• 94 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Seppli (10251 posts) -
#2 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

Crysis 2 just got me thinking. What is a 'bad framerate' for you? Like there's lots of CoD players who turn up their noses at Battlefield's 30 FPS (on consoles of course). When reading comments on games with a locked framerate of 30 FPS, there's always that one guy saying 'framerate is terrible'. Having played many games below required specs on PC as a kid, a bad framerate is below 20 FPS for me. Probably more precisely, below 24/26 FPS (that's what TV shows are/were at).
 
How about you? What's a disturbingly bad framerate to you?

#3 Posted by Cameron (599 posts) -

Depends on the game. I like my racing games and FPS at 60+, but for games like Civ 5 or Total War games I'm good with anything over 20.

#4 Posted by moelarrycurly (668 posts) -

It really depends; only if it's noticeable I guess, which can sometimes be as high as 30 FPS.

#5 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

For some reason, I never really notice bad frame rates. OK, I notice them on my computer, sometimes, but that's more due to my computer being shit.

#6 Posted by MildMolasses (3221 posts) -

Why would anyone answer anything below 60?  A bad framerate is anything that stutters. To say that 30 fps is bad is idiotic
#7 Posted by Icemael (6320 posts) -

If it's a really slow game, I can be fine with 20+. If it's something fast, however, 30 is the minimum.

#8 Posted by natetodamax (19205 posts) -

A bad framerate is one that stutters.

#9 Posted by ThePhantomnaut (6197 posts) -

Below 25 is breaking balls and uteri.

#10 Posted by MistaSparkle (2148 posts) -

Although low frame rate is bad, so is super high frame rate. Ever played sonic at 120 FPS? Its pretty messed up.

#11 Posted by jakob187 (21670 posts) -

Torchlight on XBLA.  That's a bad framerate.

#12 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -
@MildMolasses said:

" Why would anyone answer anything below 60?  A bad framerate is anything that stutters. To say that 30 fps is bad is idiotic "

While I agree with that, I've seen lots of comments on how 30 FPS is gamebreakingly bad. That's why I'm so curious. I can deal with framerates dropping anywhere between 20-30 FPS when under heavy duty, as long as the game runs a smooth 30 FPS most of the time.
 
Other's seem to have a problem with framerates dropping under 60 FPS, which I find outlandish.
#13 Posted by SomeJerk (3246 posts) -

If it's a game where a high and stable framerate matters, like shooters and racers, a steady 60 is essential. BC2 on consoles does pretty well for being 30 though, I must say.
 
But if you're going to give me 30, you better goddamn give me 1280x720 with a stable 30.

#14 Posted by Little_Socrates (5677 posts) -

If you give me a stable 30, I'm totally happy. If it's chugging when I'm casting spells, start glowing, or something explodes, then we've got an issue.

#15 Posted by Captain_Felafel (1573 posts) -

It actually depends on the game for me, as there are just certain genres I'm used to producing a higher framerate than others. But as a general rule of thumb, anything below 30 is noticeable, anything below 25 is annoying, anything below 20 is bad and anything below 15 is unplayable. 

#16 Posted by MooseyMcMan (11003 posts) -

It's not so much a matter of the number as it is how well it maintains it. I'd rather take a game that runs smoothly at 30 than a game that's sometimes at 60, but is all stutter-y and twitchy. 

Moderator Online
#17 Posted by B0nd07 (1699 posts) -

Anything that visually stutters, so roughly mid-20s fps and lower.

#18 Posted by jorbear (2517 posts) -

If the framerate makes the game harder to play, it's bad; anything other than that is okay for me. So it really just depends on the game.

#19 Posted by IBurningStar (2172 posts) -

It really depends on the game. As long as it stays at 30 fps or above then I am fine. As long as that speed is consistent and doesn't stutter, then I usually don't have a problem with it. The exception to this would be if I am playing a twitch reflexes type of game then I want it to be locked at 60 fps at all times. I don't play a lot of those kind of games, though.

#20 Posted by Th3_James (2578 posts) -

Depends on game, but yeah below 60 annoys me if i am playing a pc game.

#21 Posted by JoelTGM (5596 posts) -

Below 60 is bad.  

#22 Posted by Demyx (3237 posts) -

I'd agree with you, anything bellow like 25 is too low. But honestly, its only cause I'm kinda desperate. Should be like nothing below 30 or even 60 FPS

#23 Edited by Enigma777 (6073 posts) -

When frames get into the single-digit number. I'm generally oblivious to anything above that. Anyways, a bad framerate doesn't bother me as much as bad textures or bad pop-in because those are a lot more noticeable to me.  
 
I'm also oblivious to screen tear. I know what it's supposed to be, but I've never, ever noticed it in a game, even ones that were supposedly plagued with it.

#24 Edited by Beforet (2921 posts) -

Below 30 in general, but I only have a problem if the framerate is inconsistent. A while back I would get between 20-60 playing Oblivion which caused an unbearable amount of stutter. I would have been fine with a solid 20 or 25.
 
Edit: And on consoles I just don't care. Bad framerates on a PC make me anxious, like my computer is behaving poorly. With console games I can just shrug it off.

#25 Posted by p_p_o_d (543 posts) -

unless its jumping up and down I never notice it. 
 
 
 
but I would rather have a solid capped 30 FPS then a inconsistent 60fps.   
 
just try and keep it as solid as possible.  no random 10fps + drops.

#26 Posted by Cazamalos (983 posts) -

i can play almost everything at 30 fps without trouble but they need to be stable 
i don't like when games suddenly become a slideshow

#27 Posted by kingzetta (4307 posts) -

When it chugs

#28 Posted by MikkaQ (10288 posts) -

Anything slower than film (24 frames per second), is where it gets bad for me. 

#29 Posted by PerryVandell (2103 posts) -

I'm usually fine with anything that's 30+ fps. I can manage with 25 fps but anything below that can make playing the game a chore.

#30 Posted by Mirado (993 posts) -

Anything below 60; for years I was fine with anything above 30, but a new PC with Crossfire'd GPUs has ruined me.
 
It's amazing how fast a new PC can turn you into a snob; I'm having a lot of "How do you play at that rate?" moments every time I look at my roommates laptop, which I never noticed in the past.

#31 Posted by Jeff (3577 posts) -

The number is less important than the consistency. There's nothing inherently wrong with being locked at 30, as long as it maintains 30 the entire time. Obviously, 60 is preferable.

Staff
#32 Posted by MannyMAR (451 posts) -

Anything below film frame rate (24 fps) bugs the shit out of me. I say if it looks like a 1960's stop-motion Christmas special, then something's wrong.

#33 Posted by nukesniper (1312 posts) -

Less than 30 is when I can notice it most and when it starts to bother me. At 30 it looks smooth, or at least smooth enough for me to feel good about it.  At 15-20 it is still playable, but I get bothered by the thought of something big happening and having the game dip below 10 or so, where I hate it. 
 
That said, games like CoD and Burnout look so damn good at 60FPS, that I obviously would pick that if you asked me what I prefer (duh). 
 
When I play computer games (i have a med-low comp by my standards) I aim for settings that will get me to 45 or so at the lowest. I don't need super detailed shadows as much as I need a good framerate. I aim for 60, but that then affords that when stuff gets crazy it will only drop to 40 or so. Least that is my hope.

#34 Posted by reddin (418 posts) -

I prefer 60, will accept 30, and anything less than 30 is bad.

#35 Posted by Trifork89 (73 posts) -

When anything happens in Goldeneye for the Wii.. that's a piss poor frame rate, so anything better than that i can stand. 
 
Most Wii games for example in my opinion run at a steady frame rate.
#36 Posted by Hourai (2795 posts) -

If it's on console, anything below 30 bothers me. If it's on PC, I can deal with 15-20 FPS if it means the game will look significantly better.

#37 Posted by Kyreo (4600 posts) -
@jakob187 said:
" Torchlight on XBLA.  That's a bad framerate. "
Is it really that bad?
#38 Edited by ajamafalous (11993 posts) -

Having a high-end PC makes me cringe at anything under 60. I didn't used to be that way, but now anything under 45 is bad, and anything under 30 is borderline unplayable for me.
 
 
Also, no v-sync. It looks slightly worse (occasionally), but the noticeable input lag kills me.

#39 Posted by FinalCut (94 posts) -

Like mentioned by someone previously it's only when it's below 24ish when it becomes noticeable or irritating. This is especially so when there's a variable framerate and it's jumping between 24 to 30 or 60 all the time. A 24 fps locked framerate is still completely playable for me.

#40 Posted by Geno (6477 posts) -

Less than 40.

#41 Posted by Toms115 (2316 posts) -

25fps is the absolute minimum for me.

#42 Posted by crusader8463 (14422 posts) -

If I notice a stutter or slow down then it drives me nuts. Noticed it happen a ton while playing red dead in certain areas.  
 
My favourite experience with frame rate drops was with playing inFAMOUS. When you looked out over the water the game was silky smooth, then as you panned the camera around to face the city you could see the framerate slowing to a crawl then speeding back up again as you faced the water.

#43 Posted by triple07 (1196 posts) -
@Seppli said:
" @MildMolasses said:

" Why would anyone answer anything below 60?  A bad framerate is anything that stutters. To say that 30 fps is bad is idiotic "

While I agree with that, I've seen lots of comments on how 30 FPS is gamebreakingly bad. That's why I'm so curious. I can deal with framerates dropping anywhere between 20-30 FPS when under heavy duty, as long as the game runs a smooth 30 FPS most of the time.  Other's seem to have a problem with framerates dropping under 60 FPS, which I find outlandish. "
Those people are either trolling or have some sort of mental problem. I can understand wanting fast paced games like racing and competitive FPS being 60 but to say a game is broken if under 60 is crazy.  
#44 Posted by DystopiaX (5310 posts) -

Less than 30, but keeping the frame rate liked in/consistent is more important IMO.

#45 Posted by Subjugation (4720 posts) -

Anything over 30 is fine as long as it is consistent. It's the stuttering that drives me mad.

#46 Posted by TheDudeOfGaming (6078 posts) -

Saints Row 2...PC...and Oblivion some 4 years ago.  I still wake up with cold sweats.

#47 Posted by President_Barackbar (3462 posts) -

Under 30, because that's the point when you start to get some stuttering.

#48 Posted by RandomInternetUser (6789 posts) -

Usually <30 but for quicker games like FPS and Arcade Racing games I prefer to have >45.  But now that I pretty much strictly play on PC and max every game I have at 60, it sucks to see something around 30.

#49 Posted by Bobdaman18 (700 posts) -

Less than 40ish starts to bother me. I don't notice screen tearing at all though.

#50 Posted by iam3green (14390 posts) -

lower than 30 frames is bad. it's only bad when i notice that it's a bad framerate.