20 minutes ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

It's my opinion. It's neither right nor wrong. Same as yours. I don't need to prove anything, because it's just my opinion.

It also Appears its the games industries opinion too, otherwise they wouldn't have bothered and would have just kept everything at 30fps. But they push for 60 FPS min these days, and more if you can. And yes MSFS is a game, and yes, it is more fluid at higher FPS. Otherwise they wouldn't bother implementing features such as FG to begin with. they'd just tell you to stick with 30fps, 

You can give all the theoretical bases for your opinion, but the giant elephant in your room is you've yet to witness what I'm referring to, and I've certainly witnessed what you're referring to.  Even though you always say this, I don't use 30FPS, but have found 33-34 FPS provides liquid smooth animation and fluidity if setup correctly--you never did that last step and went out to get the most expensive brute force solution.  I could buy 1000 RTX 4090 today, but it's simply a waste of $$ if you understand how to achieve ultra low FTV. 

Challenge to Ian or anyone else:  do the CapFrameX capture from pushback to cruise and you can set it up any way you wish  FG to the max, and start where I did, EDDF.  I've posed this challenge at least 4x, and so far not one taker.  Odd....

People playing these popular fps games pay to get monitors that do 144 Hz refresh rate or even higher. Many have been happy with 60 Hz monitors in MSFS.

25 minutes ago, Fielder said:

In first person shooter games you constantly sweep the view left and right looking for opponents. The hobby sites look for fps over 100.  If you pan a lot in MSFS the same improvement with super high fps is there. In VR and with head tracking you normally pan a lot. 

I play Counter Strike at around 700 FPS actually. Its a hell of a difference when it comes to lag and direct feeling of your movement.

Meh. Snake oil again it seems.

I am happy at a locked 30fps with head tracking. It's smooth and the Gsync monitor at 60hz helps. I really thought that having an TLOD of 150 or higher was better but now at 100....I hardly notice. Everything is on either Ultra or sometimes High. Not to mention having GSX, AIG traffic, GA traffic, higher fidelity planes used, 2 monitors (one is 1080p for navigraph and pilot2atc) and a ton of payware/freeware.

Would it be better if I had a brand new i9 13,900k? Or a 4080? Sure.  But I am limited to the 8086k and 2080ti for now. Had this setup for several years and it handles everything else I play (cyberpunk 4k, witcher 3 at 4k, elite dangerous, etc etc) just fine. For flight sim? A smooth 30fps is just fine. For other games? Nah. Higher is usually better.

It doesn't matter if I turn down every setting to low or off and LOD to 10. There is a still a random stutter here or there.

Again, for stutters and performance there are really only two ways to help: Turn your settings down to your liking or get better hardware. Sure there is "Tweaking" in between like OC but that seems to be hit or miss as it is.

 

Edited October 6, 20232 yr by Sonosusto

Let me guess... the "30fps is enough" crowd spends 99% of their time using autopilot in heavies or GA aircraft. For those of us who like to have fun in a nimble plane doing some aggressive maneuvering, a jump to 60fps definitely makes a big difference.

1 hour ago, Noel said:

but the giant elephant in your room is you've yet to witness what I'm referring to, and I've certainly witnessed what you're referring to

Noel, I’ve been fligtsimming for 30 years. I use cutting-edge latest technology whatever the cost. With all due respect, of course I’ve witnessed smooth 30fps. But if you read what I posted, you’ll see why I’d rather have 60fps and a few stutters than 30fps and zero stutters…….. 

Edited October 6, 20232 yr by Ianrivaldosmith

1 hour ago, Noel said:

Challenge to Ian or anyone else:  do the CapFrameX capture from pushback to cruise and you can set it up any way you wish  FG to the max, and start where I did, EDDF.  I've posed this challenge at least 4x, and so far not one taker.  Odd....

It’s not odd, simply no one cares. Brutal truth. 60FPs or more using track IR or similar device and a g-sync monitor with FG is 100 times better than using locked 30fps. And that is my opinion. 

Edited October 6, 20232 yr by Ianrivaldosmith

1 hour ago, Noel said:

you never did that last step and went out to get the most expensive brute force solution.  I could buy 1000 RTX 4090 today, but it's simply a waste of $$ if you understand how to achieve ultra low FTV. 

I simmed at 30fps for decades. I couldn’t wait to get away from that! 
It’s not a waste of €€€ at all! Best invention to ever come to MSFS is FG. And that’s worth every penny. 

Even going from 30 FPS to 45 FPS there is a big difference in fluidity and flight feeling, specially noticeable when landing. Thought this discussion was dead years ago.

2 hours ago, Noel said:

Challenge to Ian or anyone else:  do the CapFrameX capture from pushback to cruise and you can set it up any way you wish  FG to the max, and start where I did, EDDF.  I've posed this challenge at least 4x, and so far not one taker.  Odd....

Think it's because no one cares about some arbitrary dick measuring contest of how smooth a frame is being delivered, especially not when it's down in 30FPS desperation territory. That's like a horsepower measurement contest on electric mobility scooters. 

6 minutes ago, Sethos said:

Think it's because no one cares about some arbitrary dick measuring contest of how smooth a frame is being delivered, especially not when it's down in 30FPS desperation territory. That's like a horsepower measurement contest on electric mobility scooters. 

Harsh, but true.

17 minutes ago, Sethos said:

Think it's because no one cares about some arbitrary dick measuring contest of how smooth a frame is being delivered, especially not when it's down in 30FPS desperation territory. That's like a horsepower measurement contest on electric mobility scooters. 

You're never going get it until you've correctly used the method I've described which I always stated was not for VR and was never attempted at 4K.  No other syncing, locking or open method compares favorably and this for me was entirely subjective:  i never even knew CapFrameX existed.  It was only when Cpt_Piett (?) turned me on to it that I found it corroborated my subjective experience.  The "arbitrary dick measurer" is an awesome simple way to corroborate the subjective and so reduce placebo.  So having "30 FPS" --not what I use, but whatever-- is not the issue, it's the sterlingly low FTV.  No other methods deliver it and until you see it, you can't appreciate it what it does to fluidity, smoothness, complete lack of hesitation, and so forth not possible w/ the other commonly used methods.  This thread was about another "magic fix" and that's why I arrived here figuring people after any kind of "fix" perhaps might benefit.  Next year we are headed for a substantial increase in performance, which essentially means there will be even less need for new hardware than there is today.

Very high frame rates certainly can mask poor FTV because at the highest rates FTV becomes progressively less of an issue.  It comes into play mostly w/ modest frame rates.  Not everyone has the resources to buy top end hardware so I like to offer this story up especially in as I say these kinds of threads.

Edited October 6, 20232 yr by Noel

Just now, Noel said:

You're never going get it until you've use the method I've described which I always stated was not for VR.  No other syncing, locking or open method compares favorable I tested them all and yes did use something to help get rid of placebo.  The "arbitrary dick measurer" is an awesome simple way to corroborate the subjective.  So having "30 FPS" --not what I use, but whatever-- is not the issue, it's the sterlingly low FTV.  No other methods deliver it and until you see it, you can't appreciate it what it does to fluidity, smoothness, complete lack of hesitation, and so forth not possible w/ the other commonly used methods.  This thread was about another "magic fix" and that's why I arrived here.  Next year we are headed for a substantial increase in performance, which essentially means there will be even less need for new hardware than there is today.

Most people do get it, because most people here, including myself, have played on a console. They literally do what you are talking about; provide the smoothest delivery of frames possible and that's why 30FPS is bearable on consoles (while they also throw in a bunch of other tricks, like motion blur, to make the overall experience seem smoother visually) but the fact as; it's still a low framerate and no matter how smooth it is, it'll always have its limitations and feel pretty bad. Exactly why even consoles and a lot of their games aim for 60FPS or at least provide the choice. 

16 minutes ago, Sethos said:

Most people do get it, because most people here, including myself, have played on a console. They literally do what you are talking about; provide the smoothest delivery of frames possible and that's why 30FPS is bearable on consoles (while they also throw in a bunch of other tricks, like motion blur, to make the overall experience seem smoother visually) but the fact as; it's still a low framerate and no matter how smooth it is, it'll always have its limitations and feel pretty bad. Exactly why even consoles and a lot of their games aim for 60FPS or at least provide the choice. 

Nah, I don't think they do.  Once again, my base rate is 33 or 34 depending on scenario.  I don't need nor use motion blur.  Now this is important:  I've RUN MSFS at 60-80FPS.  So I do know full well the difference between let's say 70 w/o perfect FTV, and 33 with perfect FTV.  Guess what?  In this flight sim, 33 w/ perfect FTV wins every time.  You can't believe it can you?   So yes, I am FULLY aware of the difference.  I'm not using a console and do you know for a fact the METHOD employed to get as you claim, the smoothest delivery of frames possible?  Was your support for this claim all anecdote, or has there been some study to substantiate the claim?

6 hours ago, Funky D said:

Let me guess... the "30fps is enough" crowd spends 99% of their time using autopilot in heavies or GA aircraft. For those of us who like to have fun in a nimble plane doing some aggressive maneuvering, a jump to 60fps definitely makes a big difference.

I fly a mix of both. Some of us have a ridiculous amount of hobbies already and a smooth 30fps is just fine.

If it's smooth then I hardly notice it. And yes my set up can work for 60fps but not in high traffic/object areas. I'd rather keep it locked and smooth.