Note to Bethesda
Lost Dragon
>Please consider adding SVGA to Daggerfall as a patch, I know this would
>People will undoubtedly pay handsomely for an upgrade of daggerfall to
Maybe they will release some type of "Daggerfall Platinum Edition" that
features SVGA graphics sometime later in the year (maybe next year). I
was a little surprised that the original had only 320x200, but then I
remembered that the FAQ mentioned something about Bethesda not wanting
to delay the game any further.
Personally, I'm more interested in character development, role-playing,
and quests than I am in whiz-bang "gee-golly-whopee" graphical effects.
/| .oo__. .-----.----------Lost-Dragon-----------.-----. .__oo. |\
| \| ,-'' | _O_ | lost...@cris.com | _O_ | ``-, |/ |
`,_/,(_)\_ | | | Member: Ultima Dragons | | | _/(_),\_,'
_.,-=(_)_)_ ''`-----`-http://www.cris.com/~lostdrgn/-'-----'`` _(_(_)=-,._
Steve Cronin
David Coffin
>> >Please consider adding SVGA to Daggerfall as a patch, I know this would
>> >People will undoubtedly pay handsomely for an upgrade of daggerfall to
People would also pay handsomely for a computer that could run this in
SVGA, with a real frame rate, not that 15 fps garbage people call
"smooth" nowadays.
30 fps. That's want I want. Right now, that means VGA.
--
"I've been doing a lot of abstract painting lately, extremely abstract.
No brush, no paint, no canvas, I just think about it."
-- Steven Wright
David Coffin
dco...@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu
Steve Cronin
human eye even perceive more than 20 frames per sec? Maybe in a racing
simulationwhere the terrain is whizzing by, However in a 3d game like
Duke Quake Daggerfall, 15-20 fps is completely acceptable.
Everyone is so willing to accept the limited amount of gain the graphics
have made from Arena to Daggerfall. Daggerfall is not like Ultima, not
like the other rpg's which I don't like. Arena was designed to be the
most realistic 3d "you are there" rpg. The experience comes from both
the realism of graphics and realism of the rpg experience. If you dont
believe me read the initial release notes 2 years ago about what
Bethesda wanted to do with Daggerfall.
Not a big deal, Not the end of the world, just a little disappointed
because I know my computer could have handled running Daggerfall in high
res. As a matter of fact sick as it may sound, Daggerfall was one small
reason for me purchasing my second computer in 2 years(486dx2 to
P166loaded).
Lost Dragon
>> > human eye even perceive more than 20 frames per sec?
>> -perceive- anything greater than say 35fps, but it's does give a better
Aren't most big-screen movies shown at 24fps? Once something looks
"smooth" I don't understand how it can look "more smooth" by increasing
the frame rate. ::ponder::
Dave Timoney
Matt Miller wrote:
>
> Steve Cronin wrote:
> >
> > David Coffin wrote:
> > > not that 15 fps garbage people call
> > > "smooth" nowadays.
> > >
> > > 30 fps. That's want I want. Right now, that means VGA.
>
>
> The human eye sees at 72kHz, that's appx 72 fps.
Of course, that's wrong by a factor of 1000. Maybe without the "k"? <g>
Sure it's hard to
> -perceive- anything greater than say 35fps, but it's does give a better
> sensation of movement. The Virtuality simulators acutually ran at 75fps,
> and caused disorientation upon finishing the rides as the eyes were
> constantly trying to adjust to having 'too much' info blasted at them.
> Anyone who thinks the eye can see at only 20fps is reading too much CGR.
>
> Matt Miller
> mpmi...@pacbell.net
Dave
Humongous Entertainment
Matt Miller
Steve Cronin wrote:
>
> David Coffin wrote:
> > not that 15 fps garbage people call
> > "smooth" nowadays.
> >
> > 30 fps. That's want I want. Right now, that means VGA.
> Just out of curiosity your organization is Tufts Med School, can the
> human eye even perceive more than 20 frames per sec?
The human eye sees at 72kHz, that's appx 72 fps. Sure it's hard to
Matt Miller
Mike Harmon
Hey, guys, don't forget motion blur. That's the reason TV running at
30fps looks smoother than a video game running at 30 fps.
Mike
Dave Timoney (da...@humongous.com) wrote:
: Matt Miller wrote:
: >
: > Steve Cronin wrote:
: > >
: > > David Coffin wrote:
: > > > not that 15 fps garbage people call
: > > > "smooth" nowadays.
: > > >
: > > > 30 fps. That's want I want. Right now, that means VGA.
: >
: > > Just out of curiosity your organization is Tufts Med School, can the
: > > human eye even perceive more than 20 frames per sec?
: >
: > The human eye sees at 72kHz, that's appx 72 fps.
:
: Of course, that's wrong by a factor of 1000. Maybe without the "k"? <g>
:
: Sure it's hard to
: > -perceive- anything greater than say 35fps, but it's does give a better
: > sensation of movement. The Virtuality simulators acutually ran at 75fps,
: > and caused disorientation upon finishing the rides as the eyes were
: > constantly trying to adjust to having 'too much' info blasted at them.
: > Anyone who thinks the eye can see at only 20fps is reading too much CGR.
: >
: > Matt Miller
: > mpmi...@pacbell.net
:
: Dave
: Humongous Entertainment
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
As usual, a knife-wielding maniac has shown us the way. - Bart Simpson
Quake is out. Why are doing anything else with your computer?
Note to morons: DO NOT send me unsolicited ads through email! If you have
gotten my email address through either the purchase of a list or by
culling usenet posts, please remove it from your mailing list immediately.
Steve Cronin
Matt Miller wrote:
>
> Steve Cronin wrote:
> >
> > David Coffin wrote:
> > > not that 15 fps garbage people call
> > > "smooth" nowadays.
> > >
> > > 30 fps. That's want I want. Right now, that means VGA.
>
> > Just out of curiosity your organization is Tufts Med School, can the
> > human eye even perceive more than 20 frames per sec?
>
> -perceive- anything greater than say 35fps, but it's does give a better
> sensation of movement. The Virtuality simulators acutually ran at 75fps,
> and caused disorientation upon finishing the rides as the eyes were
> constantly trying to adjust to having 'too much' info blasted at them.
> Anyone who thinks the eye can see at only 20fps is reading too much CGR.
>
> Matt Miller
> mpmi...@pacbell.net
Matt I defer to your greater wisdom and I retract my statement I
actually I did get my info from CGW. Live and Learn.
dec...@ucla.edu
Steve Cronin <smc...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Matt Miller wrote:
>>
>> Steve Cronin wrote:
>> >
>> > David Coffin wrote:
>> > > not that 15 fps garbage people call
>> > > "smooth" nowadays.
>> > >
>> > > 30 fps. That's want I want. Right now, that means VGA.
>>
>> > Just out of curiosity your organization is Tufts Med School, can the
>> > human eye even perceive more than 20 frames per sec?
>>
>> The human eye sees at 72kHz, that's appx 72 fps. Sure it's hard to
>> -perceive- anything greater than say 35fps, but it's does give a better
>> sensation of movement. The Virtuality simulators acutually ran at 75fps,
>> and caused disorientation upon finishing the rides as the eyes were
>> constantly trying to adjust to having 'too much' info blasted at them.
>> Anyone who thinks the eye can see at only 20fps is reading too much CGR.
Bare minimum to percieve apparent motion with persistence of vision
(why movies and cartoons work) was discovered to be 12 frames/sec.
That's not to say that you can't tell the difference between 12 fps
and 24 (which is what film runs at). IMAX, the best film format we
have at this time, runs at 30 fps, but you can easily tell the
difference yourself.
Where did you come up with 72kHz = 72 fps? 72000 x/sec isn't the same
as 72 x/sec.
------------------------
"More human than human is our motto..."
rascal
Steve Cronin wrote:
> Just out of curiosity your organization is Tufts Med School, can the
> simulationwhere the terrain is whizzing by, However in a 3d game like
> Duke Quake Daggerfall, 15-20 fps is completely acceptable.
30fps is not necessarily speed; it's the smoothness at which things
move. I dont have medical fact down about what the human eye can
perceive, but there's even a difference between 60 fps and 30 fps. I
seem to notice the difference on objects that are close to your point of
view (like floors or ceilings as they're moving OUT of your view and
behind you). You'll notice the smoothness at which the textures move,
with minimal "jumping" as you take small increments. Trust me: you CAN
notice the difference between 15 fps, 30 fps and 60 fps. And not only
that, when the action builds up in a game like Duke or Quake, even 20
fps can be quite jerky as monsters and gunfire ensues. I can live with
20 fps (even as low as 15 though I don't care for it). I prefer 30 fps
AT LEAST. But with my P90 I don't get that too often with today's
games. The game consoles are great for noticing fps. The standard for
a good (speedwise) Sony or Saturn game tends to be 30 fps (not counting
the occassional drop in speed due to lots of polygons, etc). I still
think Ridge Racer on the Playstation is a great example of 30 fps
speed. And Virtua Fighter 2 is an excellent example of 60 fps on the
Saturn.
Todd Howard
SVGA patch..probably not. Does frame rate matter over 20. YES. Does it
matter over 30. YES. I like the VF2 reference. It makes a HUGE
difference in that game...when you hear it, you wouldn't think so, but
when you play it...it matters. Still the best game on any console.
Usenet's Panache
On 16 Sep 1996 00:41:14 GMT, Rx7...@cris.com (Mike Harmon) uttered
these pearls of wisdom:
>Hey, guys, don't forget motion blur. That's the reason TV running at
>30fps looks smoother than a video game running at 30 fps.
[somewhat off-topic post]
I heard that Babylon 5 (with all of it's CGI graphics) is
intentionally blurred. They found out that if they didn't ADD
artificial blur to their clean computer-generated starships, it would
cause dizziness and disorientation. Go figure.
--------
"Only the crazies hang around nursery."
Ben
Mike Harmon wrote:
>
> Hey, guys, don't forget motion blur. That's the reason TV running at
> 30fps looks smoother than a video game running at 30 fps.
Absolutely true, and something most people do not think about. I watched
a show about the making of Jurassic Park some time ago, and one of the
special effects guys mentioned this as well. He explained that the
reason that most stop-motion animation looks "fake" is simply the lack
of motion blur- it makes the stop-motion footage look different than
everything else. In JP, they used computers to add stop-motion effects
to the dinosaurs. I think everyone will agree that the stop-motion
movement in JP looked pretty damn real...
Just something to ponder ;)
Regards,
Benjamin E. Sones
feld...@sprynet.com
Joergen Bech
Perhaps I can add a new - pardon the pun - perspective:
Due to the way a monitor or tv screen redraws the image, a game HAS to
match that speed if you don't want to see a ghost image trailing after
your spaceship/enemy/whatever. This is most noticable in 2D action
games but much less so in 3D games of the DOOM variety.
I have a double-frequency PAL tv, which stores the image in memory and
displays it twice to eliminate flicker (100Hz as opposed to the
standard 50Hz). In sports programs with a lot of camera panning, the
image takes on a slightly "soft" appearance. Even at this frequency
the problem with the trailing ghost image is not eliminated.
So is a movie or cartoon acceptable at 24 fps? Well, if you watch
it on the big screen it _is_, but tape it 5 years later when they show
it on the telly and single step through the images in an action
sequence - ugh! An ugly sight.
Best thing a programmer can do in 3D game is to
constantly try to predict where the actors should be in the next frame
(skipping appropriate number of frames depending on scene load)
rather than chiseling some global speed setting in stone at program
start.
>
>SVGA patch..probably not. Does frame rate matter over 20. YES. Does it
>matter over 30. YES. I like the VF2 reference. It makes a HUGE
>difference in that game...when you hear it, you wouldn't think so, but
>when you play it...it matters. Still the best game on any console.
Erm ... are you _still_ playing that game after all this time? Still
waiting for VF3 to hit the arcades, I guess.
Howya doing, Todd(ler)? :)
Joergen Bech, Denmark