When did 30FPS become the standard? Most of the SNES games ran at 60fps. Even the PS1 had mostly 60 fps titles.
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
When did 30FPS become the standard? Most of the SNES games ran at 60fps. Even the PS1 had mostly 60 fps titles.
>SNES
>PS1
Mostly 2D games
>PS1 had mostly 60 fps titles.
Nope
Game Sack's newest video was about PS1 titles that were solid 60FPS and it was about 25-30. Some looked pretty good!
Game sack… is actually good. Have you noticed that classic game reviews has been trying to release the same type of compilation videos as gamesack. In hopes of hitting the algorithm jackpot, but nobody is taking the bait, kek.
>classic game reviews
he sucks and you know what sucks even more? his sad attempt at making a comic book
he was making pretty nice patreon money from dummies
Love me some Game Sack. Miss Dave tho, it was better when they played off eachother. Joe's been doing a decent solo job tho.
Never watched Classic Game Reviews.
will he ever fix his teeth?
Ehhh I don't really care and I doubt he's out chasing women lol
>7,918 games
>30ish 3D ones are 60fps
30 fps never was the standard
PS2 era
30fps was always the standard.
That's the frame rate of proper interlaced NTSC.
60Hz / 2 (even lines + odd lines)
That standard stems from analog times and was hard to recreate with early digital electronics. So old consoles struggled to handle 480i @ 30fps (also interlacing can look bad in games) and instead they cheated by only sending the same half of the lines at every pass which gives you 240p @ 60fps (this is also what causes "scanlines")
>30fps was always the standard.
>That's the frame rate of proper interlaced NTSC.
That's using a fricked up definition of "frame rate" that predates video games. The temporal resolution is still 60Hz because the odd and even fields are not sampled at the same time (except in the case of telecined content with is always garbage and should never be watched). It should really be called 60 interlaced frames per second for consistency with modern terminology.
it's fricked up but it's factual.
>called 60 interlaced frames per second
not how it worked. takes two frames of odd/even lines to make 1 frame. this is how you end up with 30fps.
the sfc is not a benchmark for performance. and what do you mean became the standard? polygons happened. developers trying to capitalize on cinematic games neutered the industry prioritizing poly count over smooth play. now its the same thing, whatever bullshit they have to sell you on next.
>Even the PS1 had mostly 60 fps titles.
lolno
PS2 has more share of 60 fps titles than psx
Japs are unironically not good at programming and frick up framerate related stuff to this day. It just took them a long time figuring out how to cap at 30 frames and tie all logic to it
It’s way past time to stop giving FromSoft a pass for this sort of thing.
>Japs are unironically not good at programming
lol
You can do more with 30 fps. The real issue is when framerate isn't consistent
>You can do more with 30 fps.
What can you do at 30fps that you can't do at 60?
More complex graphics since you're targeting a lower framerate. It's a cheap and easy way to squeeze more flash out of lackluster hardware.
You can do that at 60fps too if the system is powerful enough. You said you can "do more" at 30. What can you do at 30 that is literally impossible at 60?
I guess literally nothing
The laws of physics actually mean that even after an infinite amount of years of technological progress, there will be things that are not possible at 60fps. Energy transfers can only be so efficient, atoms cannot be infinitely small, and e=mc2
>You can do that at 60fps too if the system is powerful enough.
IF the system is powerful enough. IF.
>What can you do at 30 that is literally impossible at 60?
That depends on the hardware you're targeting. If you had an infinitely powerful system, then there would be nothing you wouldn't be able to do at 30 that you couldn't do at 60, 90, 120, etc.
Anyway, I'm not this anon:
Stop being a stupid c**t. Basic arithmetic tells you that dividing a given throughput (in this case, the PlayStation's power) more frequently (in this case, higher framerates) results in less output per task. Unsurprisingly, this made 60fps Final Fantasy VII on the PlayStation impossible. Were you singing the praises of real time ray tracing in 1997 as well, frickhead?
What's wrong with real time ray tracing?
>1997
Another RGBgay pretending console gaming in the 90's was all about bringing the arcade into the homes (still cannot explain why the best-selling titles were all console-exclusive kek)
>More complex graphics since you're targeting a lower framerate.
I can't think of a single practical situation where this is actually meaningful. You're increasing the polygon count but ensuring you will never have smooth animations. At best this gives you good screenshots to bait people browsing through a gaming magazine.
30 FPS is largely just a red flag that the developers either didn't have enough time to or didn't care enough to optimize the game.
You're moving the goalposts, bud. More complex graphics is a common reason for 30 instead of 60. Simple as that.
a lower framerate doesn't just give you headroom for better graphics, but also larger levels, more enemies on screen, physics, etc. The games themselves can become conceptually more ambitious at a lower framerate
If you need your games to be in 60fps you're a permanent baby.
Why?
Framebabies throw their pacifiers out of the proverbial pram at anything less 60.
True, wouldn't go under 60 FPS for anything modern. Preferably 120+.
Cope. Stop producing cheap Chinese garbage so your games look at least half presentable
this. most "normal/average" people aren't going to notice anything past 60fps (and if you actually do you're unironically autistic and probably get bothered by florescent lights) while others aren't going to notice a difference between 30 & 60 unless it's an actual side by side comparison.
>t. someone who has never played a game at 120fps with a 120hz monitor
They definitely would if they would try.
When did this fricking board, built upon the golden era of games that was rife with technological advancement by leaps and bounds every year until the turn of the millenium, now parading its moronation by speaking against improvement?
If a company failed to deliver the framerate it promised in an arcade port, it was eaten alive.
you know the answer. It rhymes with groomer
>If a company failed to deliver the framerate it promised in an arcade port, it was eaten alive
What are you talking about, barely any arcade port lived up to arcade original in the SNES era, it was pretty much impossible for it to. Only later ports of old games managed to capture the arcade experience
>Even the PS1 had mostly 60 fps titles.
It really didn't and those that were are usually 480i.
Ahh shit, I should have read the thread before I commented. Exact video I was talking about.
>Even the PS1 had mostly 60 fps titles
LOL no the vast majority of games were 60fps until the move to 3D which resulted in a drop to 20-30fps.
The shift from 60 to 30 happened when the shift from who was making the games changed from game centric developers to failed wannabe Hollywood directors like Kojima
correct.
so it should've been 24fps then?
moron. MGS2 was 60fps
Fwiw FF7 battles were capped to 15 fps
>When did 30FPS become the standard?
When consoles switched from tilemap graphics with a fixed 60Hz render period to framebuffer graphics with flexible rendering time.
>Even the PS1 had mostly 60 fps titles.
lmao, no.
You really had to go out of your way to make a 16 bit game run at 30 fps, you required extra logic to wait for an extra frame and do more calculations, it really had to be severe as it needed more work than just running at 60 fps. Streets of Rage 1 made the choice for the handful of times when you have a huge number of enemies on screen.
I think also because are moving into the screen so its less noticable at first than a sidescroller.
>Most of the SNES games ran at 60fps.
[citation needed]
>You really had to go out of your way to make a 16 bit game run at 30 fps
SNES games frequently struggled to try to keep up at 60 FPS.
If you're talking about slowdown
it was common on all 4th gen consoles
Wrong, it was used for stylistic purposes occasionally on the other 16-bit hardwares, but performance problems were largely confined to the SNES, with it's severe relative lack of CPU power really holding it back.
Are you one of the dumb c**ts that thinks the MegaDrive didn't have slowdown?
Console performance + 30 being half v-sync of 60Hz, which most TVs are. That's more relevant to the PS2/3 era though and panels.
>Most of the SNES games ran at 60fps
Source?
My fps counter on the emulator
Refresh rate =/= framerate
60Hz means you can have up to 60fps being shown on screen. 60fps on a 30Hz screen will only show 30fps. The framerate is also dictated by the game itself, not an emulator fps counter.
yaah but if it isn't a 1:1 or dividable value it will teaaaaar
>emulators run games at 60 fps i don't understand why real hardware doesn't
you never used real hardware don't you.
snes/megadrive/ps1
>all games ran at 24 fps NTSC
>PAL games ran at 29.5 fps
>only exception would be DOA for ps1 that was the only game in playstation library that ran at 60 fps on either version (DOA2 for xbox and PS2 ran at 24 fps)
next time inform yourself,even arcade games ran at 24 fps,herz doesn't equal fps and has never been related to frames (we had 110 herz TV and monitors since 2000 yet they never related to frames)
this is why is said most emulators are poorly done
>>all games ran at 24 fps NTSC
>>PAL games ran at 29.5 fps
Tobal No.1 ran 60fps
Complete bullshit. No games ran at 24fps because it's not an integer divisor of 60fps. 2D games mostly ran at 60fps (with slowdown common on Nintendo consoles because they always cheap out on the hardware). 3D games mostly ran at 30fps or 20fps, with 60fps only rarely. 15fps/12fps/10fps wasn't unheard of. Arcade games generally had higher frame rates.
Divide all these numbers by 1.2 for PAL (and note that arcade games don't use PAL/NTSC).
You got that backwards you moronic Black person.
And it was fields per second, not frames per second, so it was equivalent of 60FPS, not 30FPS.
No one cared about the fps cap until 10 years ago. The actual issue was slowdown/lag.
VN fans be like
>1/10 fps is more my speed
It wasn't an issue with CRT's
It became a problem with LCD's due to motion blurring
I always had lower end or older graphics cards so I don't mind 30fps at all
I usually play games below 30fps to this day lol
30fps was pretty normal for pc gaming
the whole 60fps autism is a relatively recent thing that was aggressively pushed by youtubers like TotalBiscuit
sorry zoomer, but ass cancer man and his Framerate Police was instrumental in pushing it
>zoomer
I guarantee I'm older than you moron
60fps was always the standard, everyone aimed for 60hz because most pc crts were 60 or 75hz monitors, it wasnt until the shitty ps3/360 era when pc was no long the primary platform that 30fps gained ground so of course that's why it became a topic at that time you absolute mong
lmao no
frame rate and refresh rate are different things, zoom zoom.
Developers aimed for factors of 60 (not limited to 60 itself) to avoid improper framepacing. It's less that developers aimed for 60 HERTZ specifically since that's the inevitable hardware the game was going to be played on (unless you're a sorry PALBlack person like myself), but they did have to target a framerate 60 was divisible by.
>(unless you're a sorry PALBlack person like myself),
NTSC/PAL didn't matter at all for pc gaming.
Then explain why Doom (a pinnacle of PC gaming) targeted 35FPS.
That's neither NTSC nor PAL.
Look at any old PC magazines and the gold standard test was 60 fps.
>Look at any old
Prove it. Show a new release.
He probably means benchmark tests using the latest high end 3D accelerator cards. Most users weren’t getting that experience.
Maybe, but the latest games always ran like shit. Don't even get me started on the ports, God PC gamers have it so good with ports these days
>60fps was always the standard,
Not on PC, on console. PC had the appeal of running older games smoother but new releases always choked. 7th gen brain damaged PC gamers into believing 120fps at max settings 1080p was the norm. Now they're still running at 1080p 15 years later.
>most pc crts were 60 or 75hz monitors
In the DOS era 70Hz was standard. Doom runs at 35fps because that's 70 divided by 2.
When framebuffered graphics became standard, so when the IBM PC started getting mainstream vidya support.
>ITT: Tech illiterate Ganker tourists
It's not rocket science, my dudes. Come on now.
The board is so fricking tech inept it is unbelievable. Considering the board topic everyone should be at minimum in their late 20s or early 30s, which means they were front and center during the giant boom of home and portable technology, but yet 95% of the posts read like a grandmother in 2000 trying to access her e-mail.
>snes
At that era no one talked about frame rate.
No one. This is a revisionist discussion that is irrelevant. There was no standard.
Most of these games couldn't maintain the 60 fps to save their life.
ITT: Absolutely wrong answers.
OPs questions is wrong and gay too.
The advent of 3D graphics made it harder to hit
They learned early on consumers don't care.
really why should we?