Have I been spoiled? lol.

Ever since I've upgraded to next gen with the Xbox One and PC gaming, I can't enjoy certain types of games unless they are running at a buttery smooth 60 frames per second or better. 30 frames per second gaming feels sluggish to me even though it was pretty
much the standard for last gen games. I can deal without playing games in 1080p but I feel the framerate/responsiveness is more important. This a real shame too because I might have to pass up Watch Dogs on the Xbox One if it doesn't run at 60fps and opt for
the PC version.

:)

 

I have been falsely accused

I also cannot do any multiplayer games lol

 

I have been hacked.

@GNARRKILLA CHAP - Yes this seems to be a common issue at the moment, peoples accounts get broken into and their MS points get spent on Fifa 12 DLC. Maybe its just the little no life kids that get into the accounts all play Fifa lol.

 

If you feel that way about games and graphics, you should have pooled all your console money in to PC from Day 1. PC will always be leaps and bounds ahead of consoles as long as you have to system to power it.

 

The brain can't distinguish between 30 and 60 fps. The accepted scientific belief is that we only process 25 to 30 fps.

The only advantage to a game running at 60 fps is there is less of a chance of it dropping below the threshold where we will see a difference. A well optimized game running at 30 won't be distinguishable from a game running at 60.

 

Randver: That is the case if there is motion blur. Video games do not use motion blur.

60fps is the widely considered limit on a distinguishable difference without motion blur.

Take a look at Halo 4 and now Titanfall. You will see a difference.

Look at The Hobbit and Catching Fire (48p and 24p). You will see no difference in framerate, but The Hobbit's fast moving objects are easier to make out and less blurred.

 

@Virtual

Just did a little more research and you are correct.

I guess I can now justify my borderline OCD obsession with pulling frame rates on my PC that I had assumed I could never distinguish. As it turns out my 3Dmark scores do mean something ;p

 

"A well optimized game running at 30 won't be distinguishable from a game running at 60."

That's utter nonsense. I can run Grid 2 on my PC at almost max settings and hit a rock solid 60 FPS. If I crank the AA up, I can get it to run at 30 FPS and the framerate difference is immediately noticeable. In fact, I've shown friends the game running
at 30 and 60 FPS to show them the difference, and every one of them could see it.

 

Just to answer OPs question... Yes. Yes you have. lol

 

How many times will you guys debate this topic?

Do you just forget a month or so later and wake up like, "Yep i am posting that on Xbox.Com" "Sure to rouse some attention with this one!"

I mean come on! When can we get back to gaming. When again can i find something cool about the system or the games or the hardware that i may not know already, simply by reading around constructive original post's??

This forum has become an extremely boring place since Nov 22

 

@Sigma

I admitted my mistake.

As far as Grid 2 goes if your only running 30 fps, even at 16xaa you should be getting well over that on a decent rig or it's time to upgrade.

 

I could do with a new graphics card, but my rig is hardly weak: -

Maximus V Gene

3770K with Noctua NHD-14 SE 2011

Gigabyte GTX 670

16GB of RAM

Samsung 830 SSD

RME HDSPe AIO sound card

The main issue I have is that when I built the PC I had a 1080p monitor, but now I have a 1,440p one that's pushing about 1.8 times as many pixels. I'm undecided whether to get an MSI 780 Ti Gaming or just wait for the 8 series cards to start coming out.

 

@Sigma

That monitor must make a huge difference because your rig should be getting much better performance in Grid 2.

steamcommunity.com/.../864969953386326676

I run triple 1080p so have absolutely no experience with higher res monitors. Once you go triple, you never go back so upgrading monitors x3 gets pricey.

I've got a Titan Black on pre-order and no idea why because my PC gaming at the moment is mostly 16bit rogue-likes that could be run on a 10 year old laptop. more money than brains I guess.

 

I've just tried running the benchmark again and it isn't the AA that makes the difference - that was already on 16X. It's putting literally everything on Ultra and enabling every optional graphics option that brings the framerate down. It dropped down to
about 40, but the difference in smoothness was still noticeable and I wouldn't play the game with those settings because of it.

It's possible that older drivers were to blame for it being as low as 30 with those same settings, as I haven't played the game for quite a while and I've updated the drivers maybe 4 times since I last played it.

 

@Sigma

In Grid 2 the track your using as your benchmark can make a huge difference too. Some of them are hogs.