Mr.Whiteknight does it again.

I did it...it looks like shit!
reason why 24fps was[and still is] used, especially in cartoons, was because of technical limitations which we dont have now except for having TV/monitors @120Hz refresh rate in every household. There is no magic in having fewer frames!

Just some kid thinking that movie frames and video game frames are exactly the same...

Apart for the article, the thing that really pisses me off is that i write serious reviews for free and nobody gives a flying fuck, while people get paid to write bullshit like that.

Maybe i should start writing about how shitty steam is, how good is EA and how cod ghosts will be the best game of all time.

Link to the story.

I understand why you avoid linking to the stories you want to complain about, but please understand that it's just annoying for everyone else, since it means we can't see the comments or anything else on the original site; trying to read things in an image is annoying, and the links from a random forum post aren't going to change anything.

Ahhhh my brain cells this is killing them all! Why are people like this writing reviews and getting paid for this shit?

And people like this get paid for spewing shit out of their mouths.

I fail to see any shit in the "earlier" link you posted. And this new thing just isn't threadworthy. I'm perfectly fine with hearing opinions on such things. Why would you have to make such a big negative deal about it?

I think he also published quite a few books under the french alias Checkyor Privilégé, this guy is pretty big on tumblr

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0aVka8zmFw

Please stop making topics about pointless articles written by some guy nobody has heard of.

fatal error in all his argument though, "i wonder if the magic would have been there with 60 fps, if i could clearly see how everything moved- probable not.!
sheit our eyes can't keep up with 24 fps, you're already not seeing how everything move, at 60 fps it should have even more 'magic', not because the brain fill freaking gaps, because there is no such thing as gaps, the brain get's overloaded by images and that can have an impact on your imagination and feelings.

He has a point actually, as movies sped up to 60fps do tend to look too real. I don't care for his movie magic bit though, as it has more to do with how our eyes function, less on how our brain interprets it. I think, in the future, developers should be conscious of the effect. If a game were intended to be more cinematic, they could limit the frame rate down. If intended to be more realistic, they should aim for 60fps.

I feel sorry for that poor unenlightened bastard as he hasn't been shined by the brightest sun, gaben.

All heil gaben

One key element in both movies and games for entertainment is the audiences' imagination. If you ignore this fact you are likely a poor story teller - visual or otherwise - and you also insult the audiences' intelligence.

Now regarding FPS... a good entertainer (game or movie) will consider the visual effect of the piece and could utilize various different speeds of FPS in the visual artistry over the course of the experience. This engages the viewer/gamer's imagination and interaction with the visual storytelling. Hopefully drawing them in more deeply into the experience of the piece. This can enhance or manipulate the desired affect that the director wishes to create - thus making the game/movie better, when done right.

The arguments presented by most people are more based on personal preferences, experiences or opinions. A parallel can be drawn here similar to that with music theory: there is no right or wrong. It is theory after all. You may not like it presented in one way or another - or in a given musical style. But that does not leave an intelligent person without the ability to respect and appreciate the artistry even if they dislike it's presentation.

Then again, some of us are also smart enough to be able to control the FPS settings in our media players the way we desire and completely ignore the way that the director/game creator made the piece to be seen and experienced.

I get what he's saying but I'm not sure I buy it as far as it relates to games. The human brain evolved as that of a predator, to quickly track prey animals. So the brain does estimate "missing frames" inasmuch as these missing frames exist in the virtual sense due to our visual cortex's limited perception. So he's claiming that by artificially creating missing frames that the brain becomes more actively engaged in the action it's watching. It's an interesting premise and for movies and other non-interactive medium he might be on to something, and there's even some anecdotal evidence to back that up. However for games that I'm already actively engaged with I personally find lower framerates to be distracting rather than engaging as the missing frames tend to disrupt the action.

or we could just allow people to choose in the options 60 or 30fps like RE5 does (who would pick 30 though honestly?)