The difference between 60hz refresh rate and 120hz refresh rate on modern 3D LCD panels is staggering, and to me, instantly obvious which is in use in games like Quake 3. In racing games it's not so important as you're not panning a view point around as much.
[Merged] Discussion regarding LFS development
(1577 posts, started )
LFS (and any other game) looks best when VSYNC is on. Then I have smooth frames. If I turn of VSYNC is can notice how my screen "spliting". In eye perception its better that VSYNC is on. But as far as I know, LFS reads inputs (wheel, keyboard) for every frame, so its definitly not same to drive with 20 and 100 fps.
Yes. Guaranteed.
Start with a video card. Even a second handed $10 card of 5 years back can produce higher frame rates then what you are currently doing.
32 Mb video chip. Come on... Ridiculous.
How do you know if you don't have any experience? You never experienced the difference and still such harsh remarks. Like I said, I don't have problems with you personally but people like you are connecting to the server every day and then they are surprised that they get banned.
In the end abandoning this whole 'simulator'. Not because they cannot be a good racer but because they lack the knowledge how to experience it correctly.
My god, 12-16 fps and no AA, it would give me headaches after 2 minutes.
Driving good laps and being crash free is impossible this way. Throw in a video card of a few bucks and become an example in this thread
The problem is that there are many, MANY, like you.
The brain is remarkable at filling in gaps in visual perception. In fact, you'd be surprised how much of your vision is just interpreted by the brain. There are a few good books on it.
As for motion, 24FPS works in cinema so long as there is blending and motion blur on each individual frame. Action scenes are usually shot on a slower film, otherwise it does look stuttery.
Band of Brothers shot some action scenes in 24P with fast film to give it a gritty hectic feel. It's definitely not smooth.
24FPS was chosen to get the maximum amount of time out of a single reel of physical film, while still being able to suggest fluid motion, with motion blur.
It wasn't chosen because anything higher can't be perceived, or because anything higher wasn't worth it, or because it wasn't better.
It was purely a problem of length of a reel of film.
With digital taking over, there is a push to double the frame rate.
To come back to the original point. It all depends on what you're used to. If you're used to 60FPS, 24FPS will feel choppy. If you're used to 24FPS, you'll certainly notice the difference with 60FPS, but won't see what the fuss about it is, UNLESS you get used to 60FPS then try and go back to 24FPS.
Personally, 60Hz refresh rate in fast paced games is no longer 'good enough' for me, as I've gotten used to 120Hz. It feels strained. I'll know immediately if a driver update has kicked the monitor back to 60Hz, and it's not even about flicker as it's with an LCD panel.
When we are doing fast paced things, that we have had much practice in, a lot of our perception, and reaction to the things we perceive is subconscious, which is a faster pathway than conscious thought.
But as I said earlier, racing games aren't fast paced. They are usually smooth, and unless you're spinning, things blend and move slowly. For that, 30FPS at 60Hz is fine for me.
Your computer is probably in the early stages of dementia
and adult onset diabetes.
Will it be a cremation or burial?
I said You have to:
1. See
2. Predict
3. React
when You race with others - You said all You have to do is to Predict - but how do You want to do so if You can't see what is happening on track?
First: You have to be retarded to don't know how to drive on rain,
Second: In real racing You can't predict if tarmac on next corner is clean, maybe wind brought some dust/sand on track, maybe one of the car lost some oil and You have to react in time. Of course LFS does not support things like these but still You can't base Your driving on predicting only.
If You are so great clairvoyant then You can turn off Your monitor and drive with closed eyes.
Below i attach little explanation why i think drivers with very slow PCs are dangerous
It would make most sense to use some sort of safety rating. That way, it doesn't matter if the player has a slow PC, or not - if they are involved in lots of accidents, their rating suffers, and you can warn or ban them.
In my experience, by far the largest number of avoidable accidents are caused by players with bad attitude, not by slow PC's.
When I raced in CTRA, I was peaking at around 40fps, but dipping into the teens at starts with larger grids. I achieved platinum level, and had an low to average yellow flag ratio. If frame rate had been as significant as you are suggesting, I don't think this would have been possible.
Terrible idea. You could lose a lot of users that way.
Dear Gentlemen, back to topic please:
Devs, y u no release Rockingham and where's teh Schickoko? I'm waiting since 1883!
Devs, y u no release Rockingham and where's teh Schickoko? I'm waiting since 1883!
Terrible idea why?
Better than banning/kicking folks who's frame rate drops below 50fps even though they are safe racers.
Becky Rose has some good ideas about how something like this could work.
I used to race in CTRA and can tell you the flag ratio is crap. I would get yellow flagged for driving in the lead (??)
With respect it was people like you (not necessarily including yourself) who caused the countless first-lap f**k ups which meant I had to learn how to throw a tail happy car into a corner at max speed to avoid being taken out.
Banning because of frame rates is lame but I think a user who can't sustain say 20fps in the first few corners of a race should not be allowed to race on a busy, serious server.
Not that they exist anymore so no-one will be banned.
Who the **** cares about graphics? I honestly wouldn't care if the graphics didn't get an overhaul. All most people want with league stuff is just tracks. We have plenty of cars to keep stuff going, just need tracks.
And if you want a SR system, go on a server that has it. That is a great thing on LFS, variety. You change that, you ruin LFS.
And if you want a SR system, go on a server that has it. That is a great thing on LFS, variety. You change that, you ruin LFS.
First, i said 10 FPS, not 3... Not enough, but you can already hae a base of what the car is doing... Second, you are saying that a car will do 12 moves in 1 second? This doesn't makes sense...
I think it is about adding two more options to server not pernament banning everyone with less than 40 or 50 fps:
- Ping limit
- FPS limit
Thats all - there will be a lot of servers allowing You to join with slide show and connection problems but for those who want clean pure experience there will be few servers with these options enabled. If You have too slow PC and internet than You will get information that You can't join it and when You will buy better hardware You will be free to race on them.
And on that forum there are always people who made things bigger then they are in real...
- Ping limit
- FPS limit
Thats all - there will be a lot of servers allowing You to join with slide show and connection problems but for those who want clean pure experience there will be few servers with these options enabled. If You have too slow PC and internet than You will get information that You can't join it and when You will buy better hardware You will be free to race on them.
And on that forum there are always people who made things bigger then they are in real...
It's just example, graphic explanation if you don't get it it just proves that You are short minded and ignorant...
OK, so you join, and are racing, in the lead on lap 9 of a 10 lap race, when someone joins at exactly the point where you hit the most cpu stressing point of the circuit, and your fps drops from 58 to 49.2... boom, you get kicked - that would be stupid. After a while, it would divide an already small community even further.
Similarly, ping can fluctuate for various reasons - it would just be another cause of problems where half the field are all kicked at once because for some reason there is a momentary problem with the servers ISP causing a peak in ping.
I'm not developer, they don't pay me to think for them and create full projects, forum is place to post Your ideas and this is just adumbration/base of full system. Maybe You will get warned if You will keep lower than expected frame rate for longer peroid of time and after 2nd warn You will get kicked to boxes/spectator with request of fixing it or kicked out from server with same request. And when You join server You will be obligated to spectate for some time to measure Your FPS (i know at the beginning of race there is more stress to hardware so that measure will be quite useless at start) I have no idea how full system would work it is developers job to make it work perfect if they want to implement it.
Someone could just develop a benchmark or everyone run the same replay and it would spit out the min, max, and average fps.
Could even get a report online about your bandwidth.
What does your connection need to be at to not cause problems?
I have 12 down and 2 up.
Could even get a report online about your bandwidth.
What does your connection need to be at to not cause problems?
I have 12 down and 2 up.
Not talking about banning or kicking. I'm talking about not being able to join a race. That's something different.
I hàve to ban or kick now because I don't know what is happening when I see someone chrashing and missing every corner. I have to ask or kick (ban even) racers from Australia because they don't have the slightest idea what they are doing with a ping of 250 ms+ . Everything looks good on their 'screen' they say. Yes, great
The problem is that the pool of racers isn't that big anymore. So people like Si Mclaren can stay on the server if they do not cause excessive damage. But the fact that he is from Brazil alone already gives problems (due to distance).
On top of that you have many racers with poor frame rates and you can draw all kinds of images but what your head makes of the images is less important, it's the CPU which struggles to keep alive. It doesn't read the input device (wheel, mouse, keyboard) on time. Type something on your screen with t while you are spectating and if you do 12 fps you will notice that the characters on your screen appear slower.
This input lag alone causes slow laptimes and crashes.
And no it's not better to keep that on a server. It's like hearing some left party talk that we are all equal and stuff. It's not, these kind of people do not have their stuff together to be allowed to experience 'a simulator' and shouldn't be mixed with people doing 50+ FPS, having a wheel etcetc. It just isn't fair to those.
Most important thing of all is, and some of them show this very clearly here... They don't even know it.
And then we think about releasing tire physics which eats even more CPU cycles?
It's impossible before setting requirements.
But real life cameras have exposure time which will "smear" any motion in the frame, thus creating the effect we call motion blur. With this motion blur effect, the animation appears to be running smoother than it actually is. It really just is an optical illusion.
In digital animation this effect is simulated, just to create smoother animation at limited framerates. However, not all games support motion blur effect, LFS beeing one of those which doesn't.
Idealy, there should not need to be motion blur in animation and films because your eyes will naturally make "motion blur" of fast motion. If you ever watched out the side window of your car at speed without focusing on anything in particular, you will see that everything gets smeared in the same way as with motion blur.
I remember that now.
Totally agree that 250+ is just silly, and that people do need to be educated about what a sensible ping is, for everybody's sake.
There are obviously some folks who can race safely with a low fps, which suggests that it's not the input lag that's the problem, but the incompetence of the racers. It may be that a larger proportion of players with low end systems are noobs and cause crashes through incompetence... Do you have conclusive evidence that it is their slower frame rate that causes the crashes, or is it just a 'feeling'
It's like hearing right party talk that if you can't afford a top system you're not good enough to race here - "Framerate Fascism" if you like
Yes, well done for getting back to the reason for this discussion. Lot of folk complaining about Scawen optimizing for performance. It seems to me that if frame rate is so important, that's all the more reason for him to spend even more time optimizing for performance - not just so that low end systems can play, but so that mid level systems can play with "safe" fps?
#1. PC's that were low end when LFS came out, are now obsolete. Just so everyone is clear. A low end PC by today's standards would be a major improvement over a low end PC of 5-6 years ago.
#2. Low end PC's of today should have no problems running LFS at ~30+ FPS.
Example: my girlfriend's "low end pc" has a AMD Athlon II 255 CPU, 4 GB ram, ATI 5450HD. LFS runs at a smooth 40-50 fps on that machine, which isn't a high end rig by any means.
#3. Optimizing for performance is an excuse to buy more time.
#2. Low end PC's of today should have no problems running LFS at ~30+ FPS.
Example: my girlfriend's "low end pc" has a AMD Athlon II 255 CPU, 4 GB ram, ATI 5450HD. LFS runs at a smooth 40-50 fps on that machine, which isn't a high end rig by any means.
#3. Optimizing for performance is an excuse to buy more time.
[Merged] Discussion regarding LFS development
(1577 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG