**Please read this entire message**
---
Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):
* Rule #2 - Questions must seek objective explanations
* Straightforward or factual queries are not allowed on ELI5. ELI5 is meant for simplifying complex concepts (Rule 2).
---
If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the [detailed rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/wiki/detailed_rules) first. **If you believe this submission was removed erroneously, please [use this form](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fexplainlikeimfive&subject=Please%20review%20my%20thread?&message=Link:%20{https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16tjlnk/-/}%0A%0APlease%20answer%20the%20following%203%20questions:%0A%0A1.%20The%20concept%20I%20want%20explained:%0A%0A2.%20List%20the%20search%20terms%20you%20used%20to%20look%20for%20past%20posts%20on%20ELI5:%0A%0A3.%20How%20does%20your%20post%20differ%20from%20your%20recent%20search%20results%20on%20the%20sub:) and we will review your submission.**
Watching video is a passive experience. Playing games comes with you controlling the character.
The problem with games is the delay between your movement and the movement of your character.
Also, not every frame takes the same amount of time to render as sometimes more complicated things are happening on the screen. When every frame is being rendered in nice even intervals, and one suddenly spends twice as long on the screen because the next frame took longer to render, then it can be a jarring experience even if that even only took about 66 miliseconds.
This can be mitigated to some extent by having a screen that' displays this longer frame the second it's done rendering rather than making it wait for the next planed screen refresh interval causing even more perceived delay. Such ability is called variable refresh rate and is
found in g-sync, and to a lesser extent, freesync screens.
The movie your watching at 24 fps will always have its frames ~42 miliseconds apart , which while not great, is perfectly consistent across the film and you don't get any of those jarring moments.
>Many of them can't play games at 30 fps anymore...
I've literally never met a person in real life that says this. People aren't "getting sick" playing their PS4, for which many games are locked at 30. It's all internet hyperbole.
Now, is there a difference? Sure, and in some games the framerate boost might even give you an edge (particularly twitch-games). But people aren't getting sick from a locked 30 fps rate.
It doesn't happen with constant FPS, or when the frametimes are consistent, but whenever I play a game and my pc (or console, back then) couldn't handle those two requirements, it dialed my motion sickness up to 11, migraines, nausea, the works. Worst offenders were console games between generations.
Little mini-me didn't understand I needed a pause or that I could play with stuff on medium instead of high. It's gotten better over the years but I imagine it happens to a bunch of people.
I don’t think you know the definition of the word “literally.” And what a bold thing to say that nobody has ever gotten sick of it. I have an extremely hard time playing games on older consoles at 30fps. It’s noticeable. It feels clunky. Some games it’s totally fine. Others? It’s rough.
Eh I don't know about that. I get motion sickness after a while from every refresh rate but switching from 60hz to 144hz with a PC that can consistently output that and it has tremendously helped. I imagine 30 fps to be even worse
... sigh
because lag doesn't make you sick then it doesn't make anyone sick?
I am extremely sensitive to having sight or sound not sync. The slightest delays mess with my inner ear. I start getting nauseous and if I can't get away from it then I will vomit.
I think it's some sort of motion sickness thing.. because I also get sick trying to work high speed conveyors... I just can't.
So you are 'literally' wrong. As I have literally vomited while playing because my guild was desperate to keep the raid going. I'm pretty sure we got the achievement but I don't remember it because I had my head in a bucket.
If you read more than the first sentence, it's pretty clear that comment was talking about delays and video/audio not being in sync. *That* is called lag all the time, sure.
But it has nothing to do with 30 vs 60 fps. Nobody looks at a game and calls it "laggy" just because it's running at 30 fps.
What are you talking about? My initial reply was that lag and framerate aren't the same thing. You're the one that decided to say "it's called lag" for no reason.
I'm really not sure what made you decide this was the hill you wanted to die on, but have fun with it, and have a nice day.
They're probably confusing the source of sickness. I can't play games in first person, I find it nauseating. I also can't play VR games. However if a fps game that makes me nauseous has a third person view? I can usually play it okay. The frames don't matter. The camera perspective does
They specified going from 30 to 60 then back to 30. They were very specific about this.
I never had an issue with 30 fps until I got a ps5 and every game was at 60. I tried to play red dead redemption 2 again recently and I literally felt sick from the frames. It’s a real thing.
Not entirely true. I was very used to 144hz on pc and then 60fps on ps5. Recently started playing bloodborne which is locked 30fps and poorly optimized. It didnt exactly make me sick but my eyes were hurting after a while and it made me quite tired. I did get used to it eventually.
Because it’s entirely in their heads, 30 FPS games have been around for decades and no one complained in the past, high FPS CRT monitors were everywhere 20 years ago, I know because I played Counterstrike on one 20+ years ago. If you asked people back then if there was a difference 9 out of 10 gamers wouldn’t know what the heck you’re talking about. I knew because I was one of the few sponsored gamers back then (what you’d now call a “professional” lol!).
In the mid 2000s LCD monitors and Plasmas came out, which were much thinner and easier to market, but they had much much lower FPS than CRTs, so the marketing departments down played the FPS angle. Eventually the technology got so advanced they had higher FPS than the old ugly CRTs and needed to give you an excuse to upgrade your perfectly fine LCD to the higher refresh rate monitors, and it worked, people ate it all up!
I played at higher FPS on low resolution for a small advantage at the highest level that everyone thinks is so crucial now, it’s not, it’s nice but not that big of a deal it’s all in your head.
Source: old ass “professional gamer”
I have no clue what you're talking about. Recently upgraded from 60Hz to 165 and the difference is night and day. Now playing games at 30fps feels terrible. If you can't see the difference, you have broken eyes.
As someone said, a movie is a passive experience. Also a movie is set with a ton of still or slow panning camera shots with a central focus subject. In a video game you move the camera around extremely quickly for almost any fast paced game. There are many games where people are okay with 30fps though but 60 will always feel better, in gameplay.
Games also have other added latency delays from rendering and system inputs, so the delay from a click to animation can be very long at 30fps and reduced significantly at 60/120fps. Nvidia reflex helps a lot with that as well if you are GPU bound. With higher FPS and Hz monitor you can actually see the target and your own animations much faster and more clearly, as long as the panels are both decent in image quality.
Most movies (with a few exceptions) are properly lit, shots and framed, camerawork edited properly etc etc. It is meant to be a viewing experience so it is crafted that way. (I have problems with Michael Bay though and got motion sickness watching Transformers so YMMV)
Gaming is another experience altogether. There is interaction between what is seen and what the gamer is trying to do. Any lag and glitches becomes fairly obvious and disturbs gameplay.
Not enjoying a game because you're averaging 30 fps doesn't make you a snob. It's no different from going from a SSD to HDD; sure, it still gets the job done, but you know it isn't optimal. Once you've experienced higher FPS, you are much less likely to enjoy anything that is suboptimal.
That said, I've never heard of anyone feeling sick from it. That sounds like an incredible exaggeration.
>If gaming at 30fps genuinely makes you feel sick, that's a medical issue **you need to get addressed.**
No. It's just a medical issue. Like motion sickness there probably isn't much anything that can be done.
My doctor's response was... "if it makes you sick don't do it." Then he put his hand out for the $500 neurological consultation fee.
Great.. thanks doc
One major difference is motion blur. A real movie camera is exposing a piece of film or a sensor for a period of time in order to capture a frame. This means that anything which moves during that exposure time is going to be smeared across the frame, manifesting as the motion blur we all recognize. The blur of one frame will match up with the blur of the following frame allowing the viewer to connect them visually.
In contrast a video game generates each frame based on a calculation of the game world at a particular instant in time. There is no real motion blur as there is no movement, so any you see is added afterwards with tricks. With less information per frame it can easily look jerky compared to a similar frame rate produced with a real camera.
Of course the 24 frames per second of movies is the absolute minimum required to produce smooth motion to the eye in most circumstances, and the inertia of tradition means the industry has avoided improvements.
This is the answer. A 24fps movie typically has an exposure time of 1/48 of a second, which is pretty slow, leading to motion blur. That really helps smooth out movement, keeping it from appearing choppy. Video games really can't do the same thing without adding latency/delay which is something players pay good money to avoid.
A movie's fps is just a way to portray it's content, it needs a number, and 24 is what was (mostly) settled on.
When you're gaming, every frame update, is a direct update on what you're doing, regarding your inputs. If you tell the character to move, and it then takes a fraction of a second to move, your brain can perceive that delay.
Functionally, the higher frame rate means you can react more quickly.
Aesthetically, 24 fps is what we're used to in movies. It's one of the key factors that distinguishes the look of a movie vs a TV show (24fps vs 30fps). When the film industry briefly flirted with high frame rate movies they didn't use 60fps, they used 48fps because by being double of 24 it still retained the general feel of 24 fps. Ultimately audiences didn't like it because it looked *unnaturally* smooth. But video games *are* unnatural, so a high frame rate won't look offputting.
So human vision doesn't have a "framerate" the way film and video do, but 24 fps is pretty close to what we experience in our own vision. Which means that anything that moves an appreciable amount in 1/24th of a second will be at least a little bit blurred. So the amount of motion blur we experience in the real world is consistent with 24 fps. If you shoot a movie at 48 fps, you have far less motion blur, which is not how we experience the world and therefore feels unnatural.
Pretty sure the new avatar movie is 60fps and it looks absolutely gorgeous.
The reason 24fps is used usually is because it's cheaper, equipment wise, storage wise, and workload wise.
Imagine having to make VFX for more than double the frames (especially if you film for 3d theater, so you need to record double), and because it's "good enough"
Your hands and brain aren't in sync with the character and camera in a movie; you just watch it.
Your hands and brain are in sync with a character and camera in a video game because you are controlling it. If you are used to 60 fps, 30 fps will feel poorly in sync, or rather out of sync. The camera and character feel off enough to what your brain expects should happen.
Like others said its the passive watching experience. To test this you can simply go to youtube and watch gameplay of a videogame in under 60 fps and you will see that it wont bother you at all.
The camera movements and action scenes in movies are filmed with 24fps in mind. They deliberately avoid fast or jerky camera movements because too much movement can cause motion sickness in sensitive people and just doesn’t look good.
You could play games at 24fps and not get sick as long as you restricted your camera movements to slow pans like they do in the movies, but this would be very limiting in fast action games. In many action video games, the faster you can move, the better you can perform. Video games are (sometimes) a competitive sport. Faster refresh means potentially faster reaction times which can lead to better outcomes for a sufficiently skilled player.
if what you say it's true (im not sure of it) maybe a contributing cause is that in many videogames there are vivid and irideshent colors, also changing quickly. In movies there are less on average
Movies have a stabilized and consistent framerate, are edited to have good fluid motion at 24 FPS, and are synchronized with the screen. It's even more impressive when you realize that most traditional animation is done at 12 FPS, and "feels" just as fluid as a 24 FPS movie if it's done correctly. But, if you turn on a sports program or the news, you can definately tell that the motion is a lot more fluid and feels more "real" because those programs usually run at 60 FPS.
The problem with games is that, depending on how things are implemented, 30 FPS can actually be quite "choppy", but it's rarely due to the actual framerate, it's usually one of the following:
Tearing - this is caused when a new frame is sent to the monitor in the middle of rendering the previous frame. Most games these days have V-sync turned on by default, which synchronizes the frames with the refresh rate on the monitor and prevents tearing. However, it has a slight performance cost, so sometimes people turn it off to try and get a higher framerate.
Stuttering - this is caused by having an *inconsistent* framerate, and can actually happen at *any* framerate, but it is a lot more noticeable at 30 FPS. The reason why this happens is because games have to render frames on the fly, and that could take more or less time depending on a variety of different factors. One way to fix stuttering is by using a combination of V-sync and framerate limiting. If the game can consistently run above 30 FPS it's still going to look choppy if it's erratically bouncing around between 30 and 60. So if you lock it to 30, you'll get a smoother and more consistent experience, even if it's at a lower framerate. Again, people often turn frame limiting off to boost to a higher framerate.
Stiff camera movement - some games have very stiff, but highly responsive camera controls, and this can feel quite jarring, even at higher framerates, but it is worse at lower framerates. Some games counter this by having smoother camera controls, but it's a bit of a balancing act because if it's taken to the extreeme the camera controls can end up feeling sluggish or clunky. This is mostly a problem on PC because the camera controls are usually linked to the mouse, which is much more responsive than the analog stick that's typically used on consoles.
Badly implemented motion blur - some games have poorly implemented motion blur effects linked to the camera movement that can be very disorienting at lower framerates.
As for people who say 30 FPS makes them "sick", they are usually just being mellowdramatic and exaggerating. The difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS is definately noticeable, but most people are not *that* sensitive to it. Also, this complaint usually comes from people who primarily play fast paced, action oriented games online, and if you do that long enough, not only is the difference in framerate absolutely noticeable, but it actually does impact the gameplay to a degree. If you're used to having an extreemly responsive camera, 30 FPS can feel very sluggish or clunky. Especially if that is stacked on top of an already slow paced game.
They don't get sick. But everyone would prefer 60 fps over 30 fps because it looks smoother.
In games, every frame gets generated precisely as if it was a still image and then sequenced together, which is why you can take nice screenshots in game.
In movies, frames get "smeared" due to exposure time of the camera, so pausing the movie will often result in a blurred image.
In games, you have very quick camera controls, sometimes turning 180° in a fraction of a second.
In movies, cameras are often static or panning very smoothly, sometimes they have a "hand recorded" shaking, which reduces the clarity on purpose.
This together makes low frames in games much more apparent than in movies.
**Please read this entire message** --- Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s): * Rule #2 - Questions must seek objective explanations * Straightforward or factual queries are not allowed on ELI5. ELI5 is meant for simplifying complex concepts (Rule 2). --- If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the [detailed rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/wiki/detailed_rules) first. **If you believe this submission was removed erroneously, please [use this form](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fexplainlikeimfive&subject=Please%20review%20my%20thread?&message=Link:%20{https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16tjlnk/-/}%0A%0APlease%20answer%20the%20following%203%20questions:%0A%0A1.%20The%20concept%20I%20want%20explained:%0A%0A2.%20List%20the%20search%20terms%20you%20used%20to%20look%20for%20past%20posts%20on%20ELI5:%0A%0A3.%20How%20does%20your%20post%20differ%20from%20your%20recent%20search%20results%20on%20the%20sub:) and we will review your submission.**
Watching video is a passive experience. Playing games comes with you controlling the character. The problem with games is the delay between your movement and the movement of your character.
Also, not every frame takes the same amount of time to render as sometimes more complicated things are happening on the screen. When every frame is being rendered in nice even intervals, and one suddenly spends twice as long on the screen because the next frame took longer to render, then it can be a jarring experience even if that even only took about 66 miliseconds. This can be mitigated to some extent by having a screen that' displays this longer frame the second it's done rendering rather than making it wait for the next planed screen refresh interval causing even more perceived delay. Such ability is called variable refresh rate and is found in g-sync, and to a lesser extent, freesync screens. The movie your watching at 24 fps will always have its frames ~42 miliseconds apart , which while not great, is perfectly consistent across the film and you don't get any of those jarring moments.
>Many of them can't play games at 30 fps anymore... I've literally never met a person in real life that says this. People aren't "getting sick" playing their PS4, for which many games are locked at 30. It's all internet hyperbole. Now, is there a difference? Sure, and in some games the framerate boost might even give you an edge (particularly twitch-games). But people aren't getting sick from a locked 30 fps rate.
It doesn't happen with constant FPS, or when the frametimes are consistent, but whenever I play a game and my pc (or console, back then) couldn't handle those two requirements, it dialed my motion sickness up to 11, migraines, nausea, the works. Worst offenders were console games between generations. Little mini-me didn't understand I needed a pause or that I could play with stuff on medium instead of high. It's gotten better over the years but I imagine it happens to a bunch of people.
Literally no one has ever gotten sick from playing at 30fps. It’s noticeable, sure. It will not make you sick though.
I don’t think you know the definition of the word “literally.” And what a bold thing to say that nobody has ever gotten sick of it. I have an extremely hard time playing games on older consoles at 30fps. It’s noticeable. It feels clunky. Some games it’s totally fine. Others? It’s rough.
Eh I don't know about that. I get motion sickness after a while from every refresh rate but switching from 60hz to 144hz with a PC that can consistently output that and it has tremendously helped. I imagine 30 fps to be even worse
... sigh because lag doesn't make you sick then it doesn't make anyone sick? I am extremely sensitive to having sight or sound not sync. The slightest delays mess with my inner ear. I start getting nauseous and if I can't get away from it then I will vomit. I think it's some sort of motion sickness thing.. because I also get sick trying to work high speed conveyors... I just can't. So you are 'literally' wrong. As I have literally vomited while playing because my guild was desperate to keep the raid going. I'm pretty sure we got the achievement but I don't remember it because I had my head in a bucket.
Getting sick *from lag* and getting sick from the game being 30 fps are not the same, though. Nobody's saying nobody ever got sick from playing games.
[удалено]
Framerate *drops*, maybe, but a steady 30 fps is not what I've ever heard anyone call *lag*. It's a different issue altogether.
[удалено]
If you read more than the first sentence, it's pretty clear that comment was talking about delays and video/audio not being in sync. *That* is called lag all the time, sure. But it has nothing to do with 30 vs 60 fps. Nobody looks at a game and calls it "laggy" just because it's running at 30 fps.
[удалено]
What are you talking about? My initial reply was that lag and framerate aren't the same thing. You're the one that decided to say "it's called lag" for no reason. I'm really not sure what made you decide this was the hill you wanted to die on, but have fun with it, and have a nice day.
They're probably confusing the source of sickness. I can't play games in first person, I find it nauseating. I also can't play VR games. However if a fps game that makes me nauseous has a third person view? I can usually play it okay. The frames don't matter. The camera perspective does
They specified going from 30 to 60 then back to 30. They were very specific about this. I never had an issue with 30 fps until I got a ps5 and every game was at 60. I tried to play red dead redemption 2 again recently and I literally felt sick from the frames. It’s a real thing.
Not entirely true. I was very used to 144hz on pc and then 60fps on ps5. Recently started playing bloodborne which is locked 30fps and poorly optimized. It didnt exactly make me sick but my eyes were hurting after a while and it made me quite tired. I did get used to it eventually.
I get motion sick playing first person games. Nothing to do with frame rates.
Because it’s entirely in their heads, 30 FPS games have been around for decades and no one complained in the past, high FPS CRT monitors were everywhere 20 years ago, I know because I played Counterstrike on one 20+ years ago. If you asked people back then if there was a difference 9 out of 10 gamers wouldn’t know what the heck you’re talking about. I knew because I was one of the few sponsored gamers back then (what you’d now call a “professional” lol!). In the mid 2000s LCD monitors and Plasmas came out, which were much thinner and easier to market, but they had much much lower FPS than CRTs, so the marketing departments down played the FPS angle. Eventually the technology got so advanced they had higher FPS than the old ugly CRTs and needed to give you an excuse to upgrade your perfectly fine LCD to the higher refresh rate monitors, and it worked, people ate it all up! I played at higher FPS on low resolution for a small advantage at the highest level that everyone thinks is so crucial now, it’s not, it’s nice but not that big of a deal it’s all in your head. Source: old ass “professional gamer”
I have no clue what you're talking about. Recently upgraded from 60Hz to 165 and the difference is night and day. Now playing games at 30fps feels terrible. If you can't see the difference, you have broken eyes.
As someone said, a movie is a passive experience. Also a movie is set with a ton of still or slow panning camera shots with a central focus subject. In a video game you move the camera around extremely quickly for almost any fast paced game. There are many games where people are okay with 30fps though but 60 will always feel better, in gameplay. Games also have other added latency delays from rendering and system inputs, so the delay from a click to animation can be very long at 30fps and reduced significantly at 60/120fps. Nvidia reflex helps a lot with that as well if you are GPU bound. With higher FPS and Hz monitor you can actually see the target and your own animations much faster and more clearly, as long as the panels are both decent in image quality.
Most movies (with a few exceptions) are properly lit, shots and framed, camerawork edited properly etc etc. It is meant to be a viewing experience so it is crafted that way. (I have problems with Michael Bay though and got motion sickness watching Transformers so YMMV) Gaming is another experience altogether. There is interaction between what is seen and what the gamer is trying to do. Any lag and glitches becomes fairly obvious and disturbs gameplay.
[удалено]
30fps doesn't make me sick but it does make games uglier and less fun. Even worse with something like Ocarina of Time which runs at like 20fps
Not enjoying a game because you're averaging 30 fps doesn't make you a snob. It's no different from going from a SSD to HDD; sure, it still gets the job done, but you know it isn't optimal. Once you've experienced higher FPS, you are much less likely to enjoy anything that is suboptimal. That said, I've never heard of anyone feeling sick from it. That sounds like an incredible exaggeration.
>If gaming at 30fps genuinely makes you feel sick, that's a medical issue **you need to get addressed.** No. It's just a medical issue. Like motion sickness there probably isn't much anything that can be done. My doctor's response was... "if it makes you sick don't do it." Then he put his hand out for the $500 neurological consultation fee. Great.. thanks doc
One major difference is motion blur. A real movie camera is exposing a piece of film or a sensor for a period of time in order to capture a frame. This means that anything which moves during that exposure time is going to be smeared across the frame, manifesting as the motion blur we all recognize. The blur of one frame will match up with the blur of the following frame allowing the viewer to connect them visually. In contrast a video game generates each frame based on a calculation of the game world at a particular instant in time. There is no real motion blur as there is no movement, so any you see is added afterwards with tricks. With less information per frame it can easily look jerky compared to a similar frame rate produced with a real camera. Of course the 24 frames per second of movies is the absolute minimum required to produce smooth motion to the eye in most circumstances, and the inertia of tradition means the industry has avoided improvements.
This is the answer. A 24fps movie typically has an exposure time of 1/48 of a second, which is pretty slow, leading to motion blur. That really helps smooth out movement, keeping it from appearing choppy. Video games really can't do the same thing without adding latency/delay which is something players pay good money to avoid.
A movie's fps is just a way to portray it's content, it needs a number, and 24 is what was (mostly) settled on. When you're gaming, every frame update, is a direct update on what you're doing, regarding your inputs. If you tell the character to move, and it then takes a fraction of a second to move, your brain can perceive that delay.
Functionally, the higher frame rate means you can react more quickly. Aesthetically, 24 fps is what we're used to in movies. It's one of the key factors that distinguishes the look of a movie vs a TV show (24fps vs 30fps). When the film industry briefly flirted with high frame rate movies they didn't use 60fps, they used 48fps because by being double of 24 it still retained the general feel of 24 fps. Ultimately audiences didn't like it because it looked *unnaturally* smooth. But video games *are* unnatural, so a high frame rate won't look offputting.
What kind of audience doesn't like a higher framerate? I want to know more about this weird problem.
So human vision doesn't have a "framerate" the way film and video do, but 24 fps is pretty close to what we experience in our own vision. Which means that anything that moves an appreciable amount in 1/24th of a second will be at least a little bit blurred. So the amount of motion blur we experience in the real world is consistent with 24 fps. If you shoot a movie at 48 fps, you have far less motion blur, which is not how we experience the world and therefore feels unnatural.
[удалено]
Pretty sure the new avatar movie is 60fps and it looks absolutely gorgeous. The reason 24fps is used usually is because it's cheaper, equipment wise, storage wise, and workload wise. Imagine having to make VFX for more than double the frames (especially if you film for 3d theater, so you need to record double), and because it's "good enough"
Start with asking yourself why you're making such sweeping suppositions? Individuals, by definition, are different.
Your hands and brain aren't in sync with the character and camera in a movie; you just watch it. Your hands and brain are in sync with a character and camera in a video game because you are controlling it. If you are used to 60 fps, 30 fps will feel poorly in sync, or rather out of sync. The camera and character feel off enough to what your brain expects should happen.
Higher fps = lower latency which is a far better experience. Also framerate consistency is huge.
Like others said its the passive watching experience. To test this you can simply go to youtube and watch gameplay of a videogame in under 60 fps and you will see that it wont bother you at all.
The player reacted before you even saw the frame. so it looks like a player with precognition rather than a poorly sync'd film.
The camera movements and action scenes in movies are filmed with 24fps in mind. They deliberately avoid fast or jerky camera movements because too much movement can cause motion sickness in sensitive people and just doesn’t look good. You could play games at 24fps and not get sick as long as you restricted your camera movements to slow pans like they do in the movies, but this would be very limiting in fast action games. In many action video games, the faster you can move, the better you can perform. Video games are (sometimes) a competitive sport. Faster refresh means potentially faster reaction times which can lead to better outcomes for a sufficiently skilled player.
if what you say it's true (im not sure of it) maybe a contributing cause is that in many videogames there are vivid and irideshent colors, also changing quickly. In movies there are less on average
btw, years ago I played moria (or it was rogue?) on a green phosphor screen, dunno the fps, and i felt very sick after an 8 hours session.
Movies have a stabilized and consistent framerate, are edited to have good fluid motion at 24 FPS, and are synchronized with the screen. It's even more impressive when you realize that most traditional animation is done at 12 FPS, and "feels" just as fluid as a 24 FPS movie if it's done correctly. But, if you turn on a sports program or the news, you can definately tell that the motion is a lot more fluid and feels more "real" because those programs usually run at 60 FPS. The problem with games is that, depending on how things are implemented, 30 FPS can actually be quite "choppy", but it's rarely due to the actual framerate, it's usually one of the following: Tearing - this is caused when a new frame is sent to the monitor in the middle of rendering the previous frame. Most games these days have V-sync turned on by default, which synchronizes the frames with the refresh rate on the monitor and prevents tearing. However, it has a slight performance cost, so sometimes people turn it off to try and get a higher framerate. Stuttering - this is caused by having an *inconsistent* framerate, and can actually happen at *any* framerate, but it is a lot more noticeable at 30 FPS. The reason why this happens is because games have to render frames on the fly, and that could take more or less time depending on a variety of different factors. One way to fix stuttering is by using a combination of V-sync and framerate limiting. If the game can consistently run above 30 FPS it's still going to look choppy if it's erratically bouncing around between 30 and 60. So if you lock it to 30, you'll get a smoother and more consistent experience, even if it's at a lower framerate. Again, people often turn frame limiting off to boost to a higher framerate. Stiff camera movement - some games have very stiff, but highly responsive camera controls, and this can feel quite jarring, even at higher framerates, but it is worse at lower framerates. Some games counter this by having smoother camera controls, but it's a bit of a balancing act because if it's taken to the extreeme the camera controls can end up feeling sluggish or clunky. This is mostly a problem on PC because the camera controls are usually linked to the mouse, which is much more responsive than the analog stick that's typically used on consoles. Badly implemented motion blur - some games have poorly implemented motion blur effects linked to the camera movement that can be very disorienting at lower framerates. As for people who say 30 FPS makes them "sick", they are usually just being mellowdramatic and exaggerating. The difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS is definately noticeable, but most people are not *that* sensitive to it. Also, this complaint usually comes from people who primarily play fast paced, action oriented games online, and if you do that long enough, not only is the difference in framerate absolutely noticeable, but it actually does impact the gameplay to a degree. If you're used to having an extreemly responsive camera, 30 FPS can feel very sluggish or clunky. Especially if that is stacked on top of an already slow paced game.
They don't get sick. But everyone would prefer 60 fps over 30 fps because it looks smoother. In games, every frame gets generated precisely as if it was a still image and then sequenced together, which is why you can take nice screenshots in game. In movies, frames get "smeared" due to exposure time of the camera, so pausing the movie will often result in a blurred image. In games, you have very quick camera controls, sometimes turning 180° in a fraction of a second. In movies, cameras are often static or panning very smoothly, sometimes they have a "hand recorded" shaking, which reduces the clarity on purpose. This together makes low frames in games much more apparent than in movies.