FFXIV Closed Alpha/Beta Discussion (Cancelled for this week)

[Kaelan?]

Not everyone is like you, i'm rather sensitive to fps and can tell fairly accurately between 1-80. Anyway here's to 60fps!!

Most of my games run at 200~300fps and I've used both 120hz lcd and 144hz crt monitors, while 30 fps looks like shit even on 60hz and shitty old tvs.

200? Your eye can't see anything higher than 72.

The only reason to use more is for:

A) You have a lot of motion going on coupled with extremely detailed animations with tons of frames. Extremely fast motion is one of the only things that get any benefit from very high refresh rate. If you were making Uncharted 2, or something like that.
B) You're making heavy use of effects that get more visually accurate the more frequently you render (i.e. motion vectors on a motion blur, anything that interpolates results from previous frames)
C) You want to hype people who have no idea how the rendering works but love to see big numbers. Bigger number means it's better, right?!
D) I suppose if you have bad animations, the motion blur from overdoing it on the rendering rate would help. But that's a reason to fire your animators more than it is to change how your render pipe works.

Most of the time, if you have extra time, you should be drawing more eye candy, not rendering more often.

Why does everyone have to run it at 30?

I was answering the guy saying "30FPS doesn't help low end anyway!". Sure, if you have like a 5970HD or something, then you might as well run at 60 since you have more power than the game can probably use.

[Jinko]

Its Jeuno :O

[Cairthenn]

http://www.cairxiv.net/images/gamescreens/up43751.jpg

[sruon]

200? Your eye can't see anything higher than 72.

The only reason to use more is for:

A) You have a lot of motion going on coupled with extremely detailed animations with tons of frames. Extremely fast motion is one of the only things that get any benefit from very high refresh rate. If you were making Uncharted 2, or something like that.
B) You're making heavy use of effects that get more visually accurate the more frequently you render (i.e. motion vectors on a motion blur, anything that interpolates results from previous frames)
C) You want to hype people who have no idea how the rendering works but love to see big numbers. Bigger number means it's better, right?!

Most of the time, if you have extra time, you should be drawing more eye candy, not rendering more often.

Not this shit again please.

I love my 100 hertz/100 fps.

[Celeras]

This one is worth posting:

http://i39.tinypic.com/5z1y0n.jpg

[Akiyama]

That screen confuses me greatly. :/

Corei7 obviously. Wonder how that'd stack up with what I'm running, Haha. I'd probably be like 65%ish if I had my guess, so not so bad.

[Cairthenn]

Cute nips.

Anyways,

http://cairxiv.net/images/gamescreens/1270730540782.jpg

[Khamsin]

Well, there's a simple test to see what FPS the human eye can really see, since it appears to be a topic of controversy.

Flash a whole screen of white, then a whole screen of black, alternately at a rate of 30 fps, 60 fps, 200 fps, etc. and see where you can't tell anymore and it's just solid grey.

Either it'll be a low number like some people think, or the flickering will continue to be perceptible up to 200+fps like other people think.

[Kiarax]

Cute nips.

http://i43.tinypic.com/m90yon.jpg

[Cray]

This one is worth posting:
[/IMG]

I'm a little bit slow. The fact that it runs in windowed mode or low cpu utilization? Or am I missing something in the japanese text?

It's a rough morning so forgive me.

[Reizvoll]

Your eye can't see anything higher than 72 fps.

I pity you, enjoy being ignorant.

[rufus9]

This one is worth posting:

http://i39.tinypic.com/5z1y0n.jpg

game takes advantage of multi-core processors?

[Kaelan?]

Well, there's a simple test to see what FPS the human eye can really see, since it appears to be a topic of controversy.

Flash a whole screen of white, then a whole screen of black, alternately at a rate of 30 fps, 60 fps, 200 fps, etc. and see where you can't tell anymore and it's just solid grey.

Either it'll be a low number like some people think, or the flickering will continue to be perceptible up to 200+fps like other people think.

It depends on the brightness of the room and what it's being displayed on (i.e. why movies are 24), but generally speaking in PC/console conditions, it's 72

http://www.daniele.ch/school/30vs60/30vs60_3.html

[Cairthenn]

Oh come on, 9am. Cut me slack.

Anyways, not going to post seemingly-repeat images anymore, but I'll still be uploading them.

http://www.cairxiv.net/images/gamescreens/

sorry it's not organized etc, maybe later.

[Kurokikaze]

Stop with the fucking QQing about fps/refresh rates. That shit isn't important. As long as the animation is fluid - who the fuck cares?

Besides.... ITS FUCKING ALPHA! Don't you think they would limit something like that...? You know, kinda how they have 1280x720 as the only available resolution?

Edit: Just scrolled up. Multi-core support is great news.

[Cray]

game takes advantage of multi-core processors?

Ah, ok. I figured that was a given for 2010 but SE never ceases to surprise me. Game is looking good though. I'm rooting for you SE! Don't F this one up.

[Cautery]

game takes advantage of multi-core processors?

That picture seems related to a 6 core processor right?

[Jinko]

Can't view images on your site btw Cairthenn, maybe you've not enabled that yet though

[Cairthenn]

http://www.cairxiv.net/images/2.pnghttp://www.cairxiv.net/images/1.png Hi Kiara.

[rufus9]

where do you see the refresh rates?