Hi Infinity Ward,
I have a Samsung 23" S23A700D Series 7 LED 3D Monitor.
I specifically bought this monitor July 2012 for the 120Hz refresh rate on it.
I was in a clan called Mi4 (Missing in Action) and we use to play Cod Black ops Nationally.
The 120Hz refresh rate on the screen requires your game to run at 120 frames per second to look smooth where as traditional LCD & IPS monitors only requires 60 frames per second to look smooth.
For some reason (this is the first Infinity Ward game I see with a cap this low) Infinity Ward put a 90 fps cap on CoD Ghosts so my game always looks like it's lagging no matter what settings I set it on because I will never obtain 120 fps with the stupid fps cap.
Yet another problem I found on CoD Ghosts, and the problems is just piling up one after another.
PS: I gave you my money you gave me a *^%# game, and your happy coz all you see is $$$$!!!!
You can switch the monitor to 60 Hz, and enable V-sync for even more smoothness.
Out of curiousity: in the games that you used to play at 120 Hz, can you see any difference between 120 and 60?
Thanks for the suggestion but it does not work I have tried everything.
I currently play World of Warcraft, Dota 2, CoD Black ops, Black ops 2 and League of Legends all these games support 120hz and the frame rate goes up to 120 fps when I enable v-sync and even go higher when I disable it. Which means they either don't have a frame cap or it's greater than 120 fps.
CoD Ghosts has a option for 120hz but the frame cap sits at 90 fps. If I want to change my screen to 60Hz I have to go into my screen options and change it there + I have to change my settings in Windows to 60Hz, and if I want to continue playing my other games on 120Hz I have to change all these the settings back to 120Hz every time I finished playing CoD Ghosts .
Another thing is I am so used too playing FPS games on 120Hz refresh rate that when I switch to 60Hz (for instance playing on a friends rig) it just doesn't feel right. + whats the use I paid $450 for a 23" screen but can't use it to it's full potential I mean the 120Hz refresh rate is the main reason why I bought the screen in the first place and it really makes a big difference in especially FPS games.
Before you start arguing with me "no it does not make that a big of difference" go and play on a 120Hz screen for a week and go back to a 60Hz then you can argue with me.
Thanks again for your suggestion, but why only put such a low fps cap on the 8th version of Call of Duty. Why now?
Why ever? all their other games run flawlessly except for the latest one, I mean they should go forward in time not backwards.
Last thing if your a Game Developer or a Game Tester your suppose to have equipment like this, any hardcore gamer would tell you the higher your refresh rate is the better your game play would be. Infinity Ward Developers probably doesn't even know screens like this even exist.
Yep, sounds like a bug indeed. When writing the previous message, I didn't realize how cumbersome switching to 60 Hz is since you want to continue playing other games at 120.
I will, however, state that increasing refresh rate does not make for smoother gameplay as long as it's more than 30 FPS (30 Hz). There is even no reason for monitor to have 60 Hz (I don't know, maybe it's interlaced so 60 is effectively 30). Actually, 24 FPS is enough, video / TV industry has proven it over 80 years of its experience.
The purpose of a 120 Hz monitor is displaying 3D picture, which requires switching image at double normal rate. If a game feels smooth at 120 and doesn't feel so at 60 - it's not framerate problem, it's synchronization / interpolation problem.
absolute nonsense. You don't WATCH pc games, you play them and interact. There is a big difference playing @ 120hz over 60hz and its clear to an untrained eye.
There is nothing asinine about complaining about a stupid 90 fps limit when many people bought 120hz monitors. Ghosts is an unplayable game for me.
You don't really need 120fps on a 120Hz screen to get a smooth picture. That'd only be the case if you wanted to use vsync which, by itself, would cause additional input lag. And you wouldn't want that, right?
The best solution, so far, seems to be to cap the framerate at a value that can be kept steadily all the time. I used 125fps previously (older titles) and went down to ~77fps now. Of course the game doesn't feel as smooth as the older titles but it's also stuttering, micro-stuttering, still. That alone would make it feel bad.
So for now I'll wait for a patch. Even Battlefield 4 feels smoother than Ghosts at the moment.
It is not a good idea to cap FPS at a value that isn't an integer multiplier or divider of a framerate, it will cause jitter because game framerate (77) doesn't map well onto monitor framerate (60/120) no matter what. Ideally, framerate of a monitor should match game's FPS exactly or at an integer relation (2:1 and 1:2 should both be OK, 1:1 is ofc the best).
P. S. I've heard Nvidia is working on a technology for the monitor to only refres on video card's demand, eliminating all rate mismatch problems (and monitor refresh rate as such).
Just as I thought you are going to argue with me LoL
Check out the topic on Tom's Hardware 120Hz vs 60Hz.
I totally agree with you on watching a movie on 25fps and 120fps will not make a diffrence, but when you play a FPS game it is a whole other story. I said it once ima say it again go play on a 120Hz screen and then switch to a 60Hz you can't compare it.
They already have that, it's called G-Sync. 77 is one of the "magic steps" of the Quake engine, 1000/13 (instead of "my" usual 1000/8).
It also doesn't cause jitter or anything like that. It will cause tearing though if it jumps above and below a value that's an integer divider of the monitor's refresh rate.