PS3 can do 120fps. Amazing.

[VIAN]

You hear that! 120fps here we come. I mean, I've always wanted to play at that speed. Imagine, no more slide show of 60fps. I remember a few times, where if the game had run at 61fps, I wouldn't have died. All Hail Sony!

Not! Check out the Sony hype machine telling you that they want you to play games at 120fps now, because 60fps is now obsolete.

 

[BigCoolJesus]

Originally posted by: VIAN
Check out the Sony hype machine telling you that they want you to play games at 120fps now, because 60fps is now obsolete. You hear that! 120fps here we come. I mean, I've always wanted to play at that speed. Imagine, no more slide show of 60fps. I remember a few times, where if the game had run at 61fps, I wouldn't have died. All Hail Sony!

NOT!

Wow, i actually thought you were serious through your whole post until i saw that the link expressed your true sarcasm


but yes, honestly.
If 30 is the minimum for smooth graphics, and 60-70 is the minimum for the best graphics, why the hell is 120 so ub0r?

anything over 70 is worthless

 

[natto fire]

LOL, I couldn't tell if you were being sarcastic at first...
I wonder if they are going to include the surgery to be able to percieve all those extra frames.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: BigCoolJesus

Originally posted by: VIAN
Check out the Sony hype machine telling you that they want you to play games at 120fps now, because 60fps is now obsolete. You hear that! 120fps here we come. I mean, I've always wanted to play at that speed. Imagine, no more slide show of 60fps. I remember a few times, where if the game had run at 61fps, I wouldn't have died. All Hail Sony!

NOT!

Wow, i actually thought you were serious through your whole post until i saw that the link expressed your true sarcasm


but yes, honestly.
If 30 is the minimum for smooth graphics, and 60-70 is the minimum for the best graphics, why the hell is 120 so ub0r?

anything over 70 is worthless

the higher the max FPS, the higher the minimum FPS and therefore the smoother the gameplay

 

[Varun]

You know I was playing Age of Empires II on my GeForce 6600GT last night with FRAPS running, and it was like 800FPS!

Take that Sony

 

[mrza]

Whats better, Age of Empires 3 or RTW?

 

[Varun]

I don't know I was playing AoE 2.

 

[crazylegs]

Originally posted by: mrza
Whats better, Age of Empires 3 or RTW?

AOE3 suxx balls hard, really it is an awful game - get RTW or CIV4 - both great games!

 

[rancherlee]

120fps does NO GOOD when HDTV's only refresh at 60fps....... Marketing hype!!!

AOE III is kinda sucky, I still like playing AOE II better.

 

[thelush84]

30fps is needed for smooth and 60-70fps is needed for good, like another user said. However, PS3 will be hooked up to HDTV systems which have a maximum refresh rate of 60hz so what's the point of running 120 when current technology only allows refresh rates that support 60? Also, the human eye can detect a maximum of around 70 frames-per-second, so even if there was a television out there that could run a game at 120 you wouldn't be able to notice it because anything about about 70 is like I said before, undetectable to the human eye.

The sad part is that people are stupid and will buy into this, play it and then play an XBOX360, seeing to difference they will realise they have been had.

 

[Mocib]

That GameSpot article is a misinterpretation. It's 120fps for movies and videos, not games.

Here's a good post about the GameSpot screw up: http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showpost.php?p=608940&postcount=56

 

[Agnostos Insania]

I imagine there have been studies that measure how much FPS is necessary for the human eye to not detect the refresh rate. Anyone know what the magic number is?

 

[BigToque]

Originally posted by: Agnostos Insania
I imagine there have been studies that measure how much FPS is necessary for the human eye to not detect the refresh rate. Anyone know what the magic number is?

24

I don't actually know what the number is on computers, but I know it's just over 60 and it has something to do with motion bluring.

Anyway, as long as they maintain a constant number of FPS, you will never notice the refresh rate.

 

[Hacp]

50-60 fps in FPS. 24-30 FPS in racing/rpg/sports/etc.

 

[dexvx]

You people have to realize that the human eye is unique to every person. Different people have different thresholds of what they can perceive or not.

But seriously... is this what Sony has come down to. They talk as if the PS3 is the best thing since sliced bread and they don't even have a demo model when its supposed to be about 5 months from release.

 

[Cheezeit]

that is so hype... even if it was real, you have to have a supereye. do movies at the theater seem choppy to you? Because thats only 24fps.

 

[cryptonomicon]

i hate that 'human eye can only perceive' blah blah fps bullcrap.

bunch of fvcking morons always say that.

dont TELL me I can't see the difference between 70 and 120fps because I can and it is a huge differrence to me.

 

[goobernoodles]

Can you fly too?!

 

[CraKaJaX]

Originally posted by: Captain_Howdy
LOL, I couldn't tell if you were being sarcastic at first...
I wonder if they are going to include the surgery to be able to percieve all those extra frames.

:laugh:

 

[SickBeast]

Sony is obviously getting desperate, which surprises me.

They lost $140 million this past year, and are releasing a console that could be less powerful than the 360, 360 days after it comes out. Sounds serious to me.

 

[grimdeath]

can the human eye even tell the differnce between 60 and 120 fps?

 

[Regs]

Whenever Microsoft enters the market....it destroys the competition with its capital. Like you said SickBeast, it's coming a year earlier than the PS3. Even better, it's coming to the United States first.

 

[MobiusPizza]

Originally posted by: mrza
Whats better, Age of Empires 3 or RTW?

RTW is much better imo
but well they aren't the same genre technically so you can't compare

AOE3 is sole RTS+minor RPG (Home City) while RTW is more Turn-based Strategy and Management + minor RTS

 

[QueZart]

between 60 and 120? yes the Eye Can, Between 70-74 and 120 fps? No Absolutely No way

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: QueZart
between 60 and 120? yes the Eye Can, Between 70-74 and 120 fps? No Absolutely No way

Yes way. There have been several *long* threads in Video discussing this. The basic conclusion is that anyone who says "you can't tell the difference past (X) FPS" (unless X is a very high number) is full of it.

There's a small openGL utility/demo you can download called FPSCompare (link) that lets you display a splitscreen with each half locked at a different refresh rate. Most people can tell differences up to at least 100FPS, although they get much less noticeable (at least for me) after 80FPS or so. Certainly almost anyone could tell the difference between 60-70FPS and 100-120FPS.

With 24FPS movies, there are a couple notes:

1) In a movie theater, the project each frame twice so that you don't notice the horrible flicker you'd get from only seeing 24 images/second, so clearly 24FPS is not high enough to be completely smooth.

2) You can *easily* see motion blur in any kind of fast tracking shot in 24FPS film if you look for it (or take framegrabs from a DVD).

Edit: Link is busted and the program doesn't seem to be hosted on Arsware.org anymore. I'll see if I can dig it up tomorrow, but you may be able to find another link somewhere in one of those Video forum threads.