Thread 11839062

Around what time would you say people became obsessed with framerates?

I'd say Quake 3 era was when people became really into benchmark shit.

>>11839062 (OP)
Crisis broke the barrier into mainstream to a point, people actually cared about "benchmarks".

>>11839062 (OP)
mid to late 90s.

Total Biscuit sperging on about 30 FPS is when I remember everyone started going on about it to the point of nausea.
Prior to that I don't think anyone gave a shit unless it ran slow or you were running camtasia.

I still don’t understand the obsession, it rarely matters outside of online games.

12 FPS is all you need

>Game developers in the 1980s didn't even know what a frame was, they just typed random shit on computers and it worked like magic

If you can believe this, you can believe anything.

>>11839062 (OP)
The beginning.

>>11839096
That's because that's only when you got old enough to start paying attention.
People cared about frame rates from the earliest action games.

Check old gaming magazines reviews. They used "fast" and "choppy" in the context of framerates quite often. Most of the games on major systems like NES, SNES and Genesis were 60 fps too. Arcade games as well. It's when the 3D era started people noticed that suddenly there were way more choppy games than before and framerates as in actual number of frames per second became common knowledge.

>>11839123
Yeah, no, people played flight simulator at a framerate of a literal slideshow presentation and unironically thought "This is the best shit ever!" back in the 80s.

>>11839062 (OP)
I'm sure there was always some nerd niche that was obsessed since the earliest days but it seem like it became a major thing around Crysis

>>11839062 (OP)
On pc games it was when they forced v sync so that when it slowed down it made the speed of the game slow too, I think it was early direct x and the start of 3D cards. Older games like Doom still play well at 20 fps or lower. Something like Half Life is still decent at low fps but plenty of pc racing games can be poor even at 50 fps because the game will actually be slower.

>>11839062 (OP)
>Around what time would you say people became obsessed with framerates?
since the invention of television and the movie camera.

Quake 3 was a start indeed, every PC nerd then just bought super expensive parts even if they barely played video games but at least they could say "look at my benchmark stats!"

Followed by the advant of non CRT screens, which is when consoles started to give a shit as well. The same framerate on a CRT feels a lot smoother than it does on an LCD or more modern screen.
So I'd say 1999 for PCs, and NOT RETRO for consoles, which makes your thread half off topic which seems to be the trend of every two posts on /vr/ these days

>>11839183
>most snes and megadrive games were 60 fps.
Well retard emulator user-kun learn more before having verbal diarrea.
>NTSC games up to 2024 ran at 24 fps
>PAL games up to 2024 ran at 29.5 fps
Nothing changed and people became too retarded and obsessed with claiming hertz = frames which isn't, hz is mostly the speed at which the image is generated along quality (higher hz TV higher image quality).
Sadly benchmarks and emus are made by people like you hence stuff or details are missing (like pal games running slower because retards just assume lower hz so slower hence running worse then real hardware).
For example in dreamcast/ps2 era you could compare stuff.
>DOA2 dreamast 60 fps.
>DOA2 ps2/xbox 24 fps ntsc, 29.5 fps pal.
And people didn't notice at all because the human eye can't see beyond 24 frames per second.

>>11839113
Based.

>>11839364
Think again.

>>11839062 (OP)
Got damn, tell me more about VLB. You're getting me hard.

>>11839062 (OP)
1993
People played Doom on a postage stamp.

>>11839440
if you think people never gave a thought about frame rates until gaymin then you are a drooling spastic.

>>11839470
Yeah, they didn't.

>>11839062 (OP)
Patricians care about the "video" in video games

For me it was around 2000/2001 when I played TWINE on N64 with a friend and I started feeling nauseated from the low frame rate.

>>11839062 (OP)
quake 3

>>11839062 (OP)
>obsessed with framerates?
who? the gamers, the "journalists" or the devs?
AFAIK, PC magazine were already using framerates to benchmark GPUs when Tomb Raider came out.

Devs always needed to think about framerates esp the euros, becuase their TVs were fixed to 50Hz, even while the gaming powerhouses of USA + Japan had 60Hz TVs which matched up nicely with most console games designed to run at 60fps.

>>11839067
like i said above. who are these people? PC mags and devs are people too. they cared about framerates as early as the first game console.

>>11839096
i never knew he existed until he got cancelled for being "nazi" or some bullshit. are you like a zoomer or something? or born yesterday? who watched that fat fuck?

>>11839439
you only need 4 FPS to give the illusion of movement.

>>11839434
>retard
>diarrea (sic ESL spelling kun)
>And people didn't notice at all because the human eye can't see beyond 24 frames per second.

stop flamemongering, ESL janny. people literally hated the higher framerate of home camcorder videos because they looked different from the 24FPS they got from movies all along. people on youtube complain about 60FPS videos being weird because many of them just added extra blurred frame inbetween the original recordings. were you born yesterday or born to troll while working for free?

>>11839434
>>NTSC games up to 2024 ran at 24 fps
>>PAL games up to 2024 ran at 29.5 fps
>>DOA2 ps2/xbox 24 fps ntsc, 29.5 fps pal.
>>DOA2 ps2/xbox 24 fps ntsc, 29.5 fps pal.
Wtf is this retardation?

FPS didn't matter AS much back when CRT's allowed for it and still have low latency and no response time issues.
FPS discourse is frustrating because of how fucking unreasonably high FPS needs to be on an expensive monitor to match the latency/response time of your average consumer TV from the 90's.
I find the current "UHM, WE HAD IT SO MUCH WORSE OK??? JUST STOP COMPLAINING AND JUST ACCEPT 30FPS OK???" retort so dishonest.

Look at the Switch 2, with its 120hz display. Should've been a homerun of a value proposition and there goes the highest response time of any modern display. Oops.

>>11839584
>i never knew he existed until he got cancelled for being "nazi" or some bullshit
wow this staunchly anti-trump dude was considered a nazi?

>>11839647
60hz on a CRT feels better than 120hz on a modern display

>>11839097
>performance doesn't matter to the gameplay
try playing a game at 8 fps and tell that again

>>11839450
Good luck getting full speed in doom on a stock 486 anon.

>>11839845
What if I told you I already did? :)

>he plays Sonic on his consumer set
>he thinks it's playing at 60hz and not 15hz because he doesn't know the difference between hz and fps

>>11839496
what a fucking retard.

>>11839850
the way some retards here talk about doom you'd get the impression it ran full speed on a 286.

>>11839868
>the way some retards here talk about doom you'd get the impression it ran full speed on a 286.
Well that is because underage b& see 30 years of hardware and software advances being used to port doom to everything and assume doom always ran good because it does now. it gets even spicier when you realise they don't understand full speed is 35fps.

>>11839874
>underage b&
they will never understand that time period at all unless they got access to real hardware. emulators just don't do the experience justice. you will bypass bios ram ceck, you will wait for the drives to spin up, you will have your system setup to boot directly into ms-dos, no cheating using ssd to ide zoomie faggots.etc. fuck, even i don't want to go back.

>>11839584
>like i said above. who are these people? PC mags and devs are people too. they cared about framerates as early as the first game console.
>>11839246

>>11839113
Yeah, all that a consoleslave needs
>thanks massa for dem single digit fps, lawdy dis is great

>>11839874
>it gets even spicier when you realise they don't understand full speed is 35fps
That's pretty widely understood though.

>>11839864
you have no idea what you're talking about

>>11839062 (OP)
As a mainstream thing probably a couple years after every new TV had hdmi inputs, sometime in the 7th generation. People always hated slowdown and choppiness, or sacrificing visual quality to avoid those things. Outside of noticeably bad frame rates people didn't really care enough to pay attention. Times were also different, the average person couldn't tell what the frame rate was on a console game. Now it's common knowledge that Ocarina of Time ran under 20 fps at points, back then even if younnoticed it you probably wouldnt be able to quantify it. Even if you did what would you it to compare too that would make you think that was a bad thing. Obviously pc gamers would notice it more because you not only might be able to view the frame rate in the game but different settings and hardware could yield vastly different results. If you went over your friends house to play Ocarina of Time on his n64 it would most likely run the same as yours.

24fps on a CRT monitor is equivalent to 240fps on a LCD display.

PC gamers always cared about FPS. Every year you would buy the new Best Buy prebuilt so you could play last year's games at a reasonable framerate.

>>11839434
You have no idea what in the world you're talking about. Learn the difference between game engine frame rates, video frame rates, and refresh rates. Lurk more.

>>11839850
Did I not mention a fucking postage stamp? Or can't you read?

>>11839850
Oh... I get it. You weren't born yet and have no idea that people used to shrink the screen down to the SIZE OF A POSTAGE STAMP to get good frames per second.

>>11843274
>>11843280
Samefagging is unbecoming.

>>11843316
No shit it's the same guy making those two comments back to back. Are you actually retarded or something?

>>11843331
POSTAGE STAMP

>>11839124
They really didn't. Even in Gen 7, you can find references on forums, but it was a very rare and an obscure topic. People didn't know nor care what framerate games ran at.

All of this shit happened around Gen 8 with the rise of TB and the "PCMR" crap

>>11843338
Do you even know what that means?

>>11839062 (OP)
idk, but I remember when I first played Spliter Cell on my brother's PC I would lower the graphics a bit so the game would feel faster
I never cared about exact numbers, I just turn down the graphics until I feel comfortable

>>11843352
luv me green borders

>>11839062 (OP)
When I bought Morrowind and it ran at like 15 fps on my Riva TNT2 Ultra. Had to grab a new GPU, which ended up being a GeForce 4 MX 440.

was playing WoW at the time I bought my first graphics card. went from 18~20fps up to an incredibly smooth 60~80 depending and it made me like the game a lot more

>>11843446
I thought there was a lot more time between the TNT 2 and the Geforce 4. Not really. Wow was I lucky to get a Geforce DDR when they were new. That card had legs.

>>11839434
>And people didn't notice at all because the human eye can't see beyond 24 frames per second.
You trying to tell me that running a 30FPS game at 60 or 144fps is a placebo?

>>11844147
Yes.

This is from a 2001 issue PC Games Hardware, a popular German magazine for pc gaming enthusiasts.
This is the earliest I can find that pushes against the 30fps standard of the time and promotes 60fps instead.

It talks about the problem with average fps scores, where the game still often drops down to around 20fps, the motion blur advantage 24fps film has, and the reduced latency of 60fps.

>>11839096
Retard. People used framerate configs in shooters since way before.

>>11839062 (OP)
The impression I get as someone who wasn't there and only read forums was that people always cared but were more understanding about new games requiring new hardware to run well.

I've always cared.

>>11839062 (OP)
who cares, it's a stupid obsession. there are games that are more smooth at 30 fps than others are at 60. it's common for nocoders to blame low fps for what is really a scheduling issue. at some point devs got lazy and just started brute-forcing every scheduling problem by demanding higher fps from their customers' machines. gamers, being quite possibly the most cucked consumers of all time, caved to the devs' demands without resistance. 30 fps is fine, it's what most movies run at and nobody cries about choppy or stuttering movies. if it looks choppy it's because the devs couldn't be bothered to schedule animations and frames properly.

>>11844147
not exactly. if you run a game at 60 fps on a 144hz monitor you will have uneven frame times. it would be better to run at 72fps to get an even 2 cycles per frame. running a properly scheduled game at 30 fps on a 60 or 120hz will appear no different to the human eye than it would at 60. your eyes don't see entire "frames" at a time and instead look for movement or changes and your brain fills in the rest from either memory or prediction not unlike what you see when dreaming. as a result in scientific studies they found that humans can't actually tell the difference over about 24 fps. if your game has animation frames hanging around for too long or full frames being displayed for uneven intervals you will notice the stuttering misassociated with low fps because what changes on the screen is different than what your brain expected so the stuttering or choppiness is actually happening in your brain and not on the screen. in that sense it is similar to a placebo i suppose. higher fps can mask the issue but doesn't do anything at all to solve it.

I remember understanding "frames" in fighting games in the late '90s and it's a pretty short trip from there to me understanding why one game is "choppy" and another isn't.

>>11844728
Exactly.
The ability to play Indy500 at a good frame rate was peak experience for its day.

Nintendo Power in 1998 hyped up thr fact that F-Zero X on N64 ran at 60fps

>>11839496
All I ever heard about from my older family who were into PCs was how much faster shit ran on their 486 compared to their 386 or "IBM compatible" and shit like that, people were absolutely conscious of things running faster and smoother with new hardware. You're retarded.

>>11844728
Authentic douk player omg

>>11845191
> ran at 60fps
many shortcuts were made and it showed. looks like ass and every object is a handful of polygons just so it would run at full speed.

>>11846615
I wish more games had taken the F-Zero X approach actually. Instead you had Rareware packing their games games excess detail running at 10-15fps and looking outdated 2 years after release anyway. Meanwhile F-Zero X looks timeless and as an extra perk, it runs smooth.

>>11839434
>>11839584
kys

>>11846626
>I wish more games had taken the F-Zero X approach actually.
many tried to increase performance but there's only so much they could do.
> F-Zero X looks timeless and as an extra perk, it runs smooth.
yeah, runs nicely. many games couldn't do this without reducing polygon count so much that all you're left with pushing around deformed shapes of objects
>Rareware packing their games games excess detail running at 10-15fps and looking outdated 2 years after release anyway
speaking of deformed shapes of objects.. yeah, they looked very out of date when released. i find it very difficult to go back and play games like goldeneye or dk64.

>>11839062 (OP)
when they were allowed to measure it.
thats it.
if they cant measure it, they literally dont give a shit unless its uneven/stuttering/dipping. its all smug elitist garbage.

>>11846626
>>11847840
I was so disappointed when the PS2 got going and the 60fps launch title games gave way to everyone else going "I dunno I GUESS 30fps is good enough?"

>>11839062 (OP)
When PC fags became a majority. I still have no issues with 30fps

>>11850252
>When PC fags became a majority
Which has not happened yet.

>>11845218
PCs running faster =/= framerate

>>11847840
>i find it very difficult to go back and play games like goldeneye or dk64.
to be fair that's probably as much to do with cartridge storage limitations as poly count.

>>11839851
Fuck off Dobson.

>>11839120
They called it refresh rate

>>11839062 (OP)
For me, people uploading NES games in 30FPS

>>11850337
Wrong. Most play minecraft, roblox, and frotnite though.

>>11839067
>I'd say Quake 3 era was when people became really into benchmark shit.

PC bench marking became popular around 1995-1996, with the event of 3DFX and other competitors from that point in time. The first benchmarks that websites like Toms Hardware created used the original DOS Tomb Raider from 1996. As it was one of the few games that supported multiple video driver API's (Glide, PowerVR, Matrox, S3, etc). I would say that Quake II (and to a lesser extent Quake) was the original 'universal' bench marking software. As Quake II was one of the first retail PC games to have Open GL support out of the box. The original Quake didn't get OpenGL support until early 1997, with the MiniGL drivers. At that point in time, just about every video card manufacturer was adding OpenGL to their driver support. Quake II was released a few months after the MiniGL driver patch release for Quake 1. Futuremark then showed up in later 1998 with their 3dMark benchmark software that was based on Remedy Entertainment's MaxFX engine. 3DMark really focused on Direct3D, which was still a new API from Microsoft.

>>11839183
This. I remember some gaming mags talked a ton about frame rate and I remember thinking wtf who cares because I was so used to n64 jank.

>>11840615
I'm a PC gamer

>>11839067
yea that sounds right

tbf no one ever rly LIKED choppy framerates
its just kinda what a lot of us were working with if you had a subpar rig