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
60fps I'm told is technically achievable through mods, but would require so much manual fine tuning due to how the stuff under the hood works that no one will ever do it. Something about frames and loading times, so if you mess with the framerate limiter you can get stuck between screens, I think.
I have a 144hz monitor and I don't find X/X-2 a problem to play in any way. And I'm pretty sensitive to framerate, if I play e.g. a racing game or an FPS and it's low framerate I get simulator sickness very easily. But I've never had any discomfort whatsoever with X/X-2. There's barely any scenes where things move quickly.
I think the key might have to do with the fixed camera movement. Because you can't move the camera, and it moves very slowly on its own, you're far less likely to notice the lower framerate than you would be in a game where you can control the camera yourself.
To sum it up; we can process 1000 FPS but with a diminishing return. The average person sitting in a chair and actively guessing at how high a framerate is, can interpret up to about 150 frames per second.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXJh9ut2hrc&list=PL8s0qGGPgBf3Pfdf47xqmJ919qex6awfq&index=5
Under 60 just doesn't look good if there is movement. At 30 the running animations look bad, attacks look bad, the game only looks good when I put the controller down and look at almost completely static scenes. You are correct 30 FPS wont affect my performance like as it would in a first person shooter, but 30 FPS is almost nauseating when lots of things are happening on screen. Which is like all the battle animations
I would have liked it if it was unlocked form the getgo, but its ok.
They just didn't want to put in that much work as many things are hardcoded to the 30FPS (which makes many things easier/more efficient in terms of coding), and unlocking it is possible but with many glitches and makeing the game softlock/crash often.
No we can't. The fastest ever measured transmisison of optical data from the eye to the brain is at around 500 Hz, the fastest ever measured subcontious recognition of patterns was at roughly half of that - 240 Hz, and contious recognition is again far slower.
(No, seeing a flash of light 1/1000 th of a second does not mean your eyes are that fast - 2 flashes with half the intensity will look absolutely identical to you).
Yes I'm aware the game isn't real time combat, I played a few hours before uninstall. 30 FPS is not effecting my ability to play, just affecting my my ability to enjoy any animations. Do you have 2 or 3 monitors? Play the game on a second monitor beside a game with at least 60 FPS, you will notice the stark contrast between one looking smooth and pretty and one looking choppy, animations looking simple. It's plain ugly as sin.
Go to a store and check out a 144HZ monitor beside a 240HZ monitor. The difference takes a second to notice your first time, but it's quite obvious the difference, with animations looking super smooth and clean.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCWZ_kWTB9w
Well - to each dishonest liar their own.
(Btw - you might want to go see a doctor - by your own claim you would be a super human that the medical world really would pay a fortune to study).
i can just say one thing , in siege if i see an enemy for a few frames i usually can kill them , and i improved alot since i got my 144hz monitor , but ,and this is a big but
for most console ports , especially those i play with controllers 30 and 60fps are fine , i recently played skyward sword and i didnt feel like the 30fps were a problem , its mostly competetive games and first person games that outright make me feel nauseaus at a low framerate ( same if the fov is far too low , i just dont feel well if i look at the screen to long like that )
but ff10 is perfectly playable at 30 fps
30fps only looks terrible if theres a camera movement , i doubt i could play a shooter at 30fps anymore , that would make anyone sick but for console games (which ffx is ) its not as much of a problem , alot of console games dont have a huge focus on camera movement , some like zelda have a feature to position the camera automatically into the direction the character is facing but ffx has an unmoving camera there it doesnt matter at all , you cant get motion sick from laggy camera movement bc there is none , framerate is important when stuff moves , i play most shooters at 144fps , but in ffx theres nothing i need to hit in real time when i only see it for a few frames