Pick One Of The 2... Regarding Framerate...

[look]

But you can get Quake to run at 20fps on the gp32_console ... h34r:

must be the drugs.

This explains a lot.

​

This stirs up another argument.

would you prefer a game to look like shit or play like shit?

r_drawflat 1 will take out all the textures and leave it looking terrible.

or you can have it looking great and running like teletext.

(I am of course offering the extreme's of the scale here. gpquake ahs come a long way. and is starting to become playable.)

 

[mattbakse]

Hmmm maybe they like the 10fps thing because it give's the illusion of the program running "faster"... for instance awhile ago i downloaded nestergp and played excitebike, and i think nester is set to default frameskip 2 (i dunno what it would be for fps) but it made the game look like it ran "faster", but personally it looks worse and sounded worse. SO, maybe they like to make people think that their device is more powerful than it really is... why do they want to make people think the gp32 is more powerful than it is, should maybe be the question to ask.

 

[toxibunny]

But you can get Quake to run at 20fps on the gp32_console ... h34r:

must be the drugs.

This explains a lot.

​

This stirs up another argument.

would you prefer a game to look like shit or play like shit?

r_drawflat 1 will take out all the textures and leave it looking terrible.

or you can have it looking great and running like teletext.

(I am of course offering the extreme's of the scale here. gpquake ahs come a long way. and is starting to become playable.)

​

if there was an option to remove the textures, but it had lighting, it'd be worth a try...

 

[toxibunny]

Hmmm maybe they like the 10fps thing because it give's the illusion of the program running "faster"... for instance awhile ago i downloaded nestergp and played excitebike, and i think nester is set to default frameskip 2 (i dunno what it would be for fps) but it made the game look like it ran "faster", but personally it looks worse and sounded worse. SO, maybe they like to make people think that their device is more powerful than it really is... why do they want to make people think the gp32 is more powerful than it is, should maybe be the question to ask.

​

you are wise. any suggestions?


edit: although I figure a combination of 3 and 4 might cover it...

 

[mattbakse]

maybe they feel like the system is infirior to what other people have so they must try to make it look "better" than the other peoples,

or

they feel like the system is a piece of shit and hate it but they spent the money on it and knowing that other people may think that it is "stupid" too and think the person is stupid for buy a "piece of shit" (and nobody wants that), so they try to make it seem "better" by making it look like it runs "faster" and look more "powerful".

yeah... 3 and 4 may cover it...

 

[toxibunny]

maybe they feel like the system is infirior to what other people have so they must try to make it look "better" than the other peoples,

or

they feel like the system is a piece of shit and hate it but they spent the money on it and knowing that other people may think that it is "stupid" too and think the person is stupid for buy a "piece of shit" (and nobody wants that), so they try to make it seem "better" by making it look like it runs "faster" and look more "powerful".

yeah... 3 and 4 may cover it...

​

doesn't mean they think it's shit though, or that other people would... just means they/we want to think we've got our money's worth... and we want to big it up to other people.


if gpquake runs at 20 fps, I *will* be happy. and i'll give that detexture command a go, see what that looks like. (although without lighting, i dunno... i'd like to see a built-for-gp32 app with flat filled, lighted polygons... samsung webpage specs says it'll fly!)

 

[mattbakse]

doesn't mean they think it's shit though, or that other people would... just means they/we want to think we've got our money's worth... and we want to big it up to other people.

Still, they could think it's a piece of shit.

 

[look]

Diarrhea runs faster than most peoples shit.

At the end of the day its still shit though

 

[pea]

I think people who 'like' it that their games run at 10fps are impressed because those games weren't developed to run on the GP initially, and that they run at all, and can be played at all, is very cool. 10fps is almost cartoon quality (12fps like the older warner bros and disney stuff) so is not too bad when you compare it to *zip* - which is what you would get if the GP didn't have those emulators or ports.

I think the main thing here is that the initial question is flawed.

Games that are designed with the GP in mind - specifically for the GP - run very well, usually at 20+ fps. People only like 10fps when you compare it to the alternative - which is, as I said earlier - zip, nothing, zero, niks, nix, nada etc..

those who can handle 10 fps or less have superior brain power and imagination, which fills in the gaps for them and makes it tolerable, sometimes even pleasurable for them to play games at 10 fps or less...

OR:

those who can handle 10 fps or less are somehow stupid in a helpful way.. their brains only run at 15 fps or something like that normally, so any more than 20 fps would be kinda wasted...

I choose - OR -

those who can handle 10 fps or less appreciate that their GP can run them at all, therefore are neither superior nor stupid, they are just appreciative.

Just my 2c

 

[BaDToaD]

I don't think you can generalise about 10fps. A slow moving RPG is going to look passable at 10 fps but a fast shooter or platform game isn't.

EDIT: PS I wonder what framerate the old game and watch games were

 

[BobBorakovitz]

PS I wonder what framerate the old game and watch games were wink.gif

lol, 1fps, it only refreshed the screen about once every second!

 

[BaDToaD]

PS I wonder what framerate the old game and watch games were wink.gif

lol, 1fps, it only refreshed the screen about once every second!

​

My point exactly

 

[Mosch]

I think it depends on how you look at the program. A Playstation emulator that runs at 10 fps (yeah, I know, this is theory, OK?) is absolutely impressive because it would take one hell of optimisation. Space Invaders running at 10 fps is not really impresisve for a handheld that can reach 166MHz or more. So, I suppose it depends on the program, and I for one would be really like an N64 emulator that ran at, I don't know, 5 fps, just as a tech demo, to see what the GP32 is really capable of (I told you, theory). Then there are some games that don't really demand such a high frame rate - Final Fantasy looks OK with 10 fps.

I think I'm going the route of

"People that like 10 fps like it because it's the best they get"

More or less the thing pea said.

 

[EvilBoB]

I think it depends on how you look at the program. A Playstation emulator that runs at 10 fps (yeah, I know, this is theory, OK?) is absolutely impressive because it would take one hell of optimisation. Space Invaders running at 10 fps is not really impresisve for a handheld that can reach 166MHz or more. So, I suppose it depends on the program, and I for one would be really like an N64 emulator that ran at, I don't know, 5 fps, just as a tech demo, to see what the GP32 is really capable of (I told you, theory). Then there are some games that don't really demand such a high frame rate - Final Fantasy looks OK with 10 fps.

I think I'm going the route of

"People that like 10 fps like it because it's the best they get"

More or less the thing pea said.

​

Yeah - what he said :lol:

RPGs and slow moving games work fine at 10fps but if you want a fast action 3d game with realtime gourad shading and "fricking lasers" then you should probably look elsewhere if you are seeing 10fps speeds

example:
I would not play Quake at 10fps because its not worth the effort
The SNES emulator(s) may not be the quickest and some games are downright unplayable because of the speed but then there are others that work fine.

I think anyone that made a blanket statement of "I like games that run at 10fps" either has a very poor grasp of the English language and mistook the number "10" for "60" or they only play slow paced games and have no intention of playing anything with action so don't realise how poor it is under other applications!

At 15fps a movie is watchable as long as it's not a high action flick however lower that to 10fps and it's really not enjoyable - this has nothing to do with your mind "not filling in the gaps" but more to do with the stop/start nature of the viewing medium at this framerate.

Try playing something like a flight simulator at 10fps - then you will realise how non-enjoyable the game can really be. By the time you target the enemy it will be gone! On the other hand I could play Solitaire at 1fps as there is no action that needs to be timed...

So my response is :

"I like games running at an optimum framerate for its particular needs"

 

[Goity]

I don't really care unless it is slow, even sonic at 10fps was fine

 

[onionfrog]

I assume that i do care about framerate because havent played Snes on my gp32 lately. But its like pea said. Playing something at 10 fps is better than not playing it at all. Rpgs are just fine at slow framerate. But action games aren't. Even if chrono trigger is only running at less than 10 fps at half speed on battles. It sill makes my firends with Gba's look like crap!Then I insult them!! :lol: :lol:

 

[Octavious]

well, quick note about games running good looking like shit
I have doe the oposite
I have turned on the Quake Engine's AA feature and get about 3-5 frames, unplayable yes
GREAT LOOKING, thats an understatement

I have usually no problem with 15 frames on GPCinema, but I like 30
I guess its kinda based on what the person is like
I am a video whore, and could care less about audio in non console/PC games
I never use sound on Quake ( that enables the damn thing to actually run with AA )
I usually dont listen to most movies I watch
I dont think we can generalize people into categories, its just a matter of preferance

~Octavious

 

[mattbakse]

well i really don't care as long s it doesn't look bad and/or take away from gameplay.

 

[Blah]

I just encoded something in 12fps. It still looked great because it allowed me
to go to 300kbps (edit: I mean without choppying up the sound), and it was a music video that was a mixture of:

modern black & white 24fps stuff

old black & white 12fps stuff

old color 12fps stuff

So it looked awesome, even though it was only 12fps, becuase the picture quality was so good.

I don't think we need to work on our framerate. I think we need to work on our flame rate.