unlimited frame rate option has been removed from the client on 5.0

Not to mention several people have issues when they set the cap to the pretended ("120/144 FPS" instead of "Unlimited")

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LalaRu

Feels like too much people jumps to the reply button with their disapproval, without noticing the issue was unveiled in page 1 of the thread, and you still can play your 144Hz fine tomorrow as you do today.

---

A frame rate cap of 90fps means the game will only draw 90 frames per second when a monitor can be natively running at 100hz or above.

Thus, when using a non G-Sync or Freesync enabled monitor at above 90hz refresh rate (will be using 144hz as the example), you will get screen tearing as well as noticeable stuttering effects. This is due to the monitor still drawing 144 frames per second. 144 is not divisible by 90 (in terms of whole numbers), which means when the monitor done drawing a frame, it has to wait for the GPU to send the next frame to it. This results in the monitor redrawing the previous frame to fill time until it gets more information to display from the input. The monitor will begin displaying the new information as it receives it, which results in it partially redrawing the previous frame and drawing the next new frame as it comes from the GPU. The image is effectively cut, which is where the tearing other posters mention comes from, and the redrawing of the same frame at uneven intervals is where the perception of stuttering comes from.

If I were to cap my frame rate at 72FPS and play on my 144hz monitor, I would not notice a difference aside from a less smooth experience when seeing stuff move since the monitor would draw the same frame 2 times exactly before getting the next frame from the input. Screen tearing and the perception of stutter is effectively gone because the frame rate is exactly half of the screen refresh rate.

The issue of input delay that some mention is another issue entirely, but it is also an effect frame rate capping can have due to things such as double and triple buffering of frames on the PC side. The difference can be perceived more easily by those with fast response time monitors (like a 1ms response time TN panel gaming monitor) than those playing on lower response time monitors (like a professional artist's IPS panel with 99% color space accuracy) or TVs (because there are couch PC gamers).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnSpawnVFX

Not to mention several people have issues when they set the cap to the pretended ("120/144 FPS" instead of "Unlimited")

---

These several people already had hands-off of the updated 5.0 client and hit the issue? Or everything here are just suppositions? I know, a day is a long time to let it pass...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LalaRu

These several people already had hands-off of the updated 5.0 client and hit the issue? Or everything here are just suppositions? I know, a day is a long time to let it pass...

---

And yes, the thread is because of the statement in the preliminary patch notes. No one has the full client yet, and people who regularly play games at over 90FPS on their dedicated gaming rigs are expressing their disapproval of the hard cap on their frame rates. It is yet to be seen if it actually goes into effect, or if it was somehow a mistranslation or some such. But the wording used in the prelim patch notes is what sparked the discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LalaRu

These several people already had hands-off of the updated 5.0 client and hit the issue? Or everything here are just suppositions? I know, a day is a long time to let it pass...

---

He is describing issues which exist now, in the current version of the game. It is not unreasonable to extrapolate that if such issues occur with the current version of the in-game frame limiter, they will also appear similarly once the unlimited option is changed to 90 fps.

Keep in mind that it's written as "maximum (90 fps)" not "maximum 90 fps" or "90 fps", the () have meaning too but it's currently unclear.
It's strange that they set all the others as a clear limit but not for this one.
So for me I understand it as: "maximum your hardware can do, but we can't guarantee/force higher than 90 fps. good for you if you do."

But until they clarify or people actually test it once it's live. my guess is as good as any.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MerleSirlos

Keep in mind that it's written as "maximum (90 fps)" not "maximum 90 fps" or "90 fps", the () have meaning too but it's currently unclear.
It's strange that they set all the others as a clear limit but not for this one.
So for me I understand it as: "maximum your hardware can do, but we can't guarantee/force higher than 90 fps. good for you if you do."

But until they clarify or people actually test it once it's live. my guess is as good as any.

---

Quote:

---

The "Unlimited" setting under Frame Rate Limit in the Display Settings section of System Configuration has been replaced with a "Maximum (90 fps)" setting.

---

Unlimited has been replaced by Maximum (90 fps). To me this is stating a hard cap because of the options which were already in game. The frame limiting options in Stormblood and prior were stated like 1/1 (144 fps), 1/2 (72fps) or 1/1 (60 fps) and 1/2 (30 fps).

That's my interpretation anyway, could be wrong. I hope I am anyway.

Personally when I use the in-game limiter to 60 FPS I have a lot more noticeable problems than when I limit my desktop to 60Hz refresh rate and run the game on 'unlimited'. There is this weird stutter going on when I have my desktop at 120Hz and I use the in-game 1/2 fps option. I can tell this stutter the best by opening my character window or the gear preview window and just turning my character around with the mouse. The turning of my character is so incredibly choppy as if turning at 5fps in that window. Running around in for example Lower Limsa's decks when using 1/2 to get to 60 FPS also gives me this weird noticeable stutter where as when I'm using either 60Hz or even 120+Hz desktop refresh and the unlimited option completely gets rid of stutters.

I will see how the 90 FPS limit will turn out, but if it will do what I fear it will do, I'm afraid ShB will take a step back for me in graphic fidelity because that stutter is driving me crazy. For the record, I'm using a 144Hz G-Synch monitor and of course I don't have an expensive 144Hz gaming monitor just so I can't use it optimally with the game. It would be silly beyond words if I would have to cap my refresh to 60Hz (or 90 I suppose) just to play this game without stutter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MerleSirlos

Keep in mind that it's written as "maximum (90 fps)" not "maximum 90 fps" or "90 fps", the () have meaning too but it's currently unclear.
[...]

---

In german it's "90 fps (Obergrenze)" (engl.: "90 fps (Upper Limit)"). Strange wording, since Maximum (engl.) = Maximum (german)...

I don't know if it's been brought up, but physics and movement are tied to framerate in XIV. If you got your FPS high enough, it was possible to get out of bounds. This is very likely a bandaid fix to combat bots clipping through the world.

It was probably done just to address the physics glitches unlimited frame rates could introduce, because the bots are just straight up telling the servers where they want to be via packet injection hacks, not exploiting the physics engine.

The most noticeable effect of it is that making the jumps for some of the ARR sightseeing vistas is noticeably more difficult as you get slightly less air time when jumping depending on how high your FPS. It also messes with the jiggle physics, reducing them if not disabling them entirely depending on the object in question.

Here are some people saying you can't see the difference in 60+ Hz. I was the same before I invested in a monitor.
I wanted primarily G-Sync and these monitors usually are 144Hz and more. My cousin is always like 5 years ahead of me and was encouraging me to get one.
As I plugged it in, it took me 1 second to see the difference: The mouse cursor in Windows moves so smooth! That was the best demonstration of what 144Hz are.

Right now, my GTX1080 gets 80-105 fps on 2560x1440. So the 90fps seem to be right in the golden middle. I wonder if it interfers with G-Sync (as I still have no clue how it really works. I just see every game runs smoother even when the framerate swings 20 frames up and down)..

Was watching Yoshi read out the patch notes on twitch and I asked what they said about the hard cap. Supposedly they're afraid of breaking people's PC's? Can't confirm as I don't speak Japanese but that's what others told me. If that's true, that is a weak excuse. At this point I'm just hoping it's a true frame cap and not the same limiter as 1/1, 1/2 etc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KrystalRaina

Was watching Yoshi read out the patch notes on twitch and I asked what they said about the hard cap. Supposedly they're afraid of breaking people's PC's? Can't confirm as I don't speak Japanese but that's what others told me. If that's true, that is a weak excuse. At this point I'm just hoping it's a true frame cap and not the same limiter as 1/1, 1/2 etc

---

"Breaking people's PC" lol. So PCs from CSGO or World of Warcraft-players must explode then? :D
PCs aren't from 90s anymore. There are plenty of fail safes. Especially when it comes to temperature, or electrical voltage/current.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unaki

This is not a solution for bots in the slightest. It has absolutely nothing to do with bots. The bots you see teleporting around are not using uncapped FPS and are instead using a map hack to get around and jump to wherever they need to go.

---

Look out now we got us an expert on botting in XIV.

Yoshida "We went too far on this aspect and it made some parts of the game broken, and we got claims/complaints from some of the players so we have to lower the FPS cap."

I don't really think that, in 2019, you should be punishing your playerbase because you can't control your botting problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gula

Look out now we got us an expert on botting in XIV.

---

Well, I mean....it's obvious.

High FPS on engines that are not designed for it can, and will, result in physics glitches.....but after seeing some of these bots in action, there is no way they are exploiting physics glitches of that nature.

In most physics engines, phasing through solid geometry is not smooth even if you can pull it off via a glitch. These bots are flying around like as if nothing is solid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DumdogsWorld

Well, I mean....it's obvious.

High FPS on engines that are not designed for it can, and will, result in physics glitches.....but after seeing some of these bots in action, there is no way they are exploiting physics glitches of that nature.

In most physics engines, phasing through solid geometry is not smooth even if you can pull it off via a glitch. These bots are flying around like as if nothing is solid.

---

And those who jump and hang around under Limsa?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gula

And those who jump and hang around under Limsa?

---

What about them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WaterShield

Translation "I don't value this, so it's preposterous that people should be upset."

I will be incensed if it is a 90 FPS hard cap for everyone.

---

I get what he's saying... To use a more open example.

Rich person. " NOOO I lost 5k this morning while swimming in my money pool of 100,000,000,000,000. I'm super pissed.
Poor person. " Seriously? Why should I feel sorry for you? "

Yes being hard capped at 90FPS would be a bad more for SE to do.. but you can't expect people who've never been that high to care. If you've only been capped at 60 or worst yet.. 30 complaining to them being capped at a rate higher then theirs is pointless.

Well this has certainly been an interesting read.

When I saw this "cap" in the patch notes, I immediately thought, "This is going to cause some hate and discontent," and it did. As well it should.

I am no bot expert, so I don't know whose explanation of how FPS is related to botting is closest to on point. But I do despise bots and wish Square would find a way to rid us of their infernal presence. Maybe this is intended to do that, sort of? It isn't clear.

I have played this game at everything from 15FPS (on a horrid laptop) to 1440p @ 165Hz, and the smoothness of play at 120+ FPS over 60 FPS is quite noticeable to me. I have played with the limiter on and off, and I have not personally seen the stuttering effect some have described. Now I'm trying out 4K@ 75Hz. Even with a R7 1700[X] and a 2080Ti, at max graphics settings I get as high as the high-80s in the open world or as low as the mid-40s FPS in the Limsa plaza with everyone hanging out with minions and popping off actions. I knew when I went 4K that high FPS would not be achievable, but I still have that 165Hz monitor attached to the same PC so that I can play at high FPS when it pleases me to do so. That should not be taken away by an artificial in-game FPS cap.

I have noted that the in-game animations and physics seem to work best at 55-70 FPS, FWIW.

Whatever SE's reason for doing this, if it is a hard cap (which is certainly how it reads to me, and I made a career of teaching English), we should have been informed in detail about those reasons. This has essentially been dropped on [most of] us out of nowhere. Anyone who has invested hard-earned dollars in high-end equipment so he or she can play FFXIV at high FPS has a good reason to be sorely miffed.

Bad play, Square!

If they could limit fps w/o input lag, id be fine with that. (would help on bad PCs/laptops) but the lower the fps, the worse the inout delay.
i remember doing titan HM back in 2.0, and a cap of 60fps made me fail to dodge landlside nearly 75% of the time, due to the small bit of extra input delay. (back when you had to move the moment titan turned around. if u moved after seeing the cast bar, or the land marker, u were 100% guaranteed to die, even if you were out of the marker when it was only 10% into casting.
I was only ever caught in landslide during small lag spikes, which was roughly 1 in maybe a 100.
but capped FPS of 60 felt like i was almost always hit by landslide. (I was used to dodging it before the cap, so i knew what was normal)
i tried 30fps, and saw how bad the input lag was, and realized i was getting input delay from 60cap, just less noticable, once used to it, and going back to uncapped, i noticed it far more then.

Please be a mistake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DumdogsWorld

What about them?

---

You seemed keen on elaborating, so please- elaborate. How does locking the framerate not affect them too. Seems to me like they jump jump jump until they fall through.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Felis

Don't have they announced it with the Viera trailer (no male Viera in the video)?

---

Exactly, but they've never done a single gender race in the past. We have no reason to believe this won't be the case (they won't frame rate limit everyone to 90FPS) because they didn't specifically say that.

Do you understand the point now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Insertcoins

I get what he's saying... To use a more open example.

Rich person. " NOOO I lost 5k this morning while swimming in my money pool of 100,000,000,000,000. I'm super pissed.
Poor person. " Seriously? Why should I feel sorry for you? "

Yes being hard capped at 90FPS would be a bad more for SE to do.. but you can't expect people who've never been that high to care. If you've only been capped at 60 or worst yet.. 30 complaining to them being capped at a rate higher then theirs is pointless.

---

I don't expect them to care. I especially don't expect them to come spit in my face, because they don't like other people having nicer things than them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WaterShield

I don't expect them to care. I especially don't expect them to come spit in my face, because they don't like other people having nicer things than them?

---

If you read people—like me—having a hard time taking the way these complaints seriously as a "spit in your face," then you're just adding words to our mouths. It's not that we want you deprived of nice things, but it's the hyperbolic reaction of three times the console FPS being unacceptable, unplayable, ridiculous etc. It's an extreme over reaction that borders on comical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eli85

If you read people—like me—having a hard time taking the way these complaints seriously as a "spit in your face," then you're just adding words to our mouths. It's not that we want you deprived of nice things, but it's the hyperbolic reaction of three times the console FPS being unacceptable, unplayable, ridiculous etc. It's an extreme over reaction that borders on comical.

---

So again, you are trying to de legitimize a complaint because you never had the thing, so us being upset is comical to you.

If someone stole your car, and then returned a different car to you that was almost half as expensive... would you not be angry. I mean... you don't neeed the nice thing you worked hard for. But that's ok, so long as you have what you "NEED".

Why not take it a step further. Make everything be rationed out by the government while you're at it. Want to eat more because you are hungry? Too bad, this chart shows the minimum needed amount of food for your body type and that's what you get. Oh, and you get to work twice as hard for it as other people. Because why should anyone be rewarded for what they do?

TLDR: You are seriously saying that my hard earned purchase means nothing, because how dare I have it better than you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Insertcoins

I get what he's saying... To use a more open example.

Rich person. " NOOO I lost 5k this morning while swimming in my money pool of 100,000,000,000,000. I'm super pissed.
Poor person. " Seriously? Why should I feel sorry for you? "

Yes being hard capped at 90FPS would be a bad more for SE to do.. but you can't expect people who've never been that high to care. If you've only been capped at 60 or worst yet.. 30 complaining to them being capped at a rate higher then theirs is pointless.

---

But if they don't care and it doesn't affect them, then why are they even posting?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alundarus

But if they don't care and it doesn't affect them, then why are they even posting?

---

Schadenfreude

There is no other reason than that.

Aggression-Based Schadenfreude primarily involves group identity. The joy of observing the suffering of others comes from the observer feeling that the other's failure represents an improvement or validation of their own group's (in-group's) status in relation to external (out-groups) groups. This is, essentially, schadenfreude based on group versus group status.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrFlesh

just a heads up, the ingame frame limiter is 100% garbage, if they haven't fixed this the game is gonna be a stutter fest for people with a high end rig and of course if you have a 90hz + monitor is useless now

---

I turned off the frame-rate limiter and it went up to 427 fps, which is..... i was like.. .what?

I know everyone's setup is different, but sometimes if feels like having either a cap, or a variable-cap limiter would make more sense. Because this engine is weird, because if a engine allows the FPS to go over 400+ simply because a person turns off the limiter, just feels weird to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrKusakabe

Here are some people saying you can't see the difference in 60+ Hz. I was the same before I invested in a monitor.
I wanted primarily G-Sync and these monitors usually are 144Hz and more. My cousin is always like 5 years ahead of me and was encouraging me to get one.
As I plugged it in, it took me 1 second to see the difference: The mouse cursor in Windows moves so smooth! That was the best demonstration of what 144Hz are.

Right now, my GTX1080 gets 80-105 fps on 2560x1440. So the 90fps seem to be right in the golden middle. I wonder if it interfers with G-Sync (as I still have no clue how it really works. I just see every game runs smoother even when the framerate swings 20 frames up and down)..

---

G-sync operates at whatever your monitor's refresh rate is, so if it's 144hz, when you go above 144fps Gsync will stop. This is one reason frame limiters are actually nice (when well implemented). Typically you want to have vsync off everywhere including the application and then limit to about 141/142 (a few frames below cap).

FFXIV has always had a garbage in game frame limit setup though.

The silly part is the eye sees somewhere up to 1000 frames per second, there are huge diminishing returns at about 140-150 though where no one will be able to tell the difference between 150-300 basically. But it is not unnoticeable, people's eyes just adjust to the crappy framerate they play at and they think there's "no difference" because to them it looked smooth already.

Meanwhile, I can tell 30 - 60, 60 with gsync and 141 apart. Which lines up with reality, people need to stop believing there's no difference someday. lol

I can also tell when gsync hasn't been turned on, or if a monitor is set to 60 rather than 144 during normal desktop tasks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alundarus

But if they don't care and it doesn't affect them, then why are they even posting?

---

Cause the patch isn't out yet and people are trying to past the time before they get back into the game. That and you can't stop people from expressing their opinion... rather if it matters or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neoyoshi

I turned off the frame-rate limiter and it went up to 427 fps, which is..... i was like.. .what?

I know everyone's setup is different, but sometimes if feels like having either a cap, or a variable-cap limiter would make more sense. Because this engine is weird, because if a engine allows the FPS to go over 400+ simply because a person turns off the limiter, just feels weird to me.

---

This is how every PC game will typically perform without V-Sync enabled. You'll also see this particularly in indie games if you turn off V-Sync as they spike to 800+ FPS. This causes an unneeded use of resources typically on the PC if it's over your monitor's refresh rate. This is why most here assumed the change was tied to 1.5x monitor refresh. This would still allow higher framerates when uncapped (if desired for some reason), but not to a silly point such as 8x your monitors native refresh rate. Essentially many thought it was to help counteract user error and to a degree help laptop users/similar who need to keep thermals in control, but don't understand framerates/v-sync and had set the None/Unlimited option.

What's surprising is to learn they seemingly are intending to cap the game at 90. I'm still really not entirely sure why such is, but it's an incredibly poor way of counteracting botting if that's the goal (one that won't work). The longer the game goes on and the better hardware gets for the average user along with the wider adoption of high refresh displays the worse this change will appear to regular low/medium end users. That said even a 1060 can run the game over the framerate cap currently so it's still bizarre. 1060 is squarely considered middle tier and is affordable for a lot of new adopters on PC.

Hmm, if the cap brings the same issues as the the others besides unlimited, it will be a game breaker for me.

I have 3 monitors, middle one is for gaming with 1440p 165 Hz refresh rate (g-sync). On one of the side monitors i usually run netflix or youtube, makes grinding a lot less tedious. I usually set my gaming monitor refresh rate at 120 Hz, to avoid any potential issues with g-sync, due to games sometimes having 120 fps cap in them. And i play with borderless windowed, for obvious reasons.

Few weeks ago decided to give FFXIV a shot. Bought the base game, started playing, horrible micro stutter. FPS staying stable way above 60, no dips, but the micro stutter made the game unbearable. Googled for fixes, of them two solved the issue:
1) Run full screen resolution and turn on game optimization via Win 10 Game bar. Game ran butter smooth, stable 120 fps with g-sync, except for:
* Due to game optimization, every other program on windows had a horrible lag/stutter. So netflix and youtube unwatchable and trust me, i had more then enough resources available for them.
* Full screen on a multi monitor setup....
2) Unlimited - worked almost flawlessly in borderless windowed. No dips, always stays at 120 fps, butter smooth. That one small issues was:
* When i run netflix (fine with youtube) on a side monitor, the ingame fps jumps 140-150 and i get a very slight micro stutter (just to make clear, never happened with other games, so FFXIV specific). But that micro stutter is so miniscule that it's not a problem.

I personally don't mind playing at 90 fps, as long as it's a smooth gameplay. Anything 60+ with a smooth gameplay is fine for me. Horrible micro stutters aren't. So, if they force their V-Sync and it works the same way as till now, i'm dropping this game, it's not worth it.

And the stutter issue with their V-Sync on G-Sync monitors is a common issue. I don't see the reason why they would be doing it.
Brakes physics? I didn't even know they didn't work :D, though that explains why i didn't see any jiglin...
Bots? Would like to point out that they have said nothing about changing that 1/1 option. Assuming it stays as it is, it will still be as much fps as your monitor supports and your rig can dish out, so...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eli85

If you read people—like me—having a hard time taking the way these complaints seriously as a "spit in your face," then you're just adding words to our mouths. It's not that we want you deprived of nice things, but it's the hyperbolic reaction of three times the console FPS being unacceptable, unplayable, ridiculous etc. It's an extreme over reaction that borders on comical.

---

It's a technical problem that is hampering the enjoyment of the game by a subset of legitimate players. It sure as hell is going to affect mine after 6 years of being uncapped. I'll agree that people saying it's "unplayable" are being hyperbolic, but "unacceptable" and "ridiculous" are 100% valid given that it has been uncapped up until now.

Just because it isn't a problem for you doesn't mean it isn't a problem or that it should be brushed aside.

I see all you guys quoting hundreds of FPS and I'm like woah... I've played just fine on 30-40 FPS for 6 years! :D

I have a GTX1080 SC, and I run at 1080p at 60hz. I always play everything with vsync on... I can't stand the sight of tearing. Only time I can ever notice drops into the 50's or lower FPS-wise is when LL is crowded at the aetherye plaza.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WaterShield

So again, you are trying to de legitimize a complaint because you never had the thing, so us being upset is comical to you.

If someone stole your car, and then returned a different car to you that was almost half as expensive... would you not be angry. I mean... you don't neeed the nice thing you worked hard for. But that's ok, so long as you have what you "NEED".

Why not take it a step further. Make everything be rationed out by the government while you're at it. Want to eat more because you are hungry? Too bad, this chart shows the minimum needed amount of food for your body type and that's what you get. Oh, and you get to work twice as hard for it as other people. Because why should anyone be rewarded for what they do?

TLDR: You are seriously saying that my hard earned purchase means nothing, because how dare I have it better than you.

---

The mental gymnastics you're doing to make these audacious claims are just as bad as the ridiculous exaggerations that are made in this thread. At this point I think you're deliberately not seeing the point to be argumentative. So once again: is the decrease frames bad? Yes. No dispute. Is it an "unacceptable solution or experience"? No. Not even close. The problem is the hyperbole, and it's amazing so many people can't see that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lumis_Arvalo

It's a technical problem that is hampering the enjoyment of the game by a subset of legitimate players. It sure as hell is going to affect mine after 6 years of being uncapped. I'll agree that people saying it's "unplayable" are being hyperbolic, but "unacceptable" and "ridiculous" are 100% valid given that it has been uncapped up until now.

Just because it isn't a problem for you doesn't mean it isn't a problem or that it should be brushed aside.

---

I already said that I hope the fix gets reversed so that players can go back to their desired FPS. What I find confuddling is the exaggerated overreaction, which I do credit that you acknowledged. So I hope it gets fixed, but let's not scream the sky is falling because PC players have to deal with a horrendous 90 FPS.

I've upgraded my whole setup for Shadowbringers and it will be a real shame if the game gonna put a hardlock on 90FPS (i use a 165hz monitor)

If it's still use that crappy fps limiter,there's still gonna be way to bypass that easily without any patch ...but if a hardlock thing is actually gonna be here,rip lol