quake 4 is capped to 60 fps [Archive]

RaZz!

10-24-2005, 01:34 PM

well, maybe nothing new to people who played doom3, but in doom3 one was able to remove the capped fps by entering "com_fixedtic 1" into the console.
in quake 4 this command only applies on the singleplayer and timedemos. but the multiplayer still has the fps capped to 60...
some thread i found here http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=864852 and a lot of other sources and quake-sites confirmed this issue.

John Carmack of id sofware: "The game tic simulation, including player movement, runs at 60hz, so if it rendered any faster, it would just be rendering identical frames. A fixed tic rate removes issues like Quake 3 had, where some jumps could only be made at certain framerates. In Doom [and Doom engine type games such as Quake4], the same player inputs will produce the same motions, no matter what the framerate is."

so my question is: why the hell do they cap the frames at 60 fps to remove issues with jumpmoves which only could be made at certain framerates?! :stick:
imho this is a very lazy way to get rid of this "bug". why don't the revise their netcode?

and the worst thing is that the limit isn't at playble 100fps, or 85fps, nooooo, the frames are capped at unbelieveable low 60fps. in my opinion 60fps are far away from smooth playing - and exact this mades me mad. i can't play q4 in multiplayer for longer than 20 minutes - after that i've headache en masse. this is a horrible fun-brake...

i think it's a "scandal" to cap a new "ultra high detailed engine" game to a determined framerate.
especially if you have 130+ fps in the singleplayer and have to accept crappy 60fps in the multiplayer...

what do you think about it?

Thorry

10-24-2005, 01:44 PM

Well they have to limit it at something ok, but the problem is performance.

If they would run the game at for example 120 hz a lot of computers won't be able to keep up and thus not be able to play the game. They prolly tested some different setups (most likely a lot of P4s which suck at gaming) and saw that 60hz is the absolute minimum.

I see their point, but think that the world is not yet ready for such a setup, this offcourse solves a lot of problems easy giving more cpu and gpu power to the game itself but 60 hz is just way to slow. Most gamers do run at 75 hz (rendering more frames then the monitor refresh is absolutely useless no matter what some 'uber gamers' say.)

Gamers that run at more then 75hz prolly have good hardware too so their hardware isn't the issue. However by the time Q4 gets out maybe they will up it to 75hz, but if your computer can't keep up your framerate will drop and your lag will increase. You may even be kicked from the server.

A locked speed game engine is however a very very good idea if you can have enough speed (60hz isn't enough speed, 75 would be the minimum, 85 would be better). A locked speed game engine not only solves a lot of complex problems which provides more cpu and gpu power to the game itself, it also allows for a artificial lag in multiplayer systems. This means even at higher pings and crappy connections you would still be able to game just fine. Also the game can enforce time effects in multiplayer games such as bullet time and the sorts.

Vincentvega18

10-24-2005, 01:45 PM

Doesnt lowering the fps reduce the risk of tearing frames? Also under most circumstances you shouldnt notice. Does a flourecent light give you the headache?

DilTech

10-24-2005, 01:45 PM

The reson they capped it at 60 is because the engine's animations are made for 60 fps. You see, at higher frame-rates, the engine will end up just rendering the exact same frame multiple times, wasting power uselessly. All you have to do is change your refresh rate and the headaches go away, and users of LCD's will have no issues with such.[I]

RaZz!

10-24-2005, 02:06 PM

SewerSide

10-24-2005, 07:34 PM

If this is true and is not able to be changed, then whats the point in even releasing Quake 4, NOONE will play multiplayer if this is the case.
What is happening to the gaming industry these days :(

Kunaak

10-24-2005, 08:36 PM

lots of games are capped, and do just fine.

all the GTA games, doom 3, and now this...
its not the first, and not the last, and not a big deal.

dont want to deal with the cap, just mod the shortcut.

Magnj

10-24-2005, 08:49 PM

can't humans only detect like 30fps anyway ?

Highland3r

10-25-2005, 12:04 AM

na, my refreshrate is at 100hz - that's not the reason for the headache. it's just the 60fps... 60fps are simply too low. smooth gaming begins, imo, at 75fps-85fps. in age of empires 3 for example i don't care if there are only 40 or 30 fps.. you don't really notice them. but in a fast first person shooter like quake4 60fps are everything but smooth... the game is just choppy.......

Shouldnt get a headache from 100hz and 60 fps.... if the refresh was 60 then maybe, but not with a higher one especially not with 100...
Could always ramp up the eye candy so the game doesnt run over 60fps?

asmodean

10-25-2005, 12:41 AM

can't humans only detect like 30fps anyway ?
http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

and yeah, tickrate doesn't have anything to do with fps

perkam

10-25-2005, 01:12 AM

can't humans only detect like 30fps anyway ? It has nothing to do with how many fps we can see (nice link btw asmodean), 60fps and over is considered the optimum framerate for no disturbance gameplay - a must for high end PCs.

Where exactly does it say 60fps though :confused: It says 60Hz.

Perkam

DilTech

10-25-2005, 12:46 PM

na, my refreshrate is at 100hz - that's not the reason for the headache. it's just the 60fps... 60fps are simply too low. smooth gaming begins, imo, at 75fps-85fps. in age of empires 3 for example i don't care if there are only 40 or 30 fps.. you don't really notice them. but in a fast first person shooter like quake4 60fps are everything but smooth... the game is just choppy.......

You do realize that the doom 3 engine automatically sets your refreshrate to 60, right? You have to manually tell it higher than 60!

Also, it isn't choppy on my system, it sounds like you just need to force the higher refresh rate.

RaZz!

10-25-2005, 02:51 PM

You do realize that the doom 3 engine automatically sets your refreshrate to 60, right? You have to manually tell it higher than 60!

Also, it isn't choppy on my system, it sounds like you just need to force the higher refresh rate.

lol, trust me, i'm able to differentiate between 60hz and 100hz ;)

furthermore, i checked the refreshrate in my monitor's osd. it showed 100hz...

ok, then try following:
type "com_fixedtic 1" and "com_showfps 1" in your console (without quotation marks, of course; disables the 60fps cap and shows fps) and play the singleplayer. after that start a mp-server or join a server of your choice. you'll notice the difference. the singleplayer with high fps runs very smooth - the multiplayer however runs choppy compared to the sp.
however, maybe most of the people don't notice a difference between 60 and 85+ fps, but i notice it very well...
maybe i'm too "sensitive" (lol :p:), but it's my perception.

in addition: some of my friends reported the same "crappy" feeling in the mp, but not all. so it seems that it's really depending on the individual perception.

DilTech

10-25-2005, 05:11 PM

I don't see how you'd notice the difference tbh, considering the doom 3 engine is made to revolve around 60 fps. What this means, even at framerates above 60, the image is identical to a framerate being at 60, there's no visual difference, the game merely just re-renders the same frames....

In otherwords, at 60 or 120 fps, it's identically the same, with the same response time and the same exactly look at speed.

perkam

10-25-2005, 05:55 PM

In otherwords, at 60 or 120 fps, it's identically the same, with the same response time and the same exactly look at speed. Theoretically yes. But if its at 60 fps, you have a greater chance of it dipping below 50 or 40 than if you're at 120.

Perkam

DilTech

10-25-2005, 06:26 PM

If it drops below 60, then it would've dropped below that 60 mark anyway with the doom 3 engine....

nn_step

10-25-2005, 06:44 PM

85fps in a crt monitor is my threash hold and 55fps in a LCD monitor...
SO I guess I will only plan it on my LCD monitor..
I Hate game head aches....

DriveEuro

10-25-2005, 06:59 PM

All I thought when I saw this thread...

DUH! Its on the Doom III engine.

LOE

10-25-2005, 10:51 PM

60 fps are enough for a smooth play

quake 3 was limited at 90fps, but I personally limit it to 120FPS - that is the internal resolution of the game engine, so the best combo for quake 3 back in my pro gaming days was a monitor at 120Hz, game limited to 120GH and a ps2 mouse at 120 Ghz

the cmd in quake 3 was "com_maxfps x", it may just work as most the the cmds from q3 work in doom3 and q4

SewerSide

10-26-2005, 04:55 AM

If the FPS limiter wasnt enough, they've ruined the jumping in Quake 4.
Its not Quake1/2/3 jumping anymore, its more like CS Source.

Such a let down :(

Turok

10-26-2005, 05:51 AM

If the FPS limiter wasnt enough, they've ruined the jumping in Quake 4.
Its not Quake1/2/3 jumping anymore, its more like CS Source.

Such a let down :(

The game needs a lot of fixes in order to survive.
I dont think people would tolerate the game a few more years if it doesnt improve considerably.

1) They need to find a way to raise the FPS limit
2) They need to add double jumping, or a jump just a bit higher.
3) Moders or ID Software should remodel the rail gun so it looks more like Quake2's or Quake3's rail gun
http://img429.imageshack.us/img429/8643/q4wm.gif
4) They need to make a patch that adds more maps and player. Retail quake only comes with about 15 maps.
5) You cant download server content like Doom3. If you cant download server content for any maps or mods you dont have, and the game comes with a limited ammount of maps, people will probably get frustrated with the same maps and mods and just quit Quake4, causing yet another death of a great sequel.

Not many people play Doom3 for some of these reasons, so Quake4's fate probably depends on moders and ID software.

perkam

10-26-2005, 07:04 AM

I'll buy quake 4 if they have multi maps with vehicles and stuff. I dont get how such an amazing single player experience can translate to such a lousy multiplayer experience.

Perkam

DilTech

10-26-2005, 07:24 AM

It's not a lousy multi-player experience... It's one of the best ever. If quake 4 adds vehicles to multiplayer then it will be a travesty. Vehicles are for those who can't play and need an advantage over the ground pounders.

Sewer, it's NOTHING like CS: Source, it's VERY fast paced, similiar damage system to quake 3, strafe jumping works like it did in quake 3...CS is camper based, Quake 4 is skill based.

Turok, you CAN jump higher... Rocket jumps, Wall climbing, Blaster rushing... What else do you need to jump any higher? Double jumps aren't needed, this isn't unreal tournament.

It only came with 15 maps? You're complaining about it only coming with 15 maps? HL2 DM came with TWO, CS:S came with 9 IIRC, F.e.a.r. came with alot less... Let's not forget, unlike quake 3(which came with 17 btw, only 2 more) this isn't a MP only game... 15 is ALOT for a game with a SP to it.

FPS limit is fine, I've explained this a million times.

Auto-Downloads do work, just some servers don't enable them. Also, if it doesn't auto-download, it'll send you to a website with it to download yourself.

Finally, I end this with this...
http://gdhardware.com/ed/gaming_cynic/candyass/001.htm

perkam

10-26-2005, 07:38 AM

Quake 4 isnt perfect dil. The problem arises because of the contrasting gameplay between single and multiplayer, that's why many ppl are upset. I've never liked the doom 3 before, but i'll most likely buy quake 4 over F.E.A.R cos i like the singleplayer experience better :)

Perkam

slider99

10-26-2005, 08:11 AM

Single and multi-player are different, and they should be. I wouldn't want my squad jumping around all over the place! Frankly, I think marines's melee attacks are just stupid, if the strogg come that close, you're dead meat! I'd have wanted more squad based "single" play, with more (expendable) squad members... just make sure to protect tech and medic

Thorry

10-26-2005, 04:48 PM

Theoretically yes. But if its at 60 fps, you have a greater chance of it dipping below 50 or 40 than if you're at 120.

Perkam

LOL, that's the most thruthfull bullsh*t I've every heard:

Yes you are right, when you are running at 120 fps and the framerate drops to say 40 fps for 0.1 secs the game will prolly show the framerate as being 112 fps. You think: Yay my framerate didn't drop below 60 I'm allright.

However: The visual effect is exactly the same, the framerate did drop and you will see a stutter in the screen. This is because the FPS meter updates only 5x sec max whilst your eye updates a lot faster.

For all you guys claiming to see the difference between 60 fps and 100 fps:
This is total bullsh*t, the eye can detect difference in color in the center of the eye at about 30 fps. The outline of the eye can detect motion (difference in light) at about 50 fps.

Because of this when you look directly at a sheet of paper with artificial lights on it you will not see the flicker, but when you hold the sheet of paper in front of you but you look away from it you will be able to see it flicker.

IF you are somekind of uberman who can detect framerates above 60 fps you will not be able to read in artifical lights, you will also become nauseous playing games. Because the framerate jumps up and down between say 120 fps and 60 fps you will experience this as rapid speed-ups and slow-downs. You will puke within 10 mins.

Turning on v-sync is perfect (this locks the fps to you refresh-rate preventing framebreaks). Locking the fps in a game is also perfect, however 60 fps seems low to me. As at 85hz refresh rate can cause framebreaks

ahmad

10-26-2005, 07:56 PM

For all you guys claiming to see the difference between 60 fps and 100 fps:
This is total bullsh*t, the eye can detect difference in color in the center of the eye at about 30 fps. The outline of the eye can detect motion (difference in light) at about 50 fps.

Its not just the eye that can't detect faster than 30FPS, monitors are also capped. For example, if you have an LCD running at 70 or 80Hz, then the monitor itself refreshes 80 times in one second, regardless of what framerate you are running at!

However there is a problem with FPS. Faster framerate means you can essentially move faster. For example, say it takes 30 frames to make a 90* turn. If you are running at 300FPS, you can make that turn in (theoretically) 1/10th of a second. Also the game feels much more responsive with faster framerates.

I play (or used to) CSS and I know I can't play it if average framerate is < 90FPS. Not because I can see the faster FPS, but because my character is much more responsive (thats why this doesn't matter as much in other game genres). In that sense, I could say I notice a difference at higher FPS.

Wrench

10-26-2005, 08:17 PM

well, maybe nothing new to people who played doom3, but in doom3 one was able to remove the capped fps by entering "com_fixedtic 1" into the console.
in quake 4 this command only applies on the singleplayer and timedemos. but the multiplayer still has the fps capped to 60...
some thread i found here http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=864852 and a lot of other sources and quake-sites confirmed this issue.

so my question is: why the hell do they cap the frames at 60 fps to remove issues with jumpmoves which only could be made at certain framerates?! :stick:
imho this is a very lazy way to get rid of this "bug". why don't the revise their netcode?

and the worst thing is that the limit isn't at playble 100fps, or 85fps, nooooo, the frames are capped at unbelieveable low 60fps. in my opinion 60fps are far away from smooth playing - and exact this mades me mad. i can't play q4 in multiplayer for longer than 20 minutes - after that i've headache en masse. this is a horrible fun-brake...

i think it's a "scandal" to cap a new "ultra high detailed engine" game to a determined framerate.
especially if you have 130+ fps in the singleplayer and have to accept crappy 60fps in the multiplayer...

what do you think about it?

because Carmack is not as good of a coder as he thinks he is.

DilTech

10-26-2005, 08:56 PM

Thorry

10-27-2005, 01:28 AM

Its not just the eye that can't detect faster than 30FPS, monitors are also capped. For example, if you have an LCD running at 70 or 80Hz, then the monitor itself refreshes 80 times in one second, regardless of what framerate you are running at!

Jup monitors are also limited, that's what I said. That's why you need to enable v-sync. This makes sure you don't have framebreaks. Even at > 100 fps you can still have framebreaks.

However there is a problem with FPS. Faster framerate means you can essentially move faster. For example, say it takes 30 frames to make a 90* turn. If you are running at 300FPS, you can make that turn in (theoretically) 1/10th of a second. Also the game feels much more responsive with faster framerates.

I play (or used to) CSS and I know I can't play it if average framerate is < 90FPS. Not because I can see the faster FPS, but because my character is much more responsive (thats why this doesn't matter as much in other game genres). In that sense, I could say I notice a difference at higher FPS.

If a game works like that it's just a crappy game. It doesn't take 30 frames to do a turn. It takes how long it needs to take, depeding on how fast you move the mouse and how sensitive you set the controls. Movement will always be measured in time not in frames, otherwise people running higher FPS will be limited.

Also in games like CS people claim to have a advantage when running at high fps, this is however also total BS. The network/internet connection has trouble keeping up with your system. The connection can't update more then 30 fps over internet anyway.

RaZz!

10-27-2005, 03:49 AM

Carmack is a legend Wrench, I'm not sure who you're kidding... He *LITERALLY* is a rocket scientist you know. Ask any developer, his nick-name is "the human compiler" for a reason. He has been , and always will be, a step ahead of everyone everytime he builds an engine. One can only wonder what his next engine will be like, considering they passed Q4 over to raven to work on their new intellectual property, and he's been working on the new engine since 2003...

At one point, and likely to this day, microsoft saw him as a threat because ALL of his engines act as their own operating system...

There's a reason Carmacks speeches are always the highlight of MacWorld every year.

lol, if john carmack is that skilled, why did doom3 only support 4 players in multiplayer because of crap engine-bottlenecks? ;) i respect john carmack and the games he produced/programmed, especially quake3, but the engines from doom3 and quake4 (which is basically the same) is far away from perfectionism.

other developers like epic also were able to cap the fps in mutliplayer at 85fps without hurting anyone. i don't really like ut2k4 and it's gameplay, but it's engine runs very smooth and doesn't has framedrops in multiplayer if 2 players stand in front of you... and they don't have any issues with high fps and the movement...

why is epic able to cap the fps at 85 and id only at 60? or another example: battlefield2. the frames are capped at 100. so why the hell is every developer able to cap the fps at spots higher than 60 and id not? the examples show that it's possible to combine "high fps" and multiplayer without any problems...

so there must be something in id's engine which isn't that efficient or something ;P

Ubermann

10-27-2005, 04:11 AM

I wish he left the "space" theme and made something good and realistic.
Then even I might spend more then 10 minutes in hes games.

ahmad

10-27-2005, 07:17 AM

If a game works like that it's just a crappy game. It doesn't take 30 frames to do a turn. It takes how long it needs to take, depeding on how fast you move the mouse and how sensitive you set the controls. Movement will always be measured in time not in frames, otherwise people running higher FPS will be limited.

I made a general statement. If you want to include sensitivity, thats fine, but my argument still holds. Lets say I have my sensitivity set to 1, then it will take X/1 (X is a variable) frames to make a turn. Now make your sensitivity 2, and you will make that same turn in X/2 frames, and so on. Upping your sensitivity will have a similar impact as to running at a faster framerate.

Look at it the other way. How long will it take you to make a turn if you were running at 5 or 10FPS? I am sure it would take quite a bit more time than running at 100FPS.

Also in games like CS people claim to have a advantage when running at high fps, this is however also total BS. The network/internet connection has trouble keeping up with your system. The connection can't update more then 30 fps over internet anyway.

Both claims are wrong. If you follow the above reasoning, your initial statement is incorrect.

As for your second statement, this is all dependant on a person's rate settings inside CSS as well as server tickrate. A lot of servers are now advertising when their tickrates are 66 or higher (meaning a server will retrieve data from you 66 times every 1 second). Some servers automatically change your rates to match the server settings (cl_update and cl_cmdrate) others don't.

DilTech

10-27-2005, 10:59 AM

lol, if john carmack is that skilled, why did doom3 only support 4 players in multiplayer because of crap engine-bottlenecks? ;) i respect john carmack and the games he produced/programmed, especially quake3, but the engines from doom3 and quake4 (which is basically the same) is far away from perfectionism.

Doom 3 wasn't meant for MP, it was meant for SP. The 4 player limit was due to the massive overhead a PER PIXEL(the first, and only game to use such an accurate hit detection system) hit detection. This caused MASSIVE overhead to the server inwhich was running it, thus the huge requirements to even serve.... It's an amazing accomplishment to be able to claim such a feat, but the problem is it's just WAYYYY ahead of it's time, our internet isn't fast enough, nor are our processors.

Notice the expansion for D3 upped it to 8 players.

other developers like epic also were able to cap the fps in mutliplayer at 85fps without hurting anyone. i don't really like ut2k4 and it's gameplay, but it's engine runs very smooth and doesn't has framedrops in multiplayer if 2 players stand in front of you... and they don't have any issues with high fps and the movement...

why is epic able to cap the fps at 85 and id only at 60? or another example: battlefield2. the frames are capped at 100. so why the hell is every developer able to cap the fps at spots higher than 60 and id not? the examples show that it's possible to combine "high fps" and multiplayer without any problems...

so there must be something in id's engine which isn't that efficient or something ;P

It's not a lack of efficiency, the engine is honestly the most efficient on the market in terms of power vs performance. The move to 60 revolves around the animation, in-which is set to revolve around this 60 mark. I've explained it multiple times, I don't think I need to explain it again.... Also, in UT2k4, there ARE some things that cannot be done at lower fps compared to higher, certain jumps simply cannot be made otherwise, this occurs in practically all fast paced shooters. As for battlefield2, it's not a fast paced game, so it doesn't matter what they set it to as there's no real tricks to be done...

Like I said, Carmack is literally a rocket scientist, there's always method to his madness.

Either way, however you look at it, until Unreal Engine 3, this is THE most technologically advanced engine on the market, as well as the most optimized!

Hicks

10-27-2005, 02:43 PM

All i can say is the Single player was awesome, while it lasted. Iam getting more and more pissed of with the length of games these days. :rolleyes:

Thorry

10-27-2005, 02:44 PM

I made a general statement. If you want to include sensitivity, thats fine, but my argument still holds. Lets say I have my sensitivity set to 1, then it will take X/1 (X is a variable) frames to make a turn. Now make your sensitivity 2, and you will make that same turn in X/2 frames, and so on. Upping your sensitivity will have a similar impact as to running at a faster framerate.

Look at it the other way. How long will it take you to make a turn if you were running at 5 or 10FPS? I am sure it would take quite a bit more time than running at 100FPS.

This is incorrect, if sensitivity is set the same it will take exactly the same amount of time. When running at 5 fps, the game doesn't slow down to 5 fps, you just only get to see 5 fps. A second is a second no matter what you do.

The amount of frames rendered in a second has absolutely nothing to do with the actual gamespeed. If this were the case multiplayer gaming would be impossible as some people would move faster or slower as other people.

RaZz!

10-27-2005, 03:45 PM

When running at 5 fps, the game doesn't slow down to 5 fps, you just only get to see 5 fps. A second is a second no matter what you do.

i shortly want to comment this :)

if one is using "com_fixedtic 1" in q4, to disable the 60fps-limitation, the game will run slower in low fps. the lower the fps the slower runs the game. if the fps for example are 120, you'll run very fast, if they are at 30 the game will run like in slowmotion.

this only seems to appear if i use com_fixedtic 1.
i don't know, but i'm sure (99,9% :p:) that doom3 ran normal in all kind of fps. only the timedemo's speed depends on the fps - the gamespeed itself isn't affected. only in q4 i noticed this behaviour.

and now.. gnight everybody :D :cheer: :p:

perkam

10-27-2005, 04:21 PM

I'm just going to say this.

There is a world of difference between an X1800XT/7800GTX that runs quake 4 at 100fps+ at highest settings and a x850xt/6800U that runs them at the same settings at 60 fps.

We live in a world of technology where faster technology means faster results. Period. If Mr. Carmack HAS put a limit on fps for 60fps, then that is a disadvantage for high end enthusiasts which will forego q4 for F.E.A.R. or another new gen game.

I'll see what I can find on the doom 3 engine that explains this possible limitation. Might I suggest everyone who wishes to accuse others of posting bullshi*t do the same before posting self-approved info on the engine.

And I'm keeping this thread on my watchlist in case anyone has the urge to light any torches. Thx.

Perkam

Der_KHAN

10-27-2005, 05:25 PM

i think the problem with the frame limiter is not the number of 60fps but the way it is programmed.

this whole dicussion reminds me of grand theft auto. which has had a frame limiter ever since because the games speed is determined by the framerate and not the system clock. (at least in gta I and III)

i remember my first experiments with the frame limiter in gtaI which had a hotkey to switch it on and off ingame. the game would run at the exact same framerate and speed with or without the limiter on my lame cyrix200+. but i noticed that it was way smoother without the limiter.

when i got my 3dfx card i had to use the limiter cuz the game would be too fast without it, but i would get a headache after some minutes. so i had to uninstall the 3dfx-patch again.

i noticed the same headaches with gtaIII and c&c generals which is capped to 30fps in single player but uncapped in mp.

SoF

11-01-2005, 12:03 PM

if frame rate is 60fps constantly you won't remark anything...if you would be right you would get head ache while watching tv :rolleyes:
I think this is simply imagination, but nevertheless a bad solution for solving problems anyway...

€: the problem with the limiter is if the frames are already all calculated it simply seems to stop.
this was what it looked like in gta I....try the limiter on new systems and you will remark it will stop for half a second ^^ this is what does let it look like being unsmooth. and this is really bad I agree. but I haven't seen the limiter yet so I can't say if i'm that correct with my first sentences.

Der_KHAN

11-01-2005, 07:24 PM

if frame rate is 60fps constantly you won't remark anything...if you would be right you would get head ache while watching tv :rolleyes:remember that theres a huge difference between filmed pictures and rendered pictures.
if u film something thats moving on a camera u get a motion blur. which means that theres kind of a transition between the single frames.
and thats why i.e. pal movies at 25fps look way smoother than games at 25fps.

so if u want a game to look as smooth as a movie u have to run it at a significantly higher framerate.

ugp

11-01-2005, 09:59 PM

Removing the CAP in Doom 3 doesn't help much for anything at all...it i better to CAP the game at a fixed rate anyway and it looks smoother than a game running at various FPS all the time. And you can only see as many Frames as your monitors Refresh rate will allow you anyway. So why run anything but VSync? Unless you are using SLI and there are still some issues with that.

STEvil

11-01-2005, 10:13 PM

... Vehicles are for those who can't play and need an advantage over the ground pounders...

:slapass: :slap:

Really, really need to think that statement out a bit more.

:slap:

Der_KHAN

11-02-2005, 04:28 AM

So why run anything but VSync?because vsync will drastically lower your framerate if the refresh rate is higher than the fps

example: if ur refresh rate is 100hz and your rig can render 70fps, u will only get to see 50fps. each of those 50 frames will be shown twice to prevent tearing.
a fps counter will show you 70fps though.

so with vsync you are limited to framerates that are factors of your refresh rate:

refr.rate -> resulting fps

85 Hz -> 85, 42, 28, 21, 17, ... fps
100 Hz -> 100, 50, 33, 25, 20, ... fps
120 Hz -> 120, 60, 40, 30, 24, ... fps