how exactly does 60FPS make a football game better?

how fluent it looks. how smooth it runs.

To some people it might not make a big difference, but I know being a big footbal lfan I want to make it as close to it being the real thing as possible.

60 fps just makes playing a whole lot more smooth and comfortable.solidsnakeEx3

Yup.

It doesn't matter what genre it is, a better framerate is always good.

Choppiness is worst for those games where you have to make split second decisions or quick reflexes along with lots of micromanagement. When you the framerate drops when things get hectic....it's like the exact opposite of what you want.

As far as I know, football isn't all that complicated as far as videogames go. You pick the plays before you begin, so 80-90% of the strategy is completed before framerate becomes an issue. Still, it's important to monitor minute details and some of the action is fast. This means that framerate is fairly important.

At any rate, twice the number of frames per second is an extremely good figure and it's quite important for any videogame experience. It's not just "smoother," it eliminates the effect of choppiness and gives you an absolute grasp of your situation moment to moment.

A constant sixty frames per second would help any game.

For example, with a first person shooter, playing at ten frames, it would be difficult for you to see a rapidly moving target, your aim would be affected badly, you'll likely end up missing, and next thing you know, you're dead. Playing at sixty frames would allow you to see your opponent's movements better so you can aim better.

play NCAA 07 then play NCAA 08...world of difference. 30 FPS has a BUNCH of slowdowns...especially in sports games.hockeyruler12

we dont need more damage control threadgamergeekgeek

I really don't know. To me, madden on the 360 feels exactly Madden on the PS2, the graphical upgrade just doesn't change the game enough.7arek

[QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"]we dont need more damage control threadDualshockin

this thread is pretty close to "bu-but teh 60fps isnt need"
and what happened with sony's claim that they can do 120fps??

I guess if you are a rabid Sony fan the reasoning goes "if it ain't got it you don't need it."Riverwolf007

"We don't need 60 fps"

"We don't need rumble"

"We don't need games"

"We don't need RAM"

Cows are hilarious.

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]I guess if you are a rabid Sony fan the reasoning goes "if it ain't got it you don't need it."cheezisgoooood

"We don't need 60 fps"

"We don't need rumble"

"We don't need games"

"We don't need RAM"

Cows are hilarious.

1. lol some games that are graphically superior to madden have been proven to being able to run at 60fps.

2. Isn't there one coming out? in that case lemmings-"we don't need six axis!"

3.Got some coming out.

4.There is RAM and updates can reduce the RAM used by OS.

[QUOTE="cheezisgoooood"]

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]I guess if you are a rabid Sony fan the reasoning goes "if it ain't got it you don't need it."Scarletred

"We don't need 60 fps"

"We don't need rumble"

"We don't need games"

"We don't need RAM"

Cows are hilarious.

1. lol some games that are graphically superior to madden have been proven to being able to run at 60fps.

2. Isn't there one coming out? in that case lemmings-"we don't need six axis!"

3.Got some coming out.

4.There is RAM and updates can reduce the RAM used by OS.

go play GTA and then play ninja gaiden

extremly noticeable fluidness and theres more animation

Yea it does.

I just wish madden could come up with better graphics. They are about one generation away from matching that CGI trailer. It is so sad.

The eye can detect frequencies below 72 Hz (frames per sec). Anything less than 72 Hz will stress out the eyes and brain. 60 FPS comes close, so it is less stressful.

Old fluourescent lights would blink at a low frequency and people would get headaches. The same is true with old VGA monitors. Since then, the default minimum is 72 Hz.

Also, try spinning in a circle and read a sign at 30 FPS. You can't. At 60 FPS, you can follow the sign and read it. That's just an example of how it would improve gameplay.

60FPS is better than 30FPS.

/thread.

No stutter, less choppiness, smother animation, makes for a better sports game

duh

i would love to know. teh smooth'ness?en_V

It does make a difference but the really important thing is that it has a consistent frame rate.....something the ps3 version doesnt have.

[QUOTE="Scarletred"][QUOTE="cheezisgoooood"]

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]I guess if you are a rabid Sony fan the reasoning goes "if it ain't got it you don't need it."myke2010

"We don't need 60 fps"

"We don't need rumble"

"We don't need games"

"We don't need RAM"

Cows are hilarious.

1. lol some games that are graphically superior to madden have been proven to being able to run at 60fps.

2. Isn't there one coming out? in that case lemmings-"we don't need six axis!"

3.Got some coming out.

4.There is RAM and updates can reduce the RAM used by OS.

1.True.

2.Aww. Also some guy did mod a controller to have six-axisand try to advertise it on xbox forums.

3.Mmmhmmm

4.that may be true. I personally think the ps2 did.

i would love to know. teh smooth'ness?en_V

i am guessing you are a ps3 fanboy

i would love to know. teh smooth'ness?en_V

less choppiness=smoother gameplay and easier on the eyes.

[QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"]we dont need more damage control threadDualshockin

you're blind if you think that his question and his statements following were completely innocent and were only mentioned for learning purposes.

did you really just say that cows never attempt to use damage control... wow

this thread is pretty close to "bu-but teh 60fps isnt need"and what happened with sony's claim that they can do 120fps??gamergeekgeek

[QUOTE="Dualshockin"][QUOTE="gamergeekgeek"]we dont need more damage control threadKAS3Y_JAM3Z

you're blind if you think that his question and his statements following were completely innocent and were only mentioned for learning purposes.

did you really just say that cows never attempt to use damage control... wow

360 owners: download the NCAA demo...then play the Madden demo.

PS3 owners: downlaod the Heavenly Sword demo...then play the Ninja Gaiden demo.

It almost feels like night and day when action gets intense.

360 owners: download the NCAA demo...then play the Madden demo.

PS3 owners: downlaod the Heavenly Sword demo...then play the Ninja Gaiden demo.

It almost feels like night and day when action gets intense.

Dreams-Visions

i would love to know. teh smooth'ness?en_V

It doesn't make to much of a difference as the average person can only seen 21 - 24 FPS, anything more then that isn't noticable and things less are noticable.

[QUOTE="en_V"]i would love to know. teh smooth'ness?jliebel

It doesn't make to much of a difference as the average person can only seen 21 - 24 FPS, anything more then that isn't noticable and things less are noticable.

[QUOTE="7arek"]I really don't know. To me, madden on the 360 feels exactly Madden on the PS2, the graphical upgrade just doesn't change the game enough.Dualshockin

Um Madden 04 to Madden 05 was a HUGE leap especially when it came to competitve play. I mean 2004 was the most broken Madden ever unbelievable how that game was released.

[QUOTE="jliebel"]

[QUOTE="en_V"]i would love to know. teh smooth'ness?myke2010

It doesn't make to much of a difference as the average person can only seen 21 - 24 FPS, anything more then that isn't noticable and things less are noticable.

Actually no I am not, reason? 1.) Personally anything above 24 FPS I can't tell the difference. 2.) Most people I know besides a few(They aren't in the average) Can.

Also did you know that alot of films you see in the theature is done at 24 FPS ;)

[QUOTE="myke2010"][QUOTE="jliebel"]

[QUOTE="en_V"]i would love to know. teh smooth'ness?jliebel

It doesn't make to much of a difference as the average person can only seen 21 - 24 FPS, anything more then that isn't noticable and things less are noticable.

Actually no I am not, reason? 1.) Personally anything above 24 FPS I can't tell the difference. 2.) Most people I know besides a few(They aren't in the average) Can.

Also did you know that alot of films you see in the theature is done at 24 FPS ;)

[QUOTE="jliebel"][QUOTE="myke2010"][QUOTE="jliebel"]

[QUOTE="en_V"]i would love to know. teh smooth'ness?myke2010

It doesn't make to much of a difference as the average person can only seen 21 - 24 FPS, anything more then that isn't noticable and things less are noticable.

Actually no I am not, reason? 1.) Personally anything above 24 FPS I can't tell the difference. 2.) Most people I know besides a few(They aren't in the average) Can.

Also did you know that alot of films you see in the theature is done at 24 FPS ;)

I never said no one can, I said the average person ;) Oh and I've played PC games from 10 FPS to over 200 FPS, and I will tell you I can't tell the difference.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

360 owners: download the NCAA demo...then play the Madden demo.

PS3 owners: downlaod the Heavenly Sword demo...then play the Ninja Gaiden demo.

It almost feels like night and day when action gets intense.

Dualshockin

[QUOTE="myke2010"][QUOTE="jliebel"][QUOTE="myke2010"][QUOTE="jliebel"]

[QUOTE="en_V"]i would love to know. teh smooth'ness?jliebel

It doesn't make to much of a difference as the average person can only seen 21 - 24 FPS, anything more then that isn't noticable and things less are noticable.

Actually no I am not, reason? 1.) Personally anything above 24 FPS I can't tell the difference. 2.) Most people I know besides a few(They aren't in the average) Can.

Also did you know that alot of films you see in the theature is done at 24 FPS ;)

I never said no one can, I said the average person ;) Oh and I've played PC games from 10 FPS to over 200 FPS, and I will tell you I can't tell the difference.

As to your silly movie 24 FPS comment, that number isn't used because it is the maximum FPS the human eye can see, but rather because it is considered the most efficient. More FPS equaled more film used. The bright flicker in movies created an afterimage after being displayed that stays with you as the next frame on screen is displayed. This creates the illusion of fluid motion. However, digital images capable of capturing film at a much higher rate has been shown to noticably improve movie quality. The 24 fps has been the staple not out of concern for picture quality, but out of habit. Newer movies shot with digital medium are raising the bar.myke2010

Grats on using looking it up ;) but once again you've taken things out of context. The average person doesn't notice anything more then 21 - 24 FPS, key word here average ;)