Also AFAIK, some console games DO allow you to change FPS from 30 to 60. Skate 2 (and maybe 3) allows this, and the difference is night and day. It doesn't make any huge difference in gameplay (I don't think the mechanics even allow it), it's more of a cosmetic option for Cinematic Mode for replay playback and recording.
<!--quoteo(post=2053498:date=Dec 30 2012, 07:48 PM:name=Davil)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Davil @ Dec 30 2012, 07:48 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2053498"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Here I am to end the 30fps vs 60fps debate with a link that will force non-believers to believe.
If you can't see the difference between these, well... You're blind.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not arguing that there is a difference between 30 & 60 FPS but if you watch these two simulations long enough you'll find that the cubes are not moving at the same speeds. They eventually come into sync and then out of sync again due to a speed difference. So I wonder if this speed difference is what is making one look better than the other.
Guess what I am trying to say is that I would have figured the cubes should always be moving at the same speed but it would just look choppier at lower fps due to the slower frames but they would/should always be in sync.
<!--quoteo(post=2052446:date=Dec 28 2012, 10:38 PM:name=lumina)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (lumina @ Dec 28 2012, 10:38 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2052446"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Almost all console games, movies, and TV shows run between 24 and 30 fps. You can't see the difference, sorry. What you are seeing, is the jumping fps. If your fps isn't steady, it won't look smooth.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Your eye can tell the difference, but you are right, it is a difficult difference for the human eye to detect.
What isn't difficult at all to identify is the correlation between the display and your input, namely your mouse movements. "Your hand" can very easily tell the difference when the display is registering its motions at 30 hz, and when its registering it at 60 hz. Due to this your brain will quite quickly tell you that the refresh rate isn't fast enough, whether its due to the visuals or not.
I can see CRTs flicker at 85 hertz or less, thus my eyes can detect visual change happening in 1/85th of a second. Infact, to detect the flicker (light/dark) it is not only detecting a change in the image, but the complete removal of the image and its re-painting, so im perceiving changes happening at 1/170th of a second.
If i were cooler and could perceive the scanline more accurately as some people can, that would mean my eye was even MORE sensitive! Crazy right?
<!--quoteo(post=2053514:date=Dec 30 2012, 07:30 PM:name=MiniH0wie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MiniH0wie @ Dec 30 2012, 07:30 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2053514"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm not arguing that there is a difference between 30 & 60 FPS but if you watch these two simulations long enough you'll find that the cubes are not moving at the same speeds. They eventually come into sync and then out of sync again due to a speed difference. So I wonder if this speed difference is what is making one look better than the other.
Guess what I am trying to say is that I would have figured the cubes should always be moving at the same speed but it would just look choppier at lower fps due to the slower frames but they would/should always be in sync.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not really, it seems that way because the 3 players don't load at the same time. If you scroll down to see both of them and then hit refresh they're about right on. After that they may get a little out of sync but that's not due to the fps difference. If it was, they'd each be going twice as fast as the previous.
<!--quoteo(post=2053565:date=Dec 31 2012, 12:20 AM:name=Imbalanxd)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Imbalanxd @ Dec 31 2012, 12:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2053565"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This thread has become abut a bunch of kids who think they can see really fast things so they are cool, even though they physically cannot.
Can we get a lock?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Translation:
I've been proven wrong multiple times and now I am either having a tantrum or trolling.
Sight and feel are completely different. Regardless of whether the human eye can distinguish the frames is not the case. It's the feeling of your mouse movement and in-game interpretation. Playing CS:S at 120 FPS renders a much smoother and rewarding feel opposed to 60 FPS. Also variables such as hit registration, interpolation and lag compensation which are also affected by low or high FPS. The general consensus is that regardless of whether the human eye can see it or not, there is a distinguishable difference in performance and feel between lower and higher FPS.
<!--quoteo(post=2053565:date=Dec 31 2012, 01:20 AM:name=Imbalanxd)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Imbalanxd @ Dec 31 2012, 01:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2053565"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This thread has become abut a bunch of kids who think they can see really fast things so they are cool, even though they physically cannot.
Can we get a lock?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I've been proven wrong multiple times and now I am either having a tantrum or trolling.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My only contribution to this thread has been to say that the difference in mouse input being processed 30 times a second is easy to tell when compared to mouse input being processed 60 times a second.
I think you are both just getting mad and lashing out at anybody who posts here. Oh look another good reason to lock.
<!--quoteo(post=2053835:date=Dec 31 2012, 01:57 PM:name=Imbalanxd)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Imbalanxd @ Dec 31 2012, 01:57 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2053835"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My only contribution to this thread has been to say that the difference in mouse input being processed 30 times a second is easy to tell when compared to mouse input being processed 60 times a second.
I think you are both just getting mad and lashing out at anybody who posts here. Oh look another good reason to lock.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
yep he's trolling.
"umad?"
yeah, nobody is mad, other than you. You're wrong, it happens in life, deal with it and move on.
yeah, nobody is mad, other than you. You're wrong, it happens in life, deal with it and move on.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Looks like you summed this one up in about 20 <img src="http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u352/generalnoobus/1269352905454.png" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Comments
<a href="http://boallen.com/fps-compare.html" target="_blank">http://boallen.com/fps-compare.html</a>
If you can't see the difference between these, well... You're blind.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not arguing that there is a difference between 30 & 60 FPS but if you watch these two simulations long enough you'll find that the cubes are not moving at the same speeds. They eventually come into sync and then out of sync again due to a speed difference.
So I wonder if this speed difference is what is making one look better than the other.
Guess what I am trying to say is that I would have figured the cubes should always be moving at the same speed but it would just look choppier at lower fps due to the slower frames but they would/should always be in sync.
There's no smoothness difference between 120 fps vs 60 fps..... unless you have a 120hz monitor.
Running 120 fps on a 60hz monitor and you are still only seeing 60 fps.
Your eye can tell the difference, but you are right, it is a difficult difference for the human eye to detect.
What isn't difficult at all to identify is the correlation between the display and your input, namely your mouse movements. "Your hand" can very easily tell the difference when the display is registering its motions at 30 hz, and when its registering it at 60 hz. Due to this your brain will quite quickly tell you that the refresh rate isn't fast enough, whether its due to the visuals or not.
If i were cooler and could perceive the scanline more accurately as some people can, that would mean my eye was even MORE sensitive! Crazy right?
Can we get a lock?
Ps: Our eyes can 'see' down to maybe even 2 photons.
So I wonder if this speed difference is what is making one look better than the other.
Guess what I am trying to say is that I would have figured the cubes should always be moving at the same speed but it would just look choppier at lower fps due to the slower frames but they would/should always be in sync.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not really, it seems that way because the 3 players don't load at the same time. If you scroll down to see both of them and then hit refresh they're about right on. After that they may get a little out of sync but that's not due to the fps difference. If it was, they'd each be going twice as fast as the previous.
Can we get a lock?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Translation:
I've been proven wrong multiple times and now I am either having a tantrum or trolling.
Can we get a lock?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Post bollox, expect pain.
<!--quoteo(post=2053706:date=Dec 31 2012, 05:33 PM:name=CommunistWithAGun)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CommunistWithAGun @ Dec 31 2012, 05:33 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2053706"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Translation:
I've been proven wrong multiple times and now I am either having a tantrum or trolling.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My only contribution to this thread has been to say that the difference in mouse input being processed 30 times a second is easy to tell when compared to mouse input being processed 60 times a second.
I think you are both just getting mad and lashing out at anybody who posts here. Oh look another good reason to lock.
I think you are both just getting mad and lashing out at anybody who posts here. Oh look another good reason to lock.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
yep he's trolling.
"umad?"
yeah, nobody is mad, other than you. You're wrong, it happens in life, deal with it and move on.
"umad?"
yeah, nobody is mad, other than you. You're wrong, it happens in life, deal with it and move on.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Looks like you summed this one up in about 20
<img src="http://i519.photobucket.com/albums/u352/generalnoobus/1269352905454.png" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Locked.