480Hz prototype display spotted

[SeekaX]

I play Quake 3 at 500fps. It's visibly slightly smoother than 250fps, but most importantly the input is more direct at higher framerates, halfing the input delay is very noticeable. If a game doesn't handle high framerates well it's poorly made. I know a few people who are actively hunting on ebay for CRTs capable of 280hz and even at lower refreshrates they are slightly quicker than an LCD display. This stuff doesn't really matter if you play the witcher or fallout, but especially in fast paced FPS it's certainly relevant.
Also saying that the eye perceives stuff at a certain framerate or a certain refreshrate or at a certain resolution is complete bs since the eye is not a camera.

 

[NeverBackDown]

I play Quake 3 at 500fps. It's visibly slightly smoother than 250fps, but most importantly the input is more direct at higher framerates, halfing the input delay is very noticeable. If a game doesn't handle high framerates well it's poorly made. I know a few people who are actively hunting on ebay for CRTs capable of 280hz and even at lower refreshrates they are slightly quicker than an LCD display. This stuff doesn't really matter if you play the witcher or fallout, but especially in fast paced FPS it's certainly relevant.
Also saying that the eye perceives stuff at a certain framerate or a certain refreshrate or at a certain resolution is complete bs since the eye is not a camera.

That's pretty dumb to call a game poorly made because it can't support Uber high refresh rates. The CPU simply couldn't process game logic fast enough.
It would be like calling Skyrim or Witcher 3 poorly made games when in fact they are some of the best games EVER created.

 

[SPS]

That's pretty dumb to call a game poorly made because it can't support Uber high refresh rates. The CPU simply couldn't process game logic fast enough.
It would be like calling Skyrim or Witcher 3 poorly made games when in fact they are some of the best games EVER created.

Just because a game is badly made doesn't mean it can't be the best game to play though.

 

[NeverBackDown]

Just because a game is badly made doesn't mean it can't be the best game to play though.

Well obviously. But he's saying every game that can't run super fast is poorly made. It's wrong. I'm just saying not every game has to run at 1000fps 24/7 to be considered good

 

[SeekaX]

That's pretty dumb to call a game poorly made because it can't support Uber high refresh rates. The CPU simply couldn't process game logic fast enough.
It would be like calling Skyrim or Witcher 3 poorly made games when in fact they are some of the best games EVER created.

They are poorly made in that regard, idk what there is defend about it. For those games high framerates don't matter that much, so the games aren't ruined. There are states between 'best game of all time' and 'utter trash' you know.

 

[NeverBackDown]

They are poorly made in that regard, idk what there is defend about it. For those games high framerates don't matter that much, so the games aren't ruined. There are states between 'best game of all time' and 'utter trash' you know.

You did not say that earlier. It was logical to go by my thinking because of that. "if a game" is what you said, you did not specify what game or what kind of game. I obviously choose those games because they don't yield high framerates yet are some of the best created because it showed you were wrong. Now that you changed what you said, the argument is different. Because no longer are we talking about every game, but specific ones.

 

[Surpuppa]

I dont really know how he got that number but that seems awfully low and many has stated a higher number. You can clearly see a difference between 30 and 60, no you cant see each individual frame but you can see that it is less choppy, maybe that is what he meant by 20, over that you cant see each individual frame but overall you see a difference?

 

[SeekaX]

You did not say that earlier. It was logical to go by my thinking because of that. "if a game" is what you said, you did not specify what game or what kind of game. I obviously choose those games because they don't yield high framerates yet are some of the best created because it showed you were wrong. Now that you changed what you said, the argument is different. Because no longer are we talking about every game, but specific ones.

This stuff doesn't really matter if you play the witcher or fallout, but especially in fast paced FPS it's certainly relevant.

Even in my original post i said that. You just massively overextrapolated from me saying that a game is poorly made if it can't handle high framerates, which is a valid complaint for a game of any genre because that indicates that someone didn't care much when writing the engine. Limiting the framerate to 60 is a pretty cheap shortcut to fixing a fairly fundamental issue. No amount of compensation in other aspects of the game makes that lack of care acceptable, it just makes it tolerable.

 

[SPS]

Even in my original post i said that. You just massively overextrapolated from me saying that a game is poorly made if it can't handle high framerates, which is a valid complaint for a game of any genre because that indicates that someone didn't care much when writing the engine. Limiting the framerate to 60 is a pretty cheap shortcut to fixing a fairly fundamental issue. No amount of compensation in other aspects of the game makes that lack of care acceptable, it just makes it tolerable.

There are many other reasons besides not caring. Game developers have very finite budgets and making sure an engine can run at any frame rate may considered to be over engineered. In an ideal every game developer would 100% want their engine to cope with any frame rate but it is not always feasible due to project constraints.

 

[mb67]

Hehehehe, the STALKER benchmark states that I probably could play it at 480FPS at the lower resolution.

 

[SeekaX]

There are many other reasons besides not caring. Game developers have very finite budgets and making sure an engine can run at any frame rate may considered to be over engineered. In an ideal every game developer would 100% want their engine to cope with any frame rate but it is not always feasible due to project constraints.

I'm pretty sure Skyrim didn't have that tight of a budget. And doesn't this just shift the blame to whoever handles the budget?

 

[SPS]

I'm pretty sure Skyrim didn't have that tight of a budget. And doesn't this just shift the blame to whoever handles the budget?

How do you know though. If the budget is say $20m but it is spread across tonnes of resources/studios, it still might have a small tech budget. But yes it kind of shifts the blame to management but if they don't have the money to make it happen properly they should scale it back. However, consumers expect everything these days so you can't win.

 

[SeekaX]

How do you know though. If the budget is say $20m but it is spread across tonnes of resources/studios, it still might have a small tech budget. But yes it kind of shifts the blame to management but if they don't have the money to make it happen properly they should scale it back. However, consumers expect everything these days so you can't win.

Idk man, seems to me like skimping out in the wrong area. If the game doesn't handle high framerates well (below the threshold you mentioned where the game draws frames quicker than the gamelogic can update) odds are you'll have issues at varying framerates as well.

 

[SPS]

Idk man, seems to me like skimping out in the wrong area. If the game doesn't handle high framerates well (below the threshold you mentioned where the game draws frames quicker than the gamelogic can update) odds are you'll have issues at varying framerates as well.

Well it depends. Engines that use variable timesteps will naturally scale better with varying frame rates but can suffer unstable simulation. Engines that use fixed step have rock solid simulations but can struggle to run at very high frame rates if their simulation is expensive. You can have a hybrid of both where the physics for example is fixed step but rest of the logic is variable. It definitely depends on the game to determine what would work best.

 

[Wraith]

Hehehehe, the STALKER benchmark states that I probably could play it at 480FPS at the lower resolution.

:lol: You'll still get prefetch stutter whilst running though. Oh I miss that game.

 

[MacLeod]

Oh man, STALKER! I almost forgot about that game. Some of the best atmosphere and ambiance ever in a game. I may play that tonight just for old times sake.

 

[TheF34RChannel]

@ 144Hz - I'm good ha ha

Stalker - I lived and breathes the series. Top atmosphere; so grim and hopeless. You all remember that high pitched sound that one creature made?

 

[Dicehunter]

Idk man, seems to me like skimping out in the wrong area. If the game doesn't handle high framerates well (below the threshold you mentioned where the game draws frames quicker than the gamelogic can update) odds are you'll have issues at varying framerates as well.

While I prefer higher frame rates since making the jump to a 144Hz+ monitor, Most games are made with the lowest common denominator in mind i.e consoles, And consoles generally target 30FPS so it's not really surprising that a lot of game engines have problems with high FPS.

 

[NeverBackDown]

While I prefer higher frame rates since making the jump to a 144Hz+ monitor, Most games are made with the lowest common denominator in mind i.e consoles, And consoles generally target 30FPS so it's not really surprising that a lot of game engines have problems with high FPS.

Oh I hope this really doesn't turn into a console is holding gaming back thread....

 

[Dicehunter]

Oh I hope this really doesn't turn into a console is holding gaming back thread....

Nah I doubt it, If anything the companies making said tech are holding back gaming, The faster we get small form factor fast tech the better for all of us.