Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

FPSC Classic Product Chat / 30FPS? I thout film was 24 :S

Author
Message
=ChrisB=
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jun 2005
Location: starring into a viewfinder
Posted: 21st Dec 2005 18:40
Accualy I KNOW it is cause I work with it sometimes. But quite honistly, I am inclined to belive that a more, "Film" look would be better. But thats just my opinion.
My point? Why not try modifying the source code for 24FPS, instead of 30 or higher.

Chris: Oh god it feels good to be outta the F**king shoos!
Sterling: I know! It feels good to be outta these cloths too!
Wheelgator is a ricist. What? I swear! He called me a n***r!
Nigezu
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Nov 2005
Location: Oulu, Finland
Posted: 21st Dec 2005 18:43
You mean game has to be slower than it already is???

Intel Pentium 4 Processor 519 3.06 Ghz, 1536 MB DDR, Ati Radeon 9550 256MB
Vlad
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2005
Location:
Posted: 21st Dec 2005 18:44


You are a bit crazy, ya know Chris?

The point is to get a diferent feeling for it, right? I believe that 30FPS is hardcoded for perfomance issues (you probably know that too), but even if it goes to 24FPS, more people would be annoyed than happy.

Still, and if you really want a film look, you should aim for 23,960 FPS if I'm not mistaken, but I'm just teasing you.

V

I'm pretty sure I know everything. Doubts are something rare in me and I am never wrong, as this signature can prove.
=ChrisB=
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jun 2005
Location: starring into a viewfinder
Posted: 21st Dec 2005 18:48
LoL, I know it'll be a little, erm, un-smoth (), but if you take a look at a film shot and a video (NTSC, not PAL) of the same thing right next to eachother, you will see that the video one picks up more little blemishes in the world. Lile dust is more visible, it looks kinda crappy (video in general does, unless its 24p or 60i/p).

Chris: Oh god it feels good to be outta the F**king shoos!
Sterling: I know! It feels good to be outta these cloths too!
Wheelgator is a ricist. What? I swear! He called me a n***r!
Vlad
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2005
Location:
Posted: 21st Dec 2005 21:14
I've bought a game where the cut-scenes are intended to be that way and it was immersive to say the least, so why don't give it a shot? Even at 30FPS you are creative enough to get something different going.

I'm pretty sure I know everything. Doubts are something rare in me and I am never wrong, as this signature can prove.
transient
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Apr 2005
Location: Australia Zoo
Posted: 22nd Dec 2005 01:27
You don't interact with film so a good response time isn't necessary; it just has to look good.

I would personally like the minimum FPS to be higher than 30, but it's okay as it is.

instinct is more valuable than intelligence.....
Les Horribres
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Nov 2005
Location: My Name is... Merry
Posted: 22nd Dec 2005 02:36
I ask CellBlock to correct me if I am wrong...

add this to setup.ini

optimizemode=1

Anti-Noob Justice League, an ANJL of Mercy.
[url=ochanicon.gif]
uman
Retired Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posted: 22nd Dec 2005 03:10
Film Grain and other special effects have nothing at all to do with British or American Film Speed standards. They are applied by film studios purposefully to various kinds of Film productions on purpose and have been for many years since film quality improved to such an extent that it became so high that it became boyond the reality of excpectation to the human eye being unreflective of materials and environmental surfaces in the real world.

Thus the application of these special effects are now standard to reverse that film quality in a controlled way or environment to something approaching the real world capabilities of the human eye rather than presenting a rather false plastic representation of it. The crappy look as described is what the human eye expects to see and what film studios give you puposefully. The plastic looks is apparently disturbing to the human eye making humans uncomfortable in watching film of that quality.

Apparently.

30fps is actually the lowest frame rate at which FPSC can sustain smooth gameplay irrespective of any other considerations and though the human eye sees animation of anything of any kind best and correctly at that 30fps the cap limit of FPSC means that its not possible currently to maintain that 30fps consistantly throughout a game made with it.

The FPSC 30fps cap limit therefore cannot be OK as set as it is as it would make your games unplayable which is not much use to any gamemaker unless they purposefully thats just ludicrous.

Actually the fps issue is more complex in that in FPSC as you should all know than all that and other factors such as poor culling and alike are involved which make cap limits and those other fps considerations that exist unrealistic to debate as you cannot do so with any sensibility when you have an engine that fluctuates between basic minium human gameplay expectations or requirement to one of gameplay incapability.

The whole issue is just a waste of space unless you have the capability to maintain a stable 30fps throughout - just as "Your Film" does.

I doubt anyone would like to go watch a movie in a cinema where one minute you are watching your long awaited movie of the year when a moment later the movie is dropping Frames and jumping around erratically or the film or is running in slow motion. In that situation I am sure you would not be very happy and neither will any FPSC game Players for those of you who ever expect to complete a game to distribute.

The issue of the difference between NTSC and PAL filmspeeds is also more complicated than that which the standards imply - but thats another matter.

Still theres nothing stopping you crapping up your game look to give it a worn or real world look or at the other end of the scale giving it a plastic futuristic look - but hard work.

Differentials in FPS below 30fps will do nothing for a dated look unless you want gameplayers to think your game was made in 1903 for playing on a wind up computer as the frame speeds become impossible and nothing at all for the futuristic look for the same reason.

I dont expect anyone to make a serious game with FPSC that maintains acceptable 30fps throughout gameplay - thats near enough impossible with FPSC in its current condition.

If you can achieve 30fps or therabouts within a couple of frames either way throughout a game with FPSC that would be acceptable as any more than 30fps is a waste to the user during gameplay as the human eye cannot differentiate higher fps. Its the maintaining of that 30fps consistently I very much doubt is achievable. Its almost impossible in an engine where you start building in an empty level at 32fps.

Les Horribres
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Nov 2005
Location: My Name is... Merry
Posted: 22nd Dec 2005 03:17
Quote: "If you can achieve 30fps or therabouts within a couple of frames either way throughout a game with FPSC that would be acceptable as any more than 30fps is a waste to the user during gameplay as the human eye cannot differentiate higher fps. Its the maintaining of that 30fps consistently I very much doubt is achievable. Its almost impossible in an engine where you start building in an empty level at 32fps."


actually, I was corrected on that one, you see at 100fps, 200 with light in dark. But 60fps is good enough.

Don't know what your talking about 32 fps, but that is what FPSC keeps at (i've gotten 33 some times) I have a small problem with window bubbles, and door bubbels, but if Riker 9 fixes that, I have a pretty smooth game. But I have a lot of doors and windows in the upper level and those screw up the frame rate. (the 2 court yards of course are 18fps, complete with 8 lights, 1 tree, and 30 grass entitys).

Anti-Noob Justice League, an ANJL of Mercy.
[url=ochanicon.gif]
uman
Retired Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posted: 22nd Dec 2005 04:01
Quote: "Don't know what your talking about 32 fps"


I am just quoting a figure as one has to be suggested at which on average users start their empty game level building at. Every user finds this start or cap figure to vary somewhat dependant upon varying circumstances - you know that.

Quote: "I have a small problem with window bubbles, and door bubbels, but if Riker 9 fixes that, I have a pretty smooth game. But I have a lot of doors and windows in the upper level and those screw up the frame rate. (the 2 court yards of course are 18fps, complete with 8 lights, 1 tree, and 30 grass entitys)."


Thats all just unacceptable during gameplay excluding Riker9 which you dont have and irrespective of what may happen from now to you completing your game.

The bit where you say
Quote: "(the 2 court yards of course are 18fps, complete with 8 lights, 1 tree, and 30 grass entitys)."


Thats pretty abismal and a danmning condemnation of poor FPSC fps - those entity numbers are really low by modern gamemaking standards and should hardly affect frame rates if at all in a modern engine of any status. I know there may be some others which are not any better and no one makes successful games with them either. Well I doubt it. Depends on your definition of game I expect.

Les Horribres
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Nov 2005
Location: My Name is... Merry
Posted: 22nd Dec 2005 04:11 Edited at: 22nd Dec 2005 04:26
Did a recount, seems it is closer to 50, but I know what is really causing the slow down... I have a couple windows of DOOM.

Quote: "Its almost impossible in an engine where you start building in an empty level at 32fps."

Explain

Anti-Noob Justice League, an ANJL of Mercy.
[url=ochanicon.gif]
uman
Retired Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posted: 22nd Dec 2005 05:08 Edited at: 22nd Dec 2005 05:44
Quote: ""Its almost impossible in an engine where you start building in an empty level at 32fps."
Explain"



If you start building in a capped engine in an empty level at 33fps say - in order to end up with a gameplay speed of 30fps maintained consistantly throughout gameplay - you have 3fps to play with. Thats all you can afford to drop off or loose in adding all of your level or game content and 3fps is just not enough.

Explained.



Edited
Les Horribres
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Nov 2005
Location: My Name is... Merry
Posted: 22nd Dec 2005 05:38
The bold part was all that was nessisary.


Although you have 90fps originally (so 60fps play room)

Anti-Noob Justice League, an ANJL of Mercy.
[url=ochanicon.gif]
uman
Retired Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posted: 22nd Dec 2005 05:43
Quote: "Although you have 90fps originally (so 60fps play room)"


Where on earth do you get those figures from?

transient
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Apr 2005
Location: Australia Zoo
Posted: 22nd Dec 2005 08:44
You don't always have 33fps to begin with.

In test mode I've had framerates as high as 150 (or even more I think)with the sync disabled.

I don't seem to be having too much trouble making a playable game without too much lag, but a more efficient engine would be nice.

instinct is more valuable than intelligence.....
uman
Retired Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posted: 22nd Dec 2005 09:34
transient,

Quote: "In test mode I've had framerates as high as 150 (or even more I think)with the sync disabled."


Thats of no use to anyone if its not a capability available in final game during player gameplay - theres absolutely no point in working away in any mode during development, test or not in making a game that can run at higher speeds if the final game cant maintain the same speed. Thats just delusion. What you would see in development is not what youd get in final game. Thats no use at all.

Its like having 150 fps in development but only 18 or sometimes much less in final game even if only in parts as many people are finding - whats the point in that. Anything much below 30fps during development (forget about sync just for testing) is just not good enough.

Any reasonable developer would want to maintain 30fps minimum throughout during testing in a capped engine so that they can reasonably expect their finished product to run on a wide range of end user machines as the cap means there is no engine support for flexiblity of fps to accommodate difference in those end user systems.

Developing with FPSC on a high spec system required to maintain a playable game speed made with it one can reasonably assume that many end users of your game just wont have that same performance.

You may well be happy with your owns game and its performance on your machine - you are in a minority I can tell you. There ceratinly as long as I have followed FPSC been many more users saying that the gameplay performance is less than adequate than there have been finding anything like acceptable gameplay speeds.

More widley speaking users of FPSC not necessarily of this forum amongst the products target audience there is likely to be a large proportion who dont have high spec systems and find working with it or playing games with it near impossible.

Of course performance does depend somewhat undeniably on game design and content needless to say and we must take account of that.

The balance however between sensible and good game design and engine capability is unbalanced as FPSC does not fairly play its part due to the now well known and presented issues it has.

Anyone who can fully complete a reasonably modern type FPS game and still maintain acceptable gameplay speeds throughout is either lucky or very clever and perhaps both.

Certainly personally I dont see how I could do that with enough enemy entertainment to make the game worthwhile and still maintain gameplay speeds as would be expected in such a game.

I dont yet have a level complete that would meet those standards of gameplay speed. If I can get to that stage and overcome all problems and obstacles currently restricting fps to unacceptable levels then that would be a different matter. Currently thats not the case.

=ChrisB=
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jun 2005
Location: starring into a viewfinder
Posted: 22nd Dec 2005 09:59
Wow, I am popular.

Chris: Oh god it feels good to be outta the F**king shoos!
Sterling: I know! It feels good to be outta these cloths too!
Wheelgator is a ricist. What? I swear! He called me a n***r!
transient
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Apr 2005
Location: Australia Zoo
Posted: 22nd Dec 2005 15:13
FPSC is definitely no speed demon, but I'm happy with it.

If it ran as slick as Painkiller does on my machine I'd be stoked, but for now at least it will do me.

That said, I'm not trying to make a commercial game with it so my expectations aren't as high, I guess.

instinct is more valuable than intelligence.....
uman
Retired Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posted: 22nd Dec 2005 15:48
transient,

A very enviable and wise condition. A clever man you are.

Les Horribres
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Nov 2005
Location: My Name is... Merry
Posted: 23rd Dec 2005 01:23
Uhh, uman, I will read your argument later (I typically end up doing so anyways) but it sounds like you believe it doesn't matter of the max capable frame rate. MCFR!

Your previous argument (before my post beore this one) assumes that since the frame rates are capped that it ignores system capabilitys. This is untrue. The MCFR is your buffer, not 33fps.

Anti-Noob Justice League, an ANJL of Mercy.
[url=ochanicon.gif]
uman
Retired Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posted: 24th Dec 2005 03:38 Edited at: 24th Dec 2005 03:39
Merranvo,

Not quite what I meant - It does not matter anyway as I really dont know exactly what FPSC does with anything internally.

I will leave all that up to you clever guys to do something to improve it or not - I am trying to concentrate on using whatever I have to work with and use my own methods to achieve needed speeds in any way I can in lue of any any lack of engine capability.

Rockdrala
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Dec 2005
Location:
Posted: 25th Dec 2005 10:00
man more frames per second plus more poly count ability = bad ass mama jama graphics...

Those who fly low hurt least when they fall...
iisjreg
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Dec 2005
Location:
Posted: 29th Dec 2005 16:55
@uman. I think you need to calm down and actually evaluate what is going on. Firstly, you seem to be focused on the use of FPSC as a commercial commodity, something which is still far from being true - especially as the main userbase are solo developers and their desktops.
Then, you're not taking on board other peoples arguments, namely Merranvo, but insist on your closeminded 'facts'.

The main argument though comes down to the quality of Film frame rates, which, I agree with uman, that film speeds have no effect on a quality of image these days- besides its a totally different medium and the day developers can get (digital) video quality in interactive realtime, will be the day we eat our graphics cards.

I'm not going to comment on the abilities of FSPC as I am still deciding whether to spend the money on it, especially after reading this thread. I am sorry for sounding condesending, but this thread has become very demorilising.

I just hope people can chear up.

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-24 03:39:16
Your offset time is: 2024-11-24 03:39:16