3 ms·
I'd rather have 1000FPS. 1000FPS is enough for motion quality that's good enough to be mistaken for real motion, and unlike realistic image quality, all it need
by mrob 2y ago
I'd rather have 1000FPS. 1000FPS is enough for motion quality that's good enough to be mistaken for real motion, and unlike realistic image quality, all it needs is one skilled programmer. Chasing realistic image quality is so expensive that you need to target the biggest market to stand any chance of making a profit. It inevitably leads to modern game design, where everything is homogenized and dumbed down for the masses, and full of anti-consumer practices like micro-transactions and games as a service.
- anal_reactor 2y agoYou, sir, are not the target audience
- unleaded 2y agodo you have a 1000hz monitor?
- mrob 2y agoNo, but I could at least benefit from reduced latency by disabling vsync. The higher the frame rate the less obvious the tearing this causes. And monitor manufacturers are more likely to produce a 1000Hz monitor if there are already games that can render that fast.