[–] DeathorGlory9 3 points 5 points 8 points (+8|-3) ago
TotalBiscuit is really starting to go over board with the whole 60fps thing lately. Sure 60fps is nice to have especially in certain genres of games like fps or fighting games but is it really necessary for games like VVVVV, Anodyne or Jet Set radio?
I think its more as, this info should be known so the consumer can make a better choice. Some people (like me) don't really give a hoot whether a game is 30 or 60 fps, my laptop is a toaster.
[–] KeyboardFrenzy 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I think it is only overboard for some people. I for one, used to be in the same boat, and thought "what's the big deal? 30fps is fine for a lot of stuff as long as it's super stable." Then I started watching 1080p60 on youtube and actually noticed the difference; specifically, I was watching a game stream that had traditionally been 1080p but not 60fps, and right after the update, I noticed an immediate difference (and I didn't know about the update, I just sort of thought "wow, this seems a lot smoother then normal. did this streamer get a new pc? was there some update on my pc to enable this?" little digging, some quick toggling, and low and behold it's this new fangled 60fps option). So to me, even if I can get by with 30fps (after all, I have been for quite some time), I really notice and appreciate the ability of 60fps, and higher. And so really, for me, it's not overboard, it's a selling point (or a con, in this case of these games listed) for me, and I appreciate the fact that this list was made and is maintained.
Just my 2cents.
[–] DeathorGlory9 ago
But for sprite based games like Anodyne it would increase the work load by a huge amount for no benefit aside from smoother animations that in most games like Anodyne it has no effect on the game play.
[–] Ahabandthewhitegrail 0 points 16 points 16 points (+16|-0) ago
This may be my favorite name and shame campaign ever, especially with the "you deserve better" tag line.
[–] [deleted] 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
[–] ltmyndonos 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
I think that is the point. It's on a PC, so we should be able to customize the game to play better. Placing a lock on it is defeating the purpose of PC( not that I make mods, but those wonderful people greatly enhance my gaming experience)
[–] peter_file 0 points 18 points 18 points (+18|-0) ago
That's a disturbingly large amount of games, though.
[–] [deleted] 0 points 11 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago
[–] phly95 1 point 6 points 7 points (+7|-1) ago (edited ago)
Really? Are you going to not play a good game just because of a framerate lock? Sure they shouldn't do that, but if you enjoy the game, fps is just icing on the cake (unless you've got fluctuating framerate and/or stuttering but that's different). The n64 Zelda series was locked at 20 fps, but people really enjoy it and play it anyway. They did remake it on 3ds at 60fps though)
[–] Bobfish_Almighty 1 point 1 point 2 points (+2|-1) ago
Why is it such a big deal anyway?
As long as it's stable, why do you care so much?
[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
[–] Bobfish_Almighty ago
Of course, I understand the preference. I prefer a higher framerate myself. What I'm still trying to understand is why people say that 30 frames is objectively a bad thing. You know, those people that will say it's an unplayable slideshow. That kind of thing. I just can't wrap my head around the reasoning. The only argument I've seen seems to reside solely around frustration that a killer machine is being hamstrung. Which is fine, if that's your reason for being pissed at the cap, there's no shame in that.
But I keep hearing people insist that it's an irrefutable fact that a 30 frame limit is out and out bad. Not just inferior, but bad. And I keep trying to ask people why, but all I get is circular arguments and "well DUH" responses.
See. now, there was another guy in here who said that he gets screen tearing at 30 frames. And that's a good reason. We all know how infuriating screen tearing can be. But some people don't have that problem. I mean, dude, I played Crysis at an average framerate of 12 and didn't get any tearing at all at the time. Whilst I played F.3.A.R at a solid 60 and had screen tearing everywhere because it's a shitty game.
So, my question is, what makes 30fps bad? Not just worse, less good, inferior, but actively a bad, unacceptable thing beyond personal preference and frustration at games not fully utilising your hardware? Can you explain that to me?
[–] [deleted] 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
[–] Bobfish_Almighty 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Good reason
[–] LaconicSpecter 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
The thing is that these are PC games. On a fixed environment, sure, if 30fps is what you have to do for it to be stable then do it. But in the PC environment, system specifications are not fixed and my computer may well be capable of running the game at double or even triple that framerate and as arbitrary framerates are not hard to support nowadays, the game should let me take advantage of the hardware I selected.
[–] Bobfish_Almighty 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
It's the very fact that PC specs aren't set that leads to caps though. You might be able to hit higher, and so might I, and a million other people. But the people who can't, are they supposed to just make do with a choppy framerate because we want to show off our rigs?