• nyoooom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Have been playing all night, the performances are not great, but it’s actually playable for most people with lower settings, and the game is pretty great.

    Also it’s a city builder, it’s okay to play it with 30fps in low, it’s not a FPS.

    It’s CS2, not CS2.

    • XTornado@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s CS2, not CS2.

      At first I tought it was mistake and you repeated the same 😅 .

    • JJROKCZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Agreed, I’ve played strategy and builder games forever on 20fps.

      I remember playing tw:rome (1) on my xp machine at a solid 12 fps and having a blast. 60fps should be the goal if you meet recommended specs I agree but it’s unreasonable to say that anything less is “unplayable” because that just isn’t true

    • SchizoDenji
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Also it’s a city builder, it’s okay to play it with 30fps in low

      In 2007? Sure. In 2023 why should a consumer settle for 30 fps on fucking low settings?

    • StereoTrespasser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      The need to hit FPS targets has always been blown way out of proportion by the casual gamer. But seeing people bitch about their city builder not hitting 30+ is a new low in the chase for unnecessary frames.

      • good_girl@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        30 is the bare minimum for any game regardless of genre lmfao. Anything below 30 gets hard to look at because of the bad frame pacing, things below 60 can still cause eye strain if you’re not used to low fps.