Does frame rate matter to you? Personally, as long as the game is playable, I don't care what the frame rate is.
don't care if its 30 or 60, just be stable most of the time, hell i don't even mind when shit gets accidentally slow-mo when a bunch of explosions go off and body parts are flying, shit looks cool.
>>332237435
I can play a game at 30 FPS, I loved Bloodborne. But it's impossible to deny that any game running at 30 FPS would be better at 60 FPS. If 60 is an option, I'll always take it
>>332237435
To me frame rate is more important than graphics.
A game can be fine with low poly graphics or low resolution textures as long as it has a stable frame rate but a even a game with hi res textures will look like shit and be unplayable at a low frame rate.
How many people here are ok with fps over 40? I can't stand 30 but 40+ feels pretty good. Don't even need anything but adaptive vsync
>>332239238
Strange, I've only ever heard of frame rates being set at 30 or 60. Then again I only play on consoles
I highly prefer 60 fps but 30 is playable. It does matter in multiplayer games where milliseconds count (like most First person shooters).
>>332237435
Bellow 30 is not playable to me. Anywhere from 30 to 60 is fine, as long as it's locked. A frame rate thats all over the place in between 40 to 60 annoys the fuck out of me. I would have have locked 30 than having my fps constantly travelling from 30 to 60.
tl;dr fps needs to be stable
>>332237435
As long as they're ain't massive framedrops, I don't care.
60fps is cool though
More than graphics, yes. So I'll turn the fucking graphics down to nothing if it means the game runs properly.
Meaning consoles who have a complete opposite opinion are not a fucking option.
>>332237435
Anything below 144 fps is shit
Depends:
While I think 30 is fine, I will go for 60 FPS versions of games if it is a multiplat. I think any lower then 60 FPS on a modern PC port is not excusable, and any lower then a (mostly) stable 30 FPS on consoles is not great.
Problem is, too many modern console games are 20-30 FPS and it looks like absolute ass. I would rather companies give the option to turn down certain things if it meant a better frame rate on consoles then forcing it to run something it obviously struggles at.
>locked 60
Pure perfection, ideal for all games
>60+
Nice but not needed outside of competitive shooters
>"60" (read: 40-60)
Not ideal but still pretty good
>locked 30
Just fine fampai
>"30" (read: 20-30)
Playable but could be better
>locked 20
I'll tolerate it but I won't be happy about it
>consistently <20
I'm willing to give 3D games 5th gen and below a pass on this, but anything 6th gen onward having this is inexcusable
>>332241073
Anything below locked 30 is cancer and should be avoided at all costs.
>>332241282
This. Locked 30 is fine, unlocked 30 is unacceptable, its shit, throw it in the damn trash. I don't wanna see it anywhere near my face.
>>332239457
framerate isn't "set" on a pc
>>332241073
>40-60 is pretty good
I call your opinion shit. There is very little worse than having your fps all over the place as you play. Lock this shit at 40 if you need, but 40-60 is cancer.
