-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
What is the lowest framerate you're okay with?
- Thread starter Sabretooth
- Start date
I also think that most people can barely tell the difference if they can at all, unless it's a side by side comparison.
Minimum 30. Prefer 60 if it's a multiplayer game.
A game like U4 did it perfectly for me. 30 FPS for the single player with all the eye candy and 60 for multiplayer for a better experience.
A game like U4 did it perfectly for me. 30 FPS for the single player with all the eye candy and 60 for multiplayer for a better experience.
When the original Deus Ex was released I played thru the game 3 times on a computer that was below the minimum requirements. I had a framerate around 7-11, and in some rare cases it dipped down to 2. A low framerate wasn't gonna stop me from playing an awesome game.
I've grown more fastidious since then though, but if it's above 15 I'm generally good. Depends on what kind of game it is.
I've grown more fastidious since then though, but if it's above 15 I'm generally good. Depends on what kind of game it is.
I can play sub 30, it has happened, not ideal but it's ok in some games. But I always prefer higher fps to higher res.
Now I could be wrong but I think it could be that refresh rates on monitors are faster than TVs and your eyes are probably closer so you spot imperfections that sitting away from a TV at a recommend safe distance your eyes probably won't pick up that information.
I don't generally like phrasing the question like this, because for me it's entirely genre-dependent.
For reaction-based genres I want 60 FPS at the very least, and I'd much prefer more than that.
For something like a turn-based RPG, ~40 are fine.
For reaction-based genres I want 60 FPS at the very least, and I'd much prefer more than that.
For something like a turn-based RPG, ~40 are fine.
under 30 is fine as long is playable, even low to 15 during brief periods of time like explosions.
Well, so far this poll suggests the fps bitching comes from a loud, yet tiny minority. Hardly anyone cares. 30 fps is fine.
Voted before reading. On PC I really need at least 30. A rare dip here and there is ok, too.
I'll deal with sub 30 on consoles because I don't have a choice, but if I could I would lower settings and resolution to get to 30.
I'll deal with sub 30 on consoles because I don't have a choice, but if I could I would lower settings and resolution to get to 30.
I grew up playing PC games that sometimes dropped to less than 1 FPS lol. I remember playing and beating all of LEGO Island at around 2-4 FPS. I just never had a problem with it.
Of course now I definitely strive for 60 on PC, I can definitely tolerate much less than that. (But it should at least be fluid.)
would not dropping a game because bad framerate means i'm ok with it? cuz i platinum'd drakengard 3 and that game often dips into single digit framerate
In general, I don't mind if its sub 30, but it must be playable. That means everything and nothing.
What I mean is that I even played Bayonetta on PS3 without problems (even noticing the bad framerate), or Little King Story on PSVITA (that can be atricious sometimes)... but if I like enough the game I just dont care.
What I mean is that I even played Bayonetta on PS3 without problems (even noticing the bad framerate), or Little King Story on PSVITA (that can be atricious sometimes)... but if I like enough the game I just dont care.
Bullshit. I've been playing on PC for the past 30 years and I've had numerous instance where I had to play a game at sub 20 fps and I was fine with it considering it was either "play it like that with your current hardware or don't play it at all". Certainly not saying it's ideal but with willingness, everything is possible.
I still remember playing Unreal or the original SIN in 320x240 at sub 20 fps because my Pentium 120 couldn't do any better.
Nowadays I'm pushing for 60 whenever I can but it's more because I can rather than a necessity for enjoyment.
30 fps on consoles for most games. 60 fps on PC and for first person shooters in general. Good FOV is equally important in FPS games, most are unplayable on consoles to me because of low FOV.
I think the "60+ FPS or bust" crowd is definitely small, but you can still be "ok" with 30 FPS and not like it. I'll begrudgingly play 30 FPS games if I have to, so I voted for 30. I think the results would be different if the poll was "what framerate do you prefer."
It depends on the technology.
140 fps on lcds is the near equivalent to
60 fps on crts.
Those high framerates are absolutely better.
That said I think low framerate games are fascinating. As long as the frame rate is 100% stable it is possible to play games at even 7 fps. I had beta tested an mmo one time and for a brief time for whatever reason the game was capped at 16 fps and it held there. I actually had a lot of fun because the enemies movements became way more consistent compared to the variable warping that occurred before and after that moment.
It was then I realized how much stable framerates can potentially be leveraged.
140 fps on lcds is the near equivalent to
60 fps on crts.
Those high framerates are absolutely better.
That said I think low framerate games are fascinating. As long as the frame rate is 100% stable it is possible to play games at even 7 fps. I had beta tested an mmo one time and for a brief time for whatever reason the game was capped at 16 fps and it held there. I actually had a lot of fun because the enemies movements became way more consistent compared to the variable warping that occurred before and after that moment.
It was then I realized how much stable framerates can potentially be leveraged.
30 with drops here and there is tolerable. I'm not hyper sensitive about framerate usually. I remember playing Castlevania: Lords of Shadow with frequent drops and it never really bothered me. If I'm having a good time I don't notice as much.
Depends on game.
I just about tolerate 30fps, but it has too be stable. I can maybe deal with dips if its say, a turn based strategy game. But otherwise nah
I just about tolerate 30fps, but it has too be stable. I can maybe deal with dips if its say, a turn based strategy game. But otherwise nah
30 is fine, but I've found that stuff like MGSV dropping to sub-30 on PS3 or Read Dead 2 dropping sub 30 on base PS4 doesn't really bother me. Assuming I can get 30 fps @ 1080p, I will prioritize maxing out graphics settings over resolution or frame rate. 1440p @ 60fps with mostly max settings is generally where I tend to fall these days. I'm a whore for eye candy first though.
Same. Even using a controller. Mouse movement can be stuttery so I thought this would be important. But not only that.
And then we have threads discussing RTSS, GPU settings, etc. Nothing makes PC games as smooth at 30 fps as Horizon Zero Dawn for example. At least not for me.
My minimum is 60 fps at 4k or near 4k resolutions (like 1800p for example) with my i7 7700k and GTX 1080 ti at sometimes reduced settings.
With multiplayer games, I drop down to 1080p/120hz/max settings for the best of all worlds.
With multiplayer games, I drop down to 1080p/120hz/max settings for the best of all worlds.
For everything but fighting games I can tolerate at least 30fps. The rare case is Bloodborne, I somehow got use to that games shitty framerate.
The more important thing is it has to be constant, otherwise it feels like shit...ie. framerates that are variable between 40-60 feel terrible to me.
The more important thing is it has to be constant, otherwise it feels like shit...ie. framerates that are variable between 40-60 feel terrible to me.
I played early 3d games with framerates in single digits, and some probably dropped way below 1 fps (meaning it took 2 or 3 seconds to draw a frame).
They were still playable, because they were designed with that in mind.
Don't make me maneuver through fast bullet hells at 20 fps and there's no need for my point and click adventure to be 120fps.
I'm no framerate elitist for the sake of it, I'm ok with any framerate doesn't get in the way of playing the game, which entirely depends on the genre and pace of the game itself.
Some will say that anything below 30 (heck, even 60) can't be tolerated but in the end everyone's "omg best game ever !!11" was a 15 fps affair.
Similarly, drops are generally acceptable when they don't get in the way, or not too often anyway
They were still playable, because they were designed with that in mind.
Don't make me maneuver through fast bullet hells at 20 fps and there's no need for my point and click adventure to be 120fps.
I'm no framerate elitist for the sake of it, I'm ok with any framerate doesn't get in the way of playing the game, which entirely depends on the genre and pace of the game itself.
Some will say that anything below 30 (heck, even 60) can't be tolerated but in the end everyone's "omg best game ever !!11" was a 15 fps affair.
Similarly, drops are generally acceptable when they don't get in the way, or not too often anyway
On console its gotta be 30 for most of the game. I can accept a hit here or there if there is lots of effects on screen due to system limitations.
On PC there is no excuse not to at least target 60 FPS.
On PC there is no excuse not to at least target 60 FPS.
Last edited:
