Support NeoGAF

[Sunnington]

I think it falls under both categories. I think framerate is the most important thing. I rather play a game at 720p with 60fps than 1080p at 30fps

 

[LCGeek]

You're describing temporal resolution, which is something I gripe about when devs settle for 30fps.

This has nothing to do with preference lower fps destroy motion clarity period there should be no debate this. Yet after seeing topics like these, gysnc, or lightboost and the dismissal of such benefits to gamers I'm convinced some just want to look at garbage on garbage displays. Odd considering so many gamers claim they want IQ yet destroy it's clarity in so many ways.

 

[Abounder]

That's the funniest thing I've read all day. If anything ue4 ensures those games will run at 30 on consoles.

The UE4 60fps Morpheus demo seems pretty impressive, it's only going to get better for console framerate if VR is a hit

 

[Flandy]

100% agree OP
Everything just looks better to me when it's running at 60fps

 

[MrCunningham]

It is more than part of the visual experience, it also affects the gameplay experience too.

 

[Goddard]

You're describing temporal resolution, which is something I gripe about when devs settle for 30fps.

This has nothing to do with preference lower fps destroy motion clarity period there should be no debate this. Yet after seeing topics like these, gysnc, or lightboost and the dismissal of such benefits to gamers I'm convinced some just want to look at garbage on garbage displays. Odd considering so many gamers claim they want IQ yet destroy it's clarity in so many ways.

I find it amazing how many people haven't figured out why so many developers lock their games at 30fps on console lately. It doesn't look better. If you want to go full graphix whore and sacrifice gameplay for visuals, it's still better looking at 60fps. The only reason 30fps caps exist is because screenshots look better, youtube videos will look better most of the time, most streams will look better, television will look better, anything that doesn't properly support 60fps will benefit from the cap. There is no benefit at all when it comes to actually playing the game, so basically companies are just throwing away the quality of their game for the purposes of short-term marketing.

Nobody on a forum like this should be in favor of that.

 

[JAYSIMPLE]

I am consistently shocked when I load my wii u after playing Ps4 or xbox one so called current gen games. Games just look better at 60. Nintendo are geniuses for pulling it off. It's really put me off the 2 competing consoles. Im getting so close to pc and wii u as the goto for all gaming needs.

So yes framerate is crazy important to anything outside of screemshots imo

 

[sbkodama]

Do some know how something can cost in framerate ?
Framerate is part of the visual experience yes, but a large part not really.

 

[Beerman462]

I prefer 60fps, but I can handle well done 30fps. Souls series was fine for me at 30fps. I'm currently playing Witcher 3 at 30fps just fine. GTAV for what ever reason bothered me at 30fps. I tried the in game half refresh and locked 30fps using Riva Tuner and it just seemed jittery. I eventually got it to run at 60fps a majority of the time with dips to mid 50s common and occasionally drops to 40fps. Still preferred that.

 

[Interceptor]

I find it amazing how many people haven't figured out why so many developers lock their games at 30fps on console lately. It doesn't look better. If you want to go full graphix whore and sacrifice gameplay for visuals, it's still better looking at 60fps. The only reason 30fps caps exist is because screenshots look better, youtube videos will look better most of the time, most streams will look better, television will look better, anything that doesn't properly support 60fps will benefit from the cap. There is no benefit at all when it comes to actually playing the game, so basically companies are just throwing away the quality of their game for the purposes of short-term marketing.

Nobody on a forum like this should be in favor of that.

Thats why everything and their mom has a photomode nowadays - you can show your e-penis while doing some marketing for free. Who cares if the real games doesn`t even look like it.

 

[leng jai]

I played The Witcher 3 at 1620p/30fps for a few hours and briefly thought the IQ boost was worth the added sluggishness.

Two seconds in switching back to 1080p/60fps and it was obvious that the game not only feels but looks much better at 60fps. The added fluidity just makes everything far more natural and immersive.

 

[Five]

Most gameplay feels better to me at 60hz. Most cinematics feel odd at that rate. Hopefully it's something I'll eventually get accustomed to, as it's obviously technically the superior product, but seeing everything else at 24/30hz makes that difficult.

Given the choice between 1080p30 and 720p60, I'll pick 1080p30 every time. Spacial resolution is more important to me than temporal, same as vertical resolution is more important to most people than horizontal resolution.

 

[Auto-Reply]

Absolutely, I believe most people don't have an adequate tv hooked up to their gaming device so the increase of visual clarity that higher frame rates bring is lost. Frame rate can't be high enough in my book. Do I have a problem playing games in 30fps? No, but the higher the frame rate the better the experience and also the visual clarity, smoothness, impact.

 

[Apoleptica]

To me the stability of the framerate is what is most important. I would choose a locked, stable, unwavering 30 fps anyday over a 60 fps framerate that stutters from 55 fps to 65 fps.

 

[Seanspeed]

Thats why everything and their mom has a photomode nowadays - you can show your e-penis while doing some marketing for free. Who cares if the real games doesn`t even look like it.

To be fair, the growth of photo modes in games is an awesome trend. I'm a 60fps guy through and through, but I still love screenshots.

 

[Goddard]

To me the stability of the framerate is what is most important. I would choose a locked, stable, unwavering 30 fps anyday over a 60 fps framerate that stutters from 55 fps to 65 fps.

Or you could reduce settings and get a steady, unwavering 60fps ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

 

[A-V-B]

It's part of the kinesthetic experience, in my opinion. More frames = more information for your brain to parse and get a better read on things. And 60 is twice the frames. Faster reaction times, less getting surprised by opponents.

 

[jett]

A solid 30fps w/ motion blur can look just as good if not better than 60fps w/out motion blur imo.

Absolutely not.

Jesuschrist.

 

[Goddard]

A solid 30fps w/ motion blur can look just as good if not better than 60fps w/out motion blur imo.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

I personally don't have any issues with 30fps. However, a really well done and beautiful 60fps title is something I have a great appreciation for.

 

[Fredrik]

FPS was never an issue for me, until I started playing Project Cars (which is 60 FPS). Until then I had played an awful lot of DriveClub and all the comments from 60 FPS moaners would annoy we. Really enjoyed the graphics and could not understand why people were complaining it was not 60 FPS.
After playing a lot of Project Cars and moving back to DriveClub I do now appreciate the difference: racing games in 60 FPS are much nicer. It's hard to explain, but the graphics in Project Cars, (less detailed than DriveClub) are so much nicer.

This is it. This is 60 vs 30 fps in a nutshell. It's when you switch back and forth between 30 and 60 that you really start to get annoyed that 30 has become a standard, as long as you just keep on playing the PS4/XB1 30 fps games you'll probably think 30 fps is perfectly fine, but start playing PC or WiiU or retro games and it'll become a real annoyance especially when so many don't seem to understand what you're complaining about.
As for myself, I would choose 60fps over 1080p any day and you'll never ever hear me complain when an XB1 title drops it's resolution to get a more stable framerate or when a WiiU title has less details but runs at 60fps.
Framerate > resolution, details, textures.

 

[BreakAtmo]

I think lower framerates will be phased out if virtual reality makes its impact, and I hope it does. Also popular game engines like UE4 should only get better and easier to maintain 60fps.

It would actually be pretty great if a lot of people get into VR and then are turned off by 30fps when they go back to it. Even Morpheus starts with each game being rendered at at least 60fps and then 'reprojecting' it to 120fps.

 

[diggmcbadass]

I agree with op, I just think it's sad that we actually have to argue the point that more fluid motions looks better than less fluid motions.

 

[Seraph_Nicholas]

I don't disagree with anything in the OP, but I thought the thread was going another way from the title - framerate as emphasis. Like, the SNES gradius games, or a life up spawning after you kill a boss in SOTN. Of course, that doesn't really happen anymore, but it could. I could see a game using an intentionally crippled framerate to denote an injury, or disorientation, or the like.

Maybe I'm just sick of red jelly on my screen.

 

[Zemm]

You can really notice this in splatoon. The game looks and feels a million times better in the matches compared to when you set foot in Inkopolis. The difference is immediately noticeable and jarring.

 

[szaromir]

I find it amazing how many people haven't figured out why so many developers lock their games at 30fps on console lately. It doesn't look better. If you want to go full graphix whore and sacrifice gameplay for visuals, it's still better looking at 60fps. The only reason 30fps caps exist is because screenshots look better, youtube videos will look better most of the time, most streams will look better, television will look better, anything that doesn't properly support 60fps will benefit from the cap. There is no benefit at all when it comes to actually playing the game, so basically companies are just throwing away the quality of their game for the purposes of short-term marketing.

Nobody on a forum like this should be in favor of that.

I am fully in favor of that. It means games have higher fidelity on my PC while still running at 60fps.

 

[SubiyaCryolite]

Not to knock on consoles but this is why I game on PC. I want good graphics but I also want to play my games north of 50fps.

 

[DINOSAURS]

It doesn't bother me too much, I survived N64... I can handle any framerate!

 

[SapientWolf]

Most gameplay feels better to me at 60hz. Most cinematics feel odd at that rate. Hopefully it's something I'll eventually get accustomed to, as it's obviously technically the superior product, but seeing everything else at 24/30hz makes that difficult.

Given the choice between 1080p30 and 720p60, I'll pick 1080p30 every time. Spacial resolution is more important to me than temporal, same as vertical resolution is more important to most people than horizontal resolution.

I wouldn't say that's universally true for everyone. Blur Busters has put together some motion tests that illustrate how temporal resolution can affect image quality. I particularly like the scrolling text example:

http://www.testufo.com/#test=framerates-text

At 30fps the text is not legible, and cranking up the resolution will not help. At 120fps with motion blur reduction the text is as clear as if it was not moving. For a racing game, that could be the difference between sharp or blurred textures, since the viewpoint is constantly in motion.

Animation also takes a hit at 30, which is really obvious with Ryse and the Batman franchise. The combat has more grace and impact at higher framerates.

 

[Sparrowhawk]

I am consistently shocked when I load my wii u after playing Ps4 or xbox one so called current gen games. Games just look better at 60. Nintendo are geniuses for pulling it off. It's really put me off the 2 competing consoles. Im getting so close to pc and wii u as the goto for all gaming needs.

So yes framerate is crazy important to anything outside of screemshots imo

Pretty much came here to say this. Yes, the aliasing sucks, but everything is so smooth. I really hope Nintendo kicks their hardware up a notch with their next console.

 

[IsntChrisL]

This is definitely true. A game running at 60fps looks better from a motion perspective alone. I'd take the smoothness of high frame rates over more detailed textures any day.

 

[MaxiLive]

It's always a two sided argument. I would love for every game to have 60fps with great IQ and focus on art style rather than effects. But that said a lot of games are already being passed as looking bland due to the diminish returns of newgen graphics where effects will give the biggest gain but also the biggest performance hit.

I think most triple A consoles games are fine running at 30fps like they have been for the past 8-10 years for the most part. It would be nice to see this generation of games improve win IQ/framerate overtime rather than graphical effects which may be the case if VR becomes a positive market to invest in.

 

[Joey Ravn]

I absolutely agree. Framerate affects both performance and visuals. For me, performance is much, much more important than image quality, so I gladly turn down the graphic options to achieve constant 60 FPS.

 

[Sotha_Sil]

At least we know MGS5 and Doom will be running at 60fps. Not sure how many other upcoming AAA games on console can say the same.

 

[red731]

Sorry to interupt, but I started to measure frametimes two days ago and I am fucked with heartbeat like frametimes on my 7970GHz.
I am spiralling into madness right now. Don't measure frametimes. Ever.

Also higher framerates are sweet from responsivenes and how it looks pov, but fps lower than 30fps, altought sluggish/slideshowish, can of course look good too, visualy - not from gameplay perspective, of course.

 

[Seanspeed]

At least we know MGS5 and Doom will be running at 60fps. Not sure how many other upcoming AAA games on console can say the same.

Black Ops 3
Battlefront(not confirmed, but should be)
Forza Motorsport 6
Halo 5

About all I can think of.

 

[Tetranet]

Of course.


Framerate is both so-called "eye candy" and a major component of gameplay, and input.


It's baffling to me how anyone doesn't consider it so.

 

[Kaffeemann]

http://www.testufo.com/#test=framerates-text

At 30fps the text is not legible, and cranking up the resolution will not help. At 120fps with motion blur reduction the text is as clear as if it was not moving. For a racing game, that could be the difference between sharp or blurred textures, since the viewpoint is constantly in motion.

That's a great example and everybody should have a look at it.

When limiting GTAV and Witcher 3 to 30 FPS on my PC I alway found that it simply isn't worth it.
Yes, I can use higher resolutions and setting at 30 FPS but as soon movement comes in, my eyes/brain/whatever have problems actually seeing those details.

 

[kerotan_eater]

It depends but I definitely err on the 60 frames is visually more appealling. It's just more immersive, it's closer to the way we see. Try playing TLOU, at 60 and then moving onto 30, Its not easy.

If you have a slow moving game like a golf game though, I don't see the issue with trading that off for 30 frames and more detail.

 

[Dremark]

Eh not really. Played through GTAV, DmC, TLoU just fine on PS3

DmC had the feel of 60 fps though so it's not a valid example.

 

[RealityCheque]

Having recently returned to PC gaming I can vouch for the value that high frame rates add for me. Its a little jarring going back to playing certain 30fps games on my PS4 in comparison and is the #1 reason I'll be buying all multiplats on PC from now on.

I'd honestly rather devs scale back the graphics a little in favour of framerate, no matter what. Smoother = better in my book.

 

[Ranger X]

I agree with you OP. Sometimes people act like the framerate isn't part of the visual quality while it totally is. Those famous "less fps but more effect" people.

 

[Zakalwe]

This is pertinent atm, lots of this talk floating around the e3 threads.

"I like 60fps, but I'd rather have 30 without the loss of graphical fidelity!".

30fps is half the frame rate of 60. If that choice as made you lost 50% of your frames. That's loss of clarity and detail in motion (especially if you slather motion blur over it to make up for the lost frames).

Less detail, less clarity, that's a loss in fidelity.

 

[SomTervo]

Splatoon has garbage IQ and looks awful in screenshots (and in Inkopolis), but in motion it's nothing less than gorgeous. 60FPS has a lot to do with that.

I've never given any credit to 60FPS, but now you mention it, it does have a significant IQ effect.

I just started playing Tomb Raider Reboot on PS4 and it's noticeably better than the last-gen versions, due to the FPS alone.

 

[ScepticMatt]

That's not what happens. Even if we're talking 30fps, we are talking about tiny fractions of a second. Unless a game is running at like 2fps, which is a literal slideshow, you will not be able to discern individual frames being held for longer. It will just look choppier and blurrier in motion.

Short answer: This is mostly false.

Long answer:
While 30 fps is perceived as in motion (beta movement), the human eye is typically able to perceive more than 30 individual frames per second, unless the screen is very small and dark.
This frame rate above which we are no longer able to perceive individual frames is called the critical flicker fusion (CFF).
This is the same reason why CRT/Plasma or low-persistence LCDs show flicker when the refresh rate falls below CFF, and the idea behind "flicker free" CRTs.
Persistence and motion blur can alleviate this somewhat, but it only works well in static and/or slow moving scenes.

What this means for this topic is that the human visual system is able to benefit from increased clarity and animation detail up to CFF, which is higher the bigger (in terms of screen FoV) and brighter the game.
So those gaming on monitors or use VR HMDs get more visual benefit from high framerates than those using a typical couch setting.