Can FPS become an obsession and needlessly ruin your experience?

even 144fps with microstutters with spikes going like a roller coaster will make it look less smooth than a stable 60fps image.

1 Like

i agree with that. - but saying there is no benefit to having a setup running at 60 v 30 is incredibly backwards

1 Like

agree also, but most people here think fps = smoothness :stuck_out_tongue:
or ā€œit looks smooth to me, so it should be smooth for everyoneā€

I mean I wish it was really stable, we wouldnā€™t have over 500 topics about performance with high-end setups if the sim was actually stable

(granted the sim is in itā€™s early stages, so lets give it some time and see how it turns out)

1 Like

1.Thatā€™s exactly what this thread is about! I donā€™t care about graphs and counters.
Simply look at the monitor! Smooth or not. End of story.

2.Maybe things are different in gaming than in flight simming.
When doing e.g .aerobatics Iā€™m locking fps to 60 which is perfectly smooth even in the very fast maneuvering case.

1 Like

I wasnā€™t replying to your post specifically, but the topic. I understand where youā€™re coming from with expectations and money spent.

I guess it depends on how you look at it and how much you know about how FS runs and processes data. I have a very unobtrusive fps counter on all the time and it keeps me in the loop to whatā€™s going on behind the scenes.

Knowing what your normal range is can be a good way to help determine if thereā€™s some performance issue going on. Itā€™s also a good way to know what areas take a fps hit (ie urban/photogrammetry areas). Iā€™m not an fps chaser by any means and stuttering is the real enemy, but for me having a counter visible at all times is a good thing and doesnā€™t at all take away from the experience.

If you donā€™t care about the performance of the sim thatā€™s your opinion tho and I respect that.
But in my opinion it has a vast amount of work to do on this subject.

Like I said before, we need to give it some time.
Itā€™s an ambitious project, weā€™ll probably see some performance optimizations at summer or after.

Stuttering / freezes is the main experience killer here, not a specific FPS value. Of cource there is FPS like 15, you canā€™t fully enjoy precision of controls.

And just from my personal experiences - as a real world pilot I can subjectively compare. So, letā€™s say for average GA aircraft like C172, at 30 FPS (without stutters) I have for sure enough control and reactivity to be able safely control my aircraft in all situations. In reality, there are things like inertia that also lower ractivity of controls (And this effect is stronger for heavier ACFTs), so no real difference of ā€œcontrolling the aircraftā€ experience when comparing 30 and 60 FPS in-sim with real world flying. Nothing else to say here. :wink:

Performance is very important for a sim IMO.
Thatā€™s one of the few reasons why I did use Aerofly FS2.
Usually 60fps are required for 100% smoothness in my experience, thatā€™s why I was surprised that MSFS is so smooth at 30fps.

2 Likes

OK, thanks for understanding and my apologies.

1 Like

Have you tried this? It makes a drastic difference in fluidity - this is why all modern developers target this as a goal
Iā€™d argue that the difference from 15>30 isnā€™t close to as big an impact as 30>60 but you really are going to feel the difference.
Brining up the shooter argument - the reason these e-sports players target HFR is it helps their reaction time. They are receiving more feedback (frames) from the display.

This is equivalent to making tiny control surface adjustments on flare before touchdown. Landing at 25 fps v 60fps - the edge will go to the 60fps player. He is receiving more ā€œinformationā€ from the sim and able to adjust quicker. (smoothness and frame drops taken out of the discussion). Iā€™m not trying to present the case that you NEED it to enjoy it. But there is an impact in how it ā€˜feelsā€™ to play. I guess weā€™re getting in the weeds over this though lol.

1 Like

Yes, Iā€™ve tried this - 60 FPS vs 30 FPS in-sim (and also different sims) in C172 (gauges) vs real world C172.

Believe me - not so high differences in control responsiveness / smoothness experience between these three cases. But still my subjective comparison / feelings, so Iā€™m not trying to persuade anyone else of ā€œmy truthā€.

EDIT: And yes, maybe personally Iā€™m affected by my real world flying, focusing not only on visual experience, but for me flying is very complex experience that most ā€œcheap / SWā€ sims really canā€™t offer.

Although there virtually no differenece in ā€˜smoothnessā€™ during the flare between 30 and 60fps I agree that thereā€™s slightly more ā€˜feelā€™ at the higher framerate.

I am running between 30-40 typically , I donā€™t have anything Iā€™d say is an ā€˜issueā€™ where itā€™s negatively impacting my good times with MSFS - but 60 is subjectively better. Iā€™m not a PPL but i do have some hands on experience just because i fly with my boss who has his PPL at least once a month and who irresponsibly lets me take control once in a while. (SR22t).

We (well most of us poors lol) donā€™t have control loading yokes so we rely ONLY on the visual experience within the sim. We arenā€™t getting that physical feedback from the control surfaces in sim. From my limited experience that was the biggest eye opener for sim v real life.

The only feedback you get in MSFS is 100% visual from that monitor. The higher your frame rates (assuming all things stutterless) the more information you are receiving and can act on. Plus itā€™s just pleasant overall!

Exactly! And I fully understand your arguments / game playerā€™s point of view. What Iā€™m trying to say (and while still referencing the tittle of this topics) is that difference between SMOOTH and STABLE 30 and 60 FPS donā€™t needlessly ruin my sim experience. Thatā€™s what I really stand for.

1 Like

LOL yes i agreeā€¦this is when i recognized how ā€˜in the weedsā€™ i was getting lol

1 Like

I long for the day when this sim is stable enough so I can turn off the fps displayā€¦

The peak FPS does not matter, but the 99th percentile does matter.

As long as your frame rate is steady at an acceptable value the overall impression is fluid.

I also turned off the FPS counter, because the above is true on my PC for anything but the most busy urban centers and mega airports.

1 Like

Yes, and it can for any game. Thatā€™s why I donā€™t use an FPS counter for anything I play. The number is utterly irrevelant. Iā€™m not in an FPS contest, Iā€™m playing a game. If Iā€™m getting framerate spikes and drops, Iā€™ll see that in stuttering. If Iā€™m getting low FPS, that will also be obvious as well. It shouldnā€™t matter if itā€™s 30, 40, or 50 FPS, it should be able having a smooth, consistent experience. Iā€™d urge everyone who FPS counts to seriously consider just turning the darn thing off and fly. Performance issues will be obvious. Stop obsessing over an ultimately meaningless number.

Thatā€™s because 1. Smoothness =/= peak FPS. Smoothness = consistent FPS. Whether youā€™re getting 30, 40, 50, or 60 FPS, if itā€™s consistent without spikes and sudden drops, it will appear smooth. And 2, certain types of games have more perceived benefit from higher FPS than others. A fast moving up close action game will feel more sluggish than a flight simulator will at 30 FPS when youā€™re flying at 10,000 feet any everything moving is really far away so it doesnā€™t move all that quickly. Much easier for your brain to see that as smooth movement. First person shooter games can really suck at 30FPS because it can mess with the quick reactions you need and the camera moves very, very quickly in often wide arcs which will accentuate a lower FPS and reward a higher one. Thatā€™s why for ages people playing Flight sims have not really aimed for 60FPS as a standard as much as 30FPS, because 30 was more acceptable in this type of title than in others.

1 Like