Poll: A Choice: Graphics vs FpS

[Sebenko]

Do you really notice? I don't notice as long as the game plays smoothly. I'll crank up all the settings until I get to the highest I can with a good frame rate.

 

[Outright Villainy]

I don't know, you should always stay high, but 50fps is still a damn respectable number. Most console games don't even go above 30 by the way, and Bioshock has a ridiculously low framerate, and I couldn't bear to ugly it up for the sake of it, as I enjoyed the atmosphere too much. In this case, as the difference is so slight, if you're feeling bad at all that you have to give up the pretty stuff then leave it on, you'd barely notice it anwyay; I very much doubt most people could tell you a difference of only a few frames, once you're above 50.

 

[Optimus Hagrid]

Graphics for single player, constant framerate for multiplayer. Simple.

 

[Kurokami]

How do you expect to perform well in the game if you don't have a good FpS?

Even forgetting game performance, games such as Farcry, Red Dead Redemption, Oblivion, whatever is meant to have very good graphics means very little unless its fluid, otherwise you're just watching a slideshow. =/

(That's how I feel anyway)

 

[Humble85]

Now I may have said this before on some of my previous threads, but I love fighting games.
I may not be extremely good at them, but I love them just the same. So, I went and reinstalled Street Fighter 4 onto my laptop today, and with my latest driver update, things have been going a lot smoother than they used to(not incredibly so, but still smoother).

And I was just wondering if I should try taking my settings to the limit..sort of.

My settings have been at Medium for the longest time, and for the most part(depends on some stages sometimes), I usually on average get about 55-60 FpS and the game ends up looking like this:

Spoiler: Street Fighter 4: Medium Settings

But since the PC version has it's own special features with its added effects(which only work on high) I was wondering if I should use one of those and this is what I got.
For all of them, I got around 50-60 FpS, though I liked the Ink and Watercolour ones the best:

Spoiler: Street Fighter 4: High Settings, Ink

Spoiler: Street Fighter 4: High Settings, Watercolour

So what do you Escapists think? Should I stay with the constant FpS, or go with the prettiness at the cost of a few?

I find low Fps to be almost unbearable and terrible to the eye and general feeling. The smoother it goes, the better. So I'd say going with the high settings is kinda stupid, go wit dem smooth frames per second, mon!

 

[Omnific One]

Once it's over 25, it feels alright to me. Remember, most films are at 24.something or 29.something frames a second.

 

[Marter]

FpS by far. I don't really care about graphics all that much, but a game playing smoothly is always nice.

 

[Wolfram23]

Try with Vsync off...

And a 5fps min drop is pretty much negligible. Anything (to me) over 40fps is decent if I can have all the eye candy.

 

[veloper]

framerate is god

30 fps may be fine for a strategy game, but not for action.
FPSes should be in the 60+ range.

Most shooters on consoles are awfully unresponsive and slow and there is room for alot of improvement here, so maybe M$ or Sony could enforce a minimum performance for game genres on the next generation consoles (and offer enough processing power so studios won't have to cry about it).

Fortunately on PC we already have the ability to play games at high settings and 60+ fps.

 

[DazZ.]

Multiplayer I'll choose lowest of the low if it means I get more frames, frames over graphics everytime in multiplayer.

Single player I'll happily take a knock down to 30fps or even 20 as a minimum.

 

[Continuity]

What matters for high paced game is a high minimum fps e.g. 30, Personally I like my games to look good and so long as I can hit a minimum fps of 30 then I will whack the settings to max. Average fps can be 60 or 70 but if you are spiking down to a minimum fps of 20 or less then the game may become unplayable.

 

[Nalgas D. Lemur]

It depends very strongly on the game. A high-speed, real-time, twitchy action game? FPS, all the way. A turn-based strategy game or RPG or something like that? As pretty as I can make it while still staying above ~30-ish FPS. It's been a while since I've had to care much one way or the other, though, because I usually don't buy anything new until it's gone down in price/is on sale a year or two after it comes out, so a $100 video card will easily max out the vast majority of stuff at that point even at 1920x1200.

 

[migo]

FPS, games were always fine with lower graphics, but choppy visuals are as annoying as stuttering sounds.

 

[Tharwen]

FPS. I think 30 is the minimum. I used to believe that there was no visible difference between 15 and 30 FPS, but then I put the graphics down and was blown away by the intense smoothness that followed. I've got a better computer since then though so I no longer have to make that choice

 

[Zing]

Always FPS. FPS affects your gameplay, graphics don't. That said, having a computer that doesn't hamper FPS when on high graphics doesn't hurt.