RE: [Algorithms] FPS Questions

[Tom F. <to...@mu...>]

Oh yes - on monitor refreshes, 60Hz hurts immediately, <70Hz hurts after a
while, and 85Hz is nice. And again, at 100Hz, something rather pleasing
happens. But that's a very different effect.

Although 60Hz in a game does indeed feel somehow "nicer", it is not (to me)
obviously _prettier_ than 30Hz. Certainly, I would much prefer twice as many
tris on the screen and running at 30Hz - seeing triangles is much more
offensive to my eye than the (perceptually, to me) slightly lower update
rate.

So I can definately see the difference, I just don't care enough about it to
more than halve my poly count. This is another reason that extreme
scalability is cool - those that want to play at 20Hz can, and those that
want to play at 100Hz can.

Incidentally, 24fps panning at the cinema does EVIL things to my eyes - can
no-one else see it? It's really really awful and stuttery and blurry and yuk
- ruins a good movie. Roll on digital projection....

Tom Forsyth - Muckyfoot bloke.
Whizzing and pasting and pooting through the day.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: gl [mailto:gl...@nt...]
> Sent: 31 July 2000 21:18
> To: gda...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Algorithms] FPS Questions
> 
> 
> 
> Not only can I see the difference between 30 and 60 (they're 
> a world apart),
> I also find < 85Hz monitor refresh rate tiring.  At a 100, 
> something very
> interesting happens that's hard to put into words.  As with 
> all things, once
> you exceed the obvious limitations of something you find that 
> there is still
> a world of sublety to explore, so don't write off >60 fps 
> just yet (Quake2
> for example is especially 'liquid' at 100+).
> 
> The reason this comes up time and time again is precisely 
> because I think
> many people really can't tell the difference.  However, 
> those'll just have
> to accept that many of us can.
> --
> gl
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <sro...@te...>
> To: <gda...@li...>
> Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 9:05 PM
> Subject: RE: [Algorithms] FPS Questions
> 
> 
> > well, i dont know for you but i can see the difference 
> beetween 30 and 60
> > fps
> >
> > Corrosif,
> > Ignore demands from the marketing department to release 
> premature shots.
> > These people are for the  most part clueless, and are only trying to
> justify
> > their job." George Broussard, President of 3DRealms.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: gda...@li...
> > [mailto:gda...@li...]On 
> Behalf Of Jim
> > Offerman
> > Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 3:31 PM
> > To: gda...@li...
> > 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
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> GDA...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
>