5 ms·
Is 50 FPS a huge issue? I play a lot of city builders and so long as the UI is still smooth I really don't notice any gameplay difference between 30fps and 60f
by legitster 3y ago
Is 50 FPS a huge issue?
I play a lot of city builders and so long as the UI is still smooth I really don't notice any gameplay difference between 30fps and 60fps.
I put 8 hours into Frostpunk before realizing I was limited to 30FPS.
- xboxnolifes 3y agoIt's not just 50 fps. It's 50 fps with the best possible hardware and lowest possible settings. But also, yes, even in a city builder low for is very annoying when you're used to the smoothness of 100+.
- ajaimk 3y ago4090 is the fastest available graphics card. That’s the problem.
- wlesieutre 3y ago20 fps is playable for a city builder, but that's on a $2000 GPU A bit unfair since most people aren't gaming at 4K (Steam hardware survey puts it at 3.29%), but still
- washadjeffmad 3y agoOk, so around 4 million users. I wonder what the overlap of 4K owners and people who play city builders is?
- janosdebugs 3y agoAnecdotal evidence: I play at 4k if I can manage, and I sport a 2060S.
- dimgl 3y agoI feel like this is grasping at straws? Plenty of unorthodox games go mainstream. Can’t expect consumer hardware to the stay the same forever. This game is just poorly optimized.
- washadjeffmad 3y agoI think I'm giving people the opposite impression that I intended. Well-compensated people (like engineers) are more likely to own a 4K monitor and high-end GPU, so I meant to convey that there's probably a large overlap with the type of people who play city builders (like engineers), so they really should have accounted for that. It was only after I bought my 4K 120Hz OLED that I found out how popular they are for sims, including pinball. It's been awesome.
- wackget 3y agoMy personal opinion: yes. As 160+Hz monitors are finally becoming commonplace, it's becoming less defensible for games to run anywhere below 60fps. But it's the fact that these figures are being seen with the most powerful consumer graphics card (on a brand new unpopulated game map) that's the problem.
- legitster 3y agoCity Skylines 1 has been played and supported non-stop for over 8 years. Why should they limit the highest possible graphics settings only to existing technology? Again, this is a simulation game. If I ask the game to spit out more detail and graphics than can be physically supported by today's technology, I guess I don't necessarily see this as a design fault.
- kaibee 3y agoIf it were doing a ton of compute-shader simulation on GPU to actually increase the fidelity of the simulation that would be one thing, but having a badly implemented graphics pipeline isn't that.
- iforgotpassword 3y agoSomewhat yes, I didn't try it yet, but a few things don't add up then: Why enable those heavy, performance crippling post processing filters by default? From what I can find in this comment section, and I guess this has to be taken with a grain of salt, performance doesn't scale. It seems we max out at 50fps on a beefy 13th gen Intel with the fastest GPU available, but then there's a couple comments with mid-range hardware where performance is nearly identical.
- HappyDaoDude 3y agoTo shoot from the hip on this one. It sounds like it could be limited by a single thread. Clock rates between mid and high end CPU's are significantly different but core count is. Thus if a single thread is holding up the works, that would explain the stagnant performance profile despite potential overall performance.
- stodor89 3y ago50fps is okay. 50fps on a $1600 GPU is definitely not okay.
- bee_rider 3y agoIt is just a matter of preference, I don’t see why people get bent out of shape about it. 30fps is fine for lots of games. Especially for stuff that doesn’t require super twitchy gameplay. If somebody really cares about 60fps or 120fps, fine. But the developers have some effects they want to implement, and if some of them don’t fit into 8.3ms, let those of us who don’t mind 30fps enjoy them, right?
- ryandrake 3y ago30FPS on the world's #1 fastest GPU is totally not OK. Heck, I'd be unhappy with 30FPS on my ancient Radeon Pro 580. I remember easily getting frame rates far in excess of my monitor's top refresh rate back in 1999.
- bee_rider 3y agoWhy isn’t it ok?
- wander_homer 3y agoBecause this means the game runs even worse on pretty much every PC out there, since the majority of gamers don't use the most powerful GPU on the market. And it's not like this game has some outstanding visuals which would somehow justify such performance.
- tomatotomato37 3y agoIt's not the average that's the problem, is that it has hard stutters from when you do something like swing or rotate the camera around and force a lot of new things to load. Also there's no fps limiter so I can't stop the game from attempting to match my monitor's 165 FPS with a overheating laptop 3060, causing the stuttering to be even more visible.
- KennyBlanken 3y agoYou can set a frame limit per-program in the NVIDIA control panel. Undervolting also reportedly works really well in laptop nvidia chipsets, FYI.
- michaelt 3y ago50 FPS certainly doesn't make the game unplayable, it's true. But if that's with an empty map, it's an ominous sign for people who plan to build a city in this city building game, as rendering usually slows as polygon count increases. And if it's with an $1800 GPU, its an ominous sign for the 99.3% of gamers who don't have an $1800 GPU. And if that's at 1440p - well, I'd wager a lot of the folks with a $1800 GPU also have a 4k screen.
- antisthenes 3y agoIt's a huge issue, considering the game doesn't look like a revolution in graphics AND you're essentially playing it on a super-computer by 5-6 year old standards. > I put 8 hours into Frostpunk before realizing I was limited to 30FPS. Yes, and I have beaten games that rendered improperly at sub-30FPS as a kid, because the requirement was 16MB of VRAM, while my card only had 8. But that's just as irrelevant to the point being made.
- pdpi 3y agoIf they said "The game is locked to 30fps" I'd probably have been ok with that. It's not a fast paced game, and capping the framerate at a low value is probably a decent enough design choice for that particular game. As you say, it's enough that you won't really notice it in gameplay. The problem is that we're talking about the absolute highest end consumer card sold by nVidia rendering a blank map, without such a framerate lock in place. If it's not locked, then that framerate is the product of a performance bottleneck somewhere. With a modern gaming PC, "performance bottleneck" also means you're sitting next to a moderately powerful space heater.
- KennyBlanken 3y agoLocking a game to 30hz would not have been a "decent design choice" given that's half the refresh rate of nearly every computer monitor out there, especially for a game that involves a lot of scrolling. Games get mocked for locking to 60hz, 30hz would get them laughed at outright.
- BlueTemplar 3y agoThe devs supposedly aimed for 30 FPS (but missed it, because that would be for low end hardware?) In my experience 30 FPS is perfectly fine for a game like this, I'm not sure what do you mean about "scrolling" ? It's the much more fast paced, mostly first person games that really need those 60+ FPS...
- serf 3y ago>In my experience 30 FPS is perfectly fine for a game like this, I'm not sure what do you mean about "scrolling" ? A top down city sim 'scrolls' up/down/left/right around a map, which is a movement that is strongly associated to screen tearing -- which i'm not really sure is a relevant thing to bring up given the variety of v-sync options available. Even a game locked at 30fps that 'scrolls' often shouldn't experience significant tearing with the options out there.
- 3y ago
- kriops 3y agoIt's like playing in black and white, kind of. But yes 50 FPS is completely fine if you have not gotten used to better. Also helps if the game doesn't rely on high levels of detail (which Skylines, unfortunately, does), so that moving the camera around doesn't just make everything blurry.
- BlueTemplar 3y agoIf moving the camera around makes things blurry, then they must be using some kind of weird post-processing on top, can't blame that on the FPS alone !
- kriops 3y agoTry moving file explorer windows with your display set to different refresh rates. “Blur” might be an incorrect description, but it’s how I would describe it at least.
- mrob 3y agoIt's unrelated to post-processing. Moving the camera around makes things blurry at low frame rate (and 50fps is low) because of sample-and-hold blur. This can be mitigated by strobing the screen at the same speed as the frame rate, but few monitors support strobing at 50Hz (it would look annoyingly flickery) and if the game ever dropped below 50fps it would break the effect. Blur Busters explains: https://blurbusters.com/faq/oled-motion-blur https://blurbusters.com/faq/oled-motion-blur
- xcv123 3y agoThe issue is that if it runs at 50 FPS on an RTX 4090, it's going to run at 5 FPS on an average GPU.
- Kuxe 3y agoProblem with these kinds of statements is that.. well, they're not true. I have RTX 2070 running in 3440x1440. I'm at 35fps on low settings with some special stuff turned off, e.g GI and fogs. In an small town with 4k inhabitants still, so things can get worse for me. Regardless, the problem is blown out of proportion. I think we can give it some weeks and 4090 performance issues will be in the past.
- dimgl 3y agoYes, yes it is. I have a 4k TV with 120hz. I want to be able to use it. If Anno 1800 can run at 100+ framerates, surely this game can too.
- sidewndr46 3y agoAs someone who can safely say that watching a video game in 30 FPS is equivalent to watching a slideshow, yes. It gives me intense motion sickness immediately. So I can't play something below 60 FPS
- epolanski 3y agoIt's a 3000$ computer playing at low resolution, of course it is.
- nzgrover 3y agoHeh, in New Zealand, the card alone is $3500NZD
- babypuncher 3y agoThe problem is the UI won't be smooth on VRR displays unless they implemented some clever workarounds. Your mouse cursor will only update at the same framerate as the rest fo the game. Even budget gaming monitors these days support g-sync, freesync, or both, so it's no longer a problem that only affects a small % of users with deep pockets. The only workaround I can think of that wouldn't also defeat the point of having VRR would be to add some in-engine low framerate compensation artifically boost the reported framerate to a multiple of the real framerate, but I have yet to see any games that actually do this.
- NBJack 3y agoYes, particularly if you become accustomed to higher refresh rates. This is even worse if the game doesn't support VRR in any form natively.