| Page 1 of 4 |
Kaltern
Posts: 5859
Location: Lockerbie, Scotland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
 Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 14:48 Post subject: |
|
|
Last edited by Interinactive on Tue, 5th Oct 2021 01:15; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 15:06 Post subject: |
|
|
Seems like the "independent" gaming journalists have a new task from their overlords from game publishers and hw manufacturers - explain the failure of the "nextgen" consoles to sound like a victory.
Notice that the article does not even divulge the name of its author. A collective effort, perhaps? No self-respecting journalist wanted to sign under drivel like this, more likely.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saner
Posts: 6873
Location: Uk
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 15:14 Post subject: |
|
|
Does anyone take anything the gadget show says seriously ?
| ragnarus wrote: |
I saw things like that in here and in other "woman problems" topics so...... Am I the only one that thinks some authorities needs to be alerted about Saner and him possibly being a rapist and/or kidnapper ? |
Saner is not being serious. Unless its the subject of Santa!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Morphineus
VIP Member
Posts: 24883
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 15:38 Post subject: |
|
|
The human eye is well over any numbers they can throw at them at the far end of the tech we have available. It's best not to entertain this unscientific drivel they keep on rehashing, if they or anyone else would truly be interested they'd search for studies rather than spouting unfounded nonsense.
And... it's the fucking gadget show... the name alone should tell you not to take it serious.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 15:42 Post subject: |
|
|
Well said Morphy 
1 and 2 are still amazing.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nui
VIP Member
Posts: 5720
Location: in a place with fluffy towels
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 16:19 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 16:26 Post subject: |
|
|
i swear, the next person claiming that the human eye cant perceive more than 24 fps...
these are the creationists of the video game industry.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 17:18 Post subject: |
|
|
I really don't fucking care. Why touch on this topic again. Just finish the damn games, optimize and make them stable. not far cry 4 bullshit or unity
ofc human eye can see more than "24fps"
the only reason that 24fps in movies is accceptable is because we are not controlling it so there is no input lag... and every frame by itself is blurred just because of how image is captured. So when played, it looks smooth. Games dont work that way. Some games do it well like Crysis (tho motion blur is still overdone and not perfect) but control input lag at 30fps is INACCEPTABLE for mouse playing. It is kinda ok with controller but I was never able to play with mouse below 60fps
3080, ps5, lg oled
Sin317-"im 31 years old and still surprised at how much shit comes out of my ass actually ..."
SteamDRM-"Call of Duty is the symbol of the true perfection in every aspect. Call of Duty games are like Mozart's/Beethoven's symphonies"
deadpoetic-"are you new to the cyberspace?"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 17:21 Post subject: I have left. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 17:41 Post subject: |
|
|
| KamamuraCZ wrote: | Seems like the "independent" gaming journalists have a new task from their overlords from game publishers and hw manufacturers - explain the failure of the "nextgen" consoles to sound like a victory.
Notice that the article does not even divulge the name of its author. A collective effort, perhaps? No self-respecting journalist wanted to sign under drivel like this, more likely. |
Must be the case.
Can't see any other reason all these retards would come out of the woodwork with their 30 FPS garbage.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zibztrollingme
Posts: 1526
Location: RAR - Racist Against Russia. Apparently.
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 18:13 Post subject: |
|
|
I would love to bludgeon to death anyone that brings the 24fps movie discussion into this because they have no fucking idea what they are talking about.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nui
VIP Member
Posts: 5720
Location: in a place with fluffy towels
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 18:22 Post subject: |
|
|
| The_Zeel wrote: | | Quote: | | 60fps is something both the Xbox One and PS4 should be able to handle, with the power-packed consoles perfectly placed to take full advantage of faster, more detailed games, although some games do drop to lower resolutions to make higher framerates a possibility. |
ps4 and xboner are the first console generation in history, that didnt have graphics superior to pc at launch.
all the other console generations delivered more impressive gfx than pc at launch, until pc overtook after a few months up to a year as always.
this time the consoles were 1 year behind pc at launch and this guy is talking about power-packed consoles.  |
Yes and no... I remember X360 at launch had a few exclusives, and also had many PC ports (Quake 4, CoD 2 for example) that were on par with PC versions actually.
I don't remember any X360 game being more impressive than a PC game graphically back then... I was just amazed by the fact such a console, for such a small price, could run CoD 2 in 720p @ 60fps... And that basically you could play most PC games fully maxed at 60fps in 1280x720, which needed an expensive PC (I remember spending 480€ on a 6800 GT back then, and it barely was enough to have CoD 2 in 1280x1024 @ 60fps)....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 18:27 Post subject: |
|
|
| cyclonefr wrote: | | The_Zeel wrote: | | Quote: | | 60fps is something both the Xbox One and PS4 should be able to handle, with the power-packed consoles perfectly placed to take full advantage of faster, more detailed games, although some games do drop to lower resolutions to make higher framerates a possibility. |
ps4 and xboner are the first console generation in history, that didnt have graphics superior to pc at launch.
all the other console generations delivered more impressive gfx than pc at launch, until pc overtook after a few months up to a year as always.
this time the consoles were 1 year behind pc at launch and this guy is talking about power-packed consoles. |
Yes and no... I remember X360 at launch had a few exclusives, and also had many PC ports (Quake 4, CoD 2 for example) that were on par with PC versions actually.
I don't remember any X360 game being more impressive than a PC game graphically back then... I was just amazed by the fact such a console, for such a small price, could run CoD 2 in 720p @ 60fps... And that basically you could play most PC games fully maxed at 60fps in 1280x720, which needed an expensive PC (I remember spending 480€ on a 6800 GT back then, and it barely was enough to have CoD 2 in 1280x1024 @ 60fps).... |
Back in 2005-2006 such a thing as 1080p didnt existed. I was playing everything at 1280x960 and later at 1680x1050.
Quake4 was fucking horrible on 360 when it came out. Prey was much better on 360. Was hardly getting playable framerates on pc while 360 was better at the time.
that is just my pc back then, tho
3080, ps5, lg oled
Sin317-"im 31 years old and still surprised at how much shit comes out of my ass actually ..."
SteamDRM-"Call of Duty is the symbol of the true perfection in every aspect. Call of Duty games are like Mozart's/Beethoven's symphonies"
deadpoetic-"are you new to the cyberspace?"
Last edited by KillerCrocker on Sun, 25th Jan 2015 18:28; edited 2 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nui
VIP Member
Posts: 5720
Location: in a place with fluffy towels
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kaltern
Posts: 5859
Location: Lockerbie, Scotland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zibztrollingme
Posts: 1526
Location: RAR - Racist Against Russia. Apparently.
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 18:34 Post subject: |
|
|
The film look for actual films makes sense. Shooting something over 24fps does not make it look better, it makes it look fake because it is fake.
Once you go above 24fps (like the hobbit) the brain receives more information and is able to distinguish the fakeness of it (sets, costumes, make-up, actors faking etc).
With 24fps there are frames missing in the information flow and the brain needs to "fill in", it receives just enough information to figure out what's happening but it needs to "imagine" the rest to paint a complete picture. Thus movies at 24 come across as "realistic".
Of course that does not apply to god damn video games as it is not something mimicking reality ffs.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kaltern
Posts: 5859
Location: Lockerbie, Scotland
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 18:35 Post subject: |
|
|
Can I just say, that a lot of this fps stuff is more relevant now than say 15 years ago, because back then, some were still using CRT monitors, and refresh rates / resolutions on those were totally different - you could easily lower the res and maintain a good FPS, because the res didn't really make as much of a difference as it does now, being fixed pixels and all.
Sometimes I wish CRT's could be brought back in some way. Wasn't there talk of a laser TV that allowed great pics without fixed res?
Playing Valheim every weekday at 10pm GMT - twitch.tv/kaltern
Follow me on Twitter if you feel like it... @kaltern
My system: Ryzen 7 3700x|Gigabyte RTX 2080 Super Windforce OC|Vengeance 3000Mz 16Gb RAM|2x 500Gb Samsung EVO 970 M.2 SSD |SanDisk SSD PLUS 240 GB + OCZ Vertex 2 60Gb SSD|EVA Supernova 650W PSU|Logitech G27 Wheel|Logitech G19 Gaming Pad|SteelSeries Arctis 7|Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum Mouse + Logitech MX Master Mouse|Razer Blackwidow Chroma X Keyboard|Oculus Quest 2 + Link|Pixio PX7 Prime 165hz HDR & 1x Samsung 24FG70FQUEN 144Hz curved monitor
-= Word to the wise: Having a higher forum post does not mean you are right. =-
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nui
VIP Member
Posts: 5720
Location: in a place with fluffy towels
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 18:36 Post subject: |
|
|
| The_Zeel wrote: | | videos/films at 24 or 30 are fine, since they have a natural motion blur. |
To me they just studder like mad. 30 being quite a bit better.
If 30 fps video looks anything but smooth to me, it should be obvious that games are even greater offenders.
| The_Zeel wrote: | | now, watching a serious movie like schindlers list at 48 fps, i think that would be weird. |
Unless you get used to it, perhaps? I mean it does more life like
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 18:37 Post subject: |
|
|
i dunno, it was a huge difference if i played a game at my then native 1024x768 or only 640x480.
(or even 512x384 god forbid)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 25th Jan 2015 18:39 Post subject: |
|
|
Why is 24fps for movies such a magic number? It's just what you're used to, simple as that. It doesn't look fake, it looks different. The same applies to games. How many people you think know what fps they are playing at when gaming on TV? I doubt there are many. Majority rules. Back when I had a shitty PC, gaming at 20fps, it didn;t bother me. The moment I experienced what was actually possible (with better HW that is), 20fps suddenly looked like crap.
As long as consoles are stuck at 30, people will be stuck at 30.
Last edited by Mister_s on Sun, 25th Jan 2015 18:42; edited 2 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 4 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
Not the human eye again 
When the fuck will they understand its about how you feel and control the game and not about what the god damn eye can see.
