By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - 60 is definitely playable, but its not ideal

Shinobi-san on 20 June 2014
Teeqoz said:
WhiteEaglePL said:
30 is ....not nice.

but anything above 45 is great......though.....60 is what I expected this generation to have as a BASIC.

locked 30 is almost always better than ~45 unless you have a monitor with GSync or something like that, because monitor refresh rates are almost always multiples of 30 ie. 30, 60, 90 ,120...


I would actually prefer the ~45 as long as the dips are not lower than 25 - 30 FPS.

Most of the games i play are at variable frame rates and usually they are at about the 40FPS mark. But thats just me.



Intel Core i7 3770K [3.5GHz]|MSI Big Bang Z77 Mpower|Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1866 2 x 4GB|MSI GeForce GTX 560 ti Twin Frozr 2|OCZ Vertex 4 128GB|Corsair HX750|Cooler Master CM 690II Advanced|

Around the Network
Anfebious on 20 June 2014

120 fps is my standard.



"I've Underestimated the Horse Power from Mario Kart 8, I'll Never Doubt the WiiU's Engine Again"

Leadified on 20 June 2014
Shinobi-san said:
Leadified said:
Areal-Llort said:
The problem with today is people have such high standards that they deem anything lower than 60fps as garbage, same goes for people that care about 1080 resolution.

1080p and 60 FPS have been standards on your average PC for years now. It's rather disappointing in 2014 when next generation consoles still can't hit that. Playing under 60 FPS is not ideal but it's not the end of the world, however it is annoying when many last gen and so far it's looking many current gen games can't even hit 30 FPS.

standard for who?

Unless you have serious money or are willing to tone down graphics to low-medium then 1080p @ 60FPS is absolutely not standard.

There is a severe overestimate on how much you need to run a game at 1080p 60 fps. You really do not need a beast rig or a lot of money to run a game well or go through a bunch of trouble as long as the game was somewhat optimized.



hunter_alien on 20 June 2014

I have no issues with framerate dips that go in the 20fps region. But it can get annoying. Hell I find Borderlands 2 for the Vita playable, and believe me that game DROPS it fast whenever there is an encounter



Vote the Mayor for Mayor!

Aura7541 on 20 June 2014

30 fps can look good as long as it's locked and stuff like motion blur is done well. 60 fps will always be better than 30 fps, but it doesn't mean that 30 fps sucks.



Around the Network
Teeqoz on 20 June 2014
Shinobi-san said:
Teeqoz said:
WhiteEaglePL said:
30 is ....not nice.

but anything above 45 is great......though.....60 is what I expected this generation to have as a BASIC.

locked 30 is almost always better than ~45 unless you have a monitor with GSync or something like that, because monitor refresh rates are almost always multiples of 30 ie. 30, 60, 90 ,120...


I would actually prefer the ~45 as long as the dips are not lower than 25 - 30 FPS.

Most of the games i play are at variable frame rates and usually they are at about the 40FPS mark. But thats just me.


if you play a game in 45 fps on a 60 hz monitor it will dislpay one single frame one time, then the next frame two times. I personally think this is worse than playing at locked 30 fps because it just gets...odd..



Frogger on 20 June 2014
Teeqoz said:


You'd have to game on a PC monitor to actually notice the 60 extra fps. And yes, 120 fps must be silky smooth!


Does anyone know why 120 hertz isn't the standard for TVs monitors?



Dr.Henry_Killinger on 20 June 2014
spemanig said:
Teeqoz said:


You'd have to game on a PC monitor to actually notice the 60 extra fps. And yes, 120 fps must be silky smooth!


Does anyone know why 120 hertz isn't the standard for TVs monitors?

http://www.cnet.com/news/why-doesnt-my-tv-say-120hz240hz/

The TV industry is moving towards  higher resolution , not higher source framerates (for the foreseeable future).

60fps is completely is basically unecessary for TV broadcasting, gaming does not matter in regards to TV production.



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

Intrinsic on 20 June 2014

Is this a PC thread? Anyways, play the games. Not the tech. Thats what I think. Some PC types are honestly more interested in what FPS or tech the game runs than if the game is actually fun or not.



brendude13 on 20 June 2014

60fps is needed for fighters, first person shooters and platformers. 30fps is fine for the rest and can actually help the game seem more cinematic. Drops into the low 20s are unacceptable though.