Manos, thats about the difference I'm experiencing as well.
Jetpacking definatly hasn't been entirely fixed. I used to be so slow and unmanouverable at 25fps, with the new pc I can move around like a nutter.
It seems to be the opposite for jetpacks. Higher fps means you are more responsive and can travel further with a jp. Lower fps means you can blink using less addrenaline.
Any chance of an explanation as to why these are bound to your frame rate, and not time or some controllable variable?
Its because of the number of times the "attack" or "jump" command is sent to the server. With Jetpacks, if you constantly tap jump, you'll use less fuel and be able to travel farther faster. With blink, when you hold the attack key down, the attack command is sent to the server much more rapidly than if you have low fps. Therefore, using more adrenaline.
To the original poster: It is true that higher fps make the fade suck more adren while blinking. My old motherboard was capping my game at 20-30 fps and i run it at 80-100 now. I had to relearn how to blink. I'm not as sure as the others about why this happens, but i assure you it does.
It seems to be taking more energy while blinking at a higher fps, but in truth it is not. Energy has an opportunity to drain faster due to the amount of actions able to be performed with 100+ fps compared to 30 FPS, however the momentum generated for the amount of energy used is the same, if not better, on a computer with higher FPS. In essence, your blink is basically better on that faster computer, but it'll take a little more precision. Shorter blinks and better arcing.
EDIT:
The reason why Jetpacking is better with more FPS was orginally, your thrust from the jetpack was determined by your FPS and your jetpack fuel's regen rate was affected by your FPS as well.
Now it's just that thrust is affected by FPS, but the fuel's regen rate is capped. Go watch a good competetive player with 100 fps, they fly so fast with a jetpack they can outrun fades.
FPS also goes towards your ROF, your ability to aim, your turnspeed, and how fast you can switch weapons.
Everyone on these forums loves to complain about unfair advantages given with scripting, but the truth is the biggest unbalancing factor with First Person Shooters is your framerate.
If you go from 40 fps to playing 100 fps, it's like the game plays itself. I know, my brother knows, in fact anyhow who makes the upgrade knows.
If anything, scripts level out the playfield so people with crappy computers can bhop easier, shoot their pistol as fast as the others, etc.
<!--QuoteBegin-6john+May 14 2005, 11:10 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (6john @ May 14 2005, 11:10 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> you know, the human eye can only register 100 fps. you might as well set your fpsmax to 100, that way if your fps DOES affect your adrenaline, it wont that much. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> err wrong its 25 fps that why film cameras run at 25 fps and only speed up to 50 75 100 or 150 for what u would call 'slowmo" i.e more frames captured played at 25 fps give ur a loger shot with slower action...i should know as i was a camera assistant for 7 years working on panavision and arri cameras.
Shut the hell up about the human eye registering in FPS - its a collection of photoreceptor cones and rods, and due to the chemical nature of the reactions they come with inertia - they simply don't work in FPS.
Even as far as image processing goes, 25 FPS is way off what looks natural. Movie movement is stylized - motion blur and smart camerawork hide the weaknesses of 25fps. Watching a movie sans motionblur and with 100+ fps on the other hand would be like watching theater - crisp and natural. The motion picture industry relys on stylizing though, so who the heck cares.
a_civilianLikes seeing numbersJoin Date: 2003-01-08Member: 12041Members, NS1 Playtester, Playtest Lead
<!--QuoteBegin-Grendel+May 16 2005, 06:10 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendel @ May 16 2005, 06:10 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> FPS only has an impact on your ROF when you test it on a Listen server, alledgedly. FYI. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Not true; I verified the effect on an internet server just now.
a_civilianLikes seeing numbersJoin Date: 2003-01-08Member: 12041Members, NS1 Playtester, Playtest Lead
Framerate also affects jump height. I verified this by attempting to bunnyhop as marine onto a very slightly elevated surface. At some framerates the slowing effect was applied; at others, it wasn't.
That 150-200 fps you say you're getting doesn't matter. You're really only getting 100. HL caps at 100, even though your net graph says higher. Deception.
<!--QuoteBegin-SaltzBad+May 16 2005, 07:34 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SaltzBad @ May 16 2005, 07:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Shut the hell up about the human eye registering in FPS - its a collection of photoreceptor cones and rods, and due to the chemical nature of the reactions they come with inertia - they simply don't work in FPS.
Even as far as image processing goes, 25 FPS is way off what looks natural. Movie movement is stylized - motion blur and smart camerawork hide the weaknesses of 25fps. Watching a movie sans motionblur and with 100+ fps on the other hand would be like watching theater - crisp and natural. The motion picture industry relys on stylizing though, so who the heck cares. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> yea you would know hey
infact i guessing you would know why 25 is the norm
dude they have been making film for decades, the motion blur is a effect that is added to a film (mostly 3d work) in the post process it has nothing to do with the purist film process that has been around decades before machines (computers) could add motion blur to a shot in post.
<!--QuoteBegin-a civilian+May 16 2005, 02:58 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (a civilian @ May 16 2005, 02:58 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Framerate also affects jump height. I verified this by attempting to bunnyhop as marine onto a very slightly elevated surface. At some framerates the slowing effect was applied; at others, it wasn't. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Are you sure that's jump height being applied there? If you were trying to bunnyhop onto the surface this means you were traveling horizontal distance... which means you were trying to bhop the same horizontal distance at a lower framerate, something you won't get because lower framerates = slower turn speed = slower bhop acceleration.
<!--QuoteBegin-a civilian+May 16 2005, 02:58 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (a civilian @ May 16 2005, 02:58 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Framerate also affects jump height. I verified this by attempting to bunnyhop as marine onto a very slightly elevated surface. At some framerates the slowing effect was applied; at others, it wasn't. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Did you have the same amount of ammo throughout?
dude they have been making film for decades, the motion blur is a effect that is added to a film (mostly 3d work) in the post process it has nothing to do with the purist film process that has been around decades before machines (computers) could add motion blur to a shot in post.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> wrong! motion blur is added to cg shots to make them blend well when composited with live footage taken with a camera. have you ever used a 35mm camera? do you know what shutter speed is? ever try to take a picture of something moving fast?
motion blur provide information to the brain on the speed and direction something is moveing . therefore 24fps film seems fluid because of it.
3d games cannot do motion blur in realtime therefore the need for high framerates to make it appear smoother.
25 fps in a 3d games feels like watching a slide show .espsecailly in a fast paced game like NS.
motion blur is desirable and will probally used once computing power is up to snuff
civilian : I thought it affected jump arch and the type of trajectory, but not the peak of the arch - hence not the height. At least thats what I read in the Quake article on FPS and RoF/jump arches/air control. Most of the other information there is correct, and when using my crosshair as a marker (with mouselook off) I get the same result - jumps are just as high with different FPS, but last longer with developer 1, and supposedly even longer with higher FPS.
Ultranewb insists its just dev1 that makes jumps last longer, but I haven't given it much testing yet. I just know they are longer with dev1 and fps_max 125.
That 150-200 fps you say you're getting doesn't matter. You're really only getting 100. HL caps at 100, even though your net graph says higher. Deception. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> If i remember rightly yes HL does cap your fps at 100 max but the net graph isn't lieing because if you have developer what ever it is entered then the net graph shows the fps that your card is capable of doing on the HL engine without the cap..
So in short if HL didn't have the 100 fps cap then you would get what the net graph is showing you so 150 - 200 fps
dude they have been making film for decades, the motion blur is a effect that is added to a film (mostly 3d work) in the post process it has nothing to do with the purist film process that has been around decades before machines (computers) could add motion blur to a shot in post.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> wrong! motion blur is added to cg shots to make them blend well when composited with live footage taken with a camera. have you ever used a 35mm camera? do you know what shutter speed is? ever try to take a picture of something moving fast?
motion blur provide information to the brain on the speed and direction something is moveing . therefore 24fps film seems fluid because of it.
3d games cannot do motion blur in realtime therefore the need for high framerates to make it appear smoother.
25 fps in a 3d games feels like watching a slide show .espsecailly in a fast paced game like NS.
motion blur is desirable and will probally used once computing power is up to snuff <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> i think you missed the part were i said i was a camera assistant for over 7 years as in motion picture....goto www.panavision.com or www.arri.com to see the cameras i worked with..as far as the 3d goes i was talking about 3d animation in film and the use of motion blur to smooth out the frame by frame blendning...this is a game forum so i can see how you misunderstood me on that point. Again please explain how motion blur was added to shot pre 1982 and the use of computers in film.....it wasnt....before then all films were shot at either 24 or 25 fps as that was the rate of frames that could be filmed in one second with out the human eye seeing the shutter.If you filmed anything above 25 fps it was to create the effect of slow motion...as in 50 fps would give 2x the frames played back at 25 fps.If you shot something at say 12 or 18 fps and then played it back at 25 fps you get that lame speeded up effect we all rember so well from knight rider.
So yea after all that do you really want to try and carry on this argument about film,frames per second and motion blur.
Lets see--if I remember correctly, the human eye has a refresh rate of about 24-30 fps (which is not the same as a framerate). That means that after you see a particular frame, that frame isn't removed from your vision for about 1/30th of a second. So if the next frame comes up before that time, you won't notice the fact that the frames inbetween (which would be continuous IRL, which is impossible on a screen) are missing. Essentially, you are seeing two different frames at once--which simulates your RL vision, where you see many frames at once.
But this only works when the frames are relatively close together. That is, if an object moves 1 pixel per frame, at 30fps, you'll see it smoothly gliding across the screen. But if the object jumps across the screen in one frame, obviously thats going to look wrong at any framerate. So when an object moves a relatively large distance per frame, motion blurring within each frame helps simulate the RL effect of havng the intermediate frames, tricking you into thinking you saw the object move through each pixel.
Edit: Oh, and on topic, on my old computer I would nearly always get Celerity as a Fade, and almost never ran out of energy while Blinking. Now I have to get Adrenaline on my new computer, because even tap-blinking down halls runs me out of energy too fast. I'll have to try limiting my framerate or something.
This is the FPS you should be getting, if your not, there is some bottleneck somewhere.
Completely off topic, but it could be useful for some people
Edit - I get sore eyes watching anything thats less than 100hz, that includes the TV. I am also one of these people who can hear the TV on standby (high pitched whistle)
(I can't look at my monitor on a new driver install for more than 5 seconds 60hz > me)
If I watch a TV for more than 10 mins I begin to see breaks in the frames, that causes headaches.
I notice a huge difference between 100 and 85 FPS, not only in vision, but in sound also.
Thanks for all the replies. I'm glad at least that the effect isn't just something to do with my PC. I can't do any more testing atm because my graphics card is being replaced. If FPS really does effect so many aspects of the game then there is probably no hope of fixing the issues with this incarnation of the game.
It does seem to me though that the developers should at least take a look at the reliance on FPS. In for example a port to the HL2 engine, are the same problems going to occur, or is it just an issue with HL1?
a_civilianLikes seeing numbersJoin Date: 2003-01-08Member: 12041Members, NS1 Playtester, Playtest Lead
edited May 2005
<!--QuoteBegin-NGE+May 17 2005, 09:27 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NGE @ May 17 2005, 09:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Are you sure that's jump height being applied there? If you were trying to bunnyhop onto the surface this means you were traveling horizontal distance... which means you were trying to bhop the same horizontal distance at a lower framerate, something you won't get because lower framerates = slower turn speed = slower bhop acceleration.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Horizontal distance or speed is irrelevent; I was determining simply whether the slowing effect would be applied, and this effect depends on the duration of the jump.
<!--QuoteBegin-Zek+May 17 2005, 10:05 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Zek @ May 17 2005, 10:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Did you have the same amount of ammo throughout?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes.
<!--QuoteBegin-SaltzBad+May 18 2005, 12:29 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SaltzBad @ May 18 2005, 12:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->civilian : I thought it affected jump arch and the type of trajectory, but not the peak of the arch - hence not the height. At least thats what I read in the Quake article on FPS and RoF/jump arches/air control. Most of the other information there is correct, and when using my crosshair as a marker (with mouselook off) I get the same result - jumps are just as high with different FPS, but last longer with developer 1, and supposedly even longer with higher FPS.
Ultranewb insists its just dev1 that makes jumps last longer, but I haven't given it much testing yet. I just know they are longer with dev1 and fps_max 125.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> All my test proved was that the duration of a jump is affected by framerate. Assuming that the effect of gravity is constant, this would imply that the jump height changes. However if the effect of gravity varies with framerate, then the jump height may not change at all.
Comments
50 fps uses like 50 % less energy then 100 fps.
for me thats the reason why i fade at 60 fps.
Jetpacking definatly hasn't been entirely fixed. I used to be so slow and unmanouverable at 25fps, with the new pc I can move around like a nutter.
It seems to be the opposite for jetpacks. Higher fps means you are more responsive and can travel further with a jp. Lower fps means you can blink using less addrenaline.
Any chance of an explanation as to why these are bound to your frame rate, and not time or some controllable variable?
EDIT:
The reason why Jetpacking is better with more FPS was orginally, your thrust from the jetpack was determined by your FPS and your jetpack fuel's regen rate was affected by your FPS as well.
Now it's just that thrust is affected by FPS, but the fuel's regen rate is capped. Go watch a good competetive player with 100 fps, they fly so fast with a jetpack they can outrun fades.
FPS also goes towards your ROF, your ability to aim, your turnspeed, and how fast you can switch weapons.
Everyone on these forums loves to complain about unfair advantages given with scripting, but the truth is the biggest unbalancing factor with First Person Shooters is your framerate.
If you go from 40 fps to playing 100 fps, it's like the game plays itself. I know, my brother knows, in fact anyhow who makes the upgrade knows.
If anything, scripts level out the playfield so people with crappy computers can bhop easier, shoot their pistol as fast as the others, etc.
err wrong its 25 fps that why film cameras run at 25 fps and only speed up to 50 75 100 or 150 for what u would call 'slowmo" i.e more frames captured played at 25 fps give ur a loger shot with slower action...i should know as i was a camera assistant for 7 years working on panavision and arri cameras.
Even as far as image processing goes, 25 FPS is way off what looks natural. Movie movement is stylized - motion blur and smart camerawork hide the weaknesses of 25fps. Watching a movie sans motionblur and with 100+ fps on the other hand would be like watching theater - crisp and natural. The motion picture industry relys on stylizing though, so who the heck cares.
Not true; I verified the effect on an internet server just now.
IE, 20 fps or something like thats lets more bullets fly then 100 fps. Something like that.
That 150-200 fps you say you're getting doesn't matter. You're really only getting 100. HL caps at 100, even though your net graph says higher. Deception.
Even as far as image processing goes, 25 FPS is way off what looks natural. Movie movement is stylized - motion blur and smart camerawork hide the weaknesses of 25fps. Watching a movie sans motionblur and with 100+ fps on the other hand would be like watching theater - crisp and natural. The motion picture industry relys on stylizing though, so who the heck cares. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
yea you would know hey
infact i guessing you would know why 25 is the norm
motion blur = lol
stylizing= lol
smart camerawork=lol
dude they have been making film for decades, the motion blur is a effect that is added to a film (mostly 3d work) in the post process it has nothing to do with the purist film process that has been around decades before machines (computers) could add motion blur to a shot in post.
Are you sure that's jump height being applied there? If you were trying to bunnyhop onto the surface this means you were traveling horizontal distance... which means you were trying to bhop the same horizontal distance at a lower framerate, something you won't get because lower framerates = slower turn speed = slower bhop acceleration.
Did you have the same amount of ammo throughout?
infact i guessing you would know why 25 is the norm
motion blur = lol
stylizing= lol
smart camerawork=lol
dude they have been making film for decades, the motion blur is a effect that is added to a film (mostly 3d work) in the post process it has nothing to do with the purist film process that has been around decades before machines (computers) could add motion blur to a shot in post.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
wrong! motion blur is added to cg shots to make them blend well when composited with live footage taken with a camera. have you ever used a 35mm camera? do you know what shutter speed is? ever try to take a picture of something moving fast?
motion blur provide information to the brain on the speed and direction something is moveing . therefore 24fps film seems fluid because of it.
3d games cannot do motion blur in realtime therefore the need for high framerates to make it appear smoother.
25 fps in a 3d games feels like watching a slide show .espsecailly in a fast paced game like NS.
motion blur is desirable and will probally used once computing power is up to snuff
Ultranewb insists its just dev1 that makes jumps last longer, but I haven't given it much testing yet. I just know they are longer with dev1 and fps_max 125.
That 150-200 fps you say you're getting doesn't matter. You're really only getting 100. HL caps at 100, even though your net graph says higher. Deception. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
If i remember rightly yes HL does cap your fps at 100 max but the net graph isn't lieing because if you have developer what ever it is entered then the net graph shows the fps that your card is capable of doing on the HL engine without the cap..
So in short if HL didn't have the 100 fps cap then you would get what the net graph is showing you so 150 - 200 fps
infact i guessing you would know why 25 is the norm
motion blur = lol
stylizing= lol
smart camerawork=lol
dude they have been making film for decades, the motion blur is a effect that is added to a film (mostly 3d work) in the post process it has nothing to do with the purist film process that has been around decades before machines (computers) could add motion blur to a shot in post.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
wrong! motion blur is added to cg shots to make them blend well when composited with live footage taken with a camera. have you ever used a 35mm camera? do you know what shutter speed is? ever try to take a picture of something moving fast?
motion blur provide information to the brain on the speed and direction something is moveing . therefore 24fps film seems fluid because of it.
3d games cannot do motion blur in realtime therefore the need for high framerates to make it appear smoother.
25 fps in a 3d games feels like watching a slide show .espsecailly in a fast paced game like NS.
motion blur is desirable and will probally used once computing power is up to snuff <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
i think you missed the part were i said i was a camera assistant for over 7 years as in motion picture....goto www.panavision.com or www.arri.com to see the cameras i worked with..as far as the 3d goes i was talking about 3d animation in film and the use of motion blur to smooth out the frame by frame blendning...this is a game forum so i can see how you misunderstood me on that point. Again please explain how motion blur was added to shot pre 1982 and the use of computers in film.....it wasnt....before then all films were shot at either 24 or 25 fps as that was the rate of frames that could be filmed in one second with out the human eye seeing the shutter.If you filmed anything above 25 fps it was to create the effect of slow motion...as in 50 fps would give 2x the frames played back at 25 fps.If you shot something at say 12 or 18 fps and then played it back at 25 fps you get that lame speeded up effect we all rember so well from knight rider.
So yea after all that do you really want to try and carry on this argument about film,frames per second and motion blur.
But this only works when the frames are relatively close together. That is, if an object moves 1 pixel per frame, at 30fps, you'll see it smoothly gliding across the screen. But if the object jumps across the screen in one frame, obviously thats going to look wrong at any framerate. So when an object moves a relatively large distance per frame, motion blurring within each frame helps simulate the RL effect of havng the intermediate frames, tricking you into thinking you saw the object move through each pixel.
Edit: Oh, and on topic, on my old computer I would nearly always get Celerity as a Fade, and almost never ran out of energy while Blinking. Now I have to get Adrenaline on my new computer, because even tap-blinking down halls runs me out of energy too fast. I'll have to try limiting my framerate or something.
This is the FPS you should be getting, if your not, there is some bottleneck somewhere.
Completely off topic, but it could be useful for some people
Edit - I get sore eyes watching anything thats less than 100hz, that includes the TV.
I am also one of these people who can hear the TV on standby (high pitched whistle)
(I can't look at my monitor on a new driver install for more than 5 seconds 60hz > me)
If I watch a TV for more than 10 mins I begin to see breaks in the frames, that causes headaches.
I notice a huge difference between 100 and 85 FPS, not only in vision, but in sound also.
Oh to be normal D:
It does seem to me though that the developers should at least take a look at the reliance on FPS. In for example a port to the HL2 engine, are the same problems going to occur, or is it just an issue with HL1?
Horizontal distance or speed is irrelevent; I was determining simply whether the slowing effect would be applied, and this effect depends on the duration of the jump.
<!--QuoteBegin-Zek+May 17 2005, 10:05 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Zek @ May 17 2005, 10:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Did you have the same amount of ammo throughout?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes.
<!--QuoteBegin-SaltzBad+May 18 2005, 12:29 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SaltzBad @ May 18 2005, 12:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->civilian : I thought it affected jump arch and the type of trajectory, but not the peak of the arch - hence not the height. At least thats what I read in the Quake article on FPS and RoF/jump arches/air control. Most of the other information there is correct, and when using my crosshair as a marker (with mouselook off) I get the same result - jumps are just as high with different FPS, but last longer with developer 1, and supposedly even longer with higher FPS.
Ultranewb insists its just dev1 that makes jumps last longer, but I haven't given it much testing yet. I just know they are longer with dev1 and fps_max 125.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
All my test proved was that the duration of a jump is affected by framerate. Assuming that the effect of gravity is constant, this would imply that the jump height changes. However if the effect of gravity varies with framerate, then the jump height may not change at all.