FPS confirmed to be unlimited in final release

[AirRaid]

For anyone who was worried they wouldn't be able to run this at a billion FPS on their uber system with their 144hz screen, stop worrying.

http://gameranx.com/updates/id/48599/article/doom-fps-unlock-announced-for-pc/

I do realise most people were worrying about being able to run it at all, but hey. It shows they are doing some work for the PC version specifically.

[Touchdown]

Yeah, I posted it somewhere yesterday. It's nice for people with $10k PCs but not so useful for most of us. I'm aiming for 1080p/60fps and I'll be happy if I can maintain that.

I'm looking forward to those PC-centric news though. Would be cool if there were some nice improvements / options for PC users to have a higher fidelity than on consoles but I don't think that's gonna happen.

[archvile82]

I feel so bad for these guys, clearly trying to make the effort in making a good pc version which include unlocked frame rate and sli. Then you got a huge ammount of pc gamers shitting on it (going by the steam store figures). Sure some people have made some valid complaints but still not deserved.

[DecemberMan]

archvile82 said:

I feel so bad for these guys, clearly trying to make the effort in making a good pc version which include unlocked frame rate and sli. Then you got a huge ammount of pc gamers shitting on it (going by the steam store figures). Sure some people have made some valid complaints but still not deserved.

Same :/

[Touchdown]

I'll judge that when the game comes out. Everyone promises that their PC versions will be awesome and somehow a lot of them turn out to be 'subpar', if you know what I mean.

[MiNaM]

Console command was already found in the Alpha data mining but it was disabled, they were planning for this since the Alpha..

[RobotJoe]

that's pretty cool.

[archvile82]

Touchdown said:

I'll judge that when the game comes out. Everyone promises that their PC versions will be awesome and somehow a lot of them turn out to be 'subpar', if you know what I mean.

Well for me I was very happy with how the beta run, much better compared to the Alpha (99% was running at 60fps). I was surprised how slick the graphics were too. After seeing various trailers and MP gameplay on youtube I was worried they dumbed down the shadows and lighting effects and thankfully this was not the case. Visuals looked really good on my Plasma TV and with the advanced menu locked down I can imagine it will look even better in the final release.

Also have to give a mention to the PS4 version, which looks great too though the textures weren't quite as sharp as they are on pc which is to be expected.

Hopefully for the guys that experienced issues they will be able to optimize for a wider variety of configurations.

[tuo]

...and there was much rejoicing!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmPhaG1ud38

Actually, I'm more interested if I can play it on a solid 45 to 60 FPS in 4K with two 980 GTX.

[HavoX]

Well, I shouldn't be too surprised. They must've learned their lesson from the 60FPS cap in Doom 3.

[Li'l devil]

What's wrong with good ol' 30 FPS? Why people always want as much FPS as possible?
I mean, there's no difference between 30 FPS and say, 60 FPS. FPS doesn't matter, because the maximum amount of frames a human eye can see in a second is 24, that was proven a long time ago.
I don't know why people bother. I play games on 30 FPS (even lower, because my laptop is a craptop) and it feels playable and there's nothing to complain about.

[TheMightyHeracross]

ChekaAgent said:

Why people always want as much FPS as possible?

Why not? It's good to have the option. You'll probably be allowed to set the cap yourself, if you so desire.

[hardcore_gamer]

ChekaAgent said:

What's wrong with good ol' 30 FPS? Why people always want as much FPS as possible?
I mean, there's no difference between 30 FPS and say, 60 FPS. FPS doesn't matter, because the maximum amount of frames a human eye can see in a second is 24, that was proven a long time ago.
I don't know why people bother. I play games on 30 FPS (even lower, because my laptop is a craptop) and it feels playable and there's nothing to complain about.

To be honest, does anyone besides tech nerds even care if the framerate is more than 60fps? I mean it makes sense why someone would want 60 frames instead of 30 frames, but honestly once I reach 60 I really could give less of a shit.

[Touchdown]

ChekaAgent said:

What's wrong with good ol' 30 FPS? Why people always want as much FPS as possible?
I mean, there's no difference between 30 FPS and say, 60 FPS. FPS doesn't matter, because the maximum amount of frames a human eye can see in a second is 24, that was proven a long time ago.
I don't know why people bother. I play games on 30 FPS (even lower, because my laptop is a craptop) and it feels playable and there's nothing to complain about.

Literally EVERYTHING you said is not true.

Can't see the difference between 30 and 60?
Still can't see the difference?

Read and learn

Want more proof? How about this: if people can't see more than 24fps then how come they noticed that 'something was wrong' with Hobbit running at 48fps? Hm, almost as if you CAN see the difference.

hardcore_gamer said:

To be honest, does anyone besides tech nerds even care if the framerate is more than 60fps? I mean it makes sense why someone would want 60 frames instead of 30 frames, but honestly once I reach 60 I really could give less of a shit.

I've recently bought a 144Hz monitor and yeah, I can see the difference between 60 and above. Even the simple cursor movement in Windows is clearly smoother but also stuff like fireballs and fast lifts in DOOM. It's less of a difference than between 30 and 60 but it's there and it feels better. There's no reason not to go higher, if you can.

[Arctangent]

ChekaAgent said:

What's wrong with good ol' 30 FPS? Why people always want as much FPS as possible?
I mean, there's no difference between 30 FPS and say, 60 FPS. FPS doesn't matter, because the maximum amount of frames a human eye can see in a second is 24, that was proven a long time ago.
I don't know why people bother. I play games on 30 FPS (even lower, because my laptop is a craptop) and it feels playable and there's nothing to complain about.

There's always the input part of it. 30 FPS means inputs are only checked and processed 0.03334 seconds, whereas 60 FPS allows for input checking every 0.01667 seconds, and, say, 257 FPS would allow checks for every 0.00389 seconds.

[Jaxxoon R]

Well that depends, it's certainly possible to process inputs 60 times a second but only render at 30.

[AirRaid]

That can cause motion sickness. Dissonance between player input and outputted motion can make some people feel really ill.

Thing is, it has been proven time and time again that higher FPSes in games specifically has a huge impact. It's less in film, but it's still there.

[Caffeine Freak]

ChekaAgent said:

What's wrong with good ol' 30 FPS? Why people always want as much FPS as possible?
I mean, there's no difference between 30 FPS and say, 60 FPS. FPS doesn't matter, because the maximum amount of frames a human eye can see in a second is 24, that was proven a long time ago.
I don't know why people bother. I play games on 30 FPS (even lower, because my laptop is a craptop) and it feels playable and there's nothing to complain about.

Completely and utterly wrong. 24 FPS is simply the historic standard for movies, and was used for decades and decades because a) it was the bare minimum requirement for certain aspects such as audio, and b) increasing the FPS in movies simply meant it was going to be more costly to shoot (higher framerate = more film usage.) There's nothing, AT ALL, that's special about 24 FPS and there's certainly no boundary line there in terms of the limits of human vision.

Secondly... if you play games on a shitty laptop and truly believe you're still getting good visuals at below 30 FPS, I'd like to suggest it's because you've become accustomed to that framerate. Seriously, if you really believe there's no telling the difference between 24 FPS and 30 FPS or 60 FPS, (or even higher) then get a beefier computer to play on, or play on a friend's PC sometime, and see if you can tell the difference. I guarantee that you will.

[The def star]

ChekaAgent said:

What's wrong with good ol' 30 FPS? Why people always want as much FPS as possible?
I mean, there's no difference between 30 FPS and say, 60 FPS. FPS doesn't matter, because the maximum amount of frames a human eye can see in a second is 24, that was proven a long time ago.
I don't know why people bother. I play games on 30 FPS (even lower, because my laptop is a craptop) and it feels playable and there's nothing to complain about.

No that is not right at all. 24fps is definitely not the maximum for the human eye. 24fps is what they use to film movies. 60fps is what they use to record sports or live TV because of the fast movements. I much prefer to play my games at 60fps especially FPS's.

[Chubzdoomer]

hardcore_gamer said:

To be honest, does anyone besides tech nerds even care if the framerate is more than 60fps? I mean it makes sense why someone would want 60 frames instead of 30 frames, but honestly once I reach 60 I really could give less of a shit.

The difference between 60 and 120+ FPS is actually noticeable if you have a monitor with a high refresh rate. There's a common misconception that 60 FPS is as good as it gets, and that anything beyond it is pointless, but that just isn't true.

[sheridan]

My poor ass has never been able to afford anything better than a 60-hz monitor, so 120+ billion fps has never done me any good. :( I am curious to see the difference some day, of course.

archvile82 said:

I feel so bad for these guys, clearly trying to make the effort in making a good pc version which include unlocked frame rate and sli. Then you got a huge ammount of pc gamers shitting on it (going by the steam store figures). Sure some people have made some valid complaints but still not deserved.

I know, right? Imagine being a developer for this game doing a triple-A job on your company's product, and then it comes out and everybody just hates on it. Kinda sad. But, some people enjoy it! So there's that.

[[LeD]Jake Crusher]

I dunno whether I should post that exactly here, but nevertheless...
https://twitter.com/LeDJakeCrusher/status/723181077037096960

Well, seems that they do pay attention to these things as well.

[capodecima]

sheridan said:

My poor ass has never been able to afford anything better than a 60-hz monitor, so 120+ billion fps has never done me any good. :( I am curious to see the difference some day, of course.

I know, right? Imagine being a developer for this game doing a triple-A job on your company's product, and then it comes out and everybody just hates on it. Kinda sad. But, some people enjoy it! So there's that.

I think every game which is made for Multiplayer and its not only for lolz, the game should run at high fps and support unlock fps too. So you can melt gpus how you want. -_-

[Doomkid]

AirRaid said:

That can cause motion sickness. Dissonance between player input and outputted motion can make some people feel really ill.

Thing is, it has been proven time and time again that higher FPSes in games specifically has a huge impact. It's less in film, but it's still there.

I can confirm this, assuming I'm reading it right. Playing Doom uncapped makes me feel like I'm going to lose my lunch in a matter of minutes. It's a strange phenomenon.

[victorboris1]

ChekaAgent said:

What's wrong with good ol' 30 FPS? Why people always want as much FPS as possible?
I mean, there's no difference between 30 FPS and say, 60 FPS. FPS doesn't matter, because the maximum amount of frames a human eye can see in a second is 24, that was proven a long time ago.
I don't know why people bother. I play games on 30 FPS (even lower, because my laptop is a craptop) and it feels playable and there's nothing to complain about.

Y'all motherfuckers got trolled the fuck out.