hunter_alien said:
michael_stutzer said:
hunter_alien said:
michael_stutzer said:
hunter_alien said:
60 FPS is not required in at least 90% of games that are released. Anyone who says otherwise is an elitist and I bet my house on the fact that I could fool him with any game that runs perfectly locked at 30fps and a 60fps game 
That said, for some genres its still a must: pixel perfect shooters, brawlers and some platformers. Every other genre can be perfectly played at 30 fps. |
Expecting a good performance out of your games is being elitist. Got it.
|
No, but pissing over a product, just because you have your subjective values, is. Most people do not prefer 60 fps over 30, they simply find it "unplayable", or at least thats what Im getting from forums these days.
30 FPS is a perfect performance for most games, like it or not, 60 is unnecesary in most cases.
|
30 FPS is not perfect for a single game, because there is always a better option that is 60 FPS. Nothing can be perfect when there is a better option. May be turn based games though I haven't seen a turn based taxing game.
30 FPS can be "acceptable" in some cases. Limited hardware for one. But going around saying "60 FPS is not important! We don't care! You are elitist!" is why we have many games that run like shit nowadays.
|
Bullshit! The reason why we have unoptimized games is because we have por developers. Dont try and put words in my mouth, when its obvious thats not what I have wrote.
60 FPS is not a better option, its a jmeaningless option in most games, as a better loking and stable 30 FPS game beats a crappy looking or fluctuating 60fps game any day. Its a facty, both reviewers and the general gaming comunity accepts it, seeing that there aere plenty multi-billion franchises that are locked at 30 fps
|
for console, yeah, 30 "locked" is better than ~40 not locked. but locking for pc is just bullshit.
the most gaming pcs arent as weak as the ps4/xbone.
