Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: 30 FPS > 60 FPS. And here's why.
  • Subject: 30 FPS > 60 FPS. And here's why.
Subject: 30 FPS > 60 FPS. And here's why.

Okay, so Halo 3 runs at 30 FPS which seems like a perfectly smooth framerate in my opinion.

I don't have a problem with 60 FPS because it runs smoother which is more common in newer titles (e.g. Modern Warfare 2)

However, I was playing Bioshock 2 (a 30 FPS game) and increased the framerate to 60 FPS, the graphics were glitching out and gameplay felt too light and not gritty enough.

Bungie said Halo: Reach would be grittier than Halo 3.
In my opinion 30 FPS should be kept for Halo: Reach due to the grittiness and to save more room for extra features in the game.

Discuss.

  • 02.21.2010 2:44 PM PST

what do 30 and 60 FPS even mean?

  • 02.21.2010 2:46 PM PST

FPS - Frames Per Second

  • 02.21.2010 2:46 PM PST

Imma musician and things :3

DOWNLOAD MY MUSIC

Posted by: papamario222
Okay, so Halo 3 runs at 30 FPS which seems like a perfectly smooth framerate in my opinion.

I don't have a problem with 60 FPS because it runs smoother which is more common in newer titles (e.g. Modern Warfare 2)

However, I was playing Bioshock 2 (a 30 FPS game) and increased the framerate to 60 FPS, the graphics were glitching out and gameplay felt too light and not gritty enough.

Bungie said Halo: Reach would be grittier than Halo 3.
In my opinion 30 FPS should be kept for Halo: Reach due to the grittiness and to save more room for extra features in the game.

Discuss.

30 FPS also lets there be more items on the screen at once, since the game doesn't have to render an extra frame each time.

  • 02.21.2010 2:48 PM PST

Indeed.

  • 02.21.2010 2:48 PM PST

Hi

I agree 100% with you


BTW how many fps does the human eye capture?

  • 02.21.2010 2:48 PM PST

Posted by: Alex Mac Kee
I agree 100% with you


BTW how many fps does the human eye capture?


Thankyou, and around 70.

  • 02.21.2010 2:49 PM PST

I think they should go with something inbetween

  • 02.21.2010 2:49 PM PST

July 15, 2008... The day the timer stood still.

Posted by: xtcarnage15586
what do 30 and 60 FPS even mean?
Frames per second. The number of frames that the game generates in a second.

  • 02.21.2010 2:49 PM PST

Posted by: xtcarnage15586
I think they should go with something inbetween


Video Game industries tend to stick to 30 or 60.

  • 02.21.2010 2:50 PM PST
  •  | 
  • Honorable Member

bungie knows what there doing so let them do it

  • 02.21.2010 2:51 PM PST
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Both optimists and pessimists contribute to our society. The optimist invents the airplane and the pessimist the parachute. " ~Gil Stern

"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." ~Albert Einstein

"What did I just drink?"~Socrates

Buyer's Guide: Headphones|Google Chrome Themes|Arena Spreadsheet

You can hardly tell the difference over 30 FPS

Fun fact movie theaters project at 24 FPS

  • 02.21.2010 2:51 PM PST

Official Spartan Laser Artist.

â–ºProminent Communiquéâ—„ Where great minds think alike!

I'm fine with 30 FPS. Halo's always had that framerate and I think upping it to 60 NOW would make the game look fairly un-Halo.

  • 02.21.2010 2:51 PM PST

Hi

Posted by: papamario222
Posted by: Alex Mac Kee
I agree 100% with you


BTW how many fps does the human eye capture?


Thankyou, and around 70.
Human eye > MW2

  • 02.21.2010 2:52 PM PST
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"You must be mistaken, Reclaimer. I've met your makers, and they don't even know your name..."

Posted by: papamario222
Posted by: Alex Mac Kee
I agree 100% with you


BTW how many fps does the human eye capture?


Thankyou, and around 70.


Everything about 25 or so is "fluid motion" to your eyes, however, so extra FPS really only eat up space. At least in my opinion. It could be stated the extra FPS make the game more responsive, but with Halo's style of play versus, say, Battlefield, the difference won't break the game.

  • 02.21.2010 2:52 PM PST

Totally agree
A lot of people complain that after playing games with higher FPS (like mw2) then going back to playing halo it feels "jumpy" and slow, I've never noticed it in my opinion :s

  • 02.21.2010 2:52 PM PST

Posted by: Alex Mac Kee
Posted by: papamario222
Posted by: Alex Mac Kee
I agree 100% with you


BTW how many fps does the human eye capture?


Thankyou, and around 70.
Human eye > MW2


Yup.

  • 02.21.2010 2:56 PM PST

Well, according to 100fps.com, if you want a perfect virtual reality or movie, you need at least 500 frames per second. That means the eye can definitely detect more than 70. But the website also goes into more detail on why it isn't accurate to ask "How many frames per second can the eye see?"

  • 02.21.2010 2:58 PM PST
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Both optimists and pessimists contribute to our society. The optimist invents the airplane and the pessimist the parachute. " ~Gil Stern

"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." ~Albert Einstein

"What did I just drink?"~Socrates

Buyer's Guide: Headphones|Google Chrome Themes|Arena Spreadsheet

Posted by: MA5C 7RUTH
Well, according to 100fps.com, if you want a perfect virtual reality or movie, you need at least 500 frames per second. That means the eye can definitely detect more than 70. But the website also goes into more detail on why it isn't accurate to ask "How many frames per second can the eye see?"


Well idk if their is a maximum since the eye doesn't see in pictures it is fluid. However, the difference between 30 and 60 is not that noticeable that it is a huge problem, like I said before you don't hear people complaining about movies not being good enough yet they are all shown in 24 fps. So in my opinion 30 is just plenty

  • 02.21.2010 3:03 PM PST

Dedicated driver.

I read somewhere that they did a test and the majority of people they picked out couldn't tell the difference between 30 and 60 hertz frame-rate.

  • 02.21.2010 3:12 PM PST
  •  | 
  • Senior Heroic Member
  • gamertag: ridum
  • user homepage:

Fight hard, have fun

I concur.

  • 02.21.2010 3:13 PM PST
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Couldn't agree more. MW2 has 60 fps but doesn't have nearly as much engine power as reach, with all the AI, details in environment, etc.

  • 02.21.2010 3:14 PM PST
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

(-_-) Bored Face

I would like to see an increase to at least 40 though. I don't know if that would make that much of a difference though.

  • 02.21.2010 3:14 PM PST

Grrar.

I just knew you were going to use Modern Warfare 2 as the example. Really, do frame rates matter? It's a game, we just play it and be happy.

  • 02.21.2010 3:16 PM PST

Posted by: drummer0702
Well idk if their is a maximum since the eye doesn't see in pictures it is fluid. However, the difference between 30 and 60 is not that noticeable that it is a huge problem, like I said before you don't hear people complaining about movies not being good enough yet they are all shown in 24 fps. So in my opinion 30 is just plenty


Actually movies play at 48 fps - they play each frame twice because the flicker at 24fps would be unbearable

[Edited on 02.21.2010 3:24 PM PST]

  • 02.21.2010 3:21 PM PST