this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024
22 points (86.7% liked)

Games

16785 readers
855 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works
22
New Research Suggests Some Gamers' Eyes See More FPS (kotaku.com)
submitted 7 months ago by nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works to c/games@sh.itjust.works
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

The test was apparently only between 30 and 60 Hz. It doesn't seem like it was well researched, and there is no clear reason why this would ever even need to be a study other than high refresh rate display manufacturers wanting a new special label they can upcharge for basic features that were previously and are currently included in the display base price.

[–] NightAuthor@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Knowing how well eyes can work could be useful for a ton of reasons, including focusing on the right aspects of display tech improvements.

As for fps, they’ve shown previously that many people can identify a person when flashed on screen for a single frame at over 200fps.

[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That last part is kinda my point. The fact that they only tested 30Hz and 60Hz seems really bad for testing when they could have just tested until people said they couldn't see the light flashing anymore? Why only test those two numbers?

[–] exocrinous@startrek.website 1 points 7 months ago

Because the hypothesis that some gamers' eyes see at different speeds only takes two datapoints to be proven true.

[–] Flamangoman@leminal.space 6 points 7 months ago

That picture for that headline is hilarious

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago

LOOK! LOOK WITH YOUR SPECIAL EYES!

[–] dgriffith@aussie.zone 1 points 7 months ago

Is this news? In the early 2000s I couldn't stand working with 60Hz monitors, there was noticeable flicker. Setting them to 72Hz was a definite improvement.

About 90 percent of my coworkers were like, "Why are you fiddling with the display settings? Flicker? Wot flicker?"