Depends on the game. If it’s not really demanding on reaction time, and the game is locked framerate I’m fine with 30, like Okami. However if the game is not locked FPS and I still can’t hit 60 FPS at least on my 1440p monitor I’d probably just play something else (because I know I could have better experience is I could run it).

However for shooter and reaction heavy games I always aim to max out my 144 Hz monitor, even 60 FPS can feel sluggish for me

Well, I first played Dragon Age Origins with the framerate fluctuating between 10 and 20 FPS. Wasn’t the most fun I’ve ever had, but ever since 30 - 60 felt like luxury. So yeah, anywhere from 10 to 30 is fine for me, but the more active a game is the closer to 30 minimum with a target of 60

I only recently experienced the luxury of higher frame rates.

I’ll put up with 30. I usually don’t notice it after a while, especially if it’s steady.

60 is preferred, and I always aim for performance if I can.

I think I’m a bit spoiled with my 144 Hz monitor; anything below maybe 120 FPS starts to bug me. Thankfully my PC is pretty powerful and I don’t really play graphics-heavy games (mostly just Minecraft) so my framerate is usually quite stable.

40-45.

There are a lot of games at 30 I’ve played through just fine, but for FPS games that extra 10-15 is about my minimum unless it’s on console with aim assist. I grew up playing Saints Row 2 at single-digit framerates, but I just can’t do that anymore.

25FPS and 480 pixels vertically is enough for me to get sucked in and forget the world around me.
Which is nice cause that way I can play open world RPGs like Kingdom Come on an old laptop.

40 is fine, I can go lower depending on how nadlyO want the experience. I grew up relatively poor, I am not going to completely pass up on an experience I am looking forward to over a lower framerate.

The average frame rate isn’t nearly as important as the stability. I’ll gladly take 30FPS over 60 + frame drops.

I play a ton of simulation and strategy games (and some that I would hazard to classify as virtual railfanning/model railroading, like Railroads Online and Transport Fever 2) so I crank up the prettiness, download as much custom content as will load and enjoy the scenery at 20-40 FPS

Anything realtime needs to be at least 60 fps, the closer to my monitor 144Hz the better. Something like a city builder or turn based strategy or non-time-critical relaxed co-op stuff is fine to be 30+.

I’d never want to play any shooter at lower than 60, no RTS, no racing game and so on.

25 and above with drops is fine for me. I grew up with an ati card on low end machine so if the stupid game runs im happy. Don’t understand the stupid " 4k 250hz perfect black oled or its shit for stupid people" attitude. As long as my 1080p doesn’t ghost its fine. T. Made art for many games some of you have played.

So long as the game doesn’t lag enough that I have input lag, I’ll gladly play through a game at prettyich any FPS.

For me, it highly depends. Turn-based strategy games, I can easily play at a much lower framerate (30 is fine tbh though I always appreciate more). FPS-style games? 60 is a bare minimum, but 100+ is what I would consider to be enjoyable.

Highly depends on the type of game. For First person shooters, 120+ fps is a must. I skipped the more recent CoDs because I couldn’t get them to run at that target consistently enough on my PC without turning them into blurry DLSS smear.

Racing games, where motion is typically always going in one direction with only smooth direction changes, a lower framerate is fine (like 60 to 80), although the added smoothness from high framerate is obviously still nice.

Slower paced or turn based games I’m fine with going as low as 40 FPS, as long as it’s consistent without drops and frame pacing issues.

I try to get 60 FPS, 30 is fine and i could live with 20

10 if the alternative is lag spikes