Spring RTS Engine

Erom wrote:Sure, but persistence effects and diminishing returns means that while 30 is ok, but annoying for long periods, and 40 is smooth, and 60 is butter, 100 looks about the same as 60.

Really, 40 is more than fine for just about anything.

Unless you're trying to play something that's *supposed* to play at a higher framerate, which is what we're talking about, in which case running it at 40 FPS means running it at a much slower speed as opposed to just showing less images.

And then 40 FPS isn't fine, hell, lots of PAL gamers insist on importing NTSC versions of certain games just because they were poorly ported down from 60 FPS to 50 FPS.

I would argue that 40 FPS isn't smooth at all even if the games were made for it, but this is the PS2 emulation topic. At any rate, AF is very, very wrong.

ZellSF wrote:Unless you're trying to play something that's *supposed* to play at a higher framerate, which is what we're talking about, in which case running it at 40 FPS means running it at a much slower speed as opposed to just showing less images.

OK, that's truth.

please, take the time to differentiate between refresh rate and framerate.

And when you talk about things running at higher framerates, there ar eidneed games that use that. i remember hearing someone in the gaming industry talk about developing for the PS3 and how people use higher framerates to negate the need for motion blur because if you see to frames in the 1 frame time, e.g. double the fps you can naturally see, then they superimpose and give a slight motion blue effect. This is how people can tell they can see more than 25-35 frames per second, not because they can see the single frames, but because they can see subtle effects due to superimposition and blurring in how things move.

Please, try waving your hand infront of a CRT monitor in a pitch black room and tell me that your hand really is moving at 15 frames per second and not one continuous burst. The do I on a wide range of screens and lighting and see how the effect varies greatly despite the same image being shown, even when in the street at light with amber street lamps.

How the heck does that relate to our discussion or even the topic? You said people were unable to see the difference between 30 and 60 frames per second, we said you were wrong (try playing Doom then play it on a source port without a capped framerate, you *WILL* see the difference). With PS2 emulation it's even more wrong, as it isn't showing less images, but slowing the game down.

If you weren't talking about PS2 emulation, why where you talking about something else in the PS2 emulation topic?

AF wrote:The emulators cpu intensive by nature, btu I got 5-15 fps on a celeron D 2.4Ghz 32bit and thats a terrible cpu, a half decent cpu should give decent framerates (anything above 32 is invisible to the human eye, despite some people who insist they can tell but they cant they just think they can).

You hounded a pretty simple statement.

Anything above 32 frames per sec and you cant see the single frames. Yes some games rely on certain effects produced by higher framerates, for example generating motion blur without needing to process it by exploiting superimposition between frames, and sem people can tell that its a higher framerate even though they cant see the individual frames, because they see side effects such as the 'smoother' aspect, but they cant see each frame 1 by 1 as if it where a 5fps motion which id what I mean when I say framerates higher than 32fps should be invisible to the human eye and appear as motion.

But since your the one perpetuating the thing, afterall I made a side comment that I never intended to debate.

ZellSF, please quit the circular arguement intended to make me look silly be coming full circle. Afterall if I'm guilty of anything here, your certainly just as guilty as me so what your doing is pointing out your own failure. Such actions are the work of a troller, I shall look you up in the flame warrior website. So please in future I'd appreciate it if you didnt scan and then hound me for a small side comment.

That being said I got nicer results on my new Pentium D around 30 fps, but sound quality was terrible and it frequently dipped fps to 12-15fps as it loaded data.

ZellSF, please quit the circular arguement intended to make me look silly be coming full circle. Afterall if I'm guilty of anything here, your certainly just as guilty as me so what your doing is pointing out your own failure. Such actions are the work of a troller, I shall look you up in the flame warrior website. So please in future I'd appreciate it if you didnt scan and then hound me for a small side comment.

Uh? You were just as guilty in going off topic as me. I'm pointing out my own failure as well as yours, though yours is greater, since if I were trolling, and you keep arguing with me, as opposed to stopping would make you look much more than just silly.

Anything above 32 frames per sec and you cant see the single frames. Yes some games rely on certain effects produced by higher framerates, for example generating motion blur without needing to process it by exploiting superimposition between frames, and sem people can tell that its a higher framerate even though they cant see the individual frames

Your claim that they don't is nothing but a theory of yours. I could just as well claim the human eye couldn't see individual frames above 24, or 10. And if I see them as motion or not, they're still visible, which you claimed they weren't.

That being said I got nicer results on my new Pentium D around 30 fps, but sound quality was terrible and it frequently dipped fps to 12-15fps as it loaded data.

All Playstation 2 games vary in performance, you could be talking about Bust A Move for all we know.

Devil May Cry 2.

Please, stop getting so uptight. If you must know, I got it from an article in the daily mirror, and a news item on google news I read ages ago, and then from other people here and there.

But really, can you see the individual frames in a 35fps stream? Sure people can tell the difference between 60 and 35, but thats not what i'm talking about, I'm talking about seeing visibly the pause in still frames, is that what you mean or are you talking about some gaging of fluidness in motion and not real choppyness?

AF wrote: Anything above 32 frames per sec and you cant see the single frames.

Wrong, since frames are discrete snapshots and the spatial distance between them doesn't necessarily lie below the eye's sensitivity threshold. Do a fast 360-degree spin in any shooter where you can cap the framerate at multiples of 30, and you'll see the difference quite well.

AF wrote:Devil May Cry 2.

Please, stop getting so uptight. If you must know, I got it from an article in the daily mirror, and a news item on google news I read ages ago, and then from other people here and there.

I just pointed out that the information was useless if you didn't say what games.

AF wrote:But really, can you see the individual frames in a 35fps stream?

That is a good question, I don't think anyone have a clue how many frames per second they eye can really see, maybe because it doesn't really see a spesific amount of images, but sees everything as a flow of light, no matter if it's 1 FPS or 60.

But as long as you see the difference, you've obviously seen the frames that make that difference and can't really claim they're invisible.

It is possible to see motion and still be able to tell how smooth it is. This seems to be what your going on about, and is a much much loser definition. My definition is much stricter, the two arent comaprable.

You can see the difference between 60FPS and 30FPS like night and day. 30 FPS works for televisions because they use hardware motion bluring. On a CRT monitor 30FPS really hurts your eyes. You can't "see individual frames" but you can see that there is animation delay time between frames that ruin the illusion for the eye. Strictly speaking the eye is capable of seeing the differences into exorbitantly high FPS figures, but a refresh rate of more then 70 hertz is enough for comfort and anything more then 60 FPS will not harm your ability and reaction time in games, unless there are other factors in play asside from human motor skills, for instance bhop jump spamming with the mousewheel in HL, your mouse will register more strokes at 100 FPS then 60 FPS so the jumps will be timed better. No human could manually take advantage of this but since the mouse wheel is a simple machine it is able to.

I'd dl this and say how it works for me, but SotC isn't fully supported.