Forum Replies Created
Sounds like good advice! Just a minor aside: 5fps could be a lot or a little, so maybe stating x milliseconds of frametime might be a better indicator of processing speed.
20fps (50ms) to 25fps (40ms) is 5fps, and a whopping 20% difference in frametime.
120fps (8.3ms) to 125fps (8.0ms) is also 5fps, but an imperceptible 3.6% difference in frametime.
Thanks for the video, lots of good tips! Alot less blind spots with something like quadruple the solid angle FOV of the 1990s Descents. Couple that with being able to move the pilots head quickly and independently of the ship with a VR HMD and a swivel chair for even fewer blindspots!
Some other 6DOF games either don’t have auto roll into a yaw turn, or provide the ability to disable it. Rolling into a turn makes sense for an airplane as you’re vectoring your lift vector into the turn. Some reasons for a spaceplane might be that it looks cool and that it pushes the pilot against the seat, not against the side of the craft, when rounding a turn (but that wouldn’t apply if you just yaw.)
It seems that ‘blaze’ doesn’t affect accelerations much if at all, tight circle strafe speed (constant acceleration) seems to be the same with it on or off, but it does seem to make top speeds roughly 50% faster. Anyone know how similar the physics is to Descent?
I’ve tried the cheat code ‘blaze’ and noticed that it was only modestly faster (took 2 seconds to cross a room rather than 3 seconds.) Any chance of a even faster cheat code? I was thinking ‘inferno’ but that’s already used for invulnerability. Perhaps ‘volcanic’?
With variable control over all thrusters (not just rotational), controlling tremendous amount of thrust is doable (with proportional friction.) Possible with devices such as 3DMice and analog keyboards. It would be a blast playing accelerated Overload like in the Descent videos on the bottom of the 1st page of this thread.
A good way to determine how much of an affect would be to get monitors with the same refresh rate, one with G/Free sync, and one without.
No matter how low your framerate goes on a 144hz (7ms) display, the longest display lag time wouldn’t be over 7ms, and that’s assuming a display has to keep scanning even if the image doesn’t change (rather just wait for a new image before scanning again.) A G/Free sync would be much more noticeable on a 60hz (16.7ms) display where you might have a display lag of up to 16.7ms.
Perhaps what G/Free sync does is double scan. It continues to draw the same image over again while at the same time starts scanning a new image in, that is assuming an image can’t be held without constant scanning.
Ya I remember you did mention it either, I was just responding to Twocable’s post just above it. On the west coast, looks like this forum is on central time.
EDIT: same here! Oh, the west coast of the US, sorry.
Not trying to wind anyone up, maybe I’ve read something the wrong way!
These new 4k 144hz HDR monitors seem awesome
However I think these are the monitors with the lossy chroma sub sampling this reddit article was warning folks about
No way would I pay $2000 for a chroma sub sampled display!
Who came up with 144hz anyways? It’s not a multiples of 8 1/3 ms like the vast majority of other framerates. (4 1/6, 2 1/12)
Probably wouldn’t notice much difference between a 144hz no-gsync display and a 144hz gsync display. When the screen is refreshed every 7 milliseconds fast sync would probably work just fine.
I’ve been reading 500w minimum PSU for 1080 cards, 1060 probably not too far off. Usually best off to get a bit more than minimum just to be on the safe side.
Nice thing about UHD is that is can also run FullHD very well. A square of 2×2 of UHD pixels becomes exactly 1 FullHD pixel. You have the option to run either res equally well. Just be sure to look for HDMI 2.1 and/or DisplayPort 1.3 support for future computer upgrades. Save yourself from having to upgrade to a 4K display later, which would result in spending more money overall.
When Doom1 came out in 1993 people’s rendering framerate was often less than 35hz, but the physics would still operate at 35hz. Problem is that as computers got faster the 35hz started to become a hindrance to very smooth gameplay that started to become possible. Other than homing physics, Descent 1&2 seemed to scale well with higher rendering framerates.
It seems that many of iD early engines had fixed physics rates (I believe some source ports removed this limitation, but sometimes altering jump trajectories by a fair amount)
(Quake2 had an annoying fixed server side fps of only 10fps!)
It seems that in order to preserve the homing missile curves in Descent 1&2 a fixed physics rate was made just for the homing missiles in the source ports.
When they are syncable, but it’s important to be able to gracefully handle cases where they are not, such as when the GPU can crank out more than the display can draw.
Games should also decouple input/physics frames from rendering frames. For older games where you can pump out a frame every millisecond, it would be rather foolish to render 1000 frames per second when the display is only capable of only 60 or 120.
However there would be nothing wrong running input/physics at 1000hz and only rendering say 1 out of 10 of those frames. Your mouse sampled at 1000hz wouldn’t be wasted. Although you’d only see some of the frames when traveling around a smooth curve, you would in fact be traveling around a smooth curve rather than along some rough approximation.
Fast sync appears to be what I’ve described earlier (though I think they could explain it better)
He states that triple buffering simply fills up the buffers, then basically stops until they are empty.
In Nvidia settings I just noticed you can enable Fastsync or adaptive sync globally or per program. With Fast Sync enabled I’m not sure how Gysnc or Freesync helps when enabled concurrently.
EDIT: ugh, apparently game support is limited
I thought that once an LCD/OLED scanned, it can stop scanning and pixels will maintain color indefinitely (each pixel with a constant charge to maintain light emittance.) This image implies that a display doesn’t have to constantly scan