So, this guy on youtube said you can see more then 30fps (NSFW)

[Timmy-P]

24-30 is more cinematic, if you call a slideshow "cinematic." I also mention that games have the factor of frametime variance, which in TV and movies where you find such framerates is quite literally a non-issue.
I bought a 144Hz monitor for a reason.

 

EDIT:  I forgot a major part of my argument.  It takes skill to do that.

[FunkyFeatures]

24-30 frames may have more motion blur, but in games like first person shooters, or where you basically have to aim at ANYTHING, its really bad, i feel like dragging the mouse over ice. I can live with NFS Rivals being 30 fps, as long as i dont have dips below it. Otherwise its not snappy.

[SkilledRebuilds]

IF someone came to me with that....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your entitled to your Opinion but..........Bitch Please
 

[Wano97]

30 FPS > 60 FPS for me

 

Most of my gaming is done on a laptop with Intel HD 4400 because I have a spare block in school. So in this case, having resolution a bit higher and settings turned up a bit more and playing at 30 FPS, is better then playing at absolute lowest resolution and settings to get 60 FPS.

 

There. You just heard someone honestly say it.

In that case, someone should say 30FPS Higher res > 60 fps lower res.

Just saying that 30 fps is better than 60 fps makes no sense

[PlayModeOn]

In that case, someone should say 30FPS Higher res > 60 fps lower res.

Just saying that 30 fps is better than 60 fps makes no sense

Well also his PC is limited. If he has a beast PC ofcourse he'll rather have 60FPS.

[ComradeHX]

He's brainwashed by peasants.

 

Movies are not interactive, he would not know the difference but it's there.

[Misanthrope]

It usually goes like this:

 

"Right....I am needed over here....for a thing.....bye"

[Wano97]

Well also his PC is limited. If he has a beast PC ofcourse he'll rather have 60FPS.

Yeah, that wasn't really the point though. If I HAD to choose between high quality or 60fps, guess which one I'd go for. Yeah that's right, 60fps.

[SeriouslyMikey]

I don't know anyone who is so moronic to believe that. 

[jamese669]

Well i generally don't give a shit so when people like that appear i just ignore them, same with master race people as well i ignore them,

[Camul]

I watched the second Hobbit movie in the higher frame rate (I think it was 48fps) and it really did have a different feel to it, and it took away from the movie for me. I went back the same day to watch the 24fps version just because I didn't enjoy the higher frame rate version. So yeah, it definitely is more 'cinematic', and that's fine for a movie, because it's non-interactive. For a video game which is an interactive piece of entertainment, the playability decreases with the frame rate, and at anything lower than 30, it just becomes unplayable. The people spouting this 'we wanted a more cinematic feel' bullshit knows it too. But I guess it's safer to say that than alienate the console players by saying "Listen. I know you wanted that next gen experience, but really, your shitty next-gen consoles aren't capable of delivering that."

 

And you know what, I'll give it to them that this is new hardware, and later-on we'll probably see games that do make better use of the hardware, but it doesn't change the fact that currently this has been the generation of compromise. They offer better visuals, or a higher frame rate, but rarely both. I'm not saying that consoles are a bad way to go though. I loved my Xbox 360, and I do miss it.

[HippY]

I am completely honest with you

 

If you would ask 10 console gamer, what FPS and resolution they are running they would usually be " I dunno" 

 

They are there as they are not avid technology lovers ( and lets be honest, it is not a problem) and all they want is to play games as simple as they can in their freetime. Most of them are not interested in resolution and FPS, as long as it is playable they are fine.

 

It is only the PC gamers who are completely in love with FPS and numbers and cores, and hertzes but for the everyday people these words and numbers says nothing. 

 

It is still beyond me, why some people takes PC gaming as their biggest pride, and tries to protect it from... well basically no one as their life depends on it

[moppop]

I love 60fps in games. I love HFR in films, but I absolutely despise when people use interpolation on video to turn 24fps into 60 and parade it around like the next best thing.  It's not.

[Recon97]

Never encountered one. But I would ignore them. Ignorance is the key.

[Omon_Ra]

He starts talking about movies, he says The Hobbit is a good example why we should not watch at 60FPS. This is wrong because because The Hobbit is 48FPS and games do not work the same way.

 

And I tell him the reason why we use 24FPS in the first place is because of storage and the limitation of films. But no he pretends that 24FPS is there because it is more cinematic. *deskpalm*

 

The high framerate 'The Hobbit' was done to try and mitigate issues with passive 3D. Peter Jackson even shot at a 270* shutter angle to try and retain more motion blur with the higher frame rate. Clearly, it didn't work well.

 

The use of 24fps in the first place is because that is the framerate of a 35mm film camera. To a degree it is because of storage and limitation of film, you only have so many feet of film per reel. Since 35mm film is the standard of cinema, the look of 24fps and the resulting motion blur is what has been established as 'cinematic.' 

 

I watched the second Hobbit movie in the higher frame rate (I think it was 48fps) and it really did have a different feel to it, and it took away from the movie for me. I went back the same day to watch the 24fps version just because I didn't enjoy the higher frame rate version. So yeah, it definitely is more 'cinematic', and that's fine for a movie, because it's non-interactive. For a video game which is an interactive piece of entertainment, the playability decreases with the frame rate, and at anything lower than 30, it just becomes unplayable. The people spouting this 'we wanted a more cinematic feel' bullshit knows it too. But I guess it's safer to say that than alienate the console players by saying "Listen. I know you wanted that next gen experience, but really, your shitty next-gen consoles aren't capable of delivering that."

 

Any you know what, I'll give it to them that this is new hardware, and later-on we'll probably see games that do make better use of the hardware, but it doesn't change the fact that currently this has been the generation of compromise. They offer better visuals, or a higher frame rate, but rarely both. I'm not saying that consoles are a bad way to go though. I loved my Xbox 360, and I do miss it.

 

^ This x3598172309479231

 

I love 60fps in games. I love HFR in films, but I absolutely despise when people use interpolation on video to turn 24fps into 60 and parade it around like the next best thing.  It's not.

 

Interpolation is the worst. Sports are okay with it, at best, but TV makers need to stop having it defaulted 'on.'

[killers993]

I don't really care, it's their opinion. Just like how I don't care if it's 30 or 60 fps, if it's playable and fun, I don't care (unless it starts to stutter or go below 30 fps). 

[Stadiz]

They are all sleeping with the fishes. We don't need more weird people on earth.

[Advic3]

Hi all, I know you can tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps but, can you tell the difference over 60+ FPS? Been wondering this...

[Arty]

Hi all, I know you can tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps but, can you tell the difference over 60+ FPS? Been wondering this...

Yes

Why would they make 144fps monitors lol

 

for the record we only see Cinematic 24fps rest is placebo 

[Aytex]

idk because i dont have a 144 hz monitur

[DEDRICK]

INB4 thread locked

[Mao_Zedong]

[STRMfrmXMN]

I can't even go back to 60Hz from my 75Hz monitor.

[Tedster]

Yes, when I run at lower resolutions I can see that 75Hz is far smoother.

[manikyath]

yes, but diminishing returns.

/thread.