In PS2 Shadow of the Colussus, often sub-30 fps made it feel like the action was being shot on a super8 camera that had been manufactured in the world the game takes place in.
I appreciate the smoother framerates in the remakes, but they did lose a little bit of something that made the original feel more weighty and “physical” for me
This reminds me of an online argument I got involved in once about framerate in PS2 SotC. I found it didn’t ever get so severe to be truly frustrating and sometimes increased the tension in a productive way. Someone else said on their PS2 it became literally unplayable.
Which reminds me that on my PS2 a certain Odin Sphere boss fight became effectively unplayable, since the frame rate slowed down to an absolute crawl. MEanwhile, a good friend said his PS2 never experienced all that much frame rate drop.
My experience of this very boss battle was that the slow frame rate made it easier to react to stuff because there was a LOT going on on the screen.
I haven’t been really paying attention to the discussion in this topic other than shitposting that image but just lol if you don’t turn down all the settings and the render resolution in your shooter of choice so you’re running at 250+ FPS all the time to feed your panel of an absurdly high refresh rate based on absurdly old LCD tech
overclock your Vita and Switch too
i accept the frames as they come to me
like having to download updates is annoying enough as it is. rebuilding my box of wires every time a new game comes out and tweaking settings and caring about temperature sounds like a drag
the frames may wash over me at any speed they wish, i am not the frame master
this is the best shit and just thinking about it makes me a little horny
fuckin’ go into Afterburner and turn the power and temp limits all the way up, sacrifice your GPU on the altar of frames, overclock the CPU, stick a fuckin’ block of copper on it and tie on like, 20 fans to it
game every day like your PC won’t boot the next morning
i just get hundred dollar laptops and type on them til the keys fall ofd
rip those fuckers open and use them on top of a bag of ice
Next time I post something controversial in general, I’m setting my sights on the cult of cramped PC cases crammed with overclocked shit here.
preserving shitty computers is fun
for me when games are involved i want as little computer as possible. when i see a keyboard/mouse/monitor i think work, when i see a screen not attached to a computer i think play. it helps my production
i get that consoles are computers but they go through a lot of work to make me forget
whattttt, what gpu do you have in there, do we already have mini versions in this gen?
the GPU is on the reverse side 
k, from that side it looked like a mini-card, was fooled by the strix label.
i suddenly realized that this is the framerate topic, and i haven’t taken a side yet.
so, since i have gotten a VEGA64 just to push project cars 2 to 60fps on 1920x1080, i am firmly in the “when i go racing, gotta go fast” camp. I can deal with 30fps (since i love split/second, have no choice there), but if it is possible to go higher w/ the fps, i do so instantly.
there’s just something about the car control and smoothness 60 fps supports that you miss ehen it is not there…
for the record, if the framerste dips to 50ish frames, i don’t care, OK, it’s just when it is half of that fps rate that i get a bit irritated, since we’re talking about sims here where you are expected to tread a fine line between crash or success.
that isn’t actually mine, just a pic I grabbed of a cleaned up sandwich case
mine is decidedly not what peak PC looks like
This is the greatest thread in sb2.0 history
Sen’s Fortress for small pets
I have rich idiot-tier computer turning up in the next few days literally just so I can run loads of DAW plugins and never finish anything
I’m pretty sure that the 2600 had a register or something that could halt the processor until the end of the TIA’s current scanline, making the process of writing sufficiently timed code slightly (marginally) easier (@vincenttoups plz confirm).
anyhow
On the flip side of vidcon antiquity, Fairchild’s Channel F took almost the exact opposite approach to video display as the 2600. It had a luxurious (for 1976) 2-bit-per-pixel 128x64 framebuffer. However, the programmer has no means of synchronizing itself with the video hardware — no hsync or vsync or pixel counters anything of that sort. Since its framebuffer only receives writes during blanking periods (at least h-blank), the machine is limited to writing one pixel per scanline — write a pixel, wait a scanline, write the next pixel, etc. Channel F games thus have a strict fill-rate limit to contend with — something totally foreign to an Atari 2600 programmer.
Also, since vsync doesn’t exist, the way games maintain a consistent framerate (if they even bother) is by having a loop the burns a variable amount of time depending on the amount of stuff happening onscreen.
Oh and by the way, the framebuffer is write-only.
(Source: I’ve disassembled a Channel F game and dabbled in homebrew.)
I bring this up because I feel there is a tendency to think of the 2600’s approach to video generation as a sort of an engineering inevitability given the constraints of the era, when it was just one part of the infinite array of possibilities hardware engineers had to puzzle their way through. Fairchild used their position as semiconductor manufacturer to give their machine a montrous 16 kilobits of vram, while Atari bet their load on an absolutely bonkers custom-made ASIC.
