Java-Gaming.org    
Featured games (81)
games approved by the League of Dukes
Games in Showcase (481)
Games in Android Showcase (110)
games submitted by our members
Games in WIP (548)
games currently in development
News: Read the Java Gaming Resources, or peek at the official Java tutorials
 
    Home     Help   Search   Login   Register   
Pages: 1 [2]
  ignore  |  Print  
  30 vs 60 vs 120 FPS  (Read 1961 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Offline Oskuro

JGO Knight


Medals: 39
Exp: 6 years


Coding in Style


« Reply #30 - Posted 2014-03-21 10:50:31 »

I always think it worthwhile to remember a silly factoid:
Quote
You don't see the world with your eyes, you see it with your brain.

What this means is that one single feature of the images being shown (in this case framerate) is not enough to grasp how it affects our perception.
Our brain does a lot of post-processing before our consciousness "sees" the image, and much of that post-processing is affected by the contents of the image themselves, which is why we get optical illusions.

This, on one hand, makes studies on the effects of FPS somewhat suspect, specially if they just fixate on the eye, but it also casts doubt on personal experiences of the "I can feel the difference" kind, sometimes most of the time we see what we want to see.


What I'm trying to say is that FPS alone is meaningless without a context. The details of image you are presenting has probably more power over how smooth it is perceived than the number of frames themselves.

Here are some funny examples of how our brain fails miserably at seeing the world.

Offline erikd

JGO Ninja


Medals: 16
Projects: 4
Exp: 14 years


Maximumisness


« Reply #31 - Posted 2014-03-23 18:06:07 »

The past TV (CRT) screens also had some natural smoothing between the frames because the former frame faded only slowly and blended with the next. It's been less sharp this way, but motions appeared smoother, and the screen flickering was less notable.

Computer screens always had less of this smoothing effect, I think intentionally, and needed higher refresh rates.

Are you sure about that? I always thought that CRTs had much faster response times and needed at least 100Hz to avoid flicker.

Offline erikd

JGO Ninja


Medals: 16
Projects: 4
Exp: 14 years


Maximumisness


« Reply #32 - Posted 2014-03-23 18:46:24 »

I think if one day we'll have VR with working eye-tracking, high frame-rates will be a lot less computationally demanding. Even at proper resolutions for VR (like 4K or even 8K).

Your eyes only see sharply at just about 2 degrees. Outside of that it all quickly becomes a blur. You brain does the rest to make you think it's all sharp.

At a 100 degrees FoV at 8K resolution, that's like 88*88 pixels per eye that need the best quality rendering, and that's with 8K resolution (i.e. 7680*4320) .
Outside of those 88*88 pixels, you can increasingly (and quickly) drop resolution, AA, texture resolution, shader quality etc.
This might be a bit of an oversimplification, but I suppose even today's PCs should be able to handle that at at least 60fps.
But good eye-tracking will be key here.

[edit]
Furthermore, when you quickly look elsewhere by turning your eyes/head, your brain needs a bit of time to adjust and see things sharply and process what you see. Test it yourself by opening a book in a random page and see how much time it takes between reading a word in the middle of the left page and reading a word in the middle of the right page.
How long did it take? Half a second? That's like a week in computer time Smiley
So there are possibilities for optimization there as well.

Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
Legends of Yore - The Casual Retro Roguelike
Offline Abuse

JGO Knight


Medals: 12


falling into the abyss of reality


« Reply #33 - Posted 2014-03-23 19:30:12 »

I think if one day we'll have VR with working eye-tracking, high frame-rates will be a lot less computationally demanding. Even at proper resolutions for VR (like 4K or even 8K).

Your eyes only see sharply at just about 2 degrees. Outside of that it all quickly becomes a blur. You brain does the rest to make you think it's all sharp.

At a 100 degrees FoV at 8K resolution, that's like 88*88 pixels per eye that need the best quality rendering, and that's with 8K resolution (i.e. 7680*4320) .
Outside of those 88*88 pixels, you can increasingly (and quickly) drop resolution, AA, texture resolution, shader quality etc.
This might be a bit of an oversimplification, but I suppose even today's PCs should be able to handle that at at least 60fps.
But good eye-tracking will be key here.

I doubt that will ever happen.
Besides the obvious problem of what to do when you have multiple observers, you'd also need absolutely insane response times for the eye not to register the low resolution/quality peripherial areas when moving focal point.

Bypassing the eye entirely & patching into the optic nerve is the next logical step IMO, though I can't even begin to imagine how that would feel to the user.

Make Elite IV:Dangerous happen! Pledge your backing at KICKSTARTER here! https://dl.dropbox.com/u/54785909/EliteIVsmaller.png
Offline Gibbo3771
« Reply #34 - Posted 2014-03-24 10:51:05 »

60fps imo should be the standard to aim for, 30 has many drawbacks.

A couple to note would be:

  • FPS drops 1-5 you will notice a heavy stutter
  • FPS below 25 can cause eye strain, this goes with point 1
  • imo large res + 30fps, things such as smoke and particles look sticky

With 60fps you are safe, you have about 20fps worth of wiggle room.

Can't say much for 120hz monitors, I have a 120hz TV and it is just reealllly weird to watch 1080p movies on it, or games. It is ridicuoulsy smooth, I think standard 60hz monitors play HD back and 25fps, cheap ones.

"This code works flawlessly first time and exactly how I wanted it"
Said no programmer ever
Offline JVallius
« Reply #35 - Posted 2014-03-24 11:27:40 »

When a game is about reflexes then 120hz monitor and over 120 fps is nice to have. I play iRacing where difference between 60 and 120 is noticeable, but not significant.

Offline princec

JGO Kernel


Medals: 362
Projects: 3
Exp: 16 years


Eh? Who? What? ... Me?


« Reply #36 - Posted 2014-03-24 11:29:36 »

The game should ideally be tuned for perfect reflexes at 60Hz. Also, in multiplayer.. it's a decided advantage to have a 120Hz update rate vs. 60Hz, and thus all players should be capped to 60Hz anyway. And so on.

... but one day we'll all be running 120Hz.

Cas Smiley

Online theagentd
« Reply #37 - Posted 2014-03-24 13:25:39 »

... thus all players should be capped to 60Hz anyway.
D: The horror!

Myomyomyo.
Offline erikd

JGO Ninja


Medals: 16
Projects: 4
Exp: 14 years


Maximumisness


« Reply #38 - Posted 2014-03-24 21:33:07 »

I doubt that will ever happen.
Besides the obvious problem of what to do when you have multiple observers, you'd also need absolutely insane response times for the eye not to register the low resolution/quality peripherial areas when moving focal point.

Bypassing the eye entirely & patching into the optic nerve is the next logical step IMO, though I can't even begin to imagine how that would feel to the user.

With VR you only have one observer: The wearer of the VR headset, so no problem there.
Eye tracking is then also very close to the eyes, so it should be possible to make it quite accurate too using just small cameras.
And I think response times of eye tracking might be not as critical as you think. It should be at most the same as the screen's refresh rate, which is perfectly doable today. And your brain needs a bit of time to adjust to the new FOV anyway.
And what if it takes a bit of time for things to adjust to your new FOV when moving your eyes? It'll still be better than not adjusting at all.

It seems a lot more practical than 'patching into the optic nerve', imho (which seems to be disturbingly close to 'eXistenZ' territory  Shocked).
As a matter of fact I think it could be doable within a few years.

IMHO Moore's law isn't moving fast enough to get us to high resolutions running at above 60fps, so optimizing to what we actually see and perceive with our brain seems to have a lot of untapped potential to me.

Pages: 1 [2]
  ignore  |  Print  
 
 

 

Add your game by posting it in the WIP section,
or publish it in Showcase.

The first screenshot will be displayed as a thumbnail.

atombrot (26 views)
2014-08-19 09:29:53

Tekkerue (24 views)
2014-08-16 06:45:27

Tekkerue (23 views)
2014-08-16 06:22:17

Tekkerue (14 views)
2014-08-16 06:20:21

Tekkerue (22 views)
2014-08-16 06:12:11

Rayexar (60 views)
2014-08-11 02:49:23

BurntPizza (39 views)
2014-08-09 21:09:32

BurntPizza (30 views)
2014-08-08 02:01:56

Norakomi (37 views)
2014-08-06 19:49:38

BurntPizza (67 views)
2014-08-03 02:57:17
List of Learning Resources
by Longor1996
2014-08-16 10:40:00

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-08-05 19:33:27

Resources for WIP games
by CogWheelz
2014-08-01 16:20:17

Resources for WIP games
by CogWheelz
2014-08-01 16:19:50

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-07-31 16:29:50

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-07-31 16:26:06

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-07-31 11:54:12

HotSpot Options
by dleskov
2014-07-08 01:59:08
java-gaming.org is not responsible for the content posted by its members, including references to external websites, and other references that may or may not have a relation with our primarily gaming and game production oriented community. inquiries and complaints can be sent via email to the info‑account of the company managing the website of java‑gaming.org
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Managed by Enhanced Four Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!