Why does everyone want a high frame rate when our eyes cant see it?

#1skermacPosted 8/10/2014 9:31:35 AM
I just did some research and found out movies run at 24 fps and they look great on Blu-ray on my HD tv. So why do games need to be much higher?

I did some more research.

We actually see 16 frames per second, our brain molds them into motion. But anything above 10 fps will appear as smooth motion. This is because it takes 1/16th of a second for a picture to fade off the back of our eye.

If you mean 'how many fps can the human eye differentiate between?', then we really start to struggle after three or four frames per second. Above that speed, we only see the transitions, which gives the illusion of movement.

So all this talk about needing 60fps in games is unfounded. We don't need it because our eyes don't know the difference. Does this make sense everyone?

inb4 pc elitists say they have to have 120fps
---
To the edge of the universe and back, endure and survive
#2Prince ShondronaiPosted 8/10/2014 9:34:49 AM
Might want to recheck your research on that one. Lots of people can tell the difference between 30fps and 60.
---
Lobotomy means never having to say you're sorry.
#3Reece504Posted 8/10/2014 9:35:03 AM
I thought the highest it could do is 30 I remember bruce lee punching so fast they had to shoot it at a different frame rate because they couldn't capture and see it.
---
PSN:Knickyknucklez 360:Kn1ckyknucklez Wii-U:KnickyKnucklez
#4GuiltySoul2005Posted 8/10/2014 9:37:19 AM(edited)
http://30vs60.com

Play a game that has drops to 24fps. Its horrible. 16fps is unplayable. Videogames aren't movies.

/thread
---
PSN: Bigboss-x
#5_Doomguy_Posted 8/10/2014 9:37:08 AM
I really hate 60fps on games that aren't FPS anyways and not all games need to be 60fps
---
Rip and tear! Rip and tear your guts! You are huge! That means you have huge guts! Rip and tear!
#6nb003_99Posted 8/10/2014 9:39:58 AM
skermac posted...
I just did some research and found out movies run at 24 fps and they look great on Blu-ray on my HD tv. So why do games need to be much higher?

I did some more research.

We actually see 16 frames per second, our brain molds them into motion. But anything above 10 fps will appear as smooth motion. This is because it takes 1/16th of a second for a picture to fade off the back of our eye.

If you mean 'how many fps can the human eye differentiate between?', then we really start to struggle after three or four frames per second. Above that speed, we only see the transitions, which gives the illusion of movement.

So all this talk about needing 60fps in games is unfounded. We don't need it because our eyes don't know the difference. Does this make sense everyone?

inb4 pc elitists say they have to have 120fps


See an optometrist ASAP.
---
"DRM aside, all of Microsofts moves have been as intended."
- Hentaidoji
#7skermac(Topic Creator)Posted 8/10/2014 9:40:43 AM
GuiltySoul2005 posted...
http://30vs60.com

Play a game that has drops to 24fps. Its horrible. 16fps is unplayable. Videogames aren't movies.

/thread


MGS 4 was a movie. Probably 20 hours of cutscenes and 4 hours of gameplay lol
---
To the edge of the universe and back, endure and survive
#8garydavexxxPosted 8/10/2014 9:42:08 AM
The Human Eye perceiving 220 Frames Per second has been proven, game developers, video card manufacturers, and monitor manufacturers all admit they've only scratched the surface of Frames Per Second. With a high quality non-interlaced display (like plasma or a large LCD FPD) and a nice video card capable of HDTV resolution, you can today see well above 120 FPS with a matching refresh rate. With some refresh rates as high as 400Hz on some non-interlaced displays, that display is capable of 400 FPS alone. Without the refresh rate in the way, and the right hardware capable of such fast rendering (frame buffer), it is possible to display as cameras are possible of recording 44,000 Frames Per Second. Imagine just for a moment if your display device were to be strictly governed by the input it was receiving. This is the case with computer video cards and displays in a way with adjustable resolutions, color depth, and refresh rates.

Source:

https://web.archive.org/web/20010714183232/http://www.amo.net/NT/05-24-01FPS.html
---
They picked an allegiance to a system. And they defend it and will lay their own lives for the console of their choosing. The Game of Consoles is just starting.
#9mokmuudPosted 8/10/2014 9:44:52 AM
GuiltySoul2005 posted...
http://30vs60.com

Play a game that has drops to 24fps. Its horrible. 16fps is unplayable. Videogames aren't movies.

/thread


To be fair spikes and drops are the main times you notice anything when playing a game. If you had a locked 30fps and a locked 60fps most of the time you wouldn't notice the difference if they weren't side by side.
---
PSN: Mokmuud XBL: Fumokmuud NNID: Mokmuud 3DS FC: 3222-6547-9539
#10skermac(Topic Creator)Posted 8/10/2014 9:52:58 AM(edited)
garydavexxx posted...
The Human Eye perceiving 220 Frames Per second has been proven, game developers, video card manufacturers, and monitor manufacturers all admit they've only scratched the surface of Frames Per Second. With a high quality non-interlaced display (like plasma or a large LCD FPD) and a nice video card capable of HDTV resolution, you can today see well above 120 FPS with a matching refresh rate. With some refresh rates as high as 400Hz on some non-interlaced displays, that display is capable of 400 FPS alone. Without the refresh rate in the way, and the right hardware capable of such fast rendering (frame buffer), it is possible to display as cameras are possible of recording 44,000 Frames Per Second. Imagine just for a moment if your display device were to be strictly governed by the input it was receiving. This is the case with computer video cards and displays in a way with adjustable resolutions, color depth, and refresh rates.

Source:

https://web.archive.org/web/20010714183232/http://www.amo.net/NT/05-24-01FPS.html


44,000fps? Maybe in Xbox 52

Also, The brain is deciphering the electronic signals from the retina to make an image that we can understand...which is very different from a movie camera.

In a camera, the camera does all the work. In the eye, 80% of our visual perception is done by the brain, not the actual eye.
---
To the edge of the universe and back, endure and survive