/v/ - Video Games

The holocaust didn't happen, but it should have!

New Reply
Files Max 5 files32MB total
[New Reply]

What a nice board!
READ THE RULES https://zzzchan.xyz/v/custompage/rules.html
Check this thread out >>>/vhs/6

24fps-30fps-and-60fps-gif.gif (u)
[Hide] (663.8KB, 479x143)
Would you say its something that can aid in a games immersion? Considering that animation, movies, etc. are all recorded in 24 frames a second and fulfill expectations just fine, could it also be applicable to games that aren't reaction-sensitive (FPS)?
There is no depth of field effect with 60fps. Depth of field is one of the most important tools in both game and cinema language.
60 fps = gimmick shit.
Replies: >>58100 >>58103
30FPS_IDF_1.jpg (u)
[Hide] (60.1KB, 564x471)
30FPS_IDF_2.jpg (u)
[Hide] (103KB, 651x558)
30FPS_IDF_3.png (u)
[Hide] (39.6KB, 490x773)
30FPS_IDF_4.jpg (u)
[Hide] (17.4KB, 608x209)
60_fps_vs_30_fps.webm (u)
[Hide] (565.9KB, 960x540, 00:04)
>enough time has passed that people are now making shitpost threads about sub-60FPS performance
Absolutely incredible.  History is a flat circle.
>>58095 (OP) 
Fuckoff /tv/
You don't notice it when movies have 24fps, but I sure as fuck do notice whenever a game drops below 60. I don't know the reason for certain, but it probably has to do with the placement of the screen, and the role of the viewer (observer instead of an active participant). 
Even when games aren't reaction sensitive it is clearly noticeable as long as something is moving. 
>24 fps aiding in immersion 
Fuck no. You can get immersed despite the framerate, but lowering won't improve it. 
At best the 24fps doesn't impact your immersion and at worst the constant slowness will break the suspension of disbelief.
Replies: >>58112
what.jpg (u)
(40KB, 180x162)
>this entire statement
None of this makes any sense. You going to back up this spicy meme or are you just here to spew shit out your ass?
6f07c06835f1bcddb25714dd9be77faadbc8783e3b7a3119c7744de90d8a2c85.png (u)
[Hide] (620.2KB, 1584x1506)
0/10 bait
Game frames are instant snapshots of time and need to be fast enough for good response times, while individual video frames are made over varying amounts of time depending on shutter speed. You use longer exposure times to take in more light and shorter exposure times to reduce motion blur. Through this, a 24fps camera can capture movement smoothly (if often blurred) while a 24fps game will suffer from jerky movement and poor response times.
>>58095 (OP) 
You think you have a choice?
You're getting 20FPS maximum with 12 frames of input lag on every console release. Now open wide and accept the turd.
>You don't notice it when movies have 24fps
I do actually, 48 FPS movies are more viable than ever with cheap storage space and everything being digital anyway.

The only thing stopping that from happening is purists and Hollywood wanting shit being put out as cheaply and quickly as possible.

A good cinematographer with a clue and some talent  could make it standard, but said movies need new  shot techniques to look good as well, panoramas and high paced action look great, but close up with dialogue look awful for example, which is even more jarring with the talentless kike cocksuckers that "act" in them
Replies: >>58114
The Hobbit was done in 48 FPS, and if you want a real extreme example there's Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk which was shot at 120 FPS (although only the 60 FPS one is available). It's like watching a jewtube video, it doesn't look right.
Replies: >>58119 >>58120
Tafazzi_10_400.gif (u)
[Hide] (3.8MB, 400x300)
>>58095 (OP) 
Honestly i'd rather have 60fps at 720p than any 4k meme resolution if that means 24fps (with drops).
Gianno_Durante.jpg (u)
[Hide] (48.5KB, 600x387)
Those are all awful examples, same with Gemini man as they are all awful movies still using techniques meant for motion blur 24 FPS motion.
>It's like watching a jewtube video
Except those actually look good unless you're talking about AI interpolated 60 FPS made by third world shitskins.
That's a whole different matter that's just as bad as low framerates.

Just a reminder that the pioneers of film would fucking kill for more frames, but not only was it expensive but a fire hazard as well.

I'm still pissed Hardcore Henry wasn't filmed at 48 FPS, it would have been perfect for it.
I'm pretty sure The Hobbit was only shown in 48fps in theatres, the blu-rays are in 24fps and all 48fps footage I've found on Youtube is interpolated.
Now, watching clips of Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk was interesting. I've heard people say that high framerates (not interpolation, actual high framerates) make acting feel fake, and now that I've seen this, it's absolutely true. You can feel actors doing their actions on cue in a way you can't in 24fps, and all the timing and movements just feel wrong.
Here's an example of what I mean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7EGV5EON_s . If you've watched sporting events or marching bands on TV, you've probably seen high framerate footage of this stuff before, yet everyone's movements in this clip are noticeably faker, more artificial than a TV broadcast's. You can feel the timing in everything, how everything has been scripted and rehearsed countless times and it's just ever so subtly wrong. The only people whose movements feel remotely okay are the dancers, who move with the music and not according to a control freak's cues.
I feel high framerate cameras are more suited to filming live events, documentaries, and dances or stage plays than movies. If movies are to be made with them, it will necessitate large changes in how they're acted, scripted, and rehearsed.
They're more suited for good actors, so not for Hollywood.
That vid looks like theater but on a much larger stage. Which is pretty much what Hollywood is, taped theater, but the 24 fps gives it a more dreamlike movement compared to 60 fps like the vid.
They could always take a cue from animation and composit footages with different framerates together to emphasize the contrast between the two. 48/60 FPS nigh universally renders action more visceral and engaging to the viewer and can "pop" when juxtaposed to 24 FPS scenes focused on character acting.
I don't know much about the acting as I'm autistic as fuck when it comes to social stuff, but the SFX look like shit on every footage I've seen of that movie.
didn't the Legend of Zelda N64 games run at like 28 FPS?
Replies: >>58154 >>58158
>>58095 (OP) 
24fps only feels cinematic because people have been trained to expect that. It obviously has downsides for things like reaction speeds and fast gameplay. If you want to make a game where looking like a movie is more important to you than gameplay then sure, it's worth using, but then you're just a failed director larping as a vidya dev.
Probably less than that, though that's just because the N64 was a piece of shit.
20 FPS for the US release, 16 FPS for the PAL regions.
Go ahead and lock all your games to 24fps faggot, then tell us how enjoyable and "cinematic" they are.
Replies: >>58202
>>58095 (OP) 
24fps is just fag devs not content with vidya being labeled art, they want it to also be of film caliber. They could never ever. Damn near any video game with combat more frames is always better, and it's rare there's a real adventure game anymore since they're just walking simulators. That would be the only real place for a filmic framerate.
Replies: >>58162
> That would be the only real place for a filmic framerate.
That's retarded and you know it. It does not matter what kind of game it is, more frames is always objectively better.
>>58095 (OP) 
Just turning the camera < 60 FPS is ass, so no
Just Telltale type shit
I tried, pretty much no difference. 
I guess EraTW is just that close to being high art.
This nigger is going to get his shit deleted, and throw a shitfit how he "wasn't breaking the rules", then spam the catalog with threads.
Replies: >>58239
Not as upset as you'll be soon.
I'm looking forward to that.
I have faith in burgerposting.
0a176998378a5369a5ddb7d7e7faa006e56f70eca9b7baa08ca810ecb61f34fd.jpg (u)
[Hide] (378KB, 957x974)
>not playing 20 year old games that would run on a literal toaster
I shiggy diggy
Replies: >>58507 >>58668
>>58095 (OP) 
>Considering that animation, movies, etc. are all recorded in 24 frames a second
Speaking of which, I wonder why more TVs don't have a 24/48hz mode to avoid judder, since it's such a common FPS.
I know everyone ITT is arguing aboug which framerates is better, but I feel content with playing any fps as long as it is consistent as opposed going from 30 to 5 fps on my ultra toaster.
A decent number of 20 year old games can't run higher than 30fps without the physics fucking up because of older programming practices.
>>58095 (OP) 
24 fps is noticeable in games due to reaction time. It's okay in movies because you're a passive observer and everything blends together.
>>58095 (OP) 
Well to start off, gifs run at 50 fps max, dork.
Replies: >>58960
5d13051da9e881b6b663a75e892587c1f06d7aa7e4fcd84bd76d5e368d6b4067.jpg (u)
[Hide] (139.8KB, 1920x1080)
>vii) Delay Time - If not 0, this field specifies the number of hundredths (1/100) of a second to wait before continuing with the processing of the Data Stream. The clock starts ticking immediately after the graphic is rendered. This field may be used in conjunction with the User Input Flag field.
Replies: >>58977
you can run them at 100fps but not 60fps because gif requires integer centiseconds
Replies: >>59037
Yes, but last time I checked 100 > 50. You can also make a ghetto 60fps gif by duplicating frames. OP sucks cocks, his gif has a delay of 3/100 or ~33.33fps.

37 replies | 12 files | 26 UIDs
Show Post Actions



- news - rules - faq -
jschan 0.1.4