Yeah. Like Megaman 2, Mario World, DKC. /sran like shit
Turn motion smoothing off?Honest question: is there a way for 60+ fps content to be displayed so that the viewer doesn’t perceive the infamous soap-opera effect?
I gave away my beloved plasma TV 3 years ago for a series of reasons, and since then my vision never fully adapted to the poor movement resolution of LED-based TVs. 30fps CG scenes and in-engine cutscenes in games are invariably a pain to watch due to sample-and-hold, and TV and movies absolutely require some motion interpolation if I want to watch more than a few minutes of footage.
On the other hand though, on modern screens the soap-opera effect is very obvious and, to use a very abused expression, “not cinematic”. Things feel too smooth, and it seems everything is moving too fast. That is perfect for actual gaming, but in cutscenes it’s a bit jarring. Would there be some way to make it “feel right” while still maintaining the smoothness?
Clown opinion. The 30fps has superior atmosphere. It's not a low standard thing. I love the feel so much I even limit certain games at 30 fps.I think it's better to just get used to it.
The only reason you see the "soap opera effect" as a negative is because you got used to the low standards of film motion and 30fps.
Same... all my displays are 1080p , even my main 27" pc monitor is 1080p but 144hz,, guess what I turn down to 60hz.. Why because its pointless. I don't need to play my strategy games at 144fps and have it make the room hotter as it overworks my rtx gpu.I'm fine with 1080p/60fps. Now you can unleash the empathy/laugh emojis.
Ironic how mine is the "clown opinion" and then you post... this.Clown opinion. The 30fps has superior atmosphere. It's not a low standard thing. I love the feel so much I even limit certain games at 30 fps.
Real life is 30fps, therefore I prefer 30fps max in my games to represent what I see everyday and produce a more cinematic end result.
That’s a great deal if you have the space! I am running a 42” C2 and that’s already a tad too large, lol.Its the LG 45" ultrawide and I overpaid to get it at launch at $2500 and here at Black Friday they were down to around $900 at some sites
Movies are terrible at 60 fps. This is a majority opinion. Try harder.Ironic how mine is the "clown opinion" and then you post... this.
Whatever floats your boat though.
Half or more of the frames missing provides a superior atmosphere, sure.The 30fps has superior atmosphere.
Diminishing returns past 125hz for the average gamer I think.
4k/144 with low latency would be great.
Currently 1440p/165hz is the best experience in terms of price/performance ratio.
If you think about it a very low percentage of gamers have the necessary hardware for high refresh rate gaming unfortunately
Honest question: is there a way for 60+ fps content to be displayed so that the viewer doesn’t perceive the infamous soap-opera effect?
I gave away my beloved plasma TV 3 years ago for a series of reasons, and since then my vision never fully adapted to the poor movement resolution of LED-based TVs. 30fps CG scenes and in-engine cutscenes in games are invariably a pain to watch due to sample-and-hold, and TV and movies absolutely require some motion interpolation if I want to watch more than a few minutes of footage.
On the other hand though, on modern screens the soap-opera effect is very obvious and, to use a very abused expression, “not cinematic”. Things feel too smooth, and it seems everything is moving too fast. That is perfect for actual gaming, but in cutscenes it’s a bit jarring. Would there be some way to make it “feel right” while still maintaining the smoothness?
I'm currently using 1440p/165Hz with a RTX 3080, and it's pretty perfect most of the time, I tend to cap all games at 120fps and I can hit that in pretty much every game, I can only think of two which don't and that's Cyberpunk and Alan Wake II which are more around 90--120fps. I'm saving up for a 5090 when they release, and that should be the perfect card to make the move to 4K.
They look fine, it's just that you got used to the lower frame rates and it feels unfamiliar. It's OK though.Movies are terrible at 60 fps. This is a majority opinion. Try harder.
But with those games 120fps is more than enough for a great experience.
It’s the competitive shooters like Counter Strike, CoD, Val, Apex, Quake, etc. that benefit form frames above 125.
At this rate 5090 will probably cost $3000 lol
You can certainly play as you wish. I don’t think anyone is stating otherwise. However, lower FPS gameplay is objectively worse from multiple angles and folks saying “it’s fine” should clarify “for me” part. Especially with OLED lower FPS is pretty atrocious.I fucking hate the game forum elitism that tries to shame people who don't care about this stuff. If you can only play with the highest refresh rates, frame rates, resolution, graphics etc. then more power to you, but why shame those that don't feel the same way? It shouldn't make any difference to your own preferences.
Shaming? You mean like calling others elitists for appreciating nicer things? Yeah, that does look like shaming indeed.I fucking hate the game forum elitism that tries to shame people who don't care about this stuff. If you can only play with the highest refresh rates, frame rates, resolution, graphics etc. then more power to you, but why shame those that don't feel the same way? It shouldn't make any difference to your own preferences.
Is pretty atrocious "for you".You can certainly play as you wish. I don’t think anyone is stating otherwise. However, lower FPS gameplay is objectively worse from multiple angles and folks saying “it’s fine” should clarify “for me” part. Especially with OLED lower FPS is pretty atrocious.
I realized that I fell out of love with gaming, or in other words, gaming lost its magic, when LCD's became the primary viewing medium.Very true.
The sad thing is that if we were talking about CRTs, all frame rates would display perfectly sharp images regardless. It's the modern panel tech that needs stupidly high frame rates to stay sharp. A huge regression.
I just get sick of seeing these threads repeatedly over the years on game boards, then someone says they don't notice or care about these things, then someone always says something about "low standards" and that seems to be the whole point of the threads--either people agree with the tc and pats on the back ensue, or the "low standards" insults start to happen. Just a very pointless thread imo.Shaming? You mean like calling others elitists for appreciating nicer things? Yeah, that does look like shaming indeed.
OP provides information about how and why higher frame rates makes the gaming experience/functionality objectively better. All you have to do is accept the information given and move on. If you can access those frame rates, awesome. If not, oh well, it's OK still and if you can enjoy games at lower frame rates more power to you, just ignore the whole topic.
This applies to all nice things.
Heck, if you can indeed enjoy the hobby just as much at lower frame rates you are among the lucky ones. You should be happy you don't have to spend more money for more expensive hardware and monitors. I really wish i was like you, honestly. But instead you seem angry about this which is odd to me and makes me wonder why. It almost looks like the bitterness of someone who doesn't have those nice things mentioned but i'm probably missing something.
I just get sick of seeing these threads repeatedly over the years on game boards, then someone says they don't notice or care about these things, then someone always says something about "low standards" and that seems to be the whole point of the threads--either people agree with the tc and pats on the back ensue, or the "low standards" insults start to happen. Just a very pointless thread imo.