What's New
Off Topix: Embrace the Unexpected in Every Discussion

Off Topix is a well established general discussion forum that originally opened to the public way back in 2009! We provide a laid back atmosphere and our members are down to earth. We have a ton of content and fresh stuff is constantly being added. We cover all sorts of topics, so there's bound to be something inside to pique your interest. We welcome anyone and everyone to register & become a member of our awesome community.

Graphics vs framerate

Amir

Dedicated Member
Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2014
Posts
374
OT Bucks
766
what do you think? graphics or framerate very important for you? in my opinion, framerate more important than graphics...because without good framerate, graphics doesnt matter for me...what about your opinion :) (sorry for english)
 
A very pretty slideshow is not a game.

There's a trade off: sacrificing frame rate for graphics. For movies and suchlike, frame rate doesn't matter, they can spend hours or even days waiting for the final result to render. This doesn't really work for games though (yeah, who'd have thought). Sure there're some tricks (loading screens) you can pull, but in the end a game needs a certain frame rate to be playable - very much dependent on the type of game.

For example, I don't mind playing Morrowind at 20FPS, it's an old game that was more or less designed to run like that. On the other hand, playing League of Legends at 20FPS is a nightmare.
Another example, I could play a game like chess at less than 1FPS, nothing much needs to change while I'm thinking after all. Again, I wouldn't dream of playing a shooter at 1FPS, I'd be dead non-stop.
 
Framerate. This is a very important thing when it comes to developing Android and iOS games. ARMv6 devices are so slow they can't run most of the recent games (even if they're ported to older devices) because they were originally made for 1Ghz+ devices (ie, ARMv7).
 
Evil Eye said:
A very pretty slideshow is not a game.

There's a trade off: sacrificing frame rate for graphics. For movies and suchlike, frame rate doesn't matter, they can spend hours or even days waiting for the final result to render. This doesn't really work for games though (yeah, who'd have thought). Sure there're some tricks (loading screens) you can pull, but in the end a game needs a certain frame rate to be playable - very much dependent on the type of game.

For example, I don't mind playing Morrowind at 20FPS, it's an old game that was more or less designed to run like that. On the other hand, playing League of Legends at 20FPS is a nightmare.
Another example, I could play a game like chess at less than 1FPS, nothing much needs to change while I'm thinking after all. Again, I wouldn't dream of playing a shooter at 1FPS, I'd be dead non-stop.
what do you mean "I could play a game like chess at less than 1FPS"?
 
Playing Guild wars 2 with anything lower than 30FPS really sucks. You're dead before you can see it on your screen (one shot mechanics) so I'm definitely picking framerate here.
 
Amir said:
what do you mean "I could play a game like chess at less than 1FPS"?
Chess is a fairly static game, i.e.: nothing changes while the other player is thinking about their move. Since nothing changes between moves, the game does not need to render anything new between moves and could, in theory, drop the rate of updates per second (frame rate) to 0 until a player decides to make a move.
 
Evil Eye said:
Amir said:
what do you mean "I could play a game like chess at less than 1FPS"?
Chess is a fairly static game, i.e.: nothing changes while the other player is thinking about their move. Since nothing changes between moves, the game does not need to render anything new between moves and could, in theory, drop the rate of updates per second (frame rate) to 0 until a player decides to make a move.
ohh :D you right
 
Back
Top Bottom