Absolutely bizarre that a 1st party title doesn't seem optimized for the console they're developing for. This makes me skeptical the PC version will be optimized too.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] variants@possumpat.io 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The human eye can't see more than 30fps anyway /s

[–] Ghoelian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 2 months ago (3 children)

The people that keep saying that should really just try to use a 144+hz monitor for a while. Surely they'll be able to notice the difference as well.

[–] lengau@midwest.social 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If someone's saying that about 30fps they should just set their refresh rate to 30 and move their mouse.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 7 points 2 months ago

Or just stand in a room with fluorescent lights and move their eyes

[–] Thrashy@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)

Might just be my middle-aged eyes, but I recently went from a 75Hz monitor to a 160Hz one and I'll be damned if I can see the difference in motion. Granted that don't play much in the way of twitch-style shooters anymore, but for me the threshold of visual smoothness is closer to 60Hz than whatever bonkers 240Hz+ refresh rates that current OLEDs are pushing.

I'll agree that 30fps is pretty marginal for any sort of action gameplay, though historically console players have been more forgiving of mediocre performance in service of more eye candy.

[–] mephiska@fedia.io 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Are you sure you have the reset rate set correctly on your video card? The difference between 75hz and 160hz is very clear just by moving your mouse cursor around. Age shouldn't have anything to do with it.

[–] Thrashy@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Quite sure -- and given that one game I've been playing lately (and the exception to the lack of shooters in my portfolio) is Selaco, so I ought to have noticed by now.

There's a very slight difference in smoothness when I'm rapidly waving a mouse cursor waving around on one screen versus the other, but it's hardly the night-and-day difference that going from 30fsp to 60fps was back in Ye Olden Days, and watching a small, fast-moving, high-contrast object doesn't make up the bulk of gameplay in anything I play these days.

[–] OminousOrange@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If the two are beside eachother, you'll definitely see the difference.

[–] Thrashy@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The old one and the new one are literally side by side on my desktop, don't know what to tell you...

[–] OminousOrange@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Hmm, I've found it quite noticeable. Perhaps turn an FPS counter on and see what it's actually running at. If you have a game showing on both screens, it'll likely limit the fps to suit the lowest display hz.

[–] Gerudo@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago

This is a good point, a lot of people just assume plugging it in gets the hz, but a lot of the time you have to select the hz in your settings.

[–] ParetoOptimalDev@lemmy.today 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Games feel almost disgusting on 60hz now, but they felt fine before I tried 144hz.

Maybe if I was stuck at 60hz for a long time id get used to it.

Now though, if I switch for 30m I can't ignore the difference.

[–] lustyargonian@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Do you primarily game on mouse or controller?

[–] ParetoOptimalDev@lemmy.today 1 points 1 month ago

Mouse, mostly. I've noticed that I feel lag much much more with mouse.

[–] jorp@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

A 160hz refresh rate gives the software a 6ms render budget, do things actually even run at that rate?

[–] SpacetimeMachine@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

If your comp is good enough absolutely. Strong PCs now can run sub 5ms frame times at 4k pretty regularly. Especially for competitive games that aren't designed to look incredible.

[–] ParetoOptimalDev@lemmy.today 4 points 2 months ago

I can confirm 3-5ms frametimes with a popular shooter at 165hz.

[–] r00ty@kbin.life 1 points 2 months ago

That's weird. I'm getting to the age where I wouldn't see the point in 4k, I'd need to have my head on top of the screen to see it. But refresh rate can be felt in fluid scrolling etc and definitely even if only on the unconcious level, improves awareness in games too.

[–] lengau@midwest.social 1 points 2 months ago

It really depends what one's doing, also. For many things, including many games, 30fps is fine for me. But I need at least 60fps for mousing. Beyond that though I don't notice the mouse getting smoother above 60fps, but some games I do have a better experience at 120fps. And I'm absolutely sold on 500+ fps for simulating paper.

[–] lustyargonian@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago

My work macbook can only do 60 while my Rog Ally can do 120, and damn the mouse feel of 120 is so much better that I hate my work laptop can't do it.