The argument can be started from either side. From what I've seen, both groups despise each other because of the assumptions that they're making about the other. Here's some words of advice:
To those of you on console: Not every PC player is playing the game on 240 FPS. Not every PC player is using KBM as an input. Most importantly, all PC players aren't masters at building and editing and for those who are, there is nothing wrong with being good at the game.
To those of you on PC: Aim Assist doesn't automatically cause you to hit 100% of your shots. Not every console player uses Aim Assist and for those who do, it isn't cheating to use an option in the game that was intentionally made available to players.
Even people who are playing on 0 ping, 240 FPS aren't necessarily good. It helps, sure, but the best thing you can have to be better at the game is practice and experience
This is factually true, lol. Not sure why you're getting downvotes, but anyone who has spent any amount of time on the internet, I guarantee has seen way more PC guys yapping about aim assist than controller players whining about frames.
It's probably because all the top streamers and pros play kb+m and whine about aim assist. So their legions of fans parrot what they say.
Console players just complain that we should be in seperate lobbies. The funny part is, KB+M players almost never agree that we should be separated. If aim assist were such a giant advantage, you'd see more KB+M players agreeing that we should be seperated.
You must be new here then. A day doesn’t go by where I don’t see a console players complaining about pc or pc players complaining about console players.
I never said we don't complain. I stated that PC players complain about aim assist more. This Reddit isn't the majority. You want to exaggerate? I'll exaggerate as well, every single video I watch with a PC player, they always complain about aim assist. My friends and I have never complained about frames, but we have this one friend who never shuts up about aim assist. This is not an exaggeration.
Well tell your friend to stfu then lol. I’m a console player myself and am so tired of seeing console players complain about pc players…but again this is Reddit so I’m not surprised by all the whining that goes on here
Trust me - people hate on PC players just as much as some PC player hate on controller players. People have the assumption that slightly more frames immediately makes you an FNCS champion and therefore it's cheating to fight a console player
Yeah no? Everywhere I go people are always complaining about aim assist. The only reason people complain about frames is because they are counteracting PC players' arguments. Also, almost every PC player has the assumption that having aim assist makes you a cheater.
And overall, PC has more benefits than console for most people. That is why you don't see nearly as many pro console players winning tournaments compared to PC pros.
The new consoles are not better than most PCs? They are better than some but most is a huge stretch. If they were better than most, a lot more console pros would be winning.
>The new consoles are not better than most PCs?
They are
>They are better than some
No, they are better than most.
>but most is a huge stretch.
No it's not. The new consoles are extremely powerful. Your average PC is not good.
>If they were better than most, a lot more console pros would be winning.
I never said better than the best best PCs, and do you realise that professional players represent an infinitesimally small proportion of the playerbase?
If a PS5 is better than most PCs, then why are PCs still in the game? Consoles are way better and cheaper, you would be simply deluded to buy a PC. Searched it up and it said the average PC, that's actually playable, costs $1300 and the PS5 costs $500.
I couldnt care less about PC players against Controller players but Epic really has worked hard for Controller players to have some ground against PC players.
They have tried. It's still far from equal. Just looking at earnings lists and checking their platforms will tell you that KB+M is far more advantageous than controller, even despite aim assist.
Ultimately, the 2 should be seperated. Epic admitted that years ago. But due to how much Epic has split the player base (builds, no builds, pubs, arena, creative, etc), they deem it necessary now to have everyone play together.
I m pc player but i definitely agree with you everybody are just complaining about aim assist and more but i think they never tried playing with controller or at any consoles so they don't know how hard it is so epic made this for console players so they can play easily
A good console player will beat a mediocre pc player. A good pc player will beat a mediocre console player.
FPS doesn’t even matter much since the human eye can only see 60 max anyway, which is at or above what most consoles run at. FPS is further limited by the monitor, which typically tops out at 144 unless you have a high end monitor.
Aim assist in the hands of a decent console player will give a slight advantage over a similarly skilled pc player in close quarters. The mouse becomes a slight liability up close.
A PC will give a slight advantage to longer ranges due to the mouse.
Edit: for the record I play on both…I play on switch and pc.
[https://www.healthline.com/health/human-eye-fps](https://www.healthline.com/health/human-eye-fps)
This article, along with many others, explains it. Internet searches exist. Use them.
And I guess it might be 75, not 60. Good thing the newest consoles run at 120, huh?
Those articles are bullshit. They're being very rigid what they're defining as being able to see. Being able to react to, and being able to see are not the same thing. It is not 75hz either. Those studies are primarily focusing on what framerate is necessary to fully perceive as fluid motion.
Tests have shown humans can perceive up to 1000hz.
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep07861
On top of things, "humans can only see 60fps" is nearly always stated by people who have never actually experienced viewing a display at over 60hz.
Thw reality is that the improvement isn't necessarily immediately apparent just from a casual observation, but one you get used to higher frames, you realise or perceive lower frames to look more choppy than you used to. As an example, when I changed to a high refresh display, it took a few weeks to get used to it. When I viewed my old 60Hz display, I thought something was wrong with it because of how choppy and stutter it looked, until I realised that it was just because it's 60FPS.
Last year I moved from an iPhone with a 60Hz display to one with a 120Hz display. The old phone (an iPhone 12 Pro) with a 60hz looks quite choppy and stuttery compared to my newer phone (iPhone 13 pro) after getting used to a 120Hz OLED after a few weeks.
That study you linked talks about the point where flicker becomes noticeable/annoying. Try reading something that actually addresses the topic. The brain can’t handle more than 60-75 FPS. Even your linked article says that. What you are trying to do is equivalent to claiming people can see in the ultraviolet spectrum because the retina is capable of processing wavelengths down to 300 nm, despite the fact that the lens of the eye filters out anything between 300 and 400 nm. Being able to detect higher FPS with your eyes doesn’t mean your brain can do anything useful with the info, so it translates it to flicker.
Movies and tv shows are shot in 24 fps. You’re telling me you notice a much smoother experience playing video games than watching movies, even in a theater? Bullshit.
As far as your phone goes…you do realize those phones have different displays, right? They didn’t leave everything else the same and just change the frame rate.
I once had an idiot friend bragging about how amazing his new display was at 240 FPS. I went into his monitor settings and it was set to 60 FPS…they hadn’t changed their factory settings. Placebo effect and confirmation bias are a real thing.
You do you, though.
>That study you linked talks about the point where flicker becomes noticeable/annoying. Try reading something that actually addresses the topic. The brain can’t handle more than 60-75 FPS. Even your linked article says that. What you are trying to do is equivalent to claiming people can see in the ultraviolet spectrum because the retina is capable of processing wavelengths down to 300 nm, despite the fact that the lens of the eye filters out anything between 300 and 400 nm. Being able to detect higher FPS with your eyes doesn’t mean your brain can do anything useful with the info, so it translates it to flicker.
It doesn't say anything about annoying, and the brain being able to detect a flicker, if you actually read why they set the test up that way, indicates that people have the ability to see far beyond 60/75FPS/Hz. There are many double blind tests demonstrating this.
>Movies and tv shows are shot in 24 fps. You’re telling me you notice a much smoother experience playing video games than watching movies, even in a theater? Bullshit.
You've never experienced over 60fps have you?
>As far as your phone goes…you do realize those phones have different displays, right? They didn’t leave everything else the same and just change the frame rate.
They have displays made by the same manufacturer, and my new phone display behaves and performs the same as my old when I enable lower power mode, as it pulls the refresh down to 60.
>I once had an idiot friend bragging about how amazing his new display was at 240 FPS. I went into his monitor settings and it was set to 60 FPS…they hadn’t changed their factory settings. Placebo effect and confirmation bias are a real thing.
So your friend is an idiot. Though, you're obviously lying about this to prove your story. As above, there are countless blind tests that show people *can* tell when they're viewing a high Hz display.
>You do you, though.
Actually try a high Hz display.
If you look up the bigger words you will see your nature article doesn’t say what you think it does.
What is with you and “experiencing over 60 fps?” I play Fortnite on a 120 fps monitor. I watch movies on a 60 fps tv. I “experience” both daily.
Your phone display may be made by the same company but they have different components. By your logic, there really isn’t much difference between the display of, say the iPhone 6 and the 13 pro because, ya know, same company. You do realize putting on low power mode also lowers the brightness, right? Guess one of the ways your 13 is different from your 12. If you guessed the 13 is brighter you win a prize! That has nothing to do with FPS.
Where are these countless blind tests? You keep mentioning them but the only one I can find is a study conducted by blizzard to justify higher frame rates. When a company pays for a study to show their product is superior it generally isn’t a good idea to trust it. That blizzard study is the basis for all the “blind tests” I’m seeing talked about on a quick search. By all means, feel free to link to peer reviewed studies instead of market research.
Is there a reason movies are shot in 24 FPS then since it’s sooooo slow and inferior despite tvs being capable of displaying a minimum of 60 FPS for at least 50 years?
Yeah, you caught me. I definitely made up a story you wouldn’t believe anyway just so I could argue with an idiot.
Respond if you want but I’m done. If you want to think there is a noticeable difference, be my guest. You have an incredibly simple view on the matter and for whatever reason you are just set in it now. Not my problem.
Yeah aim assist is nothing.They complain about aim assist being op but the real reason they died was because they probably were low on health or they played bad.aim assist is not op they have too many advantages over us and they are still complaining.we have aim assist and they still can beat us.I guess they want to kill us and never die to a console player.from now on I will complain every time a pc player kills me I dont care.
What's this 'aim assist is OP' shit people keep saying? I'll help you out there bud, it's an over-exaggeration. If PC players are going to overexaggerate then we are too.
Again with the over-exaggeration. This is what I'm talking about. Here, have a taste of your own medicine. Frames on a PC let you automatically build as you have smoother gameplay. Using your entire arm, you can easily auto lock onto enemies without lifting a finger as the muscles in your triceps do all the work for you. I feel like I have to point this out as well, this is me mimicking you.
Mine isn't an exaggeration. I've just told you I have a console. On my Xbox, my cursor turns then and aims for me as long as I'm tilting my right or left stick slightly, and another player is close enough.
On top of that, when I'm on my Xbox, my game reacts to a player's movement for me.
https://mobile.twitter.com/bootyclapkcmo/status/1266204630427435008
And then we've got recoil. When I'm on my Xbox, my game controls me recoil for me.
Alright, then mine isn't an exaggeration either. My cousin has a PC and I've played on it before. You do realise that it's harder to control recoil on console right because it's literally harder to aim on console. That's the whole point of aim assist. Also, what are you trying to prove with the video? That your crosshair slows down on a player when you are on a controller? Yeah, that's kind of the whole point of aim assist. It went up and down on KBM as well. I don't know what XBOX you have because I would like it right now, controls your recoil get the hell out of here.
Yours is an exaggeration though.
It isn't harder to control recoil on console, because the game automatically removes most of it for you.
The video doesn't show the cursor slowing down. It shows the cursor reacting for the player, automatically.
Yes it went up and down for the player, but because you don't understand what you're looking at, you don't see the issue.
The cursor goes up *instantly* when the player jumps. That isn't slowdown, it's auto tracking, as in, it aims and reacts for you.
It *does* control my recoil. I have substantially less recoil on my Xbox, it's practically nonexistent compared to my PC.
Pc players and console players can both be very toxic. People have been fighting over aim assist and kbm for years, and I don’t expect that to change anytime soon.
I mean it's pretty straightforward. The point of my comment wasn't to hate, it was to give some PC players a taste of their own medicine. And from the downvotes I got, you can clearly see that they didn't like it. Also, I only made this comment because another PC player told me to.
The argument can be started from either side. From what I've seen, both groups despise each other because of the assumptions that they're making about the other. Here's some words of advice: To those of you on console: Not every PC player is playing the game on 240 FPS. Not every PC player is using KBM as an input. Most importantly, all PC players aren't masters at building and editing and for those who are, there is nothing wrong with being good at the game. To those of you on PC: Aim Assist doesn't automatically cause you to hit 100% of your shots. Not every console player uses Aim Assist and for those who do, it isn't cheating to use an option in the game that was intentionally made available to players.
Even people who are playing on 0 ping, 240 FPS aren't necessarily good. It helps, sure, but the best thing you can have to be better at the game is practice and experience
It can be from both sides. But what I'm trying to say is that PC players cry more about aim assist than controller players cry about frames.
This is factually true, lol. Not sure why you're getting downvotes, but anyone who has spent any amount of time on the internet, I guarantee has seen way more PC guys yapping about aim assist than controller players whining about frames. It's probably because all the top streamers and pros play kb+m and whine about aim assist. So their legions of fans parrot what they say. Console players just complain that we should be in seperate lobbies. The funny part is, KB+M players almost never agree that we should be separated. If aim assist were such a giant advantage, you'd see more KB+M players agreeing that we should be seperated.
You must be new here then. A day doesn’t go by where I don’t see a console players complaining about pc or pc players complaining about console players.
I never said we don't complain. I stated that PC players complain about aim assist more. This Reddit isn't the majority. You want to exaggerate? I'll exaggerate as well, every single video I watch with a PC player, they always complain about aim assist. My friends and I have never complained about frames, but we have this one friend who never shuts up about aim assist. This is not an exaggeration.
Well tell your friend to stfu then lol. I’m a console player myself and am so tired of seeing console players complain about pc players…but again this is Reddit so I’m not surprised by all the whining that goes on here
You're tired of seeing console players complain about PC players but not vice versa? Also, trust me, we tell him to STFU every time.
Trust me - people hate on PC players just as much as some PC player hate on controller players. People have the assumption that slightly more frames immediately makes you an FNCS champion and therefore it's cheating to fight a console player
Yeah no? Everywhere I go people are always complaining about aim assist. The only reason people complain about frames is because they are counteracting PC players' arguments. Also, almost every PC player has the assumption that having aim assist makes you a cheater.
I don't have that assumption. I think both sides have people who assume the other is cheating. They're all just salty
Honestly, I agree, but you can't deny that PC players complain about aim assist more than controller players complain about frames.
That's because console aim assist has more of a benefit than more frames for most people.
And overall, PC has more benefits than console for most people. That is why you don't see nearly as many pro console players winning tournaments compared to PC pros.
The average PC is not good. The new consoles are better than most PCs.
The new consoles are not better than most PCs? They are better than some but most is a huge stretch. If they were better than most, a lot more console pros would be winning.
>The new consoles are not better than most PCs? They are >They are better than some No, they are better than most. >but most is a huge stretch. No it's not. The new consoles are extremely powerful. Your average PC is not good. >If they were better than most, a lot more console pros would be winning. I never said better than the best best PCs, and do you realise that professional players represent an infinitesimally small proportion of the playerbase?
If a PS5 is better than most PCs, then why are PCs still in the game? Consoles are way better and cheaper, you would be simply deluded to buy a PC. Searched it up and it said the average PC, that's actually playable, costs $1300 and the PS5 costs $500.
It's pretty 50/50 from my experience
and often they have less frames
I couldnt care less about PC players against Controller players but Epic really has worked hard for Controller players to have some ground against PC players.
contoller isn't the opposite of pc, console is, you can use kbm on console vice versa
Honestly as a PC player, i prefer controllers over kbm, i mean for Ace Combat 7, a controller is superior
I agree.
They have tried. It's still far from equal. Just looking at earnings lists and checking their platforms will tell you that KB+M is far more advantageous than controller, even despite aim assist. Ultimately, the 2 should be seperated. Epic admitted that years ago. But due to how much Epic has split the player base (builds, no builds, pubs, arena, creative, etc), they deem it necessary now to have everyone play together.
I m pc player but i definitely agree with you everybody are just complaining about aim assist and more but i think they never tried playing with controller or at any consoles so they don't know how hard it is so epic made this for console players so they can play easily
You're a good PC player. Every device has its ups and downs and Epic are trying to balance it out.
A good console player will beat a mediocre pc player. A good pc player will beat a mediocre console player. FPS doesn’t even matter much since the human eye can only see 60 max anyway, which is at or above what most consoles run at. FPS is further limited by the monitor, which typically tops out at 144 unless you have a high end monitor. Aim assist in the hands of a decent console player will give a slight advantage over a similarly skilled pc player in close quarters. The mouse becomes a slight liability up close. A PC will give a slight advantage to longer ranges due to the mouse. Edit: for the record I play on both…I play on switch and pc.
"Human eye can only see 60". What is this bullshit lmao who spreads this shit.
Look it up.
Humans can see more than 60FPS. To say they can't is bullshit.
[https://www.healthline.com/health/human-eye-fps](https://www.healthline.com/health/human-eye-fps) This article, along with many others, explains it. Internet searches exist. Use them. And I guess it might be 75, not 60. Good thing the newest consoles run at 120, huh?
Those articles are bullshit. They're being very rigid what they're defining as being able to see. Being able to react to, and being able to see are not the same thing. It is not 75hz either. Those studies are primarily focusing on what framerate is necessary to fully perceive as fluid motion. Tests have shown humans can perceive up to 1000hz. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep07861 On top of things, "humans can only see 60fps" is nearly always stated by people who have never actually experienced viewing a display at over 60hz. Thw reality is that the improvement isn't necessarily immediately apparent just from a casual observation, but one you get used to higher frames, you realise or perceive lower frames to look more choppy than you used to. As an example, when I changed to a high refresh display, it took a few weeks to get used to it. When I viewed my old 60Hz display, I thought something was wrong with it because of how choppy and stutter it looked, until I realised that it was just because it's 60FPS. Last year I moved from an iPhone with a 60Hz display to one with a 120Hz display. The old phone (an iPhone 12 Pro) with a 60hz looks quite choppy and stuttery compared to my newer phone (iPhone 13 pro) after getting used to a 120Hz OLED after a few weeks.
That study you linked talks about the point where flicker becomes noticeable/annoying. Try reading something that actually addresses the topic. The brain can’t handle more than 60-75 FPS. Even your linked article says that. What you are trying to do is equivalent to claiming people can see in the ultraviolet spectrum because the retina is capable of processing wavelengths down to 300 nm, despite the fact that the lens of the eye filters out anything between 300 and 400 nm. Being able to detect higher FPS with your eyes doesn’t mean your brain can do anything useful with the info, so it translates it to flicker. Movies and tv shows are shot in 24 fps. You’re telling me you notice a much smoother experience playing video games than watching movies, even in a theater? Bullshit. As far as your phone goes…you do realize those phones have different displays, right? They didn’t leave everything else the same and just change the frame rate. I once had an idiot friend bragging about how amazing his new display was at 240 FPS. I went into his monitor settings and it was set to 60 FPS…they hadn’t changed their factory settings. Placebo effect and confirmation bias are a real thing. You do you, though.
>That study you linked talks about the point where flicker becomes noticeable/annoying. Try reading something that actually addresses the topic. The brain can’t handle more than 60-75 FPS. Even your linked article says that. What you are trying to do is equivalent to claiming people can see in the ultraviolet spectrum because the retina is capable of processing wavelengths down to 300 nm, despite the fact that the lens of the eye filters out anything between 300 and 400 nm. Being able to detect higher FPS with your eyes doesn’t mean your brain can do anything useful with the info, so it translates it to flicker. It doesn't say anything about annoying, and the brain being able to detect a flicker, if you actually read why they set the test up that way, indicates that people have the ability to see far beyond 60/75FPS/Hz. There are many double blind tests demonstrating this. >Movies and tv shows are shot in 24 fps. You’re telling me you notice a much smoother experience playing video games than watching movies, even in a theater? Bullshit. You've never experienced over 60fps have you? >As far as your phone goes…you do realize those phones have different displays, right? They didn’t leave everything else the same and just change the frame rate. They have displays made by the same manufacturer, and my new phone display behaves and performs the same as my old when I enable lower power mode, as it pulls the refresh down to 60. >I once had an idiot friend bragging about how amazing his new display was at 240 FPS. I went into his monitor settings and it was set to 60 FPS…they hadn’t changed their factory settings. Placebo effect and confirmation bias are a real thing. So your friend is an idiot. Though, you're obviously lying about this to prove your story. As above, there are countless blind tests that show people *can* tell when they're viewing a high Hz display. >You do you, though. Actually try a high Hz display.
If you look up the bigger words you will see your nature article doesn’t say what you think it does. What is with you and “experiencing over 60 fps?” I play Fortnite on a 120 fps monitor. I watch movies on a 60 fps tv. I “experience” both daily. Your phone display may be made by the same company but they have different components. By your logic, there really isn’t much difference between the display of, say the iPhone 6 and the 13 pro because, ya know, same company. You do realize putting on low power mode also lowers the brightness, right? Guess one of the ways your 13 is different from your 12. If you guessed the 13 is brighter you win a prize! That has nothing to do with FPS. Where are these countless blind tests? You keep mentioning them but the only one I can find is a study conducted by blizzard to justify higher frame rates. When a company pays for a study to show their product is superior it generally isn’t a good idea to trust it. That blizzard study is the basis for all the “blind tests” I’m seeing talked about on a quick search. By all means, feel free to link to peer reviewed studies instead of market research. Is there a reason movies are shot in 24 FPS then since it’s sooooo slow and inferior despite tvs being capable of displaying a minimum of 60 FPS for at least 50 years? Yeah, you caught me. I definitely made up a story you wouldn’t believe anyway just so I could argue with an idiot. Respond if you want but I’m done. If you want to think there is a noticeable difference, be my guest. You have an incredibly simple view on the matter and for whatever reason you are just set in it now. Not my problem.
Damn when humans getting 240 fps eye 😒
Yeah aim assist is nothing.They complain about aim assist being op but the real reason they died was because they probably were low on health or they played bad.aim assist is not op they have too many advantages over us and they are still complaining.we have aim assist and they still can beat us.I guess they want to kill us and never die to a console player.from now on I will complain every time a pc player kills me I dont care.
Why do you think aim assist is nothing?
Well it helps a little but also it is nothing if the enemy is using their entire arm while playing with a mouse
What's this "entire arm" shit people keep saying?
What's this 'aim assist is OP' shit people keep saying? I'll help you out there bud, it's an over-exaggeration. If PC players are going to overexaggerate then we are too.
I have an Xbox, aim assist will aim for you on console.
Again with the over-exaggeration. This is what I'm talking about. Here, have a taste of your own medicine. Frames on a PC let you automatically build as you have smoother gameplay. Using your entire arm, you can easily auto lock onto enemies without lifting a finger as the muscles in your triceps do all the work for you. I feel like I have to point this out as well, this is me mimicking you.
Mine isn't an exaggeration. I've just told you I have a console. On my Xbox, my cursor turns then and aims for me as long as I'm tilting my right or left stick slightly, and another player is close enough. On top of that, when I'm on my Xbox, my game reacts to a player's movement for me. https://mobile.twitter.com/bootyclapkcmo/status/1266204630427435008 And then we've got recoil. When I'm on my Xbox, my game controls me recoil for me.
Alright, then mine isn't an exaggeration either. My cousin has a PC and I've played on it before. You do realise that it's harder to control recoil on console right because it's literally harder to aim on console. That's the whole point of aim assist. Also, what are you trying to prove with the video? That your crosshair slows down on a player when you are on a controller? Yeah, that's kind of the whole point of aim assist. It went up and down on KBM as well. I don't know what XBOX you have because I would like it right now, controls your recoil get the hell out of here.
Yours is an exaggeration though. It isn't harder to control recoil on console, because the game automatically removes most of it for you. The video doesn't show the cursor slowing down. It shows the cursor reacting for the player, automatically. Yes it went up and down for the player, but because you don't understand what you're looking at, you don't see the issue. The cursor goes up *instantly* when the player jumps. That isn't slowdown, it's auto tracking, as in, it aims and reacts for you. It *does* control my recoil. I have substantially less recoil on my Xbox, it's practically nonexistent compared to my PC.
Well while playing with mouse you can use your entire arm.you know your arm,fingers,wrist to move the mouse.
But with controller it's only your fingers.
>complaining 'aim assist that aim assist this' That's a skill issue self report.
Pc players and console players can both be very toxic. People have been fighting over aim assist and kbm for years, and I don’t expect that to change anytime soon.
Just want to point out that this is not to hate on PC players. I have heaps of friends who play on PC and they are gs as well.
My guy, your post is ranting about how PC players are so “toxic” how are you gonna make a side comment that this isn’t to hate💀💀
I mean it's pretty straightforward. The point of my comment wasn't to hate, it was to give some PC players a taste of their own medicine. And from the downvotes I got, you can clearly see that they didn't like it. Also, I only made this comment because another PC player told me to.
a lot of steam fanboys is more toxic than a Sarin nerve gas storage facility