Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sonlirain]

I must admit i'm not the most in line when it comes to modern gaming... mostly because i never cared to update my "rig" and all my modern game experiences comes from youtube (the newest FPS i played was probably BAttlefield 2142 on low/med settings).

Nowdays i keep hearing that having less then 120 degree FoV makes people dizzy after 20 minutes.
While i remeber "back then" when using the console commands to set a "fov 120" was used purely for the advantage of having a wider area of vision.
Well now apparently not having this advantage makes people dizzy nowdays.

Next thing... Frames Per Second.
I never ran a game that could go stable at or over 30 FPS (unless i run one of my first PC games from 1998 on my "new" pc bought in 2006).
Then i go watch The cynical brit on youtube and every review HAS an at least 5 minute segment about how having less than 60 FPS in shooters make him feel nauseous aim badly and generally play worse than if he had 60... hell he even complained when he had a stable 45 FPS.
The last time i saw FPS having a major impact on the game would be Quake 3 where people with high FPS could do jumps people with lower FPS could not... still it had nothing to do with feeling nauseous.

Now... could any person with a modern PC explain me what the fuss is about?
Because... well... as a person that's somewhat out of the loop i just see a big marketing ploy pushed by hardware manufacturers trying to sell stronger and stronger hardware while games (and their system requirements) are tied tightly to the console market (that's outdated for several years now).

Oh and yeah since i'm a hermit i'm entirely satisfied with anything over 20 FPS. Any less than that and the missing frames become obvious (and annoying).

[freeformschooler]

For me, it's a very specific range. When I'm at around 15-20 FPS, I can visibly see the small lag between frames. That's not sickening, that's just frustrating. However, as 30FPS is approached (usually in the 24-28FPS range), a game doesn't seem to be laggy so much as slow. When I get a consistent 25FPS in a game, that slowness and reaction lag definitely makes me dizzy/nauseous.

The above happened on this laptop with Borderlands and was enough to make me stop playing entirely.

[frostshotgg]

I think the FoV thing is simply a matter of what you're used to. I usually wind up playing games on the default FoV purely because I get used to it like that, and then every time I notice I can increase it, and I try to, I can't fucking play the game because suddenly everything is squashed together.

[WealthyRadish]

With FOV, it's bound to vary from person to person due to eye and face shape differences (and even the distance people view their monitors from). 90 is widely regarded as the minimum maximum for first person shooters (unless it's a crappy console shooter, in which case you're often lucky to get 70). With framerate... I'd say complaining about drops slightly below 60 is just being a ninny, unless you're playing at the competitive level (in which case you probably want at least 120 anyway). I guess it's possible for someone to get acclimated to 60+ and then notice the drop without a counter, but I would definitely say that any nauseousness at that point is psychosomatic, not the fault of the game's optimization.

Personally, if 120 FOV is available, I'll play at it. Once you get used to it, it is very nice to have that spatial awareness. In a game like Car of Dury, it's laughable how blind the game leaves you to your surroundings. But again, console games have a lower maximum FOV because of the distance between the screen and player, and the performance increase it gives over a high FOV... not to mention that console shooters have no intention whatsoever of being played competitively.

Edit: Forgot to mention, in many games responsiveness is directly tied to framerate. This is why competitive players play at an FPS in the thousands if possible, so that keystrokes are as close to instant as possible. Visually, distinguishing between framerates higher than 60 is nearly impossible for humans, and many media actually play at 25-30 FPS without any complaints (the vast majority of films play at 24 FPS... food for thought ). Modern monitors are also locked at 60hz, meaning that that 60 FPS is the most you'll perceive. The difference in 60+ comes from synchronizing the refresh rate and from any weirdness in the game's netcode that makes certain aspects play at different rates, even if it's graphically consistent.

[Sensei]

I personally never really messed with FoV, then again I never really played shooters like Quake or Unreal Tournament online. As for framerate, I'm used to having a shitty computer and I'm quite satisfied with anything that can consistently keep over 24 FPS, even though my computer is better than that now I'll usually choose nice graphics over a consistent 40FPS or higher framerate.

In other words, I think people who insist that they need 40 or 60 FPS are wusses. That's right. With the exception of games where the physics behavior gets inaccurate or inconsistent without a high FPS.

[kaijyuu]

I avoid first person games altogether, as all of them, without fail, make me sick.

[Willfor]

These days any FP shooter I've tried that isn't Portal 2 will make me dizzy/sick immediately. Portal 2 will have the same effect after about 20 minutes. Not sure what the difference is there.

[Levi]

I've occasionally felt a little nauseous in a few games, but I'm not sure if its FOV or something else.  Bioshock 1 I had a hard time with in particular for some reason.   Motion Blur and Depth of Field actually bother me even more than a low FOV though.

I really do prefer my FPS to be above 60, but I can handle above 30.  Anything less looks pretty lousy to be honest, so I'll happily turn down all my graphic settings if it means a smoother framerate.

[Flying Dice]

Yeah, FPS takes precedence over graphics for me as well. Anything much below 40FPS and I usually can't stand playing, because I can practically feel the delay between my reaction and my character's actions.

[Guardian G.I.]

I've always had to deal with low FPS rate because my PC doesn't have high-end hardware. I can't even imagine how someone could feel nauseous because the game he's playing runs below 40 FPS.

[Frumple]

... yeah, I've probably spent more time playing with <30 fps* than I have >30 fps (actually, around 30 is usually pretty comfortable. I've beat some fairly twitchy games, FPS and otherwise, with an fps hovering in the mid-teens to lower twenties.). I certainly haven't noticed in particular nausea effects. Not saying it's not happening to folks, just that I've never noticed it happening to me. Dunno about FOV stuff, though. I've never really bothered to pay enough attention to notice a difference, I think.

*And that's after turning all the silly useless pretty crap off.

[alway]

Firstly, increased detail levels in the scene is likely what is causing the issue, along with farther view distances. Far views result in more aliasing-related issues with trees and such in the far distance, as well as aliasing with the high detail stuff nearby. It results in a sort of noise being applied to the scene if not dealt with entirely, and is likely the cause of many of the complains about modern graphics.

As for FPS, there is actually a more important quality to it than just the FPS number. And that quality is stuttering. If I have 100 frames that render in 0.005 seconds, and 1 frame that renders in 0.5 seconds, the result is a massive stuttering that makes a game unplayable, despite only lowering the displayed framerate to 30FPS. This is actually the real culprit behind any of the 'unplayable at <number greater than 25> fps.' When computation isn't evenly spread out between your frames, you end up with say, 2 frames having a speed of 10FPS and 36 frames having a speed of 60FPS. That will be extremely noticeable. Keep in mind, FPS only tells part of the picture, since the actual frame times are highly non-uniform if not addressed properly. Those examples given above provide you with 30 and 38 FPS, respectively. If those were entirely uniform, there would be no issues nor a noticeable frame rate slowdown; but with the numbers making up those frame rates, it is not only highly noticeable, but would degrade your gaming experience greatly.

FPS means little in regards to actual perceived frame rate, which is much more strongly influenced by stuttering.

[Scelly9]

I never get sick because of games. <30 FPS is annoying though.

[Guardian G.I.]

GTA IV could run on my laptop with an FPS rate of only 5-10 frames per second.
I've completed it anyway!

[freeformschooler]

GTA IV could run on my laptop with an FPS rate of only 5-10 frames per second.
I've completed it anyway!

* freeformschooler salutes.