[Jeston]

Originally Posted by vossiewulf [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I come from a generation where we learned to play flight simulators and racing sims when 15fps was excellent. The real point at which you have zero reason to complain about frame rate affecting gameplay is 30fps. Actually my real opinion is anything faster than 24fps or so is making excuses.

That is after all the traditional fps of every movie shot on film, and I don't recall anyone coming out of a theater complaining about blurriness or choppy motion. The film industry had an obvious need to cut the frame rate to the minimum to save huge costs on film, and they decided that 24fps was the number at which the human eye still does not notice the jump in frames, even in fast action.

With TV, NTSC is 30fps in the US, PAL is 25fps. Back in the pre-integrated circuit days engineers were pretty much limited to using the AC power frequency as the basis of any timing system, and it's 60hz in the US and 50hz most everywhere else.

That's not to say you can't see a minor difference in smoothness if you compare 60fps to 30fps, and if for some reason that really bugs you visually, ok. Still would place it in the "being overly picky" bin though.

But regularly I see people in DCS World complaining about being shot down because they "only" had 50fps and it's absurd. If you can't fly a plane smoothly or track a moving target smoothly at 50fps, that's because you suck, not because you didn't have enough frames.

Same thing when I played MWO. At a time when I was somewhat rarely outside the top 5 in a match, I'd see people complaining that their fps/ping numbers were totally unplayable when they were better than what I usually saw, which was mid 30s fps and a ping of 150-200ms.

Ok Boomer