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