Biggerboat1 said:
Chrkeller said:
The irony being I'm right about the UK rules. I have a UK drivers license. The people telling me I'm wrong, which I'm not, do not. Hell one of them hasn't even been to the UK and other has never driven a car. The issue all stimmed, not that anybody will admit it, they thought I was making fun of their policy. I wasn't. I think it is safer.  As far as fps, fair enough I should have picked my verbiage better. The gap gets smaller, especially past 90 fps. But 90 fps has an absolute tangible benefit, especially once you get used to it. I'd be curious who actually took the time to demo the UFO Test. I know HaloDust did. The UFO test, for me, is very clear in demonstration of the benefit. But to be fair, my verbiage wasn't as accurate as it should have been and has caused unnecessary back and forth. Edit I'm also sincerely curious if anybody here will change their position via prime 4 at 120 fps. |
Fair enough, I do live in the UK but don't drive so won't open that can of worms again. I did the UFO test though it maxed out at 60fps... I'm on a galaxy 23 ultra so pretty sure it should go up to 120... I'll def try MP4 at 120fps, though to me the question isn't whether people can tell the difference between 60 & 120, but if it's a big enough difference to warrant devs allocating all of that CPU & GPU resource to achieve it, instead of spending it elsewhere. |
I got the pleasure to live in the UK for work. Was there for about 3 years. When the conversation occurred, I happened to have taken the test a few months prior.
I wouldn't spend the resources on this generation of hardware. I think 120 fps being common on consoles is a generation out.
