I really hate Screen Tearing, Why have a beautiful game only to have it ruined by screen tearing. I do not care if my game does not run has fast as it does without Vsync. I just hate the screen tearing.

That's one of the many downsides of console gaming, yo. Not gonna happen. :shrug:

Screen Tearing ?

It's what happens the video feed from the game doesn't match up with the refresh rate of the monitor/screen you're using. using v-synch will mitigate this problem by locking the refresh rate and the feed together so you don't get artifacts like your screen rippling or "tearing."

If GTA 4 could do it and Oblivion could do it, Skyrim can. They could atleast have it as a option.

you know what the primary function for Vsync is don't you?

Its mainly for having more FPS then your monitor supports for example if I have a 60ghz monitor and I get 65FPS vsync fixes the issue locking it at 60fps which actually fixes any tearing with it on. Since consoles games are locked at 30FPS or 60 (skyrim appears to be 30) there really is no need for change of what it is now

Im just asking for an "option" for the Xbox or PS3 Users that do not like screen tearing. Thats all

Any confirmation?

No.

having Vsync on which it is on every console game today ensures less Screen tearing.. FPS on console is locked

Screen tearing on a console will generally be because of either faulty design (something was overlooked or the result of a bad port), or the game is to unpredictable to guarantee the resource will be there (the latter being the likely culprit in a game with Skyrim's design).

A V-sync button will be of no help in either case.

Skyrim locked at 30fps? Thats why i feel sick after playing some console games then...well not sick but really tired. Don't feel like that after playing on my PC which will give me 60+ fps.

And for those that say you can't notice ....Wrong. The more fps the better imo.

Yeah, that's true...
They say you don't need more than 30fps...
But gamers know that's not true...

If you want to play like 3, 4 hours straight.... you must not have low fps...

Can I have your monitor? :icecream:

30fps is featured in the trailer. Believe me, locked 30fps looks much better than unlocked 60fps.

Heck, when a buddy and me play an MMO it says we are getting ~1-10fps. Max 20 for me, less for him.

It's not that bad, or is the pc lying to us?

Well I certainly notice the difference from 30fps to 60fps... But if theres situations where the games going to go down to say 35fps from 60fps then I'd just keep it steady at 30. Then you won't notice it slightly slow down at all.

Is that an in-game counter, or are you using FRAPS?

Anyway, the demands of MMOs are different from the demands of an FPS, or action RPG, or turn-based strategy game. 20 on an FPS would be awful and unplayable.


I disagree. You want as many frames as possible. Cram them in. A dip from 60 to 30 is not too bad. It's still playable. A dip from 30 to 25 is the stuff of nightmares.

Low frame rates would be a big problem for me. It will get very annoying after 10 mins if the lag is poor. If the game is not running smooth it shouldn't get released until it is fixed.

Edit:
Out of curiosity, in reletive terms what does the human eye see in terms of frame rates if it were a computer?

Your question is a bit unclear. Are you asking how different framerates look to the human eye? This here is the classic page for such a question: http://www.boallen.com/fps-compare.html

No it's not lying. On my old PC I was running OB for more than 2 years (1000+hrs) at med setting and was only pulling 8-12 fps. The game is perfectly playable at that frame rate.

It was only the in-game counter.

- - -

Heard some people say most laptops only get up to 20 or something FPS. . .but I really have no clue what i'm talking about.

30fps looks good to me, depending on the person I thought they notice between 40-60fps anything else is a waste

I don't think describing 12 fps as 'perfectly playable' is quite how I would put it. :unsure2:


Nope, very visible difference between 30 and 60, and less so for 40-60, but the difference remains. Check out this page for a comparison: http://www.boallen.com/fps-compare.html

For PC gamers (especially FPS players) 60 fps is the target (some would call it the minimum). It's not unheard of to shoot for 90 fps or higher on your favourite game when putting a rig together. The reason is that the difference between 60 and 90 fps is barely noticeable, and if you're running at 90 and your computer dips down to 75 or 60, you're not going to feel it. This is pretty important for online PC FPS, where reaction times are near-instant thanks to mouse and keyboard control.

Well perhaps not "perfect" but it didn't impede my ability to play the game AT ALL. Contrary to popular belief 10 fps IS playable.

I basically wanted to know what the frame rate would need to be, in order to make it look like real life movement.

Would 60fps give the same visual quality of a human eye, if that makes sense?