretty much exclusively for FIFA. They aren't alone either.
Spending too much time on GAF can seriously warp your sense of exactly what the average person knows about gaming, let alone the technical stuff. Just from anecdotal evidence alone, I know a guy who had no idea you could share a screenshot or gameplay video on PS4, and another who didn't realise they got free games with PS+ each month. They both use their consoles pretty much exclusively for FIFA. They aren't alone either.
Teletraan1
Banned
Only a handful of games released on PC are either hard locked at 30 or are so demanding/poorly optimized with a lack of scalability and graphical options (AC Unity) that you need a top end rig to keep 60+. These games are usually met with a resounding fuck you from PC gamers. It sucks for console exclusives that push graphics over playability because people don't know better but developers/publishers are going to do what they do based on how it adds up on a balance sheet. If the average person has no frame of reference (bad pun intended) then they really aren't a factor in any of it any longer. Those decisions were made long ago when the GTAs of the world were running at 20ish frames per second lighting up the sales charts. There is no longer any need to run anything outside of competitive fps and fighting games at a high frame rate because people will buy it anyway cause graphics. Discussion over like 10 years ago, the iron has already been cast. We lose.
Schweinehund
Member
They don't know what frame rate is, but they can tell the difference. They just describe it as slowdown or choppy vs smooth.
I think most gamers notice if a game is running slowly and if the frame rate slows to a crawl, but would struggle to notice the difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS if they are running consistently. Ultimately it comes down to 'is it playable?' and people have been playing games at 30 or less for decades.
Muchi Muchi Pink
Member
I'm sure, if you show them 30 and then 60 fps they'll notice. You can't miss this side to side. Fire up tlour switch from 30 to 60 and show both to an average guy. If he can't tell it's different, he needs to see a doctor.
What does this even mean?
You should try to open your circle. I can round up at least 10 testimonies from successful individuals in a day who understand frame-rates and the effects. Everyone is very busy though.
EDIT:
I also work for a tech company. And many of my friends are mix of grown up on games, engineers, and IT. So, little bias.
Cave Johnson
Member
If this was true then Activison wouldn't have any issue dropping COD to 30fps with (as people would call) bells & whistles to keep up with the so-called graphical demand. They already have the brand power, why limit themselves to 90% people who couldn't perceive it anyways, right?
that's what I use to call it back in the day before I stumbled upon gaming forums xD
DoktorEvil
Banned
Wha?
I'm sure Kuala Lumpur is indicative of the whole wide world that successful people inhabit.
Honestly, most people are ignorant and simply don't care.
In the past, enthusiasts drove video gaming. You had to have the newest card, the latest processor, and the best games. This was because the bulk of people playing games at the time were core gamers. Currently, the market is influenced more by casual gamers who are perfectly satisfied with mobile games and "HD" (though they largely don't know what this means).
Try explaining aspect ratio and framerate to the average consumer and they won't know what the fuck you're talking about.
In the past, enthusiasts drove video gaming. You had to have the newest card, the latest processor, and the best games. This was because the bulk of people playing games at the time were core gamers. Currently, the market is influenced more by casual gamers who are perfectly satisfied with mobile games and "HD" (though they largely don't know what this means).
Try explaining aspect ratio and framerate to the average consumer and they won't know what the fuck you're talking about.
Those nitpicky gamers are so invested in their games and framerates, they couldn't possibly become successful.
I remember at the WiiU release
There was a thread called like "Did you have fun with your family over the holidays with WiiU?"
And one of the replies were "No. Me and my grandma had an argument about resolution and lack of 3rd party support that ruined the party" or something
It was brilliant
There was a thread called like "Did you have fun with your family over the holidays with WiiU?"
And one of the replies were "No. Me and my grandma had an argument about resolution and lack of 3rd party support that ruined the party" or something
It was brilliant
Memorabilia
Member
Hell no. The average person is incredibly uninformed about even the most important things going on in the world. For most people this sort of thing is so low priority &/or too complex that it doesn't even register.
I've known people like my dad to say a game is "choppy." That tells me he notices, but doesn't know the terminology.
You may have never met him, but John Carmack cares.
I'm guessing it was satirical...
I remember a post about BF4 on PS4 where someone said something like:
"My dad's friend is a trucker, not really big into games, anyway he came round and saw me playing BF4, he just looked at me and said "is that 900p?" and I said yeah, and he just shook his head and walked away"
It literally doesn't matter if you don't know the technical details of a game because it affects you regardless, like if I make a platformer with extremely tight jumps that require precision timing and test it at 30 and 60fps on someone they will always without question have an easier time playing the 60fps version despite having no idea why.
Kinda like how the Call of Duty team told everyone for years the secret to their success was having smooth 60fps multiplayer and it took about 5 years for other major teams to figure that out, but now everyone is chasing that - even slower fps games like Halo 5!
Edit - The reason low performance is the norm in currently released games is because you get little to no marketing benefit from having a game that is smooth (or anything to do with it actually being good) but you get about a years worth of media cycle that is based purely on released YouTube videos and screenshots so running at 20-30 fps means 2-3x the detail per frame and a lot easier time promoting your game.
Kinda like how the Call of Duty team told everyone for years the secret to their success was having smooth 60fps multiplayer and it took about 5 years for other major teams to figure that out, but now everyone is chasing that - even slower fps games like Halo 5!
Edit - The reason low performance is the norm in currently released games is because you get little to no marketing benefit from having a game that is smooth (or anything to do with it actually being good) but you get about a years worth of media cycle that is based purely on released YouTube videos and screenshots so running at 20-30 fps means 2-3x the detail per frame and a lot easier time promoting your game.
I knew what it was, but I didn't care one bit until I got myself a gaming PC and tried to get the most FPS possible out of every game I played on it.
I'm gonna say possibly, but chances are that the console-centric public don't care at all. They will start caring soon though, more and more games nowadays are being marketed with '60FPS' thanks to recent remasters and the like.
I'm gonna say possibly, but chances are that the console-centric public don't care at all. They will start caring soon though, more and more games nowadays are being marketed with '60FPS' thanks to recent remasters and the like.
It's one of those aspects you would never really notice if you primarily on console. I only really saw the difference once I played on a PC and then it hits like a brick.
Yeah there are 60fps experiences like CoD but when the majority of console games are 30 fps you just don't really notice.
Yeah there are 60fps experiences like CoD but when the majority of console games are 30 fps you just don't really notice.
I'm not so sure about this.
Atari was targeting mass markets 40 years ago with the 2600. Go look at some vintage commercials on YouTube. They were heavily marketed to a casual consumer base.
entremet
Member
60FPS is one of the reason why CoD became such a big hit.
Yes, I'm being serious.
When my younger brother tries to play to Halo games, he says he hates who slow it feels and that CoD is just much smoother.
Framerate matters a lot, it's just that non tech head don't how to articulate it.
Yes, I'm being serious.
When my younger brother tries to play to Halo games, he says he hates who slow it feels and that CoD is just much smoother.
Framerate matters a lot, it's just that non tech head don't how to articulate it.
This is something that is so sorely overlooked in framerate discussions, the invisible benefits that people don't have to understand to receive.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll