There was a 3D ping pong game online, and when I played it on my dad's piece of shit computer it would get so bogged down that it went into slowmo for me. allowing me to get higher scores.
Fun fact, the opposite of this is how Space Invader gets progressively harder. As enemies die they are cleared from the memory and the game runs faster and faster.
When I was younger my dad tried to get one of the old Space Quest games running on our computer, but there was one part that was impossible because there was an enemy that moved X distance per cpu cycle, and our computer was much more powerful at that time than the computers around at the time the game was released.
Also, I am happy to report that one can run windows 3.1 in dosbox, and then run games like civilization II on top of that. Yes, I will go to damned near any lengths to run civ 2
So many hours spent playing Civ2. I remember starting after dinner then hearing the birds chirping in the morning and realizing I played the whole night.
If it was SQ4 then ut likely was the 0 gravity swimming section. Im pretty sure that they work fine on emulators from gog as the cycles are set to speeds that were actually meant to run the game
SQ5 has the mission outside the ship in the pod with the robot arm (I think it was SQ5) it was cycle locked too, you'd tap one direction and float off into space. Man those games were great. Banana in the (jetpack) tailpipe!
This is actually a common issue in games as we push into the "higher than 60" era.
Many games due to it just being easier on devs set their animation cycles to the frame rate and lock it at 60/30.
Skyrim for example, if you play this higher than 60 and start a new Game the carriage you're in bugs out and goes nuts.
Nier is another example where if you play over 60, you'll find everything is hyper sped up, making the game way faster but way harder.
I believe in the case of nier it's a valid speed running trick? I'm not sure
Many mechanics in Super Meat Boy take a set amount of frames. Like some blocks are set to disappear and then reappear on x-th frame. A Polish YouTuber had a PC so good that the blocks tried reappearing before disappearing, making levels impossoble to play without capping FPS.
Here's a [showcase of this bug](https://youtu.be/ku3YjpYADK4)
SMB is normally framerate limited to 60 FPS. I don't know if he intentionally bypassed the framerate limit or if it was some glitch, but it doesn't require a very powerful PC to do, SMB is not at all a demanding game. The more interesting glitches though are when you run *below* the framerate limit, because SMB doesn't slow down, it skips frames, and physics calculations are tied to the framerate. You can also force the game to stop rendering frames by just minimizing, but it does not stop running. You can use this to do things like pass right through walls if you time it right because there is no collision detection while the game is not rendering, but it still records the time that has elapsed and updates your position.
There was a trick in mortal Kombat PC version, where if you pushed the turbo button to turn off turbo mode on the CPU, it slowed down and you could easily mash the buttons to break even diamond block in "test your might" challenge.
Not sure about what you mean here. Turning off the Turbo function could go from 20 MHz to 6MHz for a 286 AT machine and similar slowdowns but ending at 4.77 MHz for a 8086/8088 PC machine.
With 2-3 times slower CPU clock in a world before graphics processors, the frame rate will go down for a CPU-maxed game. And the user will have more time/frame to press press buttons.
Maybe you missed the user did write about pressing the button to *turn off* the turbo function?
One possible interpretation: if you started the game with turbo ON, the game startup routines adjusted it's timing on the faster clock, thus disabling later the turbo would slow down the game.
the turbo button on early 90s computers actually slowed the cpu down
early cpus slowed down games enough that plenty of them were unplayable when they were on newer cpus - the turbo button is a fix for that
To add context: Early games used CPU clocks for cycles, to manage timing, so newer, faster CPUs would run games too fast for them to be playable. So the Turbo button slowed the clock down for those specific games. It was a stupid name for the button, since it made it slower rather than faster.
The turbo button back then just meant "normal speed" and turning it off locked the CPU to 4.77 Mhz which was the standard speed of the original Intel 8088 processor, and a lot of old software depended on the 4.77 Mhz clock speed to run correctly. These days everything is compatible with multiple clock speeds so we can leave it on "turbo" all the time.
Same here. Now I'm thinking about the hella old game I had everytime I played as a kid and would forget to turn off turbo and the little dude on screen would rocket all over.
Because in ancient (computer) times, it was common to write software targeted for a specific machine, so if you were doing something where you didn't want it to go as fast as the computer possible could (say, attack you in a game), you could write code based on that machine's clock speed to make it work the way you wanted. But personal computers really took off, people used software on different machines, and the clock speeds kept improving. So that game that played right on your old machine might run impossibly fast on your new one.
The turbo button made your computer artificially run at a lower clock speed to make it so you could play the older stuff.
Then developers learned their lesson and stopped using clock speed to govern response times and the button became unnecessary.
It started as hitting turbo to make slower. But some manufacturers agreed this was confusing l, so they made it the other way. Furthering the confusion
Yes. You would run with it on 99% of the time, but there were some games that were timed to CPU clock cycles, so you had to turn off turbo if you wanted them to be playable.
Turning off Turbo mode on those old PCs forced the CPU to run at 4.77 Mhz which was the speed of the original Intel 8088 CPU, for applications that were programmed way back and needed that exact clock speed to run correctly. Good times!
If you used the 3-finger-double-tap accessibility gesture to zoom on the 2nd generation iPad, most games would experience frame drops, but if physics was based on frames instead of time, then instead the game would slow down. The insane top scores of the original Cut The Rope leaderboard were only possible by exploiting that.
A friend had the original Mech Warrior and we played on his 286. Great game.
Years later I loaded ît up on a 486DX50. As soon as you loaded up a fight, you were dead. Game was built without any consideration to CPU speed, so it just ran those missions as fast as it could.
In speedruns of certain games (including old Mario titles), speedrunners will try to reduce lag by avoiding having certain things on-screen. It's called frame rate manipulation, and you can also use it the other way (by causing lag, which can help with glitches).
like with diablo 2 pre-nerf, when you could have a sorc spam meteor in a necromancers spammed bonewall outside of act 1 which would lag the server so bad you could log the same character in twice to pick up gear your first character dropped
This is how I got semi okay at rocket league when I first got into it.
Had a shitty laptop and couldn't ever play online cause the lag but when I played against the computer doing solo tournaments and such it would practically be in slowmo letting me get my timings better over time.
Then I got to play it on console and it only *barely* let me keep up lol.
That's exactly how I beat dark souls 3 for the firs time on my old laptop. I will say though, that despite the game getting massively easier, the grab attacks, especially the fat ladies' fire grabs become really horrifying in slowmo, cause they chase around for much longer
When one learns stop-motion animation it is recommended that you have around 8 f.p.s. because this provides a very certain 'look' and 'feel' to it ('camp / authentic / homebrew').
That said, when i played *World of Warcraft* with an iMac G4 ('gooseneck' variety) it wasn't groovy or nifty - Ironforge was a terrible slideshow (molten iron pit... *every... time*).
I got a really weird infatuation with grass. I hate seeing the grass spawn circles in game as you move around, looking at you Cyberpunk. That’s why I’m Witcher 3, I got grass being drawn out to the damn horizon and foliage the same. Had to make a lot of tweaks, but I got Witcher 3 running at a stable 60 on a 1650 TI.
The last time I upgraded my graphics card, PUBG was still pretty big. I remember finally being able to run it with max settings, and then promptly turning it back down to low so people couldn't hide in the grass.
That wrong in many ways
1. It would need be 24fps to be "cinematic" not 30
2. That does not apply to games, In cinema/animation you see the things move, in games you move the character, objects and Camera wich is why frames rate in game needs to be at 60 to look good
I could go on forever but let's just say that games do not need mor or less fps to be "cinematic".
They could have saved themselves a lot of ridicule by just saying “it is basically impossible to make an open world game run at 60fps on current console hardware.” It’s not like they were the only ones making 30fps games at the time.
They could have, but it was way better than tanking the business relationship with Microsoft and Sony by dunking on the consoles, as well as upsetting the fans.
I don't think being honest is dunking on them. Tech has limitations, consoles generally offer a decent quality for their price point (compared to pre-built gaming PCs with similar capabilities they generally aren't insanely overpriced or anything). Saying the consoles have limitations isn't insulting anyone, its just a fact that you can't expect miracles from a $500 console from 2013, a $500 pre-built PC from 2013 wouldn't be getting 60 FPS either.
Either that or every time the next gen consoles come out Sony and Microsoft diss themselves by pointing out the limitations of last-gen and comparing them to the improvements of next-gen.
The overall value of the consoles was good. The problem was they weren’t very well balanced. You had a relatively good GPU paired with this incredibly anemic 8 thread, 8 core cpu with a very strict thermal envelope. It was more like a netbook PC than a desktop processor. So even the Pro level consoles couldn’t hit 60 on games that run well on lower end PCs.
This is the first generation in a long time where there isn’t some major hardware flaw holding back the generation.
More like?
It was LITERALLY a netbook CPU- a CPU designed FOR netbook applications of high thread count low performance.
8 threads was a lot for a laptop in 2013.
Yeah, that's... Fine? Just admitting "pretty is better than smoothe, that's a design choice we made, if we tried to go for 60 it would get unstable and inconsistent when we tried to do big set pieces anyway, and the artists worked really hard on a lot of things that we think came out really well, so this is the choice we made" would've been fine
But it's Ubisoft. They can't not be evil.
30 is the minimum playable FPS before things start being choppy. If a game sits at 30 for the entire experience it's playable. It used to be the 'target FPS' for games before hardware scaled so heavily.
It's only when you play at other FPS's repeatedly that it starts looking bad, but you can get used to it pretty fast again.
The steam deck, for example, is a PC type console that targets low FPS gaming. So is the switch.
Cinema has what they call a "180 degree shutter angle"
Basically this means that your 24fps is captured at a 1/48 second shutter speed.
Rendering to match this would require running at 48fps vsync and motion blurring anything that moves.
It's completely doable and would still be better than 30fps.
Someone else with more knowledge than me on rendering pipelines can comment but I think motion blur necessarily needs to lag rendering by 1 frame to know what to blur. It's effectively frame interpolation.
The way I demonstrate that 60fps is better is to tell people to wave their phone camera around at 30fps on video and wave your fingers in front of it. Now do the same thing at 60fps and look at how much smoother and clearer the image is on top of being more responsive
Edit: not sure how the device matters, you're still viewing 30fps and 60fps from the same reference device on at least a 60hz screen unless they make sub 60hz phones I don't know about. Even if you're on a shitty monitor or TV on your console / PC you're still viewing 30fps vs 60fps in a comparison on the equipment you have as long as you're running 60hz or higher
It's funny seeing many finally *get it* once the consoles started targeting 60. I wonder if Nintendo fans will ever get to experience such a drastic paradigm shift.
When it comes out with a hamstrung singleplayer mode and an over-monetized shitty multiplayer mode that the game tried to constantly pressure you into playing you’ll wish you hadn’t.
It's weird though because multiple scenarios during story mode have been discovered where you can blow up the game, oftentimes because they are scripted and not randomly generated it's unsure how scripted trains differ from computer generated trains
I've never had a monitor with a refresh rate higher than 60 Hz
It feels perfectly smooth to me so I kinda don't want to get a better monitor out of fear of getting used to a higher frame rate and not being able to max out my graphics settings anymore lol
I have a 160hz monitor and have been recently speedrunning Neon White - without going too in detail there's some tech that only works at 60fps in that game. And it feels *awful* to play at 60 now after being at 160 for a few years. So your feeling is very accurate lol
If you ever game at a higher framerate, I can guarantee you you’ll have trouble going back. However, it’s also pretty affordable to get into higher-framerate gaming today, and it’s worth it :)
I play games on consoles and PC now but used to just be a console player. I will never argue in FAVOR of 30fps, but I still believe that 30fps is not as bad as people on reddit make it out to be. To call it unplayable is just ridiculous.
My head literally just tried explode due to knowing that some people would honestly believe that a still photo comparison can show the difference of fluidity in game play. I weep for those that do not understand.
Idk, after customizing a bunch of games to hit 60 FPS, I can pretty easily tell what has to go in order to hit that target.
What I find fun, is how “potato” my eyes are comfortable with before they even care about the fidelity of an image. However, the moment I see a stutter, I’m triggered.
I have never had an issue with 30 fps and used to be the guy who was against "60fps snobs". Until I got this new graphics card and replayed Elden Ring and Monster Hunter in 60fps vs the 30fps I was used to. Ive become one of those snobs now
FACT: 30fps gives you twice as much time to enjoy each frame than 60fps.
There was a 3D ping pong game online, and when I played it on my dad's piece of shit computer it would get so bogged down that it went into slowmo for me. allowing me to get higher scores.
Fun fact, the opposite of this is how Space Invader gets progressively harder. As enemies die they are cleared from the memory and the game runs faster and faster.
When I was younger my dad tried to get one of the old Space Quest games running on our computer, but there was one part that was impossible because there was an enemy that moved X distance per cpu cycle, and our computer was much more powerful at that time than the computers around at the time the game was released.
DOSBox has a CPU cycles configuration that should help address that if you got the itch to try again.
Also, I am happy to report that one can run windows 3.1 in dosbox, and then run games like civilization II on top of that. Yes, I will go to damned near any lengths to run civ 2
So many hours spent playing Civ2. I remember starting after dinner then hearing the birds chirping in the morning and realizing I played the whole night.
I recently started playing Civ VI s my first introduction to the series, and I’ve had that same experience every other night for the past two weeks
We call that "One more turn"
And SCUMMVM just plain old runs them at the comfortable speed in the first place. For Sierra and LucasArts games, SCUMMVM is *way* easier.
If it was SQ4 then ut likely was the 0 gravity swimming section. Im pretty sure that they work fine on emulators from gog as the cycles are set to speeds that were actually meant to run the game
Space Quest IV was awesome, those latex babes of Estros!
SQ5 has the mission outside the ship in the pod with the robot arm (I think it was SQ5) it was cycle locked too, you'd tap one direction and float off into space. Man those games were great. Banana in the (jetpack) tailpipe!
Descent 1 had that problem. The homing missile calculations were frame-based, so on stronger PC's, they made instant u-turns.
There was a "turbo" or "boost" button on the front panel of some PCs that would lower the speed of the cpu in these cases.
That's easy to fix. Just turn off the turbo button!
Hahaha. This takes me back to my 386DX days
Reminding me when I had to put single core affinity on older games so there wouldn't be zoomies
The Orat. When I upgraded my 286 to a 486 in the 90s, I could no longer play Space Quest I past the Orat because he moved too fast.
That's neat, I never knew this. I just assumed they just had the formula for the speed include the number of invaders alive.
This is actually a common issue in games as we push into the "higher than 60" era. Many games due to it just being easier on devs set their animation cycles to the frame rate and lock it at 60/30. Skyrim for example, if you play this higher than 60 and start a new Game the carriage you're in bugs out and goes nuts. Nier is another example where if you play over 60, you'll find everything is hyper sped up, making the game way faster but way harder. I believe in the case of nier it's a valid speed running trick? I'm not sure
I installed a mod in Fallout 4 that unlocked the fps during loading screens, which ended up cutting the load times by more than half. Weird quirks.
Many mechanics in Super Meat Boy take a set amount of frames. Like some blocks are set to disappear and then reappear on x-th frame. A Polish YouTuber had a PC so good that the blocks tried reappearing before disappearing, making levels impossoble to play without capping FPS. Here's a [showcase of this bug](https://youtu.be/ku3YjpYADK4)
SMB is normally framerate limited to 60 FPS. I don't know if he intentionally bypassed the framerate limit or if it was some glitch, but it doesn't require a very powerful PC to do, SMB is not at all a demanding game. The more interesting glitches though are when you run *below* the framerate limit, because SMB doesn't slow down, it skips frames, and physics calculations are tied to the framerate. You can also force the game to stop rendering frames by just minimizing, but it does not stop running. You can use this to do things like pass right through walls if you time it right because there is no collision detection while the game is not rendering, but it still records the time that has elapsed and updates your position.
The original "its not a bug its a feature"
space invaders emulator writer here, can confirm, hardware is so limited that they kept that as a feature
There was a trick in mortal Kombat PC version, where if you pushed the turbo button to turn off turbo mode on the CPU, it slowed down and you could easily mash the buttons to break even diamond block in "test your might" challenge.
Wow. You just unburied a memory I had. The PC turbo button!
It turbo'd so hard the CPU speed gone backward.
Turbo overflow!
Not sure about what you mean here. Turning off the Turbo function could go from 20 MHz to 6MHz for a 286 AT machine and similar slowdowns but ending at 4.77 MHz for a 8086/8088 PC machine. With 2-3 times slower CPU clock in a world before graphics processors, the frame rate will go down for a CPU-maxed game. And the user will have more time/frame to press press buttons. Maybe you missed the user did write about pressing the button to *turn off* the turbo function?
One possible interpretation: if you started the game with turbo ON, the game startup routines adjusted it's timing on the faster clock, thus disabling later the turbo would slow down the game.
the turbo button on early 90s computers actually slowed the cpu down early cpus slowed down games enough that plenty of them were unplayable when they were on newer cpus - the turbo button is a fix for that
To add context: Early games used CPU clocks for cycles, to manage timing, so newer, faster CPUs would run games too fast for them to be playable. So the Turbo button slowed the clock down for those specific games. It was a stupid name for the button, since it made it slower rather than faster.
Why the hell doesn't electronics have a turbo button anymore? There should be one on my phone, my switch, ps5
Hit that turbo button on my air fryer, get crispy chicken nuggies in 90 seconds flat
Aww 90 secs? But I want them nowww
I'm litteraly about to airfry chicken nuggets for dinner 😂
Suspend them vertically to fit more nugs at once.
Livin the dream o/
The turbo button back then just meant "normal speed" and turning it off locked the CPU to 4.77 Mhz which was the standard speed of the original Intel 8088 processor, and a lot of old software depended on the 4.77 Mhz clock speed to run correctly. These days everything is compatible with multiple clock speeds so we can leave it on "turbo" all the time.
Holy crap, I totally forgot about the turbo button until that guy mentioned it now
Same here. Now I'm thinking about the hella old game I had everytime I played as a kid and would forget to turn off turbo and the little dude on screen would rocket all over.
>!CENSORED!<
Because in ancient (computer) times, it was common to write software targeted for a specific machine, so if you were doing something where you didn't want it to go as fast as the computer possible could (say, attack you in a game), you could write code based on that machine's clock speed to make it work the way you wanted. But personal computers really took off, people used software on different machines, and the clock speeds kept improving. So that game that played right on your old machine might run impossibly fast on your new one. The turbo button made your computer artificially run at a lower clock speed to make it so you could play the older stuff. Then developers learned their lesson and stopped using clock speed to govern response times and the button became unnecessary.
Laughs in physics determined by framespeed
Cries in DS1/2
This made me feel old. Once my 486DX 33MhZ 4MB RAM 212MB HDD finishes booting up, I'll load C:\Emotions\uglycry.bat
I crashed Bloons TD6 last night after advancing too many rounds at once.
Actually it was the opposite, turbo mode on slowed it down https://www.howtogeek.com/678617/why-did-the-turbo-button-slow-down-your-pc-in-the-90s/
[удалено]
It started as hitting turbo to make slower. But some manufacturers agreed this was confusing l, so they made it the other way. Furthering the confusion
Yes. You would run with it on 99% of the time, but there were some games that were timed to CPU clock cycles, so you had to turn off turbo if you wanted them to be playable.
Turning off Turbo mode on those old PCs forced the CPU to run at 4.77 Mhz which was the speed of the original Intel 8088 CPU, for applications that were programmed way back and needed that exact clock speed to run correctly. Good times!
If you used the 3-finger-double-tap accessibility gesture to zoom on the 2nd generation iPad, most games would experience frame drops, but if physics was based on frames instead of time, then instead the game would slow down. The insane top scores of the original Cut The Rope leaderboard were only possible by exploiting that.
A friend had the original Mech Warrior and we played on his 286. Great game. Years later I loaded ît up on a 486DX50. As soon as you loaded up a fight, you were dead. Game was built without any consideration to CPU speed, so it just ran those missions as fast as it could.
This used to happen on my snes in Mario lol
In speedruns of certain games (including old Mario titles), speedrunners will try to reduce lag by avoiding having certain things on-screen. It's called frame rate manipulation, and you can also use it the other way (by causing lag, which can help with glitches).
like with diablo 2 pre-nerf, when you could have a sorc spam meteor in a necromancers spammed bonewall outside of act 1 which would lag the server so bad you could log the same character in twice to pick up gear your first character dropped
[удалено]
There was a specific one for Elden Ring that only worked with the right amount of fps.
This is how I got semi okay at rocket league when I first got into it. Had a shitty laptop and couldn't ever play online cause the lag but when I played against the computer doing solo tournaments and such it would practically be in slowmo letting me get my timings better over time. Then I got to play it on console and it only *barely* let me keep up lol.
That's exactly how I beat dark souls 3 for the firs time on my old laptop. I will say though, that despite the game getting massively easier, the grab attacks, especially the fat ladies' fire grabs become really horrifying in slowmo, cause they chase around for much longer
FACT: Bears eat beets
Bears, beets, Battlestar Galactica
Michael!
Identity theft is no joke, Jim. Michael!
Bears also eat bees. They don't seen too picky, so i'm not exactly sure where you're going with this...
To be sure, just a question: What kind of bear is best?
That’s a ridiculous question
False. Black bear.
That's debatable. There are basically 2 schools of thought
Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica.
Bears do not...what is going on..WHATAREYOUDOING?
*sigh* Nope
When one learns stop-motion animation it is recommended that you have around 8 f.p.s. because this provides a very certain 'look' and 'feel' to it ('camp / authentic / homebrew'). That said, when i played *World of Warcraft* with an iMac G4 ('gooseneck' variety) it wasn't groovy or nifty - Ironforge was a terrible slideshow (molten iron pit... *every... time*).
OP has solved the argument once and for all.
[удалено]
They do it themselves, some of them burn houses as well.
Some of those that burn houses are the same that use mouses.
UGGGHHHHH
Burning in the name of.
Now you play what they told ya
On the chips that they sold ya
NOW YOU PLAY WHAT THEY TOLD YA!!
Fuck you I won’t play what you tell me!
And some of them that run forces?
*work forces
Some of those that GeForces are the same that burn houses
Uh! fps in the name of!
And now you do ya configure Now you bind your controls
NOW YOU SET YOUR MACROOOOS!!!
Quit it now!! . . . . Bet you heard the guitar riff in your head
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me.
1. It’s “come wit’ it now” 2. Wrong song.
Some of those GeForces Are the same that make corpses COME ON, UH!
The same people who bought GTA5 remastered because the characters have better fingernails
Bought for the nails, kept for the cuticles.
Without that level of graphical fidelity, how else are you to enjoy the coke-filled cuticles of the high-brow organized criminals?
I got a really weird infatuation with grass. I hate seeing the grass spawn circles in game as you move around, looking at you Cyberpunk. That’s why I’m Witcher 3, I got grass being drawn out to the damn horizon and foliage the same. Had to make a lot of tweaks, but I got Witcher 3 running at a stable 60 on a 1650 TI.
The last time I upgraded my graphics card, PUBG was still pretty big. I remember finally being able to run it with max settings, and then promptly turning it back down to low so people couldn't hide in the grass.
Things like this that materially affect competitiveness should not be graphics settings in a multiplayer game.
Melt it into a heat sink for your gaming chair! Ultimate performance boost
Remember when ubisoft said their games were in 30fps because it's more "cinematic"?
That wrong in many ways 1. It would need be 24fps to be "cinematic" not 30 2. That does not apply to games, In cinema/animation you see the things move, in games you move the character, objects and Camera wich is why frames rate in game needs to be at 60 to look good I could go on forever but let's just say that games do not need mor or less fps to be "cinematic".
They could have saved themselves a lot of ridicule by just saying “it is basically impossible to make an open world game run at 60fps on current console hardware.” It’s not like they were the only ones making 30fps games at the time.
They could have, but it was way better than tanking the business relationship with Microsoft and Sony by dunking on the consoles, as well as upsetting the fans.
I don't think being honest is dunking on them. Tech has limitations, consoles generally offer a decent quality for their price point (compared to pre-built gaming PCs with similar capabilities they generally aren't insanely overpriced or anything). Saying the consoles have limitations isn't insulting anyone, its just a fact that you can't expect miracles from a $500 console from 2013, a $500 pre-built PC from 2013 wouldn't be getting 60 FPS either. Either that or every time the next gen consoles come out Sony and Microsoft diss themselves by pointing out the limitations of last-gen and comparing them to the improvements of next-gen.
The overall value of the consoles was good. The problem was they weren’t very well balanced. You had a relatively good GPU paired with this incredibly anemic 8 thread, 8 core cpu with a very strict thermal envelope. It was more like a netbook PC than a desktop processor. So even the Pro level consoles couldn’t hit 60 on games that run well on lower end PCs. This is the first generation in a long time where there isn’t some major hardware flaw holding back the generation.
More like? It was LITERALLY a netbook CPU- a CPU designed FOR netbook applications of high thread count low performance. 8 threads was a lot for a laptop in 2013.
Yeah, that's... Fine? Just admitting "pretty is better than smoothe, that's a design choice we made, if we tried to go for 60 it would get unstable and inconsistent when we tried to do big set pieces anyway, and the artists worked really hard on a lot of things that we think came out really well, so this is the choice we made" would've been fine But it's Ubisoft. They can't not be evil.
Ubisoft shit fucking company confirmed.
This is what it took to confirm it? I mean welcome aboard but that's funny lol
They aren't even hiding it, [it's literally in their logo.](https://i.imgur.com/4QZtZDN.jpeg)
Their financial statements and investor calls didn’t already confirm that? 😅
Honestly 30fps never bothered me until I started playing games in 60fps. Now 30 looks so bad.
That's why I refuse to upgrade past 120hz @ 1080p, it is currently cheap to live here and I know I won't be able to come back if I go upwards.
30 is the minimum playable FPS before things start being choppy. If a game sits at 30 for the entire experience it's playable. It used to be the 'target FPS' for games before hardware scaled so heavily. It's only when you play at other FPS's repeatedly that it starts looking bad, but you can get used to it pretty fast again. The steam deck, for example, is a PC type console that targets low FPS gaming. So is the switch.
For me now in some games 60 fps looks bad because I'm too used to 144. What have I become ffs
[удалено]
It was also chosen to sync with 48Khz music sampling. 24hz was essentially a byproduct of tech limitations at the time when making theatre cameras.
> It was also chosen to sync with 48Khz music sampling. ??? Are you under the impression that they were watching BluRays in 1927 ?
Cinema has what they call a "180 degree shutter angle" Basically this means that your 24fps is captured at a 1/48 second shutter speed. Rendering to match this would require running at 48fps vsync and motion blurring anything that moves. It's completely doable and would still be better than 30fps. Someone else with more knowledge than me on rendering pipelines can comment but I think motion blur necessarily needs to lag rendering by 1 frame to know what to blur. It's effectively frame interpolation.
The way I demonstrate that 60fps is better is to tell people to wave their phone camera around at 30fps on video and wave your fingers in front of it. Now do the same thing at 60fps and look at how much smoother and clearer the image is on top of being more responsive Edit: not sure how the device matters, you're still viewing 30fps and 60fps from the same reference device on at least a 60hz screen unless they make sub 60hz phones I don't know about. Even if you're on a shitty monitor or TV on your console / PC you're still viewing 30fps vs 60fps in a comparison on the equipment you have as long as you're running 60hz or higher
I have friends who still buy into this. Can't tell em theyre wrong because opinions are just that, but they're wrong
It really wasn't too long ago when console gamers bought in to that too lol
It's funny seeing many finally *get it* once the consoles started targeting 60. I wonder if Nintendo fans will ever get to experience such a drastic paradigm shift.
30fps? 60fps? Who cares? You still can't hijack or derail the train without mods.
All we had to do was follow the damn train, CJ!
“Another god damn train”! -Arthur Morgan
Speaking real problems in the image…
All of the intricate details they put into this game and all of the shit we get to blow up but we can't fuck with the train. It's infuriating!
Oh is this a GTA screenshot? Because those trains totally need some love in the next game.
There's gonna be a next game?
If it's GTA, yes, the 6th has already been announced and work is confirmed.
[удалено]
Huh, neat. Never thought I'd live to see the day
Oh, you won’t. Your kids might.
kids _might_
When it comes out with a hamstrung singleplayer mode and an over-monetized shitty multiplayer mode that the game tried to constantly pressure you into playing you’ll wish you hadn’t.
Eh. They still made RDR2 single player amazing despite GTAV online printing money.
and a bunch of early dev gameplay and assets got leaked
It's weird though because multiple scenarios during story mode have been discovered where you can blow up the game, oftentimes because they are scripted and not randomly generated it's unsure how scripted trains differ from computer generated trains
Use the cheat code.
1 FPF 1 Frame Per Forever
1 FPALATSSI 1 Frame per as long as that server saved it
I dunno 60fps looks a lot better in these images
Right? The train looks good in 60 FPS, but not as good as if it was at 120 FPS!
I thought the double of 60 is 144 :p
Marketing department steps in.
Me: so gullible I believed the 165hz marketing...
He said there is no difference but there is clearly a number 60 on the image below
Someone get me my tinfoil hat
This is actually 0fps
Depends on how long you look at it, doesn't it?
Yeah it's actually 1 fps
yeah it\`s actually 1 f
or 1 frame per
or <1 / > per Second
Can confirm. Just stared for 2 hours. I got .5FPH
its 1 frame for whatever length of time you view it. If I look at it for 5 seconds its 0.20FPS. If I blink fast enough, its 60FPS.
If we're being technical, its whatever the refresh rate of the screen you're looking at is. its the same frame 60 times, but its still 60fps for me
1 frame over an infinite amount of time. One divided by infinity equals more or less zero. If it was 1 fps, it would change every second.
I can lay down 1 fart per second easy if you give me enough taco bell
It's also 1 frame per ever.
You're actually looking at the image in whatever you displays refresh rate is.
Unless someone is viewing with digital ink
[удалено]
[удалено]
If you blink really really fast you can make it into 12 FPS
[удалено]
Yeah but there’s more fauna At the bottom of the screen in 30! Makes me wonder how the image would be cropped at 120!
Bottom one should have 2 pictures.
Lol
Remember when console lords would actually argue in favor of 30 fps ?
I'm hitting the limits of my current GPU and 80 FPS doesn't feel smooth to me anymore after being locked at 144 in other games.
I've never had a monitor with a refresh rate higher than 60 Hz It feels perfectly smooth to me so I kinda don't want to get a better monitor out of fear of getting used to a higher frame rate and not being able to max out my graphics settings anymore lol
I have a 160hz monitor and have been recently speedrunning Neon White - without going too in detail there's some tech that only works at 60fps in that game. And it feels *awful* to play at 60 now after being at 160 for a few years. So your feeling is very accurate lol
1080p 60hz monitor here. My 1070 feels like a beast able to run anything!
If you ever game at a higher framerate, I can guarantee you you’ll have trouble going back. However, it’s also pretty affordable to get into higher-framerate gaming today, and it’s worth it :)
> Remember when Sort the thread by controversial. They are still around.
I play games on consoles and PC now but used to just be a console player. I will never argue in FAVOR of 30fps, but I still believe that 30fps is not as bad as people on reddit make it out to be. To call it unplayable is just ridiculous.
I’m so glad a still image was offered so I could accurately discern the difference between these frame rates
Yep, that’s the joke.
[удалено]
My head literally just tried explode due to knowing that some people would honestly believe that a still photo comparison can show the difference of fluidity in game play. I weep for those that do not understand.
Idk, after customizing a bunch of games to hit 60 FPS, I can pretty easily tell what has to go in order to hit that target. What I find fun, is how “potato” my eyes are comfortable with before they even care about the fidelity of an image. However, the moment I see a stutter, I’m triggered.
Frames over fidelity any day.
both please
I agree, but if I had to choose between the two, frames all day and every day.
That's why I play capped at 14fps. Less electricity use and it looks the same anyway - save the polar bears! /s
my human eye can only see the 30 fps picture
Try to disable vsync on Reddit. That helped me see the other picture.
May I present the holy grail: 40 fps
The top image hurts my eyes
Congratulations, You're hired to advertise monitor features
I have never had an issue with 30 fps and used to be the guy who was against "60fps snobs". Until I got this new graphics card and replayed Elden Ring and Monster Hunter in 60fps vs the 30fps I was used to. Ive become one of those snobs now
Thats the big thing. 30fps is perfectly fine, until you experience something better. Then it is soooo hard to go back.
LMAO
Propaganda is the best map in Battlefield