Frame rate or Resolution?

Depends, I don't want to play 720p games on current gen consoles.

It depends on what kind of game you're playing. Sometimes 30fps is just fine, but still, you can't deny that a solid 60fps is more playable, no matter what. I prefer a better framerate to better graphics, myself. It works like this: No one cares about framerates until they get a decent PC--and then they realize what they've been missing all those years. Once you've gone 60fps, there's no going back.

I definitely prefer a stable frame-rate. However, I don't like it when the frame-rate keeps jumping between 30 and 60 fps. I'd rather prefer a consistent 30 fps over a jerky frame-rate that keeps fluctuating between 30 and 60. But of course, a stable 60 fps would be best.

I prefer both.

If both isn't an option due to weak hardware I tend to chose either framerate or resolution based on the genre.

If it's a multiplayer shooter or a game that requires quick reflexes then framerate is key but if it's an adventure game or a game that doesn't require quick reflexes then I prefer a higher resolution.

Puzzle games benefit from 60 frames, what puzzle games have you been playing?

Ditto platformers, which is why they were 60 frames and are 60 frames as usual. The fucking Snes and Genesis had a bunch of 60 frames games.

Action RPGS and most WRPGs would benefit from having a smoother framerate as well since all the action is done in real time, ditto a third person shooter. The only genre you listed that doesn't inherently improve "gameplay" are turn-based jrpgs and yeah card games, and in the case of the jrpg, everything would still animate and move quicker so it would still be a boon for the game.

So do you even game? Because apparently you don't know the benefit of a higher framerate if you honestly felt: Real Time Strategy, Platformers, and third person shooters are genres where high frames isn't necessary. Much less puzzle games like Braid, Portal, or Antichamber which clearly benefit from higher framerates. Anything with real time action or precision focused gameplay will do better with 60 frames.

And the answer is Framerate.

Resolution is cute if you really want that image quality, but I want a better playing game. And it is a fact that 60 frames plays better than 30, not even close. Image quality to me doesn't improve the interacting aspect of this medium, you know the thing that is unique about this medium.

Beauty of PC gaming is, I get to pick, and in most cases I don't need to pick. I get both the high resolution and the high framerate.

neither has been an issue for me since 2011 because i dont own a lada oops i mean console

Yeah :D

Poor framerate can make a game unplayable. 1080p is nice but it isn't a must if frame rate has to be sacrificed.

Which ever one the PS4 does better than the Xbox One. That's the answer this board is looking for, right?

Kinda depends... I'm good with 1080p/30fps on any and all games.

So long as I get my minimum framerates 30+ and the average around 40+, I'm happy. More would be better but not essential. My threshold for resolution is whatever the native resolution of my screen is. I don't mind playing games on a 14" 1366x768 screen, 19" 1600x900, 24" 1920x1080, and so on. Obviously, I'm referring to PC games.

I have a variety of monitors/TVs at home. When a game is too much to handle by my 4Gb GTX 770 at 1080p, I play it on the next smaller monitor (900p). I even have a 17" 1280x1024 monitor just for nostalgia.

Well, at least on the PC, you don't need to comprise resolution for frame rate. Just turn other graphical settings down.

Frame rate is really important. Gameplay is better at 60fps. It's just sad that the standard on consoles is to sacrifice fps for graphics. The only time I game at 30fps on the PC is when the choice is taken away from me and I use an over clocked 750Ti, so I'm not even a graphics whore.

That doesn't make sense , lower some graphical options and play on 1080p ...

Framerate. All day, every day.

FPS is more important to me as a console gamer.

I don't think this is a contest.. FPS.

higher framerate of course..prefer framerate that is constant..dislike it when it jumps around. :p

Playing FzeroX leads me to say framerate. That game made all the right design choices, though. However, saying framerate also negates a lot of design advancements in many genres, for sure. Goldeneye could not have been made if sacrifices weren't made--and it still plays great.

But the graphics would look worse. If he does it his way the graphics would look better but not as sharp.

Well it's not just framerate vs. resolution, but graphics in general. In the past, it was a toss up and depended on the game. Making Resident evil 4 60fps for example would've been very detrimental to the game. N64 couldn't handle 60fps with any game unless the game had very simple design.

These days, Wii U aside (though it can do 60 just fine, I don't think Zelda would look very good without it being 30) console games should always go for 60fps. Games look detailed enough, time to focus more on the gameplay. Metal gear solid 5 and Halo 5 show that games can look great at 60fps these days.

I prefer framerate and resolution and i'm willing to pay for both which is why I prefer PC. As an added bonus you also get 1 second load times and a choice between M&K or controller.

What about when in game assets don't animate at 60fps and the game does?

Frame rate. 60 fps games on Dreamcast still look great even today.

I prefer higher fps

... And all of those games that you listed, play better with higher frame rates, especially RPGs, Strategy games, MMOs, Shooters (TPS/FPS) and Platformers.

Depends the genre.

The ideal ofc is 1080p/60fps

Games like RTS / Adventures etc etc ... fps dont matter

Games like Racing , FPS , high paced action titles etc ... Fps matter

There is not a single kind of game that wouldn't benefit from a higher framerate, except maybe for a text based adventure.

Framerate easily. If I wanted to play graphics, I would watch a movie

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

lmao!

What do you mean?

This.

It depends on a case by case basis. There are lots of options I'll turn off before touching resolution.

On the other hand I'm fine with playing some games 30 FPS on PC to get some extra eye-candy.

I prefer having a steady framerate

Resolution is important ... to a point. If my choices are 576p with a higher framerate and 720p with a lower framerate then I might choose the resolution. That's because anything lower than 720p is pretty damned ugly. But when you're getting up there to like 900p vs 1080p it's a different story; the framerate is absolutely more important.

I don't feel that 60 fps is necessary for everything. I agree that with some games the quality of the graphics is part of the experience and it also depends on the type of game it is. Competitive multiplayer games like fighting, driving, and shooters are where 60 fps is most important. All I ask from games that target 30 fps is that it be a steady 30 fps. Screw this shit where a game is 30 fps one minute, then it dips to 20, then it goes up to 26, then drops to 22, etc. Make it 30 fps the whole time! If you need a dynamic resolution scaler to achieve it then so be it.

Depends on game,

If you want both the only option is a decent PC, as neither console can really do it. They may pretend to be 60fps but 99% of the time (with the exception of remakes and Halo 5) they cannot stick to it.

How about 720p60fps vs 1080p30fps?

You could have titled this thread: Who is a cow?

Both. I'm a grown-ass man, I can afford it.

(...but framerate is more important)

Where are we getting this RTS don't benefit from 60 frames thing?

We're talking about a genre that isn't turn based, everything is done on the fly, between you and another player, besides a good connection (if you're not local), you're going to want as many frames as possible to work with so everything animates quicker, moves quicker, and above all else your controls are nice and responsive. Which yes at 60 frames is going to be the case over 30.

The platformer one is the most LOL one, when so many of the ones that would be considered good/great all launched at 60 frames.

idk, let's ask cows how presentation over gameplay has been treating them...The Order and Driveclub come to mind.

lmao , remember this thread and you'll identify hypocrites :D

Resolution all the way, the difference between 30fps and 60fps is meh (unless you wanna talk about 20fps and 60fps), but holy crap the difference between 720p and 1080p is up there.

On my pc, I have the best of both. But that's for another argument and another day.

On the consoles I want a smooth experience, so framerate would win for me. If it has both, that only makes things better. I don't care about the debates/arguments over 900p vs 1080p on the consoles.
I care more about the game running smooth and tbh, gameplay. I don't buy games for the resolution. I buy them to play them and its the gameplay and story that determines (most times, about 90%) if I will like the game or hate it.
If the framerate is bad, that I can be a real turn off and make me dislike the game sometimes, but its rare that would completely make me stop playing it.

Frame Rate. Resolution can be worked around with the right art style.

Its big (720 and 1080) playing some xbox 360/ps3 games on this monitor (1440p) look terrible. 1080 is a bit better, but you'll still notice it.
I've got a handful of monitors though, so I can easily make it so that the games look better (If I wanted). x3 1080 and a odd one, that does 1050 (it's like 1650x1050 or something like that)

Both whenever possible but if I had to sacrifice one it would be resolution over frame rate.