"PC master racers" tend to be idiots, and I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't on the platform in the 80s and 90s. Most the people I know that have been on the PC platform for ages realize each input method has strengths and weaknesses and the great thing is PC can accomodate all of them. Some genres just work better with some input methods.

Now I'm curious to know the names of some of the titles, so I can determine if 30fps has been a noticeable problem for me. But then that starts the policing, I guess.

While I certainly prefer gamepads for say fighting games, flight games, 2D shooters or twin-stick shooters, and plat-formers.

While FPS, action adventure/looter games, puzzles, and anything with an emphasis on precise aiming (and a lot of other types) are just better on keyboard,

The prejudice isn't just in the term though. "Locking" a game at 30 fps can be a very difficult decision for a developer, and lack of optimization may just be one of them. A blanket list that doesn't go into these many considerations is always meant to shame developers instead of informing gamers.

When games that supposedly are a high speed experience, such as first person shooters, are locked at 30 fps, that is indeed a sad occurrence. But how many FPS games even do that, and how many other games are being ostracised by that silly Steam group instead?

The guiding hand just can't be a list in which games are bullet points. There are just individual cases in which 30 fps truly suck for some people, and these can and should be discussed individually.

And WITH the developers.

General rule of thumb for me is if it requires precise movement I'll use a gamepad, if it needs aiming I'll go mouse and keyboard. There are a few exceptions, and some things would be better with a "third option" but you work with what you've got.

Hmmm while that sounds reasonable, I'm finding I'm more comfortable sitting back and not having to be poised over the keyboard. So if there's a controller option and even if it's slightly less than optimal, I might gravitate towards it, although if it heavily diminishes the experience I'll go with what's best rather than what's most comfortably to me physically.

That's a major consideration too for me. Some things I just don't want to hunch over a keyboard for if I don't have to. Like FPS and or TPS. If it's slower paced singleplayer I may just chill with a gamepad and the aim-assist.

Kind of the same way about framerates, I don't mind capping things lower to crank the graphics/downsample. If it's not "twitch" speed or competative I'd rather have the eye candy a lot of the time.

Yeah. As we get older, what we can deal with (or dealt with as kids) doesn't apply the same way anymore.

I'm also finding although my computer can probably deal with higher quality levels, I don't like hearing the noisy fan as it picks up with the 'I'M WORKING REALLY REALLY HARD RIGHT NOW! SO I'M GETTING REALLY REALLY HOT!!' so I'll tone down the graphics and demand until it isn't making nearly as much heat as it was.

Still I can't say my gaming rig has provided a bad experience at all.

I'm finding a lot of it is just PC is so accessible now (and last console gen especially) that people have unrealistic expectations about a lot of things. Especially when it comes to money, hardware, and performance.

My last GPU was like that. GTX 780... thing sounded like a jet engine if I wanted to avoid thermal throttling. Thing also produced enough heat to function as a space heater. Learned my lesson, am never ever buying a reference model again... it's not worth it and the cooling is awful.

Replaced it with an RX 480 (powercolor red devil), not only does it run a lot better and cooler... I can barely hear the fans even with the case a foot and a half away from me.

Surprised we don't have a GOGmix of it. Someone should get one going.

Heh, I'll be happier getting a mobile chip model next time, it will certainly be strong enough in the next 2-3 years when I need a replacement card. And with winter here, well... having a space heater for a card isn't a bad thing, so long as the fan works.

But I certainly don't want to find out the fan stops working at the wrong time and fry my computer. That would be bad...

But, no big problems.

Honestly I'd rather that kind of thing stick to Steam or the TotalBitc... TotalBiscuit fanbase. For one thing it's probably going to list like all the older games. For two that kind of thing needs groundwork explaining things (a fast paced 3d game with a low framerate is completely different from a slow 2d affair and so on).

I deal with the community that obsesses about framerates way too much on Steam and it is just straight up cancer.
Eh, mobile hardware isn't worth it unless you specifically need it. It's a pain to service, support can be iffy (even with "major" things), thermals are an issue even as archs get more efficient, and etc.

I mean if you needa travel I get it, but otherwise it's never worth it even with the improved mobile hardware. Plus mobile CPUs cannot keep up, and a lot of modern stuff is just as CPU reliant as it is GPU reliant.

As far as the fan thing generally not a worry if there is a proper sink and the cooler is well designed. The thing should throttle and or shut down before anything reaches critical. At least at "stock" voltages and clocks.

Judging a game if it's playable or should even be touched/considered merely on framerate... yeah, that can cause problems.

I really don't see the need to do it here. It's like making a list of games that use the soundcard vs pc speaker support, or which ones run in dosbox rather than windows...a lot of not so useful overhead for no real benefit.

In all honesty those examples would probably be more useful to some people. Or hell something like an aspect ratio/resolution support would even be more useful.

There are just way too many old games and indie games on this storefront for wanking over framerates to make sense. Maybe if GOG was getting all the latest dude bro FPS games and online only competative shit, but it's not and that's not really its userbase.