I still consider 30fps entirely playable, not ideal but not noticeable once you get into it
cndvsn
I consider anything above 50 fps playable.
Aggravating_Stock456
If you can’t afford a 60fps experience with all settings turned down for most games. Then you should probably return the game.
The is zero reason to own a game that is barely playable when there are so many great indie titles out there which provide you with an amazing experience.
Smidgerening
I’m in the minority that will play certain games at 30 FPS, the recent Silent Hill 2 remake being an example. I do consider it unplayable if it can’t hold a steady 30 FPS though
AnalysisBudget
If it can do minimum 36 Im good. Not ideal, but I can deal with it
thicctak
I always say that it depends on the type of game, racing games, fighting games or twitchy competitive shooter? 100+ fps, no exceptions, everything else, stable 60fps is fine, I even prefer a locked stable 30-60fps over unstable 70fps to 120fps, it’s only worth it for games that need precise reaction time, turn based strategy games I’m even fine with 20fps. Of course, the more fps the better, but I don’t really need 240fps to play Stardew Valley , I do need it to play CS2 tho.
ZowmasterC
I for sure wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between 60 and 80 fps
Formal_Two_5747
Since I’ve been playing games since 1998, I have no problem with games running at 30fps. 60 is great and anything above of course complementary. But I can understand people who want more. You do you.
PadishaEmperor
I can “run” some games with my integrated graphics on my laptop, meaning that the game will load and my laptop will be extremely loud.
They are often extremely slow though and it is not fun at all.
Edit: there are some hidden gems though that run (to a decent degree) well below graphics requirements. Eg many paradox games or smaller titles like News Tower.
NineHell
I rarely play competitive and mostly coop with friends. 30 fps is playable for me.
FishCityBoi
Like cats:
*If I fits,*
*I sits*
Jose75759
Yeah. I Have a Pc that Runs Tf2 at 20-30 FPS With Low Settings 🥲
Nunulu
i beat assassin’s creed black flag with core i3 530 and ATI HD5450, with unstable ~20FPS
WiltedFlower_04
Stable 60 or 75 fps is good enough for me
zenidaz1995
30fps is fine to me, its the stuttering I can’t handle in games, fps fluctuations everytime you encounter a new area etc…
So either the game is poorly optimized or my rig can’t handle it even at locked 30, it’s a pass for me.
Bal7ha2ar
i can deal with a locked and stable 60 but i will always try to get above 90, either by turning down settings or enabling upscaling. in shooters i will take every last fps i can get tho
-Ev1l
The great Can-O-Worms has been opened.
As a CS player for 11 years now, I can handle most FPS games around 70-80fps if it’s games like Cyberpunk 2077, MilSim games (thinking Hell Let Loose or Arma) and any other non shooter games at that frame rate or lower.
I can’t stand playing fast paced games like Helldivers at anything below 70fps, even 70 feels bad.
Cs2 felt horrible at 150fps so I upgraded my PC.
Meanwhile my dad plays shooters with all of his settings jacked up, upscaling enabled on a 1080p monitor, and 35-45fps (Helldivers, Hell Let loose, ect) but he says he can’t notice.
Everyone is different
Escaliat_
If I can use my input (mouse, pad whatever depending on the system) and there isn’t noticeable stutter it input delay, it’s plenty good enough.
But sometimes I do like the fancy graffix too.
bedwars_player
i played to about 800 hours on beamng drive while never once exceeding 30 fps. usually at about 12-17.
animals_y_stuff
So if something runs at 5 fps is it acceptable lol? Dumb take.
Thezeke64
30 is the bare minimum. 60 is the standard. Everything better is a bonus
MikeSifoda
1080p 60FPS has never let me down, it’s still the cost-benefit king.
Crossman_12
My minimum is 120fps but I always shoot for 165fps
Ok_Reflection1950
after you experience for example 4k or ultra settings visuals or 120fps or so its hard to adjust to anything lower . if you played all your life 1080p 30fps for you its normal and alright .
its just standard you are used too. for me for example anything under 4k looks like ass even 2k to me look really bad on eyes visually. i am not here to hate just saying your standard arent mine standards
madix124
As long as it runs fast enough that I need to turn off Vsync then I’m happy
KimJungUnCool
You should check out /r/SteamDeck, there are so so so many children or generally young people in there that cry 30fps is unplayable; what blows my mind is having such high standards for a handheld PC lol.
I dunno, I grew up where holding 30fps in the newest games was the goal. I find 30 fps to still be perfectly playable for almost any game, and if I’m on my handheld doubly so. Kids these days call 30 fps a slide show and it makes me giggle.
BasementElf1121
Im not playing anything on tiny ass moniter so sixty is min and max
identitycrisis-again
60 fps is my baseline. Below that I begin to have problems with my psyche
CryptikTwo
Just finished a cyberpunk play through with an average of about 35fps, way lower than I usually play at but I wanted to see what the full ray traced experience was like.
Did not disappoint and actually felt surprisingly smooth 90% of the time, wouldn’t even of known how low the fps was if I didn’t have overlay on
Fantastic_Pickle_585
For me, as long as it’s smooth there’s nothing wrong with it. I’ve played plenty of games at 30 fps but it was always a stable 30fps so it was actually an enjoyable experience.
FeydMurphy
Me playing Minecraft in 2012 on 23fps, I was happy to play it!
zeek609
Honestly, it depends on the game.
I’m happy to play Pokémon at 20fps.
Tekken needs to be 60 & anything in VR is an absolute minimum of 90fps.
Whirlwind3
As long as it runs smooth, I have no issue.
deefop
Completely depends on the game.
80 fps in counter strike is dogshit. 80 fps in cyber punk is great.
HelpRespawnedAsDee
This sub hates Lossless Scaling. I find it the most important piece of gaming utility every conceived 🤷
AkijoLive
My favourite game ever is Zelda A Link To The Past, which would probably be considered as “unplayable” for many people gaming today.
Anything bellow 60 is shit… If it’s a multiplayer competitive game crank that up to anything bellow 144
Minimum_Cellist_1313
Oh yeah btw people who want 240 fps have 240hz monitors ( you have to reach 240fps to actually see 240hz ) this decreases delay in actions and allows for faster reactions
Fine-Ratio1252
I am good with a nice rock solid 30 fps😌
heroxoot
80 is such a weird number. Where did this come from? 60fps is okay, 120 is good, 144 is preferred, for me anyway.
Kinksune13
How did they type 80 instead of 20 …. Very odd
DumbusMaxim0
# Not everyone has the hardware for that many frames
nor the refresh rate
GIsimpnumber1236
For some reason I can’t stand games over 30 fps, I get dizzy so if a game does not have a 2000 fps I’m fine with that
Prolapsed_Pigeons
nobody says this what are you even talking about
Nielips
Personally I think 90 FPS is a minimum for a good experience in first person games, and 45 – 60 for 3rd person or top down. Playing first person games at less than 90 usually gives me headaches.
46 Comments
I still consider 30fps entirely playable, not ideal but not noticeable once you get into it
I consider anything above 50 fps playable.
If you can’t afford a 60fps experience with all settings turned down for most games. Then you should probably return the game.
The is zero reason to own a game that is barely playable when there are so many great indie titles out there which provide you with an amazing experience.
I’m in the minority that will play certain games at 30 FPS, the recent Silent Hill 2 remake being an example. I do consider it unplayable if it can’t hold a steady 30 FPS though
If it can do minimum 36 Im good. Not ideal, but I can deal with it
I always say that it depends on the type of game, racing games, fighting games or twitchy competitive shooter? 100+ fps, no exceptions, everything else, stable 60fps is fine, I even prefer a locked stable 30-60fps over unstable 70fps to 120fps, it’s only worth it for games that need precise reaction time, turn based strategy games I’m even fine with 20fps. Of course, the more fps the better, but I don’t really need 240fps to play Stardew Valley , I do need it to play CS2 tho.
I for sure wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between 60 and 80 fps
Since I’ve been playing games since 1998, I have no problem with games running at 30fps. 60 is great and anything above of course complementary. But I can understand people who want more. You do you.
I can “run” some games with my integrated graphics on my laptop, meaning that the game will load and my laptop will be extremely loud.
They are often extremely slow though and it is not fun at all.
Edit: there are some hidden gems though that run (to a decent degree) well below graphics requirements. Eg many paradox games or smaller titles like News Tower.
I rarely play competitive and mostly coop with friends. 30 fps is playable for me.
Like cats:
*If I fits,*
*I sits*
Yeah. I Have a Pc that Runs Tf2 at 20-30 FPS With Low Settings 🥲
i beat assassin’s creed black flag with core i3 530 and ATI HD5450, with unstable ~20FPS
Stable 60 or 75 fps is good enough for me
30fps is fine to me, its the stuttering I can’t handle in games, fps fluctuations everytime you encounter a new area etc…
So either the game is poorly optimized or my rig can’t handle it even at locked 30, it’s a pass for me.
i can deal with a locked and stable 60 but i will always try to get above 90, either by turning down settings or enabling upscaling. in shooters i will take every last fps i can get tho
The great Can-O-Worms has been opened.
As a CS player for 11 years now, I can handle most FPS games around 70-80fps if it’s games like Cyberpunk 2077, MilSim games (thinking Hell Let Loose or Arma) and any other non shooter games at that frame rate or lower.
I can’t stand playing fast paced games like Helldivers at anything below 70fps, even 70 feels bad.
Cs2 felt horrible at 150fps so I upgraded my PC.
Meanwhile my dad plays shooters with all of his settings jacked up, upscaling enabled on a 1080p monitor, and 35-45fps (Helldivers, Hell Let loose, ect) but he says he can’t notice.
Everyone is different
If I can use my input (mouse, pad whatever depending on the system) and there isn’t noticeable stutter it input delay, it’s plenty good enough.
But sometimes I do like the fancy graffix too.
i played to about 800 hours on beamng drive while never once exceeding 30 fps. usually at about 12-17.
So if something runs at 5 fps is it acceptable lol? Dumb take.
30 is the bare minimum. 60 is the standard. Everything better is a bonus
1080p 60FPS has never let me down, it’s still the cost-benefit king.
My minimum is 120fps but I always shoot for 165fps
after you experience for example 4k or ultra settings visuals or 120fps or so its hard to adjust to anything lower . if you played all your life 1080p 30fps for you its normal and alright .
its just standard you are used too. for me for example anything under 4k looks like ass even 2k to me look really bad on eyes visually. i am not here to hate just saying your standard arent mine standards
As long as it runs fast enough that I need to turn off Vsync then I’m happy
You should check out /r/SteamDeck, there are so so so many children or generally young people in there that cry 30fps is unplayable; what blows my mind is having such high standards for a handheld PC lol.
I dunno, I grew up where holding 30fps in the newest games was the goal. I find 30 fps to still be perfectly playable for almost any game, and if I’m on my handheld doubly so. Kids these days call 30 fps a slide show and it makes me giggle.
Im not playing anything on tiny ass moniter so sixty is min and max
60 fps is my baseline. Below that I begin to have problems with my psyche
Just finished a cyberpunk play through with an average of about 35fps, way lower than I usually play at but I wanted to see what the full ray traced experience was like.
Did not disappoint and actually felt surprisingly smooth 90% of the time, wouldn’t even of known how low the fps was if I didn’t have overlay on
For me, as long as it’s smooth there’s nothing wrong with it. I’ve played plenty of games at 30 fps but it was always a stable 30fps so it was actually an enjoyable experience.
Me playing Minecraft in 2012 on 23fps, I was happy to play it!
Honestly, it depends on the game.
I’m happy to play Pokémon at 20fps.
Tekken needs to be 60 & anything in VR is an absolute minimum of 90fps.
As long as it runs smooth, I have no issue.
Completely depends on the game.
80 fps in counter strike is dogshit. 80 fps in cyber punk is great.
This sub hates Lossless Scaling. I find it the most important piece of gaming utility every conceived 🤷
My favourite game ever is Zelda A Link To The Past, which would probably be considered as “unplayable” for many people gaming today.
Well the monitors are cheap:
https://preview.redd.it/azqvlh8ln8ve1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0af87084dcfacd84603bf151dad2b1343b3c0d81
Anything bellow 60 is shit… If it’s a multiplayer competitive game crank that up to anything bellow 144
Oh yeah btw people who want 240 fps have 240hz monitors ( you have to reach 240fps to actually see 240hz ) this decreases delay in actions and allows for faster reactions
I am good with a nice rock solid 30 fps😌
80 is such a weird number. Where did this come from? 60fps is okay, 120 is good, 144 is preferred, for me anyway.
How did they type 80 instead of 20 …. Very odd
# Not everyone has the hardware for that many frames
nor the refresh rate
For some reason I can’t stand games over 30 fps, I get dizzy so if a game does not have a 2000 fps I’m fine with that
nobody says this what are you even talking about
Personally I think 90 FPS is a minimum for a good experience in first person games, and 45 – 60 for 3rd person or top down. Playing first person games at less than 90 usually gives me headaches.