Absolutely bizarre that a 1st party title doesn't seem optimized for the console they're developing for. This makes me skeptical the PC version will be optimized too.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Ghoelian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 2 weeks ago (17 children)

The people that keep saying that should really just try to use a 144+hz monitor for a while. Surely they'll be able to notice the difference as well.

[–] Thrashy@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (13 children)

Might just be my middle-aged eyes, but I recently went from a 75Hz monitor to a 160Hz one and I'll be damned if I can see the difference in motion. Granted that don't play much in the way of twitch-style shooters anymore, but for me the threshold of visual smoothness is closer to 60Hz than whatever bonkers 240Hz+ refresh rates that current OLEDs are pushing.

I'll agree that 30fps is pretty marginal for any sort of action gameplay, though historically console players have been more forgiving of mediocre performance in service of more eye candy.

[–] mephiska@fedia.io 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Are you sure you have the reset rate set correctly on your video card? The difference between 75hz and 160hz is very clear just by moving your mouse cursor around. Age shouldn't have anything to do with it.

[–] Thrashy@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Quite sure -- and given that one game I've been playing lately (and the exception to the lack of shooters in my portfolio) is Selaco, so I ought to have noticed by now.

There's a very slight difference in smoothness when I'm rapidly waving a mouse cursor waving around on one screen versus the other, but it's hardly the night-and-day difference that going from 30fsp to 60fps was back in Ye Olden Days, and watching a small, fast-moving, high-contrast object doesn't make up the bulk of gameplay in anything I play these days.

load more comments (11 replies)

load more comments (14 replies)