Who actually cares about graphics and framerates?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ilikegbastuff
  • Start date Start date
  • Views Views 8,397
  • Replies Replies 69
  • Likes Likes 3

Who actually cares about graphics and framerates?


  • Total voters
    64
Funny,to see this Thread at this Moment.Really.🤣👍

I got a new CPU today for my PC and guess what I have done this Day....🤣

I can give you a small Hint:
1709842951633.png
 
framerate more than graphics, but why not both. Graphics encapsulates a lot of aspects of gameplay, though.

framerate is especially important if it's a game which originally had a certain fps (tales of symphonia), but had a hammer taken to its knees because they couldn't be bothered with fixing their mistakes. i'd definitely take an fps patch over a graphics patch. It helps with the feeling of controller responsiveness.

I don't like inconsistent framerates, and i like smoother gameplay. this is something that's been important to gamers since the ancient days (they tended to just say "smooth" back then, instead of using fps), but as long as it ran consistently it was usually fine (ocarina of time, for example, runs at 20fps).

framerate, color accuracy, rendering detail, graphical detail, resolution. in that order of importance.
 
Last edited by osaka35,
Don't care about 60 fps or whatever, but games running at stable 30 fps should be a minimal requirement in this day and age.

About graphics : I'll just say I was one of the people who tremendously enjoyed Sonic Frontiers despite its visual shortcomings.
 
I care about both to the exact extent that they should help improve the experience. A game doesn't need to run at a constant 120fps and never dip below, but it should also never really dip into numbers that make the game harder to play. Similar with graphics I don't require them to blow my mind away but they need to be functional and help make the game playable.
If the graphics make it impossible to see what I'm doing or the stuttery performance makes me unhappy I'm out faster than if the graphics are plain and performance is just okay.
 
well, my expectations aren't very high, but i do like my games to look good and not be stuttery too much.
i dont need 60+ fps though, but i do appreciate it, especially in games that are kinda build to need that. there have been a few switch games that just controlled worse compared to a pc version simply because button presses and reaction times were screwed up with fewer and fluctuating framerates
 
I've spent more time on the GBA I modded w/ laminated ITA screen for Christmas than anything else this year (so far), so these are pretty well down the list for me I guess.

That's for "games" though. If it were for a "sim," I'd want the maximum maximumest. I really want to build a simracing "rig" and do the iracing thing, but I genuinely don't have time for such a hobby, and therefore I'm not gonna spend the kind of money it takes either.
 
I mean, who really cares? I somewhat get wanting high framerates but who really cares about how good a games graphics are?
If the game is a finished product and isnt a completley buggy mess I am fine with it. I just ask for a god damn finished game. Which sadly seems to be asking for too much from a lot of devs nowadays.
 
I recently spent 600AUD on a device to play gameboy games in the exact same 60.004hz or whatever the original gameboy did, so yeah I guess I do care about them a lot. I like 30hz games if that's what they are on console, but I'd like them to stay at least 30. I bought the PS5 and XSX so I must care about graphics too.
 
I'm a Nintendo fan and the owner of a Switch... so I'm not obsessed with graphics (otherwise I would have bought a XsX).
Still, I ask for decent enough graphics. And low frame rates in 3D games might cause me dizziness.
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum