The Great Debate. Why 60 over 30?

[JettMaverick]

The concept of the argument deludes me, I used to work in film, and having worked in mediums where films are shot in 23.9/25 fps upto 30 for PAL screening, i always prefered a lower frame rate, because the progression of frames feels more movie like (Not like.. sluggish 1-10fps because of lower level hardware) but I want to know what justifies the reasoning to complain if a game is 30fps, and not 60. I'm not asking for a cussing match, & i appreciate arguments on both sides, im more curious as to why.

 

[Foolery]

30fps is acceptable, but I like a solid 60fps. Even if I sacrifice graphics to do so. It's just a personal preference. No justification needed.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

a game plays better if its at 60 FPS, thats a fact, theres less input lag, this has a real impact in the way people play

 

[JettMaverick]

30fps is acceptable, but I like a solid 60fps. Even if I sacrifice graphics to do so. It's just a personal preference. No justification needed.

Fair play! It's nice to know that there are people who are willing to accept compromise for their preferences. I've seen alot of people going on about how it must be 60fps/1080p, and accepting nothing else. I'm more curved towards the console gamer in this debate, as i can understand PC users flipping out considering money spent on hardware, thus they should be handed the best experience for the price paid.

 

[Hateren47]

Well. The question I would ask myself is would I want the moving images I'm looking at to update every time my monitor does or only half the time? I prefer it to update 60 per second for gaming because that's my monitors refresh rate.

If I had a console I would prefer that to output 100fps since that is what my last TV's had as refresh rate.

If I'm watching a movie I don't really care about the fps because it's not my GPU that's having to draw every image anyway.

 

[Foolery]

30fps is acceptable, but I like a solid 60fps. Even if I sacrifice graphics to do so. It's just a personal preference. No justification needed.

Fair play! It's nice to know that there are people who are willing to accept compromise for their preferences. I've seen alot of people going on about how it must be 60fps/1080p, and accepting nothing else. I'm more curved towards the console gamer in this debate, as i can understand PC users flipping out considering money spent on hardware, thus they should be handed the best experience for the price paid.

I've never expected consoles to be graphical powerhouses.
The biggest selling points for me are convenience, ease of use, and couch co-op.
If I want to pretty everything up to the max, I'll just use my PC.

 

[ShinyCharizard]

Well 60fps is undeniably smoother. That said, the importance really comes down to what genre of game you are playing.

 

[JettMaverick]

a game plays better if its at 60 FPS, thats a fact, theres less input lag, this has a real impact in the way people play

This is very insightful, thanks for sharing

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

30fps is acceptable, but I like a solid 60fps. Even if I sacrifice graphics to do so. It's just a personal preference. No justification needed.

Fair play! It's nice to know that there are people who are willing to accept compromise for their preferences. I've seen alot of people going on about how it must be 60fps/1080p, and accepting nothing else. I'm more curved towards the console gamer in this debate, as i can understand PC users flipping out considering money spent on hardware, thus they should be handed the best experience for the price paid.

i seriously doubt most PC gamers want 60 FPS just for the sake of it, like i showed you, 60 FPS objectively plays better than 30 FPS

a game plays better if its at 60 FPS, thats a fact, theres less input lag, this has a real impact in the way people play

This is very insightful, thanks for sharing

happy to help, you know, totalbiscuit made a similar video a few days ago, he goes a little bit more technical, he also says theres no reason why console games shouldnt ATLEAST provide the option to play games at 60 FPS, like a simple graphical option, high detail/30 FPS and low detail/60 FPS

and honestly, i agree

 

[JettMaverick]

30fps is acceptable, but I like a solid 60fps. Even if I sacrifice graphics to do so. It's just a personal preference. No justification needed.

Fair play! It's nice to know that there are people who are willing to accept compromise for their preferences. I've seen alot of people going on about how it must be 60fps/1080p, and accepting nothing else. I'm more curved towards the console gamer in this debate, as i can understand PC users flipping out considering money spent on hardware, thus they should be handed the best experience for the price paid.

i seriously doubt most PC gamers want 60 FPS just for the sake of it, like i showed you, 60 FPS objectively plays better than 30 FPS

a game plays better if its at 60 FPS, thats a fact, theres less input lag, this has a real impact in the way people play

This is very insightful, thanks for sharing

happy to help, you know, totalbiscuit made a similar video a few days ago, he goes a little bit more technical, he also says theres no reason why console games shouldnt ATLEAST provide the option to play games at 60 FPS, like a simple graphical option, high detail/30 FPS and low detail/60 FPS

and honestly, i agree

Y'know, curiously when i've opened a console games options and there's a 'display/video' sub-option, I always jumped in thinking that there 'might' be some form of alteration besides brightness etc, I agree with your agreement on this, totally.

 

[Smertnik]

Why turn on AA? Why use higher resolutions? Because it looks better.

 

[BrotherRool]

There are some technical aspects to the way films are made (involving motion blur?) that make lower frame rates a lot more acceptable to the eye. It's something about the way films are capturing a moving image in real life and turning into discrete frames, whereas a game is building up a series of images designed as discrete frames.

 

[Sabine Blochberger]

happy to help, you know, totalbiscuit made a similar video a few days ago, he goes a little bit more technical, he also says theres no reason why console games shouldnt ATLEAST provide the option to play games at 60 FPS, like a simple graphical option, high detail/30 FPS and low detail/60 FPS

and honestly, i agree

Here is that video, for the so inclined. Sums it up for me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXJh9ut2hrc

 

[The Lunatic]

Even then, 60FPS is only the current preferred due to refresh rates.

If higher refresh rates became popular, those would be preferred.

At present, 120/144hz retain a margin of the market.


Getting a computer which can run new games at 120/144FPS, however... A lot harder to do.

 

[Zipa]

Linus explains it well in this video.

 

[Bad Jim]

The concept of the argument eludes me, I used to work in film, and having worked in mediums where films are shot in 23.9/25 fps upto 30 for PAL screening, I always prefered a lower frame rate, because the progression of frames feels more movie like.

Define 'movie like'. Like all those other movies that happen to be shot at 24 fps? I can understand that 48 fps movies might look strange if you are used to 24 fps, but the argument is ultimately circular. If movies were shot at 100 fps, 100 fps would look more 'movie like' than 24 fps.

The main reason studios didn't use higher frame rates was that making copies cost money, so they just picked the lowest frame rate that didn't visibly stutter. They didn't compare 24 fps to 100 fps and declare that 24 fps looked better. If neither money nor technical issues were a factor, they would probably have gone for 100 fps or more.

Anyway, when it comes to games, high framerates tend to play better. The eye can track fast moving objects more easily at higher frame rates, and players can respond faster. Once you start playing, you will therefore have more fun if the framerate is good, whereas graphical fidelity doesn't actually matter that much.

 

[MrFalconfly]

Well, as I see it 30fps vs 60fps is like a Ford Mustang GT vs a Ferrari F12-berlinetta.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Sure I'd prefer the Ferrari, since it objectively is the best, but that doesn't preclude me from enjoying the Mustang.

 

[Risingblade]

Apparently film fps and game fps don't match because motion blur doesn't look natural in games while it does in movies. More fps just makes games look and feel smoother.