|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
dukeEarl
9
   |
Posted - 2012.08.16 18:28:00 -
[1] - Quote
Please put onus on 60 frames per sec CCP! Do whatever you have to to make that happen! I can see myself playing dust 514 for years on end, if only you can make the game playable at 60 fps! I even wont pay that much attention to the screen tearing and texture pop-ins that are likely to occur here n there! 60 fps guys. I have faith you can do it |
dukeEarl
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 18:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
Mr Funless wrote:You can't see past 30 fps anyway.
/troll
Says the guy who hasn't experienced 60 frames per sec EVER |
dukeEarl
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 18:40:00 -
[3] - Quote
Liu Kaizong wrote:LOL @ 60 FPS.
Keep fantasizing :)
Not on the ps3 ur probably right |
dukeEarl
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 18:52:00 -
[4] - Quote
Mr Funless wrote:You can't see past 30 fps anyway.
/troll
Actually pretty much anything over 30 fps is interpreted to the human eye as a FLUID MOTION! At 30 fps n under is not so much. If you can't notice a difference, (assuming you have experienced 60 fps) then either you're in denial or u have cataracts. |
dukeEarl
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 18:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
Debacle Nano wrote:I'd rather have 30-45 fps if it depends on game play. 60 is the top of the line and will most likely cause lag.
Top of the line is anywhere between 85-120 fps buddy  |
dukeEarl
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 19:18:00 -
[6] - Quote
DON RODIE II wrote:I would rather have 256 players than 60 fps. That's just overrated. Look at that trash cod. That's 60fps lol
COD sux BUT the buttery smoothness of the game is undeniable! The 60 fps is a HUGE reason why COD is so successful. IF a big player count is more important than the overall performance of you, and the game itself, then thats your problem |
dukeEarl
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 19:19:00 -
[7] - Quote
Rhadiem wrote:Debacle Nano wrote:dukeEarl wrote:Debacle Nano wrote:I'd rather have 30-45 fps if it depends on game play. 60 is the top of the line and will most likely cause lag. Top of the line is anywhere between 85-120 fps buddy Anything over 60 the human eye can barely distinguish apart from each other. No point in going that high. There are lots of factors involved beyond simply seeing a difference. I don't know the latency of the DS3 or of good HDTV's, but in the PC world FPS affects your response time for aiming, tearing and such based on refresh frequency of your monitor, providing a stable rate that won't dip when things get really crazy on the screen, etc.
Correct sir!! +1 |
dukeEarl
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 22:28:00 -
[8] - Quote
DON RODIE II wrote:dukeEarl wrote:DON RODIE II wrote:I would rather have 256 players than 60 fps. That's just overrated. Look at that trash cod. That's 60fps lol COD sux BUT the buttery smoothness of the game is undeniable! The 60 fps is a HUGE reason why COD is so successful. IF a big player count is more important than the overall performance of you, and the game itself, then thats your problem lol you actually think 60 fps is why cod sells? You in a dream world. They promotion and how they get people to buy it every year even if it sucks is why it sells a lot. It's called peer pressure and brainwashing = sells not 60 fps lol
That plays a big roll in it too, yes |
dukeEarl
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 22:31:00 -
[9] - Quote
Raynor Ragna wrote:I don't believe you can see anything beyond 30fps. But with on the fly generated images we can see the slide show effect because there is no blurring between the frames like you have on TV and essentially real life. 60fps is standard for computer games because it simulates that blur.
Not just motion blur but motion fluidity as well! You cna literally see and most importantly FEEL the effect |
|
|
| |
|