If you have higher framerates, do you have a gaming advantage?

[Fourstaff]

7fps gamer playing at masters (better than 95%) at Starcraft II, FPS doesn't matter.

The GM(top200 in EU) in the SCII gathering I join plays with half of his laptop's screen artifacting, and can still kick ass.

[PLSG08]

FPS can be used to an advantage depending on the player.

But skill is the true test whether one player is better than the other.

I remember back then I was playing AlterIW's Modern Warfare 2 online. I usually have a ping of 150-300 (350 if I'm lucky) Because I play on my first laptop (A compaq Cq40-416au) which had A turion x2 ~ 2.2 Ghz, 1GB DDR2 ram, HD 3200 256MB.

I played with everything on normal, no aa, running at 640x480, no shadows and everything else and All I can say is that my best K-D ratio was 37 Kills to 11 Deaths. I learned how to QuickScope and such and now I played BF3 (legit) in a comp shop near my college. (which barely hits the 30 fps mark)

I think I can vouch that you don't need a $1000 rig to be a good gamer, if you really want to be good you have to make out with what you have :-bd

Oh and here's an old screenshot I have from an old game of mine in AlterIW

(my name is loloTHUNDAH in the game BTW)

[1Kurgan1]

FPS does matter. I can tell the difference between 60 and 30 fps. But one could always lower settings on a cheaper rig to match the frames of someone on a better rig. Also, $10000 computer would be a joke, a 3570k + mobo + ram + 7950 and the few bits to finish up that tower would be right near $1000 and be enough to play just about anything close to max settings with great FPS. Anything beyond that is just overkill (trust me I know). Now if you want to record and get good FPS, then a bit bigger of an investment is a good idea, but still not that much more.

Originally Posted by Fourstaff

7fps gamer playing at masters (better than 95%) at Starcraft II, FPS doesn't matter.

The GM(top200 in EU) in the SCII gathering I join plays with half of his laptop's screen artifacting, and can still kick ass.

I think he's talking more about FPS games, not RTS games, more where it comes down to reaction time.

[xxdozer322]

my rig was built on a budget, my first computer was a regular p4 only getting 20fps on Counter Strike Source



but all it was skill to get these numbers on Crackhouse



yeah its crackhouse, but thats the only map where i got at least 25fps lol

[Exeodus]

It doesnt have as much do to with framerates as it does ping if you are playing online. If you ping is too high, other players will see you first and can react faster. They will have hit you once or twice before you have time to react. This is how somebody seems to get you with one shot, but in reality they hit you twice before you even knew what happened.

[1Kurgan1]

Originally Posted by Exeodus

It doesnt have as much do to with framerates as it does ping if you are playing online. If you ping is too high, other players will see you first and can react faster. They will have hit you once or twice before you have time to react. This is how somebody seems to get you with one shot, but in reality they hit you twice before you even knew what happened.

Eh, I play almost exclusively Euro servers on BF3 since Marineborn is over there right now and his internet blows. And I have no problem destroying. I don't really notice a difference playing on US servers either. And back in BC2 I use to even play on Japanese servers when he was stationed over there.

But I do notice FPS in the 30 - 40 range, it just doesn't feel as smooth. Though it doesn't have much of an effect, just feels nice to see it run smoothly all the time.

[Am*]

Here's another point of view.


People I know that ran certain shooters at 160FPS and higher with laser mice got an even challenge from me playing at 26ish FPS with a cheap-ass optical when I was still running my Athlon 64 single core dinosaur rig from 2005. When I moved up to my current PC that managed the same sorts of frame rates and got myself a laser mouse too, I annihilated them and their entire team consecutively and was dominating the scoreboards for ages, more so than I ever did. After that, when I got my 120Hz monitor, I even had people call me a cheater for reacting a lot faster than they did -- now that I think of it, I could not ever go back to 60Hz monitors and mice with a DPI below about 3200 (my old optical mouse had 800DPI)...at least not for multiplayer games.

Another thing to consider is that some games actually run quicker at higher FPS. Games like Quake III and the old Call of Duty games (like MW1) are known to make your character move, aim and react noticeably faster at higher FPS than some poor sod on a slow PC. So much so, in fact, that people still reduce visual settings for games like COD4 just to get the unfair advantage (with a noticeable improvement, even between 90-150FPS to 250FPS, seriously).

The best thing I would consider is playing on a slow-ass PC to handicap yourself for a challenge. Once you learn to gain similar scores to everyone else, move back up to a good PC, you'll be the top dog of nearly every match for a while. I still go back to my old PC every few months or so to brush up on my reaction times.

[SaiZo]

My first system was a slow, low end system, I could get somewhere around 30fps or lower in larger areas in CS1.6.

Later when I bought my first high-end system, it was amazing. But since lately I got better and better, and just the amazing fact of being called "wallhacker" or "cheater" or someone acusing me of using a "bot"(??)

I don't know my current fps in games, but no tearing or frame drop.

[aayman_farzand]

FPS only matters upto a point.

Say in CSS for example, if you have 30FPS then defintiely the 300FPS guy can kick your ass around. But as long as you have enough FPS (CSS 100+), you will not be at a competitive disadvantage as you were with 30.

High FPS makes gameplay a lot more smoother, and it does help, but after a certain point it doesn't matter as long as it's high enough. So no a $10000 PC guy will not kick a $1000 PC guy's ass, but the $1000 guy will dominate the $300 guy.

[cdawall]

Originally Posted by aayman_farzand

FPS only matters upto a point.

Say in CSS for example, if you have 30FPS then defintiely the 300FPS guy can kick your ass around. But as long as you have enough FPS (CSS 100+), you will not be at a competitive disadvantage as you were with 30.

High FPS makes gameplay a lot more smoother, and it does help, but after a certain point it doesn't matter as long as it's high enough. So no a $10000 PC guy will not kick a $1000 PC guy's ass, but the $1000 guy will dominate the $300 guy.

30000000000000000000000FPS wont make any bit of difference on a 60Hz monitor.

[Frag Maniac]

Originally Posted by cdawall

30000000000000000000000FPS wont make any bit of difference on a 60Hz monitor.

Funny how that made me think of NFS Most Wanted 2012 and Black Ops 2, a couple games who's lack of decent optimization cause wild frame rate fluctuation and actually benefit from capping the FPS to as low as 30, just as NFS The Run came shipped capped at 30.

Face it guys, we live in an age where crappy console quality PC games are the norm, often making it impossible to get the most out of uber elite gaming hardware.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by cdawall

30000000000000000000000FPS wont make any bit of difference on a 60Hz monitor.

exactly.

Originally Posted by vawrvawerawe

Will the person with a $10,000 PC be able to by default destroy the person with a $1,000 PC? Given there is not a huge difference in gaming skill level between the owners of each system.

If so, at what framerates do you begin to have a significant advantage?

no, it doesn't. in fact, if you play the FPS online games, for instance counter strike, you should check your ping (your connection) first and make sure your ping to the server less than 90ms, as can be expected only with 30fps (minimum playable fps) you can destroy/annihilate the person with framerates over 90000fps moreover the important thing is you should have good skill, without skill you're nothing despite you have 90000fps and best connection

[punisher186]

There are more important things to consider, especially in the Source Engine. Things like the fps figure and mouse polling rate relationship, cl_cmdrate and cl_updaterate, rate to throttle connection (cl_rate xxxxx), and your interp and interp ratio settings. Best to sync your display and your mouse refresh and your FPS cap to get close as possible.

[RCoon]

ping, ability to use a mouse, mouse sensor properties, proper use of dpi etc, probably make more difference than framerate. you're still going to get from point a to b within the same time on 30 or 60fps, provided the minimum fps is the same. I guess that's the key, fluid fps is better than high fps. If you're running 200fps at one point, and then dipping to 24 during intense moments, then its not going to count for much. I'd rather play on 30fps permanently than maxing 120 and dipping down to 24 during intense processes

[Guitarrassdeamor]

Originally Posted by Frag Maniac

Have you tried using DxTory to capture with? You can enable Distribution HDD Writing if you have more than one HDD and it literally removes all lag. I have recorded Metro 2033 at 720p with just a GTS 250 with no lag using just two mediocre speed HDDs. It also has a built in frame limiter you can set to any FPS.

Some games tend to fluctuate wildly from min to max frame rate. Even though they average what would normally be smooth frame rates, it can cause a weird kind of yo yoing with forward movement, as with NFS Most Wanted 2012 and Black Ops 2.

In this case I enable a frame rate cap, which can significantly improve smoothness of gameplay. So it's not just about how high a frame rate you're averaging, it has a lot to do with consistency of frame rate as well. Without the cap I can average 50 to 60 FPS in BO 2, but I get much smoother gameplay without a hint of lag if I cap it at 40 FPS.

So I had it installed but never used it. Tried it last night, worked good but it seemed to give me micro stutters here and there...was weird. Need to play around with it more. But was with everything maxxed and kept my normal FPS which = win.

[Frag Maniac]

Originally Posted by Guitarrassdeamor

So I had it installed but never used it. Tried it last night, worked good but it seemed to give me micro stutters here and there...was weird. Need to play around with it more. But was with everything maxxed and kept my normal FPS which = win.

Do you have video output set to RawCap instead of AVI with two or more HDDs enabled? In RawCap mode each enabled HDD writes a raw file, dissipating the capture writing load. Then you use it's built-in RawCap Convert tool to join them into an AVI after you're done capturing. You can also of course set it's built-in FPS cap tool to any frame rate you choose, which can fix micro stutters.

Here's a great tutorial a user made btw: