Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Excuse me for not reading your post (whoever you are) but i noticed you dont even have Elden Ring......tsk,tsk. Since you bothered necromancing this thread what about if you just buy the game now while we are on it? Even with 60 FPS you are going to have a blast!
Take care random antagonistic and wholesome forum contributor and thanks for sharing your incredible unique hot-take.
What sensei Seagull said. Elden Ring is not that frantic like hmm Remnant 2, Helldivers 2 or any other FPS uncapped games and im typing this after killing the expansion final boss wich basically looks like a Remnant boss lol......
Now of course i would love more FPS but come on....dont miss a game like Elden RIng or play it telling yourself this is a miserable experience just because "MuH NuMbErSz".
It basically means, the LCD shows the picture the whole length of the frame 16.66 ms, while Plasma or CRT, show it a lot shorter (like 4ms or such) and rest is just black.
Newer LCDs have techs like Black frame insertion, where black frames are inserted to create higher motion clarity on the expense of brightness and smoothness. OLEDs going crazy with greater Hz values like 360Hz or 540Hz. I'm curious how it will evolve and if we get screens with better motion clarity, without pumping source FPS further and further.
Higher FPS like 120 or 240 look better on LCD, because the frames are shown shorter.
Also frame generation can help, if done well. Tools like LosslessScaling might help to activate it for ER on Windows (I am on Linux, so I can't test). Or AFMF from AMD drivers.
Maybe write I need a stable 60 FPS mockingly instead.
https://store.steampowered.com/app/993090/Lossless_Scaling/
it isn't perfect but it makes most games I've used it on, with some tweaking, run very smooth, like taking Elden Rings 60 fps and boosting it to nearly 120 with added frame generation, with a litttttle bit of graphical trade off.
the game was made for 60fps lock in mind because they wanted stability,
the playstation 5 and xbox series are also only 60fps yet they can do 120hz,
its not that bad at sixty its still very smooth,
uncapping the framerate just like other souls games can break the game to the point where its unplayable due to the games mechanics are tied to 60fps.
so for a game like elden ring theres no need for more fps when from soft didnt design it to be played past 60fps.
60hz on the other hand is whats laggy on a 120/144hz monitor in my experience since i do alot of testing with different hardware and refresh rates.
so 60fps is fine if the games design for that framerate, in shooters you want more fps that your gpu and cpu can produce, since those require more reaction time on garbage tickrate servers.
anyways theres a mod that removes the forced vsync, recommend looking via bing google and other search engines.
again 60fps is perfectly fine on 144/120hz monitors its silky smooth,
gotta remember triple a devs dont care about pc players, but crying over stable framerates is pretty sad especially after updates and updates that makes the framerate unstable.
I'm a little confused here. You think it's pretty bad that you're stuck at 60 FPS? You've probably been told this, but there's no way you'd notice more than 60 FPS with the human eye. This post sounds pretty damn stupid.
Except, speaking realistically, the human eye notices the image as smoother the higher the refresh rate. This continues until we get to very high numbers, like 250-300fps.
That's not an opinion, that is an objective fact of reality. The only subjective opinions to be had is how drastic each individual notices these differences. Some people genuinely don't notice 60-90 fps, but it is virtually impossible to not notice 60-144 fps.
https://refreshrates.com/the-truth-about-60hz-vs-120hz-the-impact-on-human-eye-perception
https://www.slashgear.com/1517244/myth-about-fps-human-vision-stop-believing/