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

Me: Buys 165hz monitor to play games with really high frame rates:
SE: "Not today"

Based on some of the screenshots that were posted a few pages back, it seems that the options change automatically based on whatever the current refresh rate is when you launch the game.

Just remember to set your refresh rate correctly. It doesn't always set it to the correct one automatically, for some reason.



There's no reason to allow for unlimited frame rate. What's important is that the max framerate changes with the monitor's hz.

Originally Posted by Eli85

Apples to oranges. The more apt comparison would be downgrading from PS4 Pro to PS4. Which, while inconvenient, isn't game breaking in the slightest.

As to the other replies, well, it's jarring to "downgrade" to 90 FPS (I can't help but laugh as I write that), but really, it's, well, hard to put into words. You're all really not all that hard done by. I do hope this gets reverted for everyone affected, but let's stop treating this like the world is ending.

its the same, ps4 pro to ps4 or to ps1 or etc...the point is the same....you are accepting lowering the quality of a product as something natural....would you be happy if SE came and said "hey guys we are gonna remove X job from the game because its broken (or any reason)", then you ask why is it that every day gaming companies are becoming lazier when they develop ports.... then they charge you 100 bucks for a broken mess of a game and you go all happy and say "oh this is fine!!!!"
you are only mitigating the impact because "its just fps", but that doesnt even matter, the fact of removing something that is expected or was announced is bad, it doesnt matter if its fps, a job or the entire msq. for you "its just fps" for some other guy it could be really important...(just as if they removed rdm and that would be your main, YOU would care, any non rdm player, wont).

Originally Posted by asheryon

its the same, ps4 pro to ps4 or to ps1 or etc...the point is the same....you are accepting lowering the quality of a product as something natural....would you be happy if SE came and said "hey guys we are gonna remove X job from the game because its broken (or any reason)", then you ask why is it that every day gaming companies are becoming lazier when they develop ports.... then they charge you 100 bucks for a broken mess of a game and you go all happy and say "oh this is fine!!!!"
you are only mitigating the impact because "its just fps", but that doesnt even matter, the fact of removing something that is expected or was announced is bad, it doesnt matter if its fps, a job or the entire msq. for you "its just fps" for some other guy it could be really important...(just as if they removed rdm and that would be your main, YOU would care, any non rdm player, wont).

A complete and total misrepresentation of what I said. Of course, no one would dispute that lowering quality is a good thing (and I'm not suggesting that it's good). What I find funny and hard to wrap my head around is the hyperbole among these reactions. 90 FPS isn't "unacceptable." Sub 30 FPS is unacceptable. So, again, it's not that I would support a lowering of quality, but it's the insinuation that 90 FPS is this horrible thing. It's really not .

Originally Posted by Eli85

A complete and total misrepresentation of what I said. Of course, no one would dispute that lowering quality is a good thing (and I'm not suggesting that it's good). What I find funny and hard to wrap my head around is the hyperbole among these reactions. 90 FPS isn't "unacceptable." Sub 30 FPS is unacceptable. So, again, it's not that I would support a lowering of quality, but it's the insinuation that 90 FPS is this horrible thing. It's really not .

for someone whose eyes are accostumed to much more, it might be....you dont know.

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

Games do not inherintly process data (read game logic) faster at higher framerates.

That depends on tons of factors. Many engines stick both the rendering code and the game logic on the same thread. Faster FPS, in those cases, is a direct indication that the code is running faster. Code that is designed incorrectly (for example, not using time deltas in calculations for anything cumulative, like movement or basic DoT effects) can completely go bonkers with high frame rates. No, this isn't just a problem with indie games. Look at Bethesda games. *shutters*

The good news is, FFXIV is an MMO and most things are handled on the server. If anything breaks, it's going to be related to either animations, movement, or input latency.

Originally Posted by Valkyrie_Lenneth

See, this explains your point much better. Your first post made zero sense in context to the conversation.


My point was never that higher framerates are bad. It was that running a higher framerate when your monitor supports it does not give you an advantage in this game.

I'll give the benefit of the doubt and retract any preconceptions. In the future, ask for clarification before attacking someone's experience or dismissing them entirely.

Unfortunately we can't be certain to the extent on how much of a difference bettween 90fps and 144fps will have on an individual's performance. Do to the server side nature of FFXIV, we would need to understand what the server tickrate is. If I were to hazard a guess it would be either 30 or 60. Which understandably makes for a negligible benefit over 90fps. From my personal experience in other games, you get diminishing returns. 20 to 30 is a bigger jump in performance than 60 to 90. But the benefit is still there.

In our case it will be input latency as others pointed out.

This is basically a downgrade. I play on 144 an dused unlimited to not deal with SE's horrible implementation of their artificial FPS cappers.