DigitalFoundry Rage Analysis

[osamanobama]

zarx said:

darkknightkryta said:

Dr.Grass said:

darkknightkryta said:

Dr.Grass said:
Why is it either 60fps or 30fps!? 60fps games are silky smooth, and 30fps are ok. Why not go for 40fps or something? Higher framerate than 30 with more fidelity than 60 is surely a good idea?

God of War 3 hovers around 45 fps.

I know that happens, but in general devs seem to aim for either 30fps or 60fps.

This is true, thing is 24fps is the minimum needed for natural motion.  Generally higher than 30 would be unnatural (And it generally is).  Now that talk that Rol had with 60fps is probably right (only skimmed over what he wrote) and which is why they aim for 60 when they need a faster game.  I personally think anything higher than 60fps is just too fast to have any good gaming with.

higher framerate as long as it is constant is better and more natural looking, even if a casual observer may not be able to recognise consciously the difference tests have shown that many people can percieve single frames in the hundreds of frames per seccond range. And no sane person would ever say that a game running at 60fps looks anything but better/smoother than 30fps. Real life is > 1 Tredecillion "frames" per seccond after all (basically the time it takes for light to travel the shortest mesurable distance in a vacuum which is less than an attom across if I remember correctly).

yes 60fps > 30 fps in both look and feel.

but i would say many 30 fps games look and feel better than many 60 fps, i would also say a rock solid 30 fps game is better than a 60 fps games that has screen tear and dropped frames.

for example Uncharted is locke 30 fps, so its a very smooth experience, and through the clever use of motion blur, its very hard to tell it is a 30 fps game, becuase it plays so smoothly, and the motion blur gives the illusion of higher fps. 

call of duty on the other hand, while mostly smooth, due to its 60 fps target, drops frames, and has torn frames