PC and Console games typically get slammed for 30 fps performance and I do find them really jarring. However SD reviews generally find 30 fps perfectly acceptable. As per title, is 30 fps more acceptable on a smaller screen?

  • PhattyR6@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    30FPS is 30FPS. It’s not less noticeable because of the screen. The standards are just lower for a 15w portable device.

    It’s also still perfectly playable. Even on consoles and desktop PCs. More is better, I’d love to be able to play every game at a 120fps minimum. However I’ll never not play a game purely because it’s locked to 30FPS.

  • eightiesgamer82@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    For me personally I feel I notice it more when I’m playing on my 65” tv rather than the SD. Not saying they are any different because they are not they will both play the exact same but it doesn’t bother me as much on the SD.

    I have been making use of 40fps on SD a lot though and it’s a perfect compromise imo

  • likeonions@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    it’s complicated. 30fps is very playable in certain kinds of games and when there is minimal additional latency. Horizon Forbidden West plays great at 30fps on ps5. However, Metro Exodus is basically unplayable at 30fps on pc because the game has an absolutely insane amount of latency.

  • CodyCigar96o@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I generally find 30fps more acceptable because of the types of games I’m playing at 30fps. If I’m playing on a handheld/with controller then I’m certainly not playing FPSs, so I don’t notice as much. If I’m sat at my desk with keyboard and mouse then I probably am playing something like an FPS and then it would really matter. I’d say the issue with lower framerates is most apparent with camera movement so if you’re playing a third person or a top down game etc. where you don’t move the camera as much/not at all, it’s not as big of a deal lowering framerate.

    Having said all that I still consider framerate the most important factor and will always prefer worse graphics over lower framerate.

  • Trylun@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think it comes down to managed expectations. Valve always said their performance goal was a minimum of 30 FPS for a “playable” experience. Also, it’s a handheld that has a shared CPU/GPU power draw of 15W.

    That being said, the steam deck has the smoothest 30 FPS I’ve ever played. The Switch is a pretty close second. I think the smaller screen definitely helps with that. It takes quite a bit for me to adjust to 30FPS content on my TV.

  • FredOtash@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I feel like I notice 30 fps less on my Switch and SD. 30fps on a 7 inch screen feels smooth to me. But when I’m playing consoles on a big TV I much prefer 60fps.

    But then again… I really don’t know. It’s subjective. One thing I did in the last year is stop watching Digital Foundry breakdowns and stop caring so much about frame rate or performance and gaming is just more enjoyable that way.

  • teh_vedo@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Don’t know why, but yes, it’s not as bad on a small screen. I can not play 30fps on a monitor or tv. On my switch and deck, though, it’s perfectly fine (fine, not great).