Support NeoGAF

[Thabass]

Framerate doesn't matter so much, but framepacing is a much bigger issue. I don't mind if a game is 30 FPS, but if EVEN THAT IS INCONSISTENT then it's a moot point.

A consistent framerate can also fuck up good gameplay if it's inconsistent. So, I disagree with the topic, but pacing is a much bigger issue than actual lower framerate is. I can play Ocarina of Time at 20FPS because it's consistent and doesn't bog down the game. But try playing it if the game had poor framepacing... It would slow down to a crawl and your commands won't register.

 

[rofif]

So you admit the 240hz are manipulated through 60hz videos to create blur? Nice. We're going some places now.

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII - 240hz
I I I I I I I - 60hz

I can't make this any simpler for you.
240hz is just a guess. I don't know how many frames are enough. Blurbusters say that 1000hz is enough to fill in all the frame information holes outgoing to the brian.
There is this mod for quake 1, I cannot find it now. But if You could run the game at 500+ fps on a 60hz screen, it would use all the excess frames to help inform the motion blur algorithm how proper motion blur should look. It looked really great.
But this technique requires hundreds of frames of data.

 

[qthaumaturge]

Then you have vision problems too.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7303063/
That's what science says, not me.

 

[8BiTw0LF]

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII - 240hz
I I I I I I I - 60hz

I can't make this any simpler for you.
240hz is just a guess. I don't know how many frames are enough. Blurbusters say that 1000hz is enough to fill in all the frame information holes outgoing to the brian.
There is this mod for quake 1, I cannot find it now. But if You could run the game at 500+ fps on a 60hz screen, it would use all the excess frames to help inform the motion blur algorithm how proper motion blur should look. It looked really great.
But this technique requires hundreds of frames of data.

So you admit more frames are better? Higher frames on lower frames panels result in lower input latency, so I agree.

Now tell me how all this comes in handy for 30fps games?

 

[rofif]

So you admit more frames are better? Higher frames on lower frames panels result in lower input latency, so I agree.

Now tell me how all this comes in handy for 30fps games?

Of course more frames are better!
240hz is amazing... but the boxes are 500$. So if we have to play at 30 or 60fps, let at least motion blur compensate for low fps

 

[benno]

won't play a game which only runs at 1080p
won't play a game which only runs at 30fps

they're both as bad as each other and should have been long forgotten years ago.

 

[rodrigolfp]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7303063/
That's what science says, not me.

Science is talking about natural motion blur. Not fake artificial blur added by software that varies depending on the devs implementation.

 

[Solidus_T]

Both are good?
As long as the game runs at least 60, I am fine, though I do like to get games to run 120fps.
It's not like I will run them on low settings just to get more frames when I can get a nice framerate with higher graphics settings.

 

[Alexios]

High framerate is fidelity too. It's both a visual and gameplay element.

 

[8BiTw0LF]

Of course more frames are better!
240hz is amazing... but the boxes are 500$. So if we have to play at 30 or 60fps, let at least motion blur compensate for low fps

But we can't recreate "natural motion blur" without +240hz, so what is the option for 30fps games?

There is none. It will look like a mess when panning the camera from side to side at above sensitivity 2 in all games.

 

[rofif]

But we can't recreate "natural motion blur" without +240hz, so what is the option for 30fps games?

There is none. It will look like a mess when panning the camera from side to side at above sensitivity 2 in all games.

Drawbacks are what they are.
Some games have better, other have worse motion blur.
For me it peaked with Lost Planet 1. That game had amazing motion blur and really seemed smoother looking than 30fps it was barely running at.
ND games got good blur too aside from a bit heavy turning around

 

[rodrigolfp]

You can't recreate 240hz "natural motion blur" in a 60hz video!

You're not right and stop acting like it

Shhhhhh. We are trolls. /s

 

[8BiTw0LF]

Drawbacks are what they are.
Some games have better, other have worse motion blur.
For me it peaked with Lost Planet 1. That game had amazing motion blur and really seemed smoother looking than 30fps it was barely running at.
ND games got good blur too aside from a bit heavy turning around

Blur is a no go for me, cause I'm playing with longer sticks for better precision and maneuverability at high sensitivity in all games.
Blur and 30fps feels like absolute crap for me and I'd rather watch a movie if I have to deal with low framerates - at least moviemakers figured out how to not pan the camera at high speed like I like to play my games.

 

[qthaumaturge]

Science is talking about natural motion blur. Not fake artificial blur added by software that varies depending on the devs implementation.

Everything is "fake" in CG.
Literally.
Yet here we are, playing it.

 

[rofif]

Blur is a no go for me, cause I'm playing with longer sticks for better precision and maneuverability at high sensitivity in all games.
Blur and 30fps feels like absolute crap for me and I'd rather watch a movie if I have to deal with low framerates - at least moviemakers figured out how to not pan the camera at high speed like I like to play my games.

They didn't. Panning camera sucks ass on oled
Movies should be at least 30fps not 24. its stupid

 

[rodrigolfp]

Yet here we are, playing it.

Turning the shittier stuff off. Motion blur, CA, DoF, film grain, vignette, FXAA...

 

[8BiTw0LF]

They didn't. Panning camera sucks ass on oled
Movies should be at least 30fps not 24. its stupid

Didn't Peter Jackson receive a lot of hate for his 48fps Hobbit trilogy? I guess people are not ready to let go of the cinematic-feeling just yet.

 

[rodrigolfp]

48fps Hobbit trilogy?

It was glorious. S2

 

[qthaumaturge]

Turning the shittier stuff off. Motion blur, CA, DoF, film grain, vignette, FXAA...

I think you just lie to yourself.
Again science, about real world:

When we attempt to characterize our understanding and awareness of the visual world, a fundamental puzzle arises.
On one hand, we subjectively experience a rich visual world, effortlessly perceived (Dennett, 1991; Noë, 2002).
However, when probed on the details, observers know surprisingly little

Emphasis mine.

 

[HerjansEagleFeeder]

High resolution at low frame rate is such an unbalanced and wasteful use of resources. Here's a visual analogy to help you understand why it's dumb:

1080p @ 30 fps:

4k @ 30 fps:

1440p @ 60 fps:

How does 4K/120fps look?

 

[8BiTw0LF]

I'm going to play GoW:R in 120hz - even if it's 1080p...

 

[rodrigolfp]

I think you just lie to yourself.

Turning shitty fake stuff off is an exact science. There is no lie.

 

[Doczu]

I said it before in the other thread that had an untimely end, but just need to re-iterate.

30/40 fps is like getting a blow job off an extremely ugly woman.

It's so bad it can be considered Anal

Enjoy your UE5 slideshow games fidelitySlutz

If her sucking skills are good then i am a-ok with a slower knob polishing

 

[ryan90k]

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII - 240hz
I I I I I I I - 60hz

I can't make this any simpler for you.
240hz is just a guess. I don't know how many frames are enough. Blurbusters say that 1000hz is enough to fill in all the frame information holes outgoing to the brian.
There is this mod for quake 1, I cannot find it now. But if You could run the game at 500+ fps on a 60hz screen, it would use all the excess frames to help inform the motion blur algorithm how proper motion blur should look. It looked really great.
But this technique requires hundreds of frames of data.

hmm wonder if deep learning could be used to in the same way as super resolution and trained to create perfect motion blur. Deep-learned Upsampled Motion Blur or DUMB for short.

 

[01011001]

I'm going to play GoW:R in 120hz - even if it's 1080p...

as you should

 

[qthaumaturge]

hmm wonder if deep learning could be used to in the same way as super resolution and trained to create perfect motion blur.

It could work, if trained on focus groups with eye tracking devices.

 

[rofif]

hmm wonder if deep learning could be used to in the same way as super resolution and trained to create perfect motion blur.

That sounds like a great idea. Nvidia could render at 1000 fps and teach how that looks to the model.

 

[8BiTw0LF]

hmm wonder if deep learning could be used to in the same way as super resolution and trained to create perfect motion blur. Deep-learned Upsampled Motion Blur or DUMB for short.

It could work, if trained on focus groups with eye tracking devices.

Yes, we'll probably see something like that with PSVR2.

Edit: We'll definitely see it with PSVR2. It has 240hz eye-tracking cameras, so it can register faster than the 120hz OLED panels for each eye.

 

[ryan90k]

To be honest I've been wondering for a while why DLSS and FSR 2.1 and other reconstruction techniques don't show substantially better image quality at higher framerates. Say you can hit 120fps, Compared to something like 60fps you have twice the number of samples in between frames and half the amount of motion between frames and the 4 previous frames are just as valid as the previous last 2 in a 60fps render so with jittered rendering why can't more previous frames be used effectively to re-create a better image. Maybe i'm wrong but it seems like these techniques are not tuned correctly for high framerate reconstruction. I feel like this could be the real key to unlocking better IQ as opposed to the way nvidia have looked into with DLSS 3. I don't really like interpolation as it just adds input lag.

 

[SlimySnake]

Not a single human being would pick this running at 60 fps

over this running at 30 fps

 

[tygertrip]

24fps is the minimal threshold for human eye, below that we don't perceive as naturally moving animation, it felt more like power point presentation.

Edit: I'll just quote my own comment of me replying to to nkarafo here to make it clear so certain trolls would stop getting triggered by their own imagination instead my actual point

When Quake Test and then Quake first came out, I played the hell out of it at about 10-12 fps on my old 486 DX4/100. So you're "24 fps is the bare minimum to perceive an illusion of movement" is pure hogwash. "Muh movie industry!!!", lol. Anyway, I'll be damned if I'd play at 15, 24, or 30 now. 30 fps is a HUGE step down from 60. 30 needs to be left behind, just like 15 fps has been left behind. Good god, what's next, "muh cinematic feeling!!!!"

 

[01011001]

Not a single human being would pick this running at 60 fps

over this running at 30 fps

I would chose the 60fps over that... also no actual gameplay would ever look like that, the "natural" shaky cam and the very stationary scene help making it look more "cinematic"

look at this, running in real time on modern hardware:


if you ran that lion demo at normal gameplay like camera angles most of the "fidelity" of this demo wouldn't even be really noticeable unless you stand still and literally stare at it without moving.

also the lion demo looks way too realistic, but not quite realistic enough, giving me a really bad case of uncanny valley, and fuck that right from the getgo

 

[tygertrip]

It’s okay if you want to stay in the past. I get it.
Your father played at 30fps. Your father’s father played at 30fps.

Old guy here. From the industry's inception, the vast majority of games ran at 60 fps. It wasn't until the PS1, Saturn, and N64 days that 30 and even 15 fps became common. But I agree with your point. 60 fps should be the bare minimum nowadays for anything but the slowest games.

 

[tygertrip]

It’s a fact. Most people agree.

It’s why better graphics are always advertised and the most anticipated new feature with every new console release. not goddamn framerate.

It’s why fidelity 30fps mode is used to capture footage for every trailer and screenshot. Not 60fps mode.

It’s why you still see devs prioritizing graphics and fidelity over framerate. 2 more games this week alone. More to come as games start pushing these consoles visually.

It’s why games that offer both modes have 30fps fidelity mode set as the DEFAULT mode and you have to go in and manually switch to performance.

I could go on

Now some noob will quote me saying yOu pLAy gAmEs N0t wATch thEm as if everything I said isn’t a fact and ignore the fact that practically every game on the market launches at 30fps and is later patched for 60. Because they prioritize graphics over framerate - because that’s what most people prefer.

TLOU2, spider man, god of war, flight sim, mass effect, ghosts of Tsushima, Bioshock, Skyrim, halo, days gone, blah blah blah. every game.

Console peasant, lol.

 

[Hitchyhero]

I agree with op for the most part. I'm replying RDR2 and it's the most beautiful games I've ever played.... And the 30fps doesn't bother me. If they could make an even better graphical game, and it was still at 30fps... I'd be ok with that

 

[01011001]

I agree with op for the most part. I'm replying RDR2 and it's the most beautiful games I've ever played.... And the 30fps doesn't bother me. If they could make an even better graphical game, and it was still at 30fps... I'd be ok with that

RDR2 has such dogshit gameplay that a higher framerate doesn't help anyways

 

[The_Mike]

That's why I'm getting PS5 pro. So all them graphics get 60fps. I too am a graphics whore.

You're gonna get dissapointed when all you're gonna get are better shadows and textures notched up a scale and still have 30 fps.

 

[tygertrip]

Some of the best N64 games were 20 fps though.

I can't go back to 30 fps, and shouldn't have to. I'm perfectly fine having a 60 fps mode in games as long as it's near-locked.

WTF does the N64 have to do with 8 and 16-bit games??? Wrong generation, buddy. I'm with you on 60 fps though. To hell with slideshows.

 

[rodrigolfp]

Not a single human being would pick this running at 60 fps

over this running at 30 fps

Yeah. No one is playing CS, Rocket League, Dota, LoL, WoW... Everyone is playing Star Citizen. It's all about graphics.

 

[tygertrip]

60fps is ideal for MP games. The second you start wanting that shit in single player narrative games you need to get the fuck out.

"Muh cinematic narrative!!". LMAO!

 

[Represent.]

Console peasant, lol.

Most of the best looking games are console games. Sony first party to be exact. Head and shoulders above anything else in the industry.

 

[tygertrip]

A lot of you are getting caught up on resolution versus framerate. In OP's post, they specifically don't state anything about resolution. Fidelity is our key word, and there's a huge amount that goes into graphical fidelity beyond resolution. Texture quality, lighting and shadow technologies, geometry complexity, etc. OP is saying they'd rather push all of that to the limit rather than sacrifice whatever necessary to achieve 60 FPS for the sake of it. I never thought I'd be one to use Cyberpunk as an example, but even with an extremely powerful card, the game runs like butt on ultra maximum; you will not achieve a smooth 60 unless you have an extremely powerful rig with a 3090 or better, and even then, it's only going to be achievable with some level of DLSS.

I guess it begs the question, why give us incredible graphical fidelity if it can't be achieved? If so many people say they won't accept anything less than 60, why do we pursue the technology?

Whenever Sony first party games come out and they push the envelope of graphics presentation, it's all oooh ahhh, no one ever says "You know what, I wish they used half poly models so we could get higher framerates. Ray traced global illumination is nice but I think if they used baked lightmaps that would be fine."

I want developers to push the boundaries of the technology and what's possible on this given power envelope. If they can ratchet up the framerate with whatever juice is left, great. You can always turn your settings DOWN to achieve higher framerates, but for the people that want higher fidelity, they can never turn fidelity UP past whatever the developers have implemented. For now. I'm looking at you RTX Remix.

Every single person here is guilty of choosing graphics over framerate, and the evidence is in your very profile. Look at your avatars. Each one of them was chosen because you liked the art, or the screenshot, or how it was presented. Not one fucking one shows how fast they are being rendered. Even if you have a screen cap of something at 120FPS, guess what, it ain't now. You CAN'T sell FPS in a screenshot, but you can fidelity. Higher fidelity is ALWAYS better.

I definitely have some odd criteria when considering a purchase. How long is this game? Is it multiplayer? Local? Does it have a new game plus? Controller support? Know what I've NEVER considered? Is it 60FPS or higher. As I've stated in the past, a good implementation of motion blur and other factors, 30FPS is perfectly fine. Games tailored to 30 CAN look really good. Your eyes will adjust. You'll be okay.

Edit: I'd like to amend that some games should be designed for high FPS. Online shooters and the like should spec for high framerates. That's a given. My case is specifically for single player experiences.

You're equating still avatar pics with interactive graphics??? LMAO, ok.

 

[01011001]

Yeah. No one is playing CS, Rocket League, Dota, LoL... Everyone is playing Star Citizen. It's all about graphics.

it really makes you think...

weird how these are all so popular...

 

[01011001]

Most of the best looking games are console games. Sony first party to be exact. Head and shoulders above anything else in the industry.

and then they come out on PC and are 10x better

 

[rodrigolfp]

it really makes you think...

weird hot these are all so popular...

PS3 graphics best graphics.

 

[SlimySnake]

Yeah. No one is playing CS, Rocket League, Dota, LoL, WoW... Everyone is playing Star Citizen. It's all about graphics.

I said human beings didn’t I?

 

[Represent.]

and then they come out on PC and are 10x better

Not 10x lol. Typically just a resolution bump and some widescreen support. Not worth the 2-9 year wait. Like at all.

Plus by the time said game comes out, the sequel to it is about to launch on PS5 and look significantly better.

 

[01011001]

Not 10x lol. Typically just a resolution bump and some widescreen support. Not worth the 2-9 year wait. Like at all.

running at 120fps alone on PC hardware with the option to turn off Vsync alone will reduce the input lag by at least 80% if not more motion clarity of course is not even comparable tot he 30fps originals.

Plus by the time said game comes out, the sequel to it is about to launch on PS5 and look significantly better.

yeah, that's about to change very soon.

 

[rodrigolfp]

Most of the best looking games are console games. Sony first party to be exact. Head and shoulders above anything else in the industry.

Dat 4x AF, N64 reflections, no HBAO/VXAO/RTAO, no RTGI...

 

[Represent.]

Dat 4x AF, N64 reflections, no HBAO/VXAO/RTAO, no RTGI...

Console games have the biggest budgets, most talented and largest teams. Thats what truly matters.

All the HBAO VXAO RTAO LGTBQ+ in the world couldn't make Spider-Man on PC look better than the upcoming SpiderMan 2 on PS5