gdalgorithms-list

Re: [Algorithms] FPS Questions

[Jim O. <j.o...@in...>]

> 60fps is the ideal target.

I blindly follow the masses here, but I can't help wondering why... Anything
above 24-25 fps will not be noticed by the human eye, 30 fps animations look
_really_ smooth. So why are we all targetting for 60 fps? Shouldn't we
rather crank up the detail some more and all target 30 fps? What makes a 60
fps game more playable than a 30 fps game?

Jim Offerman

Innovade
- designing the designer

Re: [Algorithms] FPS Questions (60fps vs 30fps)

[Adam W. <ad...@ar...>]

http://www.penstarsys.com/editor/30v60/30v60p2.htm

has a reasonable discussion on the topic.

adamw

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Offerman" <j.o...@in...>
To: <gda...@li...>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 8:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Algorithms] FPS Questions


> > 60fps is the ideal target.
>
> I blindly follow the masses here, but I can't help wondering why...
Anything
> above 24-25 fps will not be noticed by the human eye, 30 fps animations
look
> _really_ smooth. So why are we all targetting for 60 fps? Shouldn't we
> rather crank up the detail some more and all target 30 fps? What makes a
60
> fps game more playable than a 30 fps game?
>
> Jim Offerman
>
> Innovade
> - designing the designer
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> GDA...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list

Re: [Algorithms] FPS Questions (60fps vs 30fps)

[Adam W. <ad...@ar...>]

Ack, seem to have bookmarked page 2, there is a page 1
(http://www.penstarsys.com/editor/30v60/30v60p1.htm).

Sorry,

adamw

----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Wright" <ad...@ar...>
To: <gda...@li...>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 8:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Algorithms] FPS Questions (60fps vs 30fps)


> http://www.penstarsys.com/editor/30v60/30v60p2.htm
>
> has a reasonable discussion on the topic.
>
> adamw
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Offerman" <j.o...@in...>
> To: <gda...@li...>
> Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 8:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [Algorithms] FPS Questions
>
>
> > > 60fps is the ideal target.
> >
> > I blindly follow the masses here, but I can't help wondering why...
> Anything
> > above 24-25 fps will not be noticed by the human eye, 30 fps animations
> look
> > _really_ smooth. So why are we all targetting for 60 fps? Shouldn't we
> > rather crank up the detail some more and all target 30 fps? What makes a
> 60
> > fps game more playable than a 30 fps game?
> >
> > Jim Offerman
> >
> > Innovade
> > - designing the designer
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> > GDA...@li...
> > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> GDA...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list

Re: [Algorithms] FPS Questions

[Leigh M. <lei...@ro...>]

Spot the PC guy :)  When your working with NTSC 30fps is a min and your next
step without tearing is 60fps. You can totally feel the difference between a
60fps and a 30fps game.  Also depends on the type of game your writing.
What if your artist are doing some crazy animations runnning at 60Hz?

Leigh McRae

----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Offerman <j.o...@in...>
To: <gda...@li...>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 3:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Algorithms] FPS Questions


> > 60fps is the ideal target.
>
> I blindly follow the masses here, but I can't help wondering why...
Anything
> above 24-25 fps will not be noticed by the human eye, 30 fps animations
look
> _really_ smooth. So why are we all targetting for 60 fps? Shouldn't we
> rather crank up the detail some more and all target 30 fps? What makes a
60
> fps game more playable than a 30 fps game?
>
> Jim Offerman
>
> Innovade
> - designing the designer
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> GDA...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
>

Re: [Algorithms] FPS Questions

[Davide P. <da...@pr...>]

> > 60fps is the ideal target.
>
> I blindly follow the masses here, but I can't help wondering why...
Anything
> above 24-25 fps will not be noticed by the human eye, 30 fps animations
look
> _really_ smooth. So why are we all targetting for 60 fps? Shouldn't we

Because at 60fps there are 60 rendered images in one second, more animation
frames, so more global quality, more detail, less missing particular between
one
frame and another.

Imagine you have an high speed movement, at 30 fps you can get only 30
images
for that movement in that second, with 60fps you have 60 images, so more
detail,
with 200fps or hz you have an incredible detailed rendered sequence...

So more fps better interpolation better detail, in theory there's no a
maximum...

Davide Pirola
www.prograph.it
www.protonic.net

Re: [Algorithms] FPS Questions

[Stephen J B. <sj...@li...>]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Jim Offerman wrote:

> > 60fps is the ideal target.
> 
> I blindly follow the masses here, but I can't help wondering why... Anything
> above 24-25 fps will not be noticed by the human eye, 30 fps animations look
> _really_ smooth.

AAAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!

30Hz (on a 60Hz monitor) looks *terrible* compared to 60Hz.

Whenever anything moves quickly in the scene, you get
double imaging!  Yuk!

Try this:

while ( 1 )
{
  Clear screen to black ;
  Draw (say) a 10x10 pixel white square at coordinate (x, 100) ;
  x += 15 pixels ;
  if ( x > screen_width ) x = 0 ;
  swapbuffers
  delay for a while
}

Set your card up to swapbuffers on a vertical retrace, then
adjust the delay to run this at 60Hz and again at 30Hz. (or
at 72Hz and 36Hz if you have a 72Hz monitor).

Now imagine you are trying to shoot at the white square.

At 30Hz you are seeing double.  If you see double at 60Hz,
you probably still have a hangover from last night - the
effects are pretty similar.

20Hz is even worse because you get TRIPLE-imaging - although
a few people see only a very jerky image - it depends on
the individual.

At 24Hz, you are going to see that horizontal tear moving
rapidly up and down the screen whenever the eye is in motion
because you can't possibly be locked to the vertical retrace
as you should be at reasonable frame rates.

Steve Baker                      (817)619-2657 (Vox/Vox-Mail)
L3Com/Link Simulation & Training (817)619-2466 (Fax)
Work: sj...@li...           http://www.link.com
Home: sjb...@ai...       http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1

Re: [Algorithms] FPS Questions

[Mats L. <ma...@al...>]

Ever played Classic Quake with 30 fps? I have, and you really Feel the
difference between 30 and 60 fps, or 30 and 100 fps...It's so much
smooother...
You also have to remember that fps-number is just the __Average__ number of
frames. There's alot more work involved in rendering when you see a whole
room with furniture, plants etc. than just a single wall. So if you're
average is 30 fps, you get 30+ when see a wall and 30- when you see a more
complex scene. (Hope ye get the idea...I'm no good story teller...)

>> 60fps is the ideal target.
>
>I blindly follow the masses here, but I can't help wondering why... Anything
>above 24-25 fps will not be noticed by the human eye, 30 fps animations look
>_really_ smooth. So why are we all targetting for 60 fps? Shouldn't we
>rather crank up the detail some more and all target 30 fps? What makes a 60
>fps game more playable than a 30 fps game?
>
>Jim Offerman
>
>Innovade
>- designing the designer
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
>GDA...@li...
>http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
>

Re: [Algorithms] FPS Questions

[Ales M. <ja...@sl...>]

Yeah, but still, I think that the 60 fps is ideal becouse of developers
working the game on the the best available computer and stuff, so that means
that It should work at 20-30 fps on a normal-gamers computer anyway. Quake
didn't work at 60 fps when they released it, but it did a ~year after. So
thinking in how much Fps do you want wont bring you nowhere. It didn't bring
Me nowhere when I was thinking too much about it anyway.

> Ever played Classic Quake with 30 fps? I have, and you really Feel the
> difference between 30 and 60 fps, or 30 and 100 fps...It's so much
> smooother...
> You also have to remember that fps-number is just the __Average__ number
of
> frames. There's alot more work involved in rendering when you see a whole
> room with furniture, plants etc. than just a single wall. So if you're
> average is 30 fps, you get 30+ when see a wall and 30- when you see a more
> complex scene. (Hope ye get the idea...I'm no good story teller...)
>
> >> 60fps is the ideal target.
> >
> >I blindly follow the masses here, but I can't help wondering why...
Anything
> >above 24-25 fps will not be noticed by the human eye, 30 fps animations
look
> >_really_ smooth. So why are we all targetting for 60 fps? Shouldn't we
> >rather crank up the detail some more and all target 30 fps? What makes a
60
> >fps game more playable than a 30 fps game?
> >
> >Jim Offerman
> >
> >Innovade
> >- designing the designer
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> >GDA...@li...
> >http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> GDA...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list