|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shutter Fly
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
494
   |
Posted - 2015.01.22 23:10:00 -
[1] - Quote
Pr0phetzReck0ning wrote:Hello Dusters! Longs time no see! I took a couple months off to get a PS4 and play other more polished games, yet I am back! For how long? Who knows, who cares? No one... But anyway. I was wondering:
Just how many FPS does Dust run off?? The reason why I ask is because i just started playing again and I said to myself: nice improvements on the gameplay! But...the game still runs like utter ****. Everytime I try and jump out the dropship the game stutters. Yesterday, I froze and then teleported to a different area of the map. Textures are consistently popping in and out.
So what am I getting at? Well, maybe what Dust needs is lower FPS. I assume that CCP is trying to run this game at 50-60 FPS but with all that goes on in the map graphically the Frames keep dipping to the point of unplayability. So yeah, how many Frames exactly does Dust work with and do you think they should lock the game at 30 FPS?? Maybe that will help the game run smoother like it use to a year ago.
Prophet
Natively, I believe the game already runs at 24 or 30FPS, there's no way it runs anywhere near 60 at any time. I don't think anything on either the PS3 or PS4 runs at 60FPS. |
Shutter Fly
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
494
|
Posted - 2015.01.22 23:18:00 -
[2] - Quote
Pr0phetzReck0ning wrote:I love how you put Reckoning in there. <3
If that is so what would you propose could fix the FPS problem? This game is clinging to life and it needs a whole overhaul as far as the engine under the hood
Not IWS, and not a particularly popular opinion, but my suggestion would be integration into the Master Race.
60-144FPS FTW
JIMvc2 wrote:On my new TV that I bought this year. Dust has been running for me so smooth that it feels like 60+ like literally. Thank you 120+ hz :D
Thats...not how it works... |
Shutter Fly
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
494
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 00:36:00 -
[3] - Quote
Aramis Madrigal wrote:Joel II X wrote:Shutter Fly wrote:Pr0phetzReck0ning wrote:I love how you put Reckoning in there. <3
If that is so what would you propose could fix the FPS problem? This game is clinging to life and it needs a whole overhaul as far as the engine under the hood Not IWS, and not a particularly popular opinion, but my suggestion would be integration into the Master Race. 60-144FPS FTW JIMvc2 wrote:On my new TV that I bought this year. Dust has been running for me so smooth that it feels like 60+ like literally. Thank you 120+ hz :D Thats...not how it works... Anything above 70 frames is solely for bragging rights. As I recall, humans can only view up to 50-60 fps Not exactly, but there are diminishing returns with regard to perceived quality of image and fluidity of motion as FPS increases. You don't get much in the way of increased quality as you increase the FPS above a certain threshold, but your visual system can perceive the difference between two games/videos/whatever played at a different, high FPS. It probably won't improve your game play, but you'll be able notice. Cheers, Aramis (my field of research/expertise is decision making based on sparse information, particularly as it relates to the chemical senses, but I know a fair amount about the visual system)
This
You can easily tell the difference between 60 and 120 FPS. The human eye isn't digital, our sight is "analog", so we don't see in terms of FPS. We see in a constant stream, not frames.
Anything above 60FPS doesn't give much of a gameplay advantage, but it does look much better. Once you start going above 144FPS, the returns start to decline, but are noticeable. A gif for comparison between 60 and 30 FPS: https://gfycat.com/SolidTallJaguar
There is obvious room for improvement above the 60FPS example, so there is definite room for a discernible difference at higher framerates. |
Shutter Fly
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
497
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 12:13:00 -
[4] - Quote
demonkiller 12 wrote:
24 or 26 actually, but when I play a game like league of legends or dota 2 at ~300 you can feel a massive difference
its like subliminal messaging, you dont really see it but you just know it was there
WRONG
Shutter Fly wrote:Anything above 60FPS doesn't give much of a gameplay advantage, but it does look much better. Once you start going above 144FPS, the returns start to decline, but are noticeable. A gif for comparison between 60 and 30 FPS: https://gfycat.com/SolidTallJaguarThere is obvious room for improvement above the 60FPS example, so there is definite room for a discernible difference at higher framerates.
I'm aware that framerate and refresh rate are different values, but they are essentially the same thing.
1Hz = 1 x/s (a 1GHz cpu core goes through 1 billion clock cycles per second) = 1FPS (1 Frame Per Second)
A 144Hz monitor refreshes 144 times per second, meaning it displays 144FPS. That monitor cannot display over 144FPS, and it does not magically turn 30FPS output into 144FPS. In the latter case, I believe the output is displayed as transmitted, but refreshed at 144Hz. When playing PC games, this is the reason why the graphics settings usually have a Vsync option, which limits the framerate to a determined multiple or factor (multiple for high FPS, factor for low FPS) of the display's refresh rate. When the refresh rate gets too far out of sync with the transmitted framrate, the display will not update and refresh correctly, causing strange display artifacts called "tearing". |
|
|
| |
|