Is 34-35 FPS playable?

Is 34-35 FPS playable?

Is 34-35 FPS playable?

biggest_loser

Yes, low 20s are barely playable for FPS, anything lower is pointless.

RTSs and other games can deal with lower fps fine though.

Yes, very playable.

In sp yes, but in mp if your average framerrate is around those numbers you're at disadvantage.

I think alot of it depends on the game, I remember I could easily play Crysis even when it dipped to below 20fps it still felt "smooth" and playable. On the other hand when I play Mass Effect 2 if I get below 60fps I kinda get irritated that it doesn't feel smooth.

I consider 20+ to be playable for most games.

I think the human eye only take in about 30fps per second. Don't quote me

I think the human eye only take in about 30fps per second. Don't quote me

Xiloa

I think the human eye only take in about 30fps per second. Don't quote me

Xiloa

I hate it when people say this. Its stupid and pointless.

Oh my POS $500 car can get from point A and B, so why should I buy that Viper, which is can easily afford.

Depends on the game.

consoles are usually locked at 30 fps for almost every game, and many people enjoy console gaming so...

Depends. I find RPG's at those frames good and shooters average.

Mid-teens are playableMr_Cumberdale

you can't see the diff between 30 and 60 fps but 20 and under is unplayable.

you can't see the diff between 30 and 60 fps but 20 and under is unplayable.

metalguitar13

you absolutely can. Its a common misconception held by a lot of people that the eye can only see 30 fps when in fact it can see 100's of fps.

you can't see the diff between 30 and 60 fps but 20 and under is unplayable.

metalguitar13

you can't see the diff between 30 and 60 fps but 20 and under is unplayable.

metalguitar13

Of course you can see the difference. The myth regarding the human eye--and the framerates it can distinguish--is incredibly pervasive, but it isn't based on truth. If you were to play your average shooter at 30 FPS, and then play it at 60 FPS, you will quite easily tell the difference. This topic has been debunked by experts for years, but there is a certain stubbornness to us gamers; we hang on to the mistruths and misunderstandings. There is plenty of informed and interestinginformation about this subject. But let it be said: The human brain is not a monitor or television. It isn't restricted to this idea of "frames per second," and can in fact distinguish information on a far more granular level.

Nor is anything under 20 unplayable. If I am playing a turn-based RPG, such frame rates might be uncomfortable, but they don't make the game impossible to play.

The answer is, simply, that it depends. If you are playing Unreal Tournament at a competition, for example, you want as high a framerate as you can muster; the human brain can detect information such as changes of light patterns and perceived motion much faster than you think. If you are playing an RPG, perhaps a framerate in the teens is perfectly reasonable to you. On the other hand, a racing game running at a lower frame rate can impact the sense of speed, which is an important element of any racer. The answer isn't based on an arbitrary number--it's simply what you are comfortable with. I personally find that a consistent framerate is far more important to me than a high one. If the framerate dips up and down, that doesn't make for a very good time. I'd rather play a game at 20 frames per second than one that fluctuates wildly depending on what's happening on the screen.

What matters most is your degree of comfort. But the FPS/human eye myth should be hung out to dry, because it simply doesn't work the way we've grown to believe.

Edit: Trying to fix the formatting.

[QUOTE="Xiloa"]

I think the human eye only take in about 30fps per second. Don't quote me

morrowindnic

I hate it when people say this. Its stupid and pointless.

Oh my POS $500 car can get from point A and B, so why should I buy that Viper, which is can easily afford.

Because a Viper is sexy and head turning, a computer is a computer no matter how fast or how much it costs.

[QUOTE="Mr_Cumberdale"]Mid-teens are playableCellAnimation

you can't see the diff between 30 and 60 fps but 20 and under is unplayable.

metalguitar13

More then playable, so long it's consistent bud.

[QUOTE="Mr_Cumberdale"]Mid-teens are playableCellAnimation

anything above 25fps is passable, above 30 is good, above 40 is great, above 50 is superb.GazaAli

20 FPS and above I consider playable, so I consider 34-35 pretty good.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"]anything above 25fps is passable, above 30 is good, above 40 is great, above 50 is superb.CellAnimation

[QUOTE="CellAnimation"][QUOTE="GazaAli"]anything above 25fps is passable, above 30 is good, above 40 is great, above 50 is superb.GazaAli

30fps is playable if it is a constant framerate.

so im sure anything above that as long as it is a CONSTANT framerate is extremely playable.

30fps is playable if it is a constant framerate.

so im sure anything above that as long as it is a CONSTANT framerate is extremely playable.

Lach0121

AAGREESS!! 30fps range is still fairly smooth. It is when your computer chokes that gets it out of hand.

[QUOTE="GazaAli"][QUOTE="CellAnimation"] In your opinion... opinions differ. I'd find all of those unacceptable on a decent computer/video card combo. I have a Q6600 and a GTX 295 and I expect most if not all of my games to run at 60 FPS at least.CellAnimation

It very much is. Heck, I consider 5-10 FPS to be playable - even for FPS.

But what do I prefer? Well, over 60 is a must, but the framerate should be at least 120-150 to feel as smooth as possible. I'll rather sacrifice graphics than framerate.

For me I like when the game stays at a constant framerate so I would prefer a constant 30fps instead of 60 that fluxiates up and down rapidly

[QUOTE="Mr_Cumberdale"]Mid-teens are playableCellAnimation