Everyone has different standards in terms of motion blur they can bear, and you need a certain framerate to achieve that standard at any given speed of motion on screen.

[–] TheDarksteel94@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's not just about how smooth the game looks, but also how smooth it feels to control. 30 fps is way too sluggish for me. Granted, most people would probably reach a point of diminishing return somewhere after 60 fps, unless you're someone with the reflexes and hardware (high polling rate mouse, good frame timing on your monitor, low system lag, etc.) to back it up. I'm quite comfy between 120 to 144 fps, but there's some absolute monsters out there who would probably find that too slow.

If it's not a very fast moving game, like a turn based RPG, then it doesn't matter that much, but at least 60 fps is still a must for me to not look like a slideshow.

[–] miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Latency plays a big part too, that's true. I mentioned that in another comment.

Though how bad a higher latency feels is also tied to how fast you move your mouse. Slowly panning across the map of your city builder makes latency less of an issue than wanting to hit flickshots in Counterstrike.

Latency and framerate go hand in hand, though depending on the game, one might be more important to you than the other.

Which is where frame interpolation gets funny.