In recent weeks, a significant portion of my time has been devoted to evaluating the performance of newly released games across a variety of PC configurations. Titles such as Final Fantasy 7: Rebirth, Civilization 7, Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2, and most recently, Avowed have been at the forefront of my testing endeavors. This meticulous process involves running benchmarks repeatedly to gather a comprehensive set of performance metrics that can illuminate how these games operate on different hardware setups.
Performance vs. Experience
However, performance charts and video clips often fail to convey the complete experience of gameplay. This is particularly true for Avowed, where the sensation of play is paramount. Despite some fluctuations in performance across various systems, the overall experience is surprisingly smooth. For instance, on my test rig equipped with a Ryzen 7 5700X3D and a GeForce RTX 4070, the game averages 68 frames per second at 1440p using the High quality preset without upscaling. While this figure may not be groundbreaking, it is certainly respectable.
Yet, the 1% low frame rate—a metric that indicates the fps the game exceeds 99% of the time—sits at a mere 34 fps. This disparity between average and low performance is notable, especially since many other games would reveal such a gap in a more jarring manner. In the case of Avowed, however, the gameplay remains fluid, with only occasional stutters during traversal detracting from the experience.
This observation leads me to ponder whether we, as PC gamers, place too much emphasis on performance statistics. Admittedly, this may seem hypocritical, given my role in testing and analyzing these figures. Yet, there exists a distinct difference between the performance of hardware and the experience of a game. Unlike CPUs, which can be quantified with definitive metrics, the subjective nature of gaming experiences complicates matters. While competitive gaming may necessitate precise performance, for many players, the overall feel of a game may hold greater significance than the raw numbers.
Of course, this notion of “feel” is inherently subjective. What feels satisfactory to one player might be intolerable for another. Nevertheless, my extensive exposure to various gaming setups allows me to provide insights into relative experiences. I frequently encounter gamers who assert that a game must run at a minimum of 120 fps to be enjoyable. While I respect such preferences, I find myself indifferent to frame rates on my own gaming rig. For me, the process involves launching the game, playing, and adjusting settings until the experience aligns with my expectations.
Avowed exemplifies this philosophy. After dedicating hours to navigating its initial stages for performance testing, I emerged with a positive impression of the game’s operation. However, when I began compiling performance data across my test rigs, I was taken aback by the relatively low figures. The 1% low of 34 fps, juxtaposed with an average of 68 fps, would typically suggest a less than optimal experience. Yet, in Avowed, the gameplay remains engaging, and paradoxically, a game running too smoothly can sometimes feel less satisfying.
While I cannot abandon the necessity of performance charts, I believe there are moments when it is beneficial to set aside the numbers and immerse oneself in the overall experience. This approach is akin to disregarding a game’s review score until one has fully absorbed the reviewer’s insights. Realizing that few will adopt this mindset, I anticipate many more hours spent gathering performance data in the future.
For my part, I will continue to prioritize the feel of gameplay. Perhaps it’s time to consider a new metric—one that quantifies the sensation of gaming in a tangible way. However, I quickly dismiss that idea, recognizing it would merely add another number to the mix.
