In use until September 2003 |
Author | Topic |
-SCUT-OpenGL | Posted - 15 November 2001 6:20 PST my computer is very poor and the timedemo results are like this(all tests done with nosound 1, r_drawviewmodel 0, viewsize 110, r_waterwarp 0 and take an average of demo1, demo2 and demo3): winquake: glquake 0.98: and morfans, about your 72fps-demo-recording explaination, i think even a dumbass like me can tell that timedemoing demo1/2/3 with 65 fps is A LOT FASTER than normal playing, but when i timedemoed some sda demos it sounds right, with 80 fps it is just about the same speed(or a bit faster) of normal playing. is this because they are recorded under different fps? is that changeable? finally, in case you dunno, quake2 demos are recorded in 10 fps, that's why it is a lot smaller than quake demos. =) Edited by - -SCUT-OpenGL on 11/15/2001 6:23:12 AM |
Nagasaki | Posted - 15 November 2001 7:24 PST Of course I know that interpolation is only one single word :P And Q2 demos are complete crap because you miss some important parts of them as crucial frames are missing. I don't understand this whole discussion really anyways. Call me superficial, but to me it's quite a clear case... *** |
Attila | Posted - 15 November 2001 10:59 PST orbs, maybe you have read my message from 12 november, but it's not likely, so here is a piece of it: "Those average FPS values in my long message are not timedemo results, they are calculated from the demos outside quake." End of story... |
Hanz | Posted - 15 November 2001 11:53 PST Ok ok I believe ya if (!cls.timedemo && realtime - oldrealtime < 1.0/72.0) |
Topic is 3 Pages Long: 1 2 3 |