Ihave a slight problem with pc games.

Yosiah

Yosiah

Yosiah

Associate
Joined
17 Sep 2010
Posts
1,028
If a game runs below 60 fps, I CANNOT play it. Over the last 13 years, I have somehow trained myself to nitpick and HATE any game that has even the slightest of performance issues. If I cannot run a game at medium with 60fps capped vsync (or whatever hz the monitor supports) I just close the game and uninstall it.

I need to get over this OCD issue I have, because there are so many games being released nowadays that are either buggy or run at lower fps. Obviously this problem would be diminished by buying a £400 graphics card and a better CPU, but what is it with PC games? If I play the same game on the 360, I can SEE it's running at 30 fps, but that 30 fps on the 360 is so much more smooth than even the 50 fps the game would run on my PC.

Arghgh. I'm tempted to just no longer upgrade my PC, because I can't afford to run at good graphics settings with stable fps anymore. If only anything less than vsync didn't feel .... weird with a mouse. I expect the consoles controllers have a positive effect on reducing the horrible "feel/responsiveness" of a low frame rate.

Anyone else really OCD about game performance, such that it can stop you from playing a game entirely, whilst you can watch your friends play at even worse performance that you would even consider playable, and be happy?

I saw my mate load up Witcher 2 for the first time, he got into the game and decided to up the graphics. He was already definitely below 60fps, but he put them to max, which lowered them to around 30-40fps, and he just carried on merrily playing. There is no way in god's earth I could have stomached nicer graphics for a less smooth experience.

It just feels that nowadays the simple console gamers have a less frustrating time, and thus more fun. I couldn't care less for the modding benefits of PC games, because I don't play games more than once anyway, so maybe PC gaming is just no longer right for me :(
 
Last edited:
All relative really.

Also highly dependent on genre. Fast reflex games it is best to have a great fps but for slower more layback games as long as it felt consistent and not impacting enjoyment say a rpg at say 30fps then that's not that bad probably as long as it didn't go under 30 because i think 30 is the smallest fps i would tolerate.
 
If you could get a small tablet peripheral for the PS3 or 360, that somehow gave you an integrated Social Network system with facebook/psn/live/messenger etc, then I would start console gaming immediately. It's a shame the chat/social aspect of console gaming is a bit convoluted - i.e. sending messages to friends on LIVE/PSN.
 
SkeeterUK said:
Fast reflex games it is best to have a great fps
Click to expand...

On a side note, and I know this isn't necessarily what you were saying, but ...

I know a lot of people always use this argument for why PC is better than 360/PS3 for shooters, because we get the mouse and keyboard and thus have a better aim over console shooters. But .... all the console gamers use the same hardware/frame rate and controllers, and do not play with PC players, so the argument is invalid.

SkeeterUK said:
as it didn't go under 30 because i think 30 is the smallest fps i would tolerate.
Click to expand...

It's not so much the playability that bothers me, it's the FEEL of a low fps. On the screen it kind of sluggishly moves the camera/view and this, on my eyes, is extremely distracting.
 
Can someone tell me why PC gamers are so obsessed with 60 fps ?

Take Battlefield 3 on the consoles, isnt it limited to 30 fps ? and we pc gamers can up it to 40 - 60 fps, even more. whats the deal ?
 
I hear what your saying. What you quoted me first with about mouse and keyboard which yeah its going to be nicer because of those but i was refering to frame rate on those games is nice to be high nothing really to do with kb and mouse.

About the 30fps. It really depends on the game. Some games run great at 30fps and feels fast especially with vsync off some dont however and feel like a the mouse is moving slow or choppy and all sorts of issues.

All people can do really is decide whether to have nice visuals and sacrifice fps or vice versa. I usually adjust on a per game process. If it feels sluggish then ill do somit about it regardless of the fps because i like constant frame rate and no dips and fast enough to use the controls properly etc. If a game runs at 30 but is perfectly fine and fast enough to play then i dont mind too much but if another game runs at 30 and feels like input lag or whatever ill whatever i can to fix it so its smooth and fast enough to enjoy.

Of course if i can get a game to 60fps then great, 50 isnt too bad but yeah most people would prefer at least a constant 60 but a lot of the time its not possible due to something or other. So you try to just get it how you want it and try not to think of the fps counters and just concentrate on how it feels for you.
 
Subzero85 said:
Can someone tell me why PC gamers are so obsessed with 60 fps ?

Take Battlefield 3 on the consoles, isnt it limited to 30 fps ? and we pc gamers can up it to 40 - 60 fps, even more. whats the deal ?
Click to expand...

This is the point i'm trying to make and figure out haha. I play 30 fps games on the console and I'm happy. I play a game with less than 60 on the PC and I'm not. It FEELS different. I can't get over it. I wonder if it has anything to do with frame rate smoothing, or the fps being LOCKED to 30 or whatever on the consoles -- rather than the fluctuation of a low fps on the PC.
 
"Placebo".

Allow me to also refer you to "gaming" keyboards, "gaming" mice, and "gaming glasses", and all other manner of paraphernalia designed to separate you from your cash more easily.
 
Shamikebab said:
How is it convoluted :confused:
Click to expand...

Sigh, just go with what I'm saying: PC chatting and socialising is easier. You can get in touch with anyone really fast, by loading up steam and going to your friends list BAM you've sent a real time message. Or quickly joining your friends' TS3 server - BAM you're chatting in real time. Or quickly log onto facebook by alt tabbing to Chrome - BAM you've sent a message or checked if they are online. Or Xfire, or MSN. The options are endless and only a click away, rather than when using a console and hoping your mate is online, and if he's not you have to switch to the PC to get in touch with them.

I know it's not DIFFICULT on the consoles, but the PC beats the 360/PSN system of NEXT SCREEN> NEXT SCREEN> TYPE MESSAGE/INVITE TO CHAT > NEXT SCREEN.

Sure, I guess you could just have a netbook on the Sofa.

As a human being we like everything in one place. The PC is just brilliant for that. I just wish it didn't cost the price of 2 consoles to buy a graphics card and the price of 1 and a half consoles to buy a 2500k cpu, because only with a 2500k and a 580 GTX do I think I would be happy with the performance of a game on the PC. This is the problem with my performance obsessed OCD.
 
Last edited:
arknor said:
you must have fraps on or something to even realise
Click to expand...

Nope. I can tell you the FPS a game is playing at without fraps, to an accuracy of 5-10fps, but not from a recorded video - you have to be playing. It's really not difficult to judge by the "feel" of a game when you move the camera/viewpoint. A lot of PC gamers will be the same way. The ability also comes from being overly obsessed with performance. Obviously when we start going over the 60's, where a normal vsync cap would give us a benchmark, it's nigh on impossible to accurately gauge the FPS.

The fact is, I don't even have to be able to do that. Any pc gamer should be able to feel when a game is not running at a stable fps (vsync if you will).
 
Last edited:
i call BS ive been around pcs for over 10 years , i was one of the people who used to hang out at madinion overclocking and doing benchies almost 24/7 before 90% of people had read about waterclocking in pc format and i cant tell the fps without fraps.

you can tell when a computer is struggling because the settings are to high and turning isnt smooth but imo this is always under 30 and somewhere around 25 fps.

its almost impossible to tell the difference between 35 fps and 50 fps in 90% of games.

i remember when the magic number was 100fps and you had to have it but imo its just tricking yourself into thinking you need it
 
I think you've just summed up a lot of people's reasons for PC gaming in the first place. Most of us play the PC version of most games because the experience gives the opportunity to have a unique experience that is smoother, better looking, and more customizable than on a console. And we pay for that privelidge.

On the flip side, yes you can play on a console and be happy with 30fps but if you know no different then quite simply ignorance is bliss. But at the same time I hear what you are saying, with the PC version of games being frustratingly difficult to get the 'performance' you have paid for over console hardware, which in itself is disappointing at times. However the other view is we have actually put ourselves in this position of expecting more and ultimately if we are unhappy it is our own doing because as you rightly say there is an alternative - you go play it on a console and ignorance is bliss - because you get what you get.

The question is whether you stick to pc gaming and keep tweaking your set-up it until you reach 'the experience' you are after or drop it all and not put yourself in the position of being able to obsess about bettering the experience with more hardware.
 
Makhaira said:
"Placebo".

Allow me to also refer you to "gaming" keyboards, "gaming" mice, and "gaming glasses", and all other manner of paraphernalia designed to separate you from your cash more easily.
Click to expand...

+1 This 60fps mantra has just gone overboard. Games are perfectly smooth at 20 or even 30fps less than 60.
 
Amen

It's like listening to peeps who claim they can hear the difference between a £500 amp/speakers and a £1000 amp/speakers. Or claim their monster cable makes their speakers "come alive" compared to other cables

Bore off
 
Chong Warrior said:
Amen

It's like listening to peeps who claim they can hear the difference between a £500 amp/speakers and a £1000 amp/speakers. Or claim their monster cable makes their speakers "come alive" compared to other cables

Bore off
Click to expand...

do you want to buy a set of cans bruv

got some dr dre beats headphones, made by the same company that do MONSTER HDMI cables!
 
pingu666 said:
depends on peoples eyes really. I can kinda see 60hz crts flicker :(

you could try a fps limiter, like people use for flightsim
Click to expand...

anyone can... i can see a 85hz crt flicker the one i owned did 120hz which looked solid.

modern day monitors use an entirely different technology though and the monitors refresh rate doesnt really matter in the way it used to.

whilst fps matters most games dont have the physics or anything else tied to the fps so it doesnt really matter if your getting 40fps or 60fps and you shouldnt be able to tell the difference.

maybe the problem if the response time of the monitor? im using a quality monitor.
maybe if i had a sluggish one 30fps vs 60fps might make a night and day difference

because 60fps at 5ms probably looks better than 30fps at 5ms

where as 60fps at 2ms and 30fps at 2ms might not seem to different?
 
I play Rift at around 40 fps on decent graphics and I find it perfectly smooth, I don't get how you can have problems at that level. Unless what you're refering to is spikes in fps, and that's something quite different, and is more likely with older cards/cpu I guess. Afterall PC games are often based around the latest, sponsoring graphics card to boost card sales and will likely need to run bigger bandwidths of textures/use more vram, whereas console games are always designed for the same card. Personally aslong as I run with a minimum of 30fps (not average) I don't notice a drop is "smoothness".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom