Arg fuck my internet and it eating my postsBlood Brain Barrier said:Yep. I don't think I'd tell the difference, to be honest. I don't really play shooters much but I've got an average PC and got along fine with Crysis 2 and Metro 2033. I haven't upgraded for 4 years and I'm running new games perfect with no problem. So I don't get all the fuss about frame-rates. I'm just saying, if I can watch space battles and action scenes in movies without the impression of it looking "absolutely awful", games should be fine too.GeneralTwinkle said:Because video games aren't film and television. You can tell the difference between 60 and 100 frames, because you're actually in control. Do you play PC games at all?Blood Brain Barrier said:What's wrong with that? 24 FPS is the standard for film and television.GeneralTwinkle said:I heard it's absolutely awful, yeah. One of the youtubers I like has pretty much the best pc you can get, it's godlike. He was getting 30-40 frames.
-_-
Anyway, what I said before my connection decided to die in the true australian internet fashion, that's really, really odd actually. It's been proven that higher fps in games really helps. I can't snipe for shit without at least 40, I can't play RTS properly and I can't time my attacks properly in fighting games. Although, that's really lucky for you. You don't have to worry about upgrading.
In any competitive fps I try and get my fps to 60-90 at least, but if it doesn't look great on high anyway, I'll push it down low so I can get well over 300 depending on how old it is, and I can see a difference.