Can someone explain what the big deal is? It doesn't seem like that big of a difference...

Can someone explain what the big deal is? It doesn't seem like that big of a difference. Why is Zig Forums so obsessed with framerate?

Attached: file.png (760x120, 22.6K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=U3Nd0zPBITU
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>It doesn't seem like that big of a difference.
What disabilities do you have, OP?

fast moving games can really expose the low framerate and make things look shitty

I enjoy playing video games

well when you're playing the game there's a massive, obvious delay between all your actions so you could try noticing that. actually the delay is 2x larger on 30 FPS vs 60 FPS. That's pretty big.

Go play Skyrim on your ps3
Now go play Skyrim on your ps4/PC

>ps4
>60 fps skyrim
wot?

fucking peasants holding everything back, even going into 'next gen'
we should be discussing 60 vs 144+

Fpbp, fuck the retards who can't tell the difference between 30, 60, and 144 fps

Came here to post this. The idea that consolefags are even pretending 60fps is some worthwhile goal to be proud of is such a joke, made even funnier by the fact that next gen still won't be able to consistently reach it without having some dedicated "60 fps" mode that neuters the graphics.

I find it more noticeable on PC than on console. Using a mouse with 30fps feels awful, but 30 fps on console with a controller is perfectly fine.

Attached: b4ad17e1eabae84994cdc6d7bb4d29ba45f00d24_00.gif (320x180, 225.32K)

Is there huge difference between 60 vs 144?

More information means you can see more stuff and the game runs better. Imagine having a framerate dip of 20fps at 60fps and then the same at 30fps. One thing is still working the other is in slideshow mode.

Consoles aren’t the only thing holding back gaming, user. Low powered PCs and the price of higher end components in addition to consoles all being the performance/fidelity average lower than we’d all want.

There is no diference at all, you can see it here.

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 157K)

60 fps feels more smoothly, but if a game is 30fps looked ,i would still play it.
You need to know Zig Forums is a bunch of nigger nerds, they need a reason to flame.

>Now go play Skyrim on your ps4
>PS4
You're as blind as OP

Defends on the game

30 fps is not hat bad with good per object motion blur.

I'd say that 60fps is mandatory in action/online games.

Absolutely based

The difference is so big, professional gamers play at AT LEAST 120 fps. Most play at 240.

No one has replied with an actual argument besides
>i-it just feels better!

Attached: 1445743558217.jpg (350x345, 33.47K)

based user btfo pcshitters

Depends on the genre, really.

It looks a lot smoother and feels better. 60fps is still fine but if I've played a game at 144 long enough 60fps just looks and feels like absolute dog shit.

Consoles would have stopped selling a long time ago if people cared about frame rateframe rate

Attached: IMG_20200628_105712448.jpg (3264x2448, 2.37M)

If it’s action I won’t play it if it’s under 60 fps
I have no problem playing turn based at 30, played through most of the ff pc ports at 30 fps
but anything else I’m playing in 60, no discussion. Rdr2 looks much better on pc

Gr8 b8 I r8 8 out of 8

When you're playing on your average TV (which has like 10ms response time) and using a controller (which also has slight latency) with motion blur on top of that, that's when you can' tell much of a difference between 30 and 60 fps, you can definitley feel it but its not dramatic.

Now take that same 30 fps game except this time, on a PC with 1ms, mouse/keyboard, and the difference is like night and day.

The problem with 30 FPS on PC is frame pacing. It plays like absolute ass, unlike on consoles 90% of the time. 30 FPS with good frame pacing takes about a minute to adapt to, 30 with bad frame pacing is always shit. 60 is always superior regardless.

PC games aren't coded where it HAS to run at a playable framerate on any piece of shit computer
For example, the newest Metro game. If you don't have something decent, you get left behind. Stop wasting money on shit for a few months and save up, because this ride is not slowing down for anyone. How it should be.

60 should be standard.
ps2 games at 60 look better than ps4 games at 30.

youtube.com/watch?v=U3Nd0zPBITU

if you still unironically think 60fps is a meme, kill yourself
the argument is now 60 vs 120/144
not even console players argue this bullshit anymore

>half the refresh rate of my shitty tv is fine

And yet the PS5 will still sell millions on launch. Keep up the cope.

I plugged my laptop into my TV for movies. Default setting at the TV's resolution is 30hz and the difference is night and fucking day when I switch it to 60hz. Just moving the mouse will tell you all you need to know.
Not to say that 30fps isn't enough for games, just not enough for certain types of games.

Even NES games were 60fps.

Ideally single player games with really good eye candy should stick to
1080p 30fps
or 4K 30FPS

Attached: fgyhj.jpg (1280x720, 138.35K)

>the world is infested with retards
and water is wet

React to enemies faster in FPS

There is a difference.
But it doesn't mean that 30fps is unplayable as some retards state.

Kek

>all these plebs talking about 30 fps being ok
>I'm here enjoying high demanding games/rpgs at around 80fps, and fps at around 140fps.

It just means it can't be described, like Earl Grey tea people who tried it know it's good but you can't describe the flavor