Does low framerate bother you when playing on console? At one point does it become hard to enjoy?

Does low framerate bother you when playing on console? At one point does it become hard to enjoy?

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Never, some of my favourite games have cripplingly low framerates.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    As long as it’s stable and above 25, I don’t really give a frick.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'd prefer it if it's not there, but it's not a dealbreaker.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's never annoyed me at all and I've never been autistic about it

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Does low framerate bother you when playing on console?
    no
    >At one point does it become hard to enjoy?
    at the point youre a moronic zoomer who just care for shiny graphix maybe

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Z-zoomers!

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        i can assure you boomers werent watching digital foundry to say a game is literally unplayable if theres a single frame drop somewhere inside 50 hours of gameplay, zoom zoom

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Z-zoomers!

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >n-no counterargument
            typical of a zoomer, in fact. here, just gave you another hilarious "z-zoomers!" reply

            ...no, we didnt need DF to tell us cause we used our own fricking eyes you fricking moron?

            yeah i remember all the people not playing N64 games and saying shit racer 3 on the playstation was so much better because it was 60fps, mong. poor nintendo, maybe if people had played ocarina of time and majoras mask they wouldnt have gone bankrupt back then

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The thing about 5th gen is that nearly every 3D game ran badly. Very, very few exceptions to this rule. It's not that people couldn't notice bad performance, they just accepted that it was the only way to play 3D games at the time and got used to it. 6th gen gave us much better performance across the board, and it made badly optimized games negatively stand out.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >people didnt know any better!
                or maybe they just didnt care because the games were still fun, slowdowns and all. its not a matter of just "getting used to it", its a matter of not being a flicky frivolous little b***h who thinks anything below 4k 144fps is an unplayable mess and would have an aneuryism playing megaman with slowdowns and sprite flicker on the nes

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The thing about 5th gen is that nearly every 3D game ran bad
                Lies from a guy who grew up with the N64. Hundreds of PS1 games run at a minimum of 30 stable FPS. Hell, the PS1 alone has nearly a hundred of games running at 60fps. Even the Saturn could make most games run well. Your console was simply badly designed.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Hell, the PS1 alone has nearly a hundred of games running at 60fps.
                How many of them are 3D?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Some of them are 3D AND high-resolution.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Off the top of my head, F-Zero X, Mischief Makers, and Super Smash Bros ran at 60fps while looking better than PS1 games

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                F-Zero X had to do away with most textures, requiring the expansion pak to even show a couple of textures on your ship. It played well but it definitely didn't look "better".

                Mischief Makers was one of those 2D games that don't count for you unless they're on N64, and Smash Bros was a fighter, a genre where PS1 had no problem shitting them at 60FPS AND high-res like Tekken 3, Tobal 2, Bloody Roar 2, Dead or Alive, etc.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >It played well but it definitely didn't look "better".
                It absolutely looked better.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Wipeout looks better than F-Zero X tbh. There's a lot more detail on your ship and the course in general.

                It doesn't have as many racers though so it's not as "impressive". And fog generally holds up better than popin.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Wipeout looks better than F-Zero X tbh. There's a lot more detail on your ship and the course in general.
                It looks like shit, especially in motion with all the textures spazzing out in typical PS1 style.
                >And fog generally holds up better than popin.
                N64 did draw distance better in general, while still making use of fog to hide pop-in.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Funny capture, when I post one that reverses the situation I get called a shill

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I thought this was a done deal terracon really frickin hits that mark. It's a developer skill issue or that time constraints that usually cause bad draw distance, not the consoles.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Forgot pic

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Top=soul
                Bottom=soulless

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Why are you comparing a 1998 game with one released in 1995, dishonest c**t?

                >Your console was simply badly designed.
                The PS1 was too moronic to even render textures correctly.

                At least it didn't smear them with vaseline

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                This webm legitimately looks even worse, with the PS1's characteristic lack of AA making the entire image look grainy and messy and textures doing their typical moronic dancing around

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >grainy
                >bad
                How?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >At least it didn't smear them with vaseline

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Looks more like a DC game than a PS1 game.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                i dont give a shit about this console war bullshit i want to know the name of that game, it looks fun

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Wipeout

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Wipeout. It’s like F-Zero except good.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Wipeout but the third entry

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Smash had a lot more action on screen than any of those 1-on-1 fighters. It's easier to hit 60fps when you only have to draw two character models and a floor.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The characters in Smash were very simplistic, even the ones in humanoid form like Samus and Falcon. Yoshimitsu alone packs more polygons and textures than your 4-player battle between Mario, Jiggypuff, Kirby and Ness

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >requiring the expansion pak to even show a couple of textures on your ship.
                What, F-Zero X didn't use the Expansion Pak. Maybe you're confusing it with the 64DD expansion that got released later.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Except that it has to process 29 capable ai racers all visible on screen at once.
                GT2 shits framerate with just a few cars on screen, with the AI being non existant, they behave like mindless drones.
                I will never claim that F Zero is a good looking title, but there are more reasons for reduced visuals besides 60fps.
                (Also it never uses the expansion pack, not sure who told you that)

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >capable ai racers
                there's no capable AI, it's all rubberbanding + mix of "moments" where the AI slows down which where you should do your turbos, and the way the AI behaves is tied to track length, which is why all those mods with revamped circuits break if the tracks don't have similar lengths to the original

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Mischief Makers
                That's a 2D game.

                >F Zero X
                >Super Smash Bros
                Lolno, they look worse than WipEout and Tekken.

                >It played well but it definitely didn't look "better".
                It absolutely looked better.

                >higher polys
                >non flat track
                >3D background
                Looks better than F-Zero. Wipeout 2097 and Wipeout 3 look even better.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Wipeout also released on N64

                ?t=1548

                Wipeout 64 utilized the N64's analogue stick, making ships more responsive than the series' predecessors. Rather than creating a full-fledged sequel to Wipeout 2097, Psygnosis decided to use Wipeout 2097 and tweak its design.
                Senior producer Andy Satterthwaite stated that Wipeout 64 is a brand-new game and not a port of its predecessor, due to changes to the game structure, new race tracks, and new features. During development, Psygnosis were impressed with the precision of the Nintendo 64 controller's control and were able to make the aircraft curve turns without sacrificing speed.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >"Graphically I think this is a kind of a step back, the graphics are kind of soft, and the rendering system seems to not be that great."
                >"I would also say that the special attacks that you get; actually any visual effect that uses like lens flare type of effect, or explosion effect seems to be a little bit muted? Or soft? Not sure what's up with that."
                N64 literally got roasted in this very video lmao.
                >Psygnosis were impressed with the precision of the Nintendo 64 controller's control
                It was a precise optical analog stick indeed, but it's expensive to manufacture and it will tear your skin while its base crumbles into parmesan. There's a reason nobody's making this shit anymore. Saturn's Hall Effect analog stick is just as precise yet a million times as durable. Nintendo's optical analog stick is objectively dumb. If they didn't want hall effect analog and wanted precision on a budget, they should've made a PS1 dualshock like gamepad, but with a potentiometer analog stick on the left (cheap but less precise) and a trackball on the right (very precise but unfit for moving character around, much more suitable for camera movement). An actual trackball lasts forever unlike n64's optical stick.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >It was a precise optical analog stick indeed, but it's expensive to manufacture and it will tear your skin while its base crumbles into parmesan. There's a reason nobody's making this shit anymore.
                Nintendo themselves started reproducing wireless N64 controllers intended to be used with their NSO titles. Along with the usual Nintendo artificial scarcity bullshit and a hiked up price tag because Nintendo, they did absolutely nothing to fix this. They have such little regard for their slavishly devoted fanbase that they are subjecting them to the same appallingly bad quality control all over again. Any other company does this and they're raked over the fricking coals, but it's okay because Nintendo.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Wipeout 64 utilized the N64's analogue stick, making ships more responsive than the series' predecessors.
                Do you know that Wipeout pros play with the d-pad? it's tailored for it given the twitchy nature of the tracks, easier to do quick direction changes with it.

                https://www.speedrun.com/users/foden44

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Also you could use the NegCon with the first Wipeout for PSX if you wanted analog anyways, so no, W64 isn't more "responsible" than the original.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Are you for real? Negcon controler it's like controlling a radio toy of sorts, only a measly 135 degrees of angled motion, meamwhile the N64 has real 360 degrees of angled precise motion

                https://n64squid.com/n64-joystick-360-degrees/

                >Wipeout XL on Playstation (better than F-Zero)

                >Wipeout on N64 with better controls and features , uuhrr it's shit

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Negcon is like some poor mans analogue stick really

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Negcon is like some poor mans analogue stick really

                You guys don't know what the frick you're talking about. The NegCon is specially designed for racing games. The NegCon is way more precise for traditional racers and as good as you can get without buying a wheel (which they didn't exist for the PS1). Ridge Racer games, Gran Turismo games (and they're dual shock compatible), they're much better and precise with the NegCon due to extra travel range of the analog input.

                I wish you guys could drop the fanboyism for 5 minutes or at least stop talking about things you didn't experience.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Wipeout 64 utilized the N64's analogue stick, making ships more responsive than the series' predecessors.
                neGcon, bro.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Your console was simply badly designed.
                The PS1 was too moronic to even render textures correctly.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Off the top of my head, F-Zero X, Mischief Makers, and Super Smash Bros ran at 60fps while looking better than PS1 games

                F-Zero X had to do away with most textures, requiring the expansion pak to even show a couple of textures on your ship. It played well but it definitely didn't look "better".

                Mischief Makers was one of those 2D games that don't count for you unless they're on N64, and Smash Bros was a fighter, a genre where PS1 had no problem shitting them at 60FPS AND high-res like Tekken 3, Tobal 2, Bloody Roar 2, Dead or Alive, etc.

                Mario Tennis ran at 60 FPS. Not sure if there was an equivalent sports game on the PS1

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Mario Tennis ran at 60 FPS. Not sure if there was an equivalent sports game on the PS1
                ISS/PES games (very popular in Europe) ran at 60fps.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Z-zoomers!

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Shut the frick up already.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          ...no, we didnt need DF to tell us cause we used our own fricking eyes you fricking moron?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why do you act like people didn't care about graphics or performance when PS2 was new in the year 2000 or even when Genesis advertised itself as having "16-bit arcade graphics"?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >n-no counterargument
      typical of a zoomer, in fact. here, just gave you another hilarious "z-zoomers!" reply

      [...]
      yeah i remember all the people not playing N64 games and saying shit racer 3 on the playstation was so much better because it was 60fps, mong. poor nintendo, maybe if people had played ocarina of time and majoras mask they wouldnt have gone bankrupt back then

      Framerate has always mattered a ton, moron.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        n64bros, our response? I don't think we can get out of this one by calling everyone a zoomer

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The response is to crawl over to Ganker and start a seething thread about how Sony is woke and pozzed etc, same as they always do

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >the human eye can't even notice more than 20 frames per sec

        My god, even the 90's had its own "human eye" meme.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >implying that people who care about FPS and people who care about shiny graphix are the same group
      moron

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Personally, I'm going to eat a shit sandwich and pretend I enjoy playing early 3D games that run at 15 or less fps.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Bot post?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yes. I just don't understand the SOVL of games that run like shit and thus have all sorts of gameplay issues and am therefore a bot, a zoomer, etc.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Read your original post back.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    how do they calculate the frame rate of a console like this without an emulator?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      same way they recorded the video

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They take the video recorded and scan it for duplicate frames. It's not that easy in practice, especially when dealing with analog captures, but the principle is there. To be honest I doubt their method is really that accurate. You can confidently say it's <30, but saying yes, we got 17 frames that second, 16 the next, 18 the one after... probably just stacked and averaged noise masquerading as data.

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Were the japanese shit at programming? Most western PS2 games ran at a very stable 30 fps and sometimes a stable 60 fps.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Japanese people care about doing interesting things with gameplay, western devs are busy making cinematic tech demo slop that has high frame rate and uncanny valley graphics

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The irony of your statement, considering most of the most major advancements in gameplay and innovation are from Western devs.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      On balance the complete opposite was true. Most western devs were riding the coattails of Renderware which was a 25-if-youre-lucky engine. Japanese were doing everything custom and hitting more consistent 30s despite their legendary lack of skill compared to western programmers. This was the era of the "engine" where instead of writing code that performed a task and performed it well, an over-educated "software engineer" would build a "module" that did highly configurable things slowly with memory leaks and bugs aplenty.
      SotC is an outlier in that it's a JP game that's ambitious and a bit rubbish.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Virtually any Japanese fighting game on PS2 runs at 60 FPS.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >fighterslop
        You don't say.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          OK. Ape Escape 2 and 3 both run at 60 FPS while Ape Escape 1 on PS1 ran at 30 FPS.
          >inb4 platformerslop

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >inb4 platformerslop
            Nope. The Jak games look a lot better and run just as good though.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      For the most part, yes. If they're told the specific architecture of hardware they can succinctly develop games for it based around that architectures, but if they have to develop a game without the specific architecture in mind, like is typical for PC's, and build games that are stable across various different setups, they are fricking atrocious. /vr/ gives them a pass though because they developed games they played in their childhood on the NES and Genesis, ignoring the fact that they completely and utterly failed to break into the PC gaming market, even on their own fricking exclusive computer hardware. They're still trying to play catch-up with the West in that regard and only a mere 5 years ago it seemed like every major triple A Japanese game on STEAM ran like dog turds because they had no idea what the frick they were doing.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    not if its a sony console

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I never cared as a kid
    Hell I regularly played Alien vs Predator on a fricking p100 at like 3 frames a second. I got quite far with it too.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You mean the 3D game for PC by Rebellion UK? The first AvP, right? 3 frames per second?

      I had a Pentium Celeron 300 mhz and a Voodoo 4 4500 for that and played it at 640x480 resolution and it was amazing.

      I had Morrowind too and that would sometimes be at 3 frames per second or worse. Got really far but can never beat it cuz exploring is too much fun.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Only when it's on a Nintendo console.
    Low framerates on a playstation are not a problem however.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Unironically true when you consider how graphically unambitious Nintendo titles are. It's fricking mind-boggling how a game that looks as shit as Pokemon chugs.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Shadow of the Colossus is a horribly optimized game and not a representative example of PS2 game performance. Many games run at locked 60 FPS.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      funny, somehow a low framerate doesn't bother me so much on console but it triggers some kind of ocd on pc.

      this is an exception. i think any version of this game is good, but boy is the bad framerate noticeable on ps2.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >funny, somehow a low framerate doesn't bother me so much on console but it triggers some kind of ocd on pc.
        I don't know, the last time I played a PS2 on CRT TV I was only 12 and didn't know PC gaming. Just a few years later I played GTA Vice City on a pentium 4 PC and an LCD monitor, and it blew my mind to see it running at 1024x768 with crisp graphics and a very stable fps. As I got older I got more sensitive to framerate.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        For me it's about the input I'm using. 30fps is totally fine on a controller but even 60fps on a mouse is a little juddery.

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If it's a low motion game, e.g. a point and click adventure, I can tolerate it. If it's an action game, 60fps is the absolute minimum.

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't know if it's my shitty eyes or something else, but I can't tell the difference between 30 and 120 FPS as long as it's stable. Obviously if there's stuttering or freezing I notice.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You might actually have something wrong with your eyes, it’s very noticeable. Try going from something with a lot of motion like Sonic Adventure 2 directly to Zelda Ocarina of Time, that should be noticeable.

      https://i.imgur.com/hq9Pc9s.png

      Does low framerate bother you when playing on console? At one point does it become hard to enjoy?

      It doesn’t bother me on console, but really bothers me on PC. Knowing there’s something I can do to improve performance always makes me feel inclined to do so. There’s a strange pride in having a powerful machine I’ve put together myself.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I don't have either of those titles, but I've watched movies with high/low frame rates and played games across different generations of consoles and I can't tell what difference frame rate makes. I don't even really know what I'm looking for. It's not like a really old system where you see the screen redraw (Amiga stuff).

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It’s always going to be more noticeable in 3D games, especially ones where you have camera movement. If you haven’t spent a lot of time with games like that then it makes sense. I’m trying to think about a good television example, back in the day some shows/movies would record on film at 24fps, and some would record on tape at 60fps. Tape was significantly cheaper to record on, so stuff like soap operas would use it. I can think of a bunch that used film, but I can’t think of anything off the top of my head that used tape. Try looking it up and you’ll likely see a difference there. Also if you try looking at these games/shows on YouTube be careful, they will change stream quality and limit to 30 fps often. Check the little cogwheel options menu and make sure it’s at 60fps.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The last time this was brought up was when I was playing Deus Ex and a friend asked why I was playing it capped at 30fps. I hadn't realised I was, and saw no real difference playing it at 120 (though my monitor has a refresh rate of 60). I think the mouse moved a bit differently and needed to be tweaked down on sensitity, but no visual differences I could see.
            Maybe it's dyspraxia.

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No, I enjoyed Goldeneye with the friends.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nice meme.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Thanks.

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's funny how some anon is trying to make sweeping generalizations about a gen based on his kiddie machine, you accuse him of being a kiddie and sure enough, he exposes himself as kiddie. I love my good endings.

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's bothersome if movement in the game is slow too

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How do Nintendo fanboys even have the balls to come here and try and talk shit about Sony when they got completely fricking dominated by them during the gens this board focuses on? It wasn’t even close, you got completely whupped and you got stuck playing embarrassing blurry fisher price games while everyone else was playing Resident Evil and MGS. Sit the frick down and eat your humble pie. Or better yet, run back to Ganker with the rest of the tendies where you can circlejerk over Nintendo’s same three games they release every year.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Booohoooo, how dare you!
      Kek, just go outside and leave this place for a while

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      God you want to revise your shitty outcast childhood so that you were a chad so bad rofl

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It bothers me when it’s on Nintendo 64

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >start talking shit about Sony
      >get utterly rocked
      >hide behind neutrality
      You do this every time. Little pussy.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        who are you quoting?

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Also, 30fps bothers me when it’s on a Microsoft console

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, always.

    The first time I noticed low framerates was probably on the N64 back in 1998.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Nintendo has always done this shit to their own detriment. It’s one reason nobody wants to develop for their consoles and they have to rely on their cult member fans to buy the same titles over and over again. But hey that cult like devotion from the bing bing wahoo crowd has kept them in business.

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    fighting games and fps have to be 60fps for me to play them. most other games i can deal with.

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    how the frick did this turn into a console war thread?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      somebody took offense after mentioning that 5th gen consoles often ran 3d games badly

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >thread specifically calls out a PS2 exclusive
      Snoys were bound to arrive in full force on this one.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Almost like you shouldn't throw stones when you live in a crystal house

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Nintendo fanboys started talking shit about the consoles that fricked theirs in the ass

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No. I see it as nescessary for visuals. I prefer it. Doubling the framerate would halve the visuals. But I am disgusted when a high resolution is used.

    Aiming needs to be at 60fps or higher. But visuals can be degraded during aim eg: only the centre of the screen in regular/high reaolution, the rest lowering towards the edge of the screen, blurred.

    Different games benefit from different framerates.
    Though I didn't consider FFXIII-2 to be playable due to it's low framerate.

    It needs to be hidden behind motion blur at least.

    SOTC was 20fps. TLOU wasn't much higher. 3rd person games can handle low framerate better.

    I'd rather play a COD MW than Crysis 2. But Killzone 2 multiplayer is better than both. I liked Tenchu Z and Kane and Lynch more than first person options.

    The Division was great. So was Homefront: The Revolution, untill it's ending. Both were 30fps. Would have preferred them at lower res with better graphics instead. I played them at 720p mostly. On a plasma and an lcd. Ran while playing them on a treadmill, a rule I imposed for myself in order to get fit, had to walk/jog/run while playing games, watching movies. Made time go faster and 10 hours or more a day enjoyable. Another story.

    Pushing hardware is somewhat required for it to be impressive. Sotc or Tlou on another console, might play better but be less impressive.

    There's no limit to graphics. It can always be better and it should be out of reach/control during development. Seem too much. Far ahead. Downgrades are generally unacceptable though. Aiming high and then degrading everything destroys something almost entirely.

    I would rather something is made too good for hardware too, to force hardware to be shaped to handle it. I don't like conforming to hardware.

    Shouldn't be doing what the hardware is good at. Should find new ways of using it that gets accross an intent or desired result.

    Varied framerate for different situations could be better. Framerate needs to increase with res.

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    23.976 fps was and is enough.
    >At one point does it become hard to enjoy?
    Below 12 fps

  28. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't really mind low framerates, I was still able to play Goldeneye on a CRT just fine and everyone knows how the FPS drops are in that game. But ideally there should be compromises like good controls so the drops don't feel as horrific, or elements like auto-aim and the like so that it doesn't get in the way of the experience.
    Even Silent Hill 1's framerate isn't the greatest, but at least combat doesn't entirely feel that demanding due to autoaim along with the fact that you can easily skip tons of fights.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      A horror game is kinda better when it has clunky and imprecise combat. A low framerate is almost an improvement.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I guess there is something to be said for a horror game when its still playable enough, but you still don't feel like your reaction time is fast enough to respond to all threats with ease.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >I was still able to play Goldeneye on a CRT just fine
      I wasn't, that game sucks shit through a straw.

  29. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, it bothers me
    I can just barely acclimate to 30 if I stick with it for a couple of days. Around 40-50 I'm comfortable if the game isn't too twitchy.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      *I somehow beat the hardest fights in armored core master of arena at 22 fps, as in the master level arena battles that get you the special credits screen. I've since learned that you can overclock the emulated PS1 cpu in duckstation and old Fromsoft games will run at higher framerates while game speed only slightly increases and without the music fricking up. Really wish I'd known that

  30. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Depends what the game is really. If your talking about a JRPG or something I couldn't care if the game is running 15-20FPS. On the other hand if your talking about FPS something like Turok 2 or Perfect Dark that ran in the low teens to single digits that's a different story. After playing those on PC at a higher framerate the N64 version is completely unplayable to me and I probably will never play those versions again.

  31. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't actually care about framerate much at all, I just use it to make fun of n64 fans. I've only ever played a few games in recent memory where the performance bothered me. If I played N64 it'd be higher.

  32. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Below 30 is rough but below 20 is a complete dealbreaker. I've never understood how people could enjoy Star Fox on SNES.

  33. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Not with console games. That's just the way it is. But with PC games I can't stand low framerate because I know it's my hardware.

  34. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ocarina of Time and Majoras Mask run at 20 FPS. Noone even notices or cares.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Noone even notices or cares.
      Todd Howard noticed and cared.

      [...]
      Framerate has always mattered a ton, moron.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        When I said noticed I meant the 20fps isnt perceived as a fault. You can obviously tell the difference between 20/30/60/144 fps. Upping OoTs framerate doesn't make the game better though.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Truly the one who should be the voice on performance related issues, a man who never made a game that ran bad in his life

  35. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >oh no white executive cares now i must care too
    low iq generation. nuke all zoomers.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >white executive
      Are you brown or something?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      how did you out-moron your earlier moronic comment?

  36. 3 weeks ago
    Radiochan

    no not in the slightest and it never did

  37. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    When I had no other way, it didn't as much.
    But I rather emulate with enhancements these days.

  38. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Does low framerate bother you when playing on console?
    Not really
    >At one point does it become hard to enjoy?
    Kill sample-and-hold displays. Behead sample-and-hold displays. Roundhouse kick sample-and-hold displays into the concrete. Slam dunk sample-and-hold displays into the trashcan. Crucify filthy sample-and-hold displays. Defecate in a sample-and-hold displays. Launch sample-and-hold displays into the sun. Stir fry sample-and-hold displays in a wok. Toss sample-and-hold displays into active volcanoes. Urinate into a sample-and-hold displays hdmi port. Judo throw sample-and-hold displays into a wood chipper. Twist sample-and-hold displays cables off. Karate chop sample-and-hold displays in half. Curb stomp sample-and-hold displays. Trap sample-and-hold displays in quicksand. Crush sample-and-hold displays in the trash compactor. Liquefy sample-and-hold displays in a vat of acid. Eat sample-and-hold displays. Dissect sample-and-hold displays. Exterminate sample-and-hold displays in the gas chamber. Stomp sample-and-hold displays screens with steel toed boots. Cremate sample-and-hold displays in the oven. Lobotomize smart sample-and-hold displays. Mandatory abortions of sample-and-hold displays. Grind sample-and-hold displays screens in the garbage disposal. Drown sample-and-hold displays in fried chicken grease. Vaporize sample-and-hold displays with a ray gun. Kick old sample-and-hold displays down the stairs. Feed sample-and-hold displays to alligators. Slice sample-and-hold displays with a katana.

  39. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I had an N64 growing up. So no.

  40. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Imagine growing up with an N64. The original nogaems console, frame rate was abysmal, games looked like blurry shit. Everyone else was enjoying the massive selection of games on the predecessor to the best-selling console of all time.

  41. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yes but it's less noticeable with a controller than with a mouse for me

  42. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I will say it again, turn /vp/ into /nin/, everybody is happy.
    Pokemon is declining either way.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      threads can stay up on /vr/ from 1 post a day I don't think the existence of nintendo threads are killing the board.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >implying it will stop them from shitting entire boards

  43. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Playing OoT at a tenuous 20fps at an impressionable age of 9 completely immunized me against caring about frame rates.

  44. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yes and it annoyed me back then too. It's just something to put up with like long load times.

  45. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't generally notice framerate unless it is extremely unstable, such as in King's Field 2, and even then it isn't enough to ruin a game for me.

  46. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    not really, i get used to it in like five minutes, its annoying when the framerate isnt consistant but even then i get used to it

  47. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Honestly low frame rates only bother me if there are alternatives with better frame rates.
    ie. I refuse to play a version of a multiplat game with worse performance than another version.

  48. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Playing a game with low framerates on an old console bothers me a lot less than playing a recent game on PC with low framerates. On console I just know I can't do anything about it at all, so I just forget about it.

  49. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I think this thread should be nuked to kill every console warring gay. Console warriors should be banned and publicly executed on the spot, what a bunch of moronic idiots.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *