Fast-moving objects with high spatial frequency content require faster frame rates for the movement to perceived smooth. Slow objects with low spatial frequencies require less. Consequently, it makes no sense to assign any single number as the limit.
120hz technology in future consoles?
- Thread starter specwarGP2
- Start date
Here is a shocking bit of anecdotal evidence how useless it all is. Last night I showed the difference between Booty at 30 fps and 60 fps (1080p vs. 720p) to a friend, and he couldn't perceive the difference! Perhaps that's a good reason why devs don't aim for 60 Hz games - Joe Public won't notice 60 Hz?
P on the rocks
Newcomer
That was never the question. Joe Public won't notice a lot of things. He won't notice 60 Hz unless you tell him to read a sign in the game world while you are panning the camera. He also won't notice the anti-aliasing, motion blur, HDRL you bought with the drop in framerate. He won't notice if you double your animation transitions. He doesn't notice the difference between the first MGS4 trailer and the actual game or the difference between the pre-rendered trailer of Motorstorm and the actual game. The saddest recent thing are some user comments at the "Black Mesa" trailer on Eurogamer where some people perceive it like just another Half Life mod.
I don't even ask myself if it is wise to aim for 30 Hz when making a game for Joe Public. It most probably is. The most important question is "Is it good to aim to please Joe Public and noone more demanding?"
btw my sister only played games ocasionally in her life but she can tell the difference. I love my sister.
If you're worrying about the bottom dollar and working to a budget, and it's Joe Public buttering your bread, sadly it probably is wise to aim for Joe Public. I don't like, being a 60 hz lover myself who hates the judder of 24 hz movies, but I am in an unimportant minority.
People are downplaying the average person to much.
The average persondoes notice AA, framerate, differences in trailers etc. They just dont care at the same level as some other persons do. They might not know the correct words for what they are seeing, but they definately are able to percieve them.
Its complete and utter BS when people say that Joe casual doesn't notice the differences, they do notice differences they just dont care as much about them.
I have primarly only casual friends, (not to many geeks like me that smoke alot of weed), and they all manage to see differences. I have friends that dont have consoles and rarely ever play games, that notice that Fifa 08 on my PS3 is not as smooth as than Fifa 08 on another friends X360. (Fifa 09 however looks about the same, and has same framerate)
They notice when framerates are bad, high, AA, everything. They are not blind, they just dont care as much about the differences.
Saying that they dont notice is imo completely ridiculous. It implies that they have worse vision that gamers or something. They have the same ability to look at pictures and tell the differences. They are able to notice the differences, its not like they are blind!!! They see them just like we see the differences. They just dont CARE as much about the differences. Thats a big difference.
specwarGP2
Regular
This is correct. The other day I showed my friend Fantastic 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer on Blu-ray with motion estimation on and he said it looked different. He couldn't quite identify exactly what was different but he said it looked smoother.
Back to motion estimation and games: certain games work a lot better with it than others. Bioshock works well with it. It doesnt look like 60fps, but its definitely a LOT smoother. Uncharted... wow. when it works it looks incredibly good, and gives the game this really cool an unusual "pop." But artifacting is common, and usually from screen tears. Also tried it with MGS4, and I didnt really notice the frame doubling effect so much.
user542745831
Veteran
The Sony digital cinema projectors can do 60P, so some cinemas are making the upgrades. Only there is a destructive force at work against progress ... IMAX! IMAX digital is old technology and completely non progressive, if IMAX had embraced Sony's projectors as IMAX digital minimum spec. (4K or 2x2K stereo, both at up to 60P) we could have made progress. Now it will take much longer, unless Sony goes to war with IMAX and tries to market a separate format too ... but it seems unlikely.
Would be wonderful though if Sony tried, mr. Cameron already said he wanted higher framerates and he has the perfect movie for it too ... Battle Angel Alita in 2x2K 60P. Please make it happen Sony!
In that respect, Sony are up against the cinema companies. They can't introduce new movie formats without a means to display them. They could possibly just go BluRay and home-cinema, offering a unique movie experience for their own IPs. That would promote BRD sales as an alternative to going to the cinema. Otherwise they either have to come to some agreement with the cinema companies, or roll out their own cinema chain. They aren't in any financial position to do that at the moment! It would tie in with a 'Sony = Entertainment' brand position though.
user542745831
Veteran
As of today, Blu-ray Disc specifications restrict to a maximum of 1080p24.
50p and 60p can only be used with 720p resolution for Blu-ray Disc playback.
And direct 25p or 30p is not in Blu-ray Disc specifications.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sure, but there's nothing preventing an update. Older players won't support it, but for movie buffs who are willing to buy hardware to display higher framerate stuff, that's not such an issue. Otherwise, how is >24 fps film ever to get anywhere? Someone somewhere is going to have to update hardware and standards. Otherwise films will be somewhat holding back the display technologies of our games. Actually, to sell new TVs games and services themselves may be enough of a push. You'd buy a 120 Hz knowing films will be a flickery, jerky mess because Hollywood is so antiquated, but your web-browsing and games will look better. Except Joe Public will never care for 120 Hz. Half of them can't even tell the difference between 30 and 60 fps. I'd be happy with a smooth 60 fps for consoles going forwards. Rendering inbetween frames would be a waste of effort IMO. And for even more people, rendering those in-between frames for 60 fps is a waste of effort compared to making 30 fps each look that much better 
user542745831
Veteran
By the way, seems someone over there posted some true 1080p60 videoclips:
http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1266709&postcount=1
http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1274617&postcount=57
http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1266709&postcount=1
http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1274617&postcount=57
Last edited by a moderator:
No more than IMAX, it would only be shown at 60P at the cinemas with their projectors obviously ... and at 24P at the others. Just like IMAX it could be applied to selected scenes. They are selling these projectors anyway, a branding campaign doesn't mean they have to subsidize them.
Last edited by a moderator:
grandmaster
Veteran
Hey, that's great news. I'm tempted to put together a disk of 1080p60 samples... now I have the i7 up and running with the GTX295 I should be able to get some great stuff up and running.
But at least we can be vocal!
Seriously, I'm not sure that the minority is so small, nor so unimportant. Sports.
And in terms of videogaming, a high frame-rate not only improves the the dynamic visual experience, but even more importantly it improves control (with input lag being the bugaboo). IMHO too much is made of static image quality. Gaming is interactive.
Similar threads
