UKGPL Season 24 Funrace - Le Mans - Jun 21 and 23

[maddog]

The 60fps patch has not received any improvement.  A reminder that it was made by a guy, who had the expertise to modify the hard coded game software, who is no longer interested.  This was only done for amusement, and was not completed.  No-one else seems able to finish his work.  So Ai are confused and unrealistic, and close racing is only possible online.

I think everyone should try 60fps.  Get online and see if it looks good.  Find a friend and bump a few times.  I don't think it should be used in official races without full testing.  We need a full grid, and tracks without a lowRes option.  

[Hristo Itchov]

Just to remind everyone why we do not use the 60fps: UKGPL Season 17 (2009) - 60fps Test Race - 65 Mod - Monza - Feb 25

It was few years ago and I assume that this patch have been improved. But until we test it on few tracks with full grids I'm against using it in our regular championships.

The only reason against it was (and is) that some people have slower PCs. That's why I suggested we run just one 60fps division and keep the rest on running the regular 36. That way those who want and can run 60 fps can enjoy it, and the rest can simply race all other divisions. This should bring in new people who are put away by the fact that we don't use 60 fps at all.

As for the close racing and bumping into each other argument, again, I don't see that as a benefit. If 60fps stimulates you to race closer to others, to take more risks, then incidents are going to happen at the same rate as now, regardless of whether a car explodes or not as a result of a contact.

[Cookie]

As for the close racing and bumping into each other argument, again, I don't see that as a benefit. If 60fps stimulates you to race closer to others, to take more risks, then incidents are going to happen at the same rate as now, regardless of whether a car explodes or not as a result of a contact.

Nobody has the idea to do such silly things just because it is 60fps.... 

But some incidents caused by the bigger pikes of the 36fps crashbox just do not happen!!!

[BadBlood]

60 fps will not make any difference to collision detection if the refresh rate on the server is set to 5 instead of 3 since there will still be 12 refreshes per second - the biggest component in collisions that are NOT down to numskull driving is client lag and 60 fps won't make any difference there either.

Are you overiding client parameters Cookie and if so, what are you using?

My issue is that I simply cannot see the supposed 'smoother graphics' but then when I started with GPL I already had a fairly meaty PC and a rock solid broadband connection and bad eyes...

[Cookie]

Are you overiding client parameters Cookie and if so, what are you using?

Yes I do override core.ini bandwith settings

- for 36fps 2/84 2/384

- for 60fps 4/84 4/384

Paul just try it on the Moon. I never had such smooth gameplay before!

[Hristo Itchov]

My issue is that I simply cannot see the supposed 'smoother graphics' but then when I started with GPL I already had a fairly meaty PC and a rock solid broadband connection and bad eyes...

Honestly, Paul... even if you have a super PC, 36 fps is 36 fps... Ask someone else around you if they see a difference, if you really have doubts about the difference between 60 and 36 fps. 

[Phil Thornton]

It would be nice to do a proper test to confirm or rebuff the apparent benefits of the 60fps patch.  Personally I like the 60fps patch, I find the car is more responsive and the graphics are smoother.  The pit straight at Le Mans on Sunday was a classic example.  The speeds are so high and the banners so numerous, at 36fps the screen appears to flicker whereas with 60fps the scenery moves seamlessly.  In my experience the crash box is less sensitive too.  In the last F2 race at Solitude I rear ended Arf.  I don't think there was any actual contact nevertheless he was sent into orbit, I doubt that would have happened with the 60fps patch.

With regards to what PC hardware people have, I suggest the graphics setup is far more important than the actual hardware.  I have a very good PC (except the OS which is Vista 64) Intel i7-2600K 3.4 GHz with a Nvidia GeForce GTX560 (with 1GB DDR5 memory) but even I get frame rate issues if the graphics options are not set correctly.  To get a rock solid 36 or 60 fps I have to set the graphics options in the Nvidia Control Panel to performance (see screenshot below).  Trying to use custom settings is too hard.  I want to race not prat about with my PC.  In order to stop my frame rate being hammered during chat (i.e when people leave the server) I have to disable the option to smooth screen fonts (as advised by Skymole - see screenshot below).  Hristo appears to have disabled chat, I've selected the option to disable chat in GPL but it is still there (is there a setting in a .ini file?)

Perhaps we could try an experiment for fun (on Cookie's server since he can run both 36 and 60 fps).  We could run a couple of int damage races at Monza 10K not as a race but to see how many cars we can drive round nose-to-tail without crashing.  I'm not suggesting we encourage tailgating but it would be useful to know once and for all if the 60 fps patch does help avoid the type of incident I experienced on Sunday.

[DLogan]

Just to remind everyone why we do not use the 60fps: UKGPL Season 17 (2009) - 60fps Test Race - 65 Mod - Monza - Feb 25...

I just read that thread, and it seems to me most of the comments were quite positive?

And there are some really good tweaking hints for those whose framerates are not what they should be (at either 36 or 60). If that applies to you, please take the time to peruse and try a few things people have suggested there.

[Dean_0]

I cant perceive any difference in driving ,and really i don't even look at the track side things while driving sure the crash box is improved ,so? the trade off ,for  me, isn't worth it.

The question still remains ? why bother with 60?

Dean_0

[Hristo Itchov]

You people must be blind if you can't see the difference... 

[DLogan]

You people must be blind if you can't see the difference... 

*sigh* All systems (and monitors especially) react differently, so what may be a huge difference on yours, JA's, and brr's, may only be a negligible-to-slight improvement (as on mine).

Spending the time and effort to ensure that your system is responding optimally is an investment that many naysayers have not chosen to do ("It doesn't work perfectly out of the box, all I can do now is throw my hands up and slag it to anyone who will listen" [hi, JR]), but calling them blind may not be the inducement they need.

What I don't understand is those who admit the advantage of SAFER online racing yet still say, "There's no point", or, "Because minor errors are not punished to ridiculous extremes (this includes lag contact, over which we have no control) it'll be more dangerous".

[john roberts]

You people must be blind if you can't see the difference...  

*sigh* All systems (and monitors especially) react differently, so what may be a huge difference on yours, JA's, and brr's, may only be a negligible-to-slight improvement (as on mine).

Spending the time and effort to ensure that your system is responding optimally is an investment that many naysayers have not chosen to do ("It doesn't work perfectly out of the box, all I can do now is throw my hands up and slag it to anyone who will listen" [hi, JR]), but calling them blind may not be the inducement they need.

What I don't understand is those who admit the advantage of SAFER online racing yet still say, "There's no point", or, "Because minor errors are not punished to ridiculous extremes (this includes lag contact, over which we have no control) it'll be more dangerous".

[hi, DL]
one of the problems with the patch is the poor implementation and there being different versions and settings , some people who are not very techie (just read this forum and you will find them) . ukgpl has always gone with how gpl came out of the box (we still run using the pitwall at kya) and have been slow to change later software (when they first ran 65mod they used vroc !) .


the main problem with the patch and other sims that don’t have a steady frame rate is when they drop frames , if you have 60 and then go around a bend and it drops to 40 it really does look bad , as you say everybodys sees things differently and to my eyes the move to 60 isnt that great .

you would have thought after all this time the patch would be finished and not still beta ?

another problem with the patch is some of the people that really like it come across like religious nutters foaming at the mouth , knocking on your front door and saying "the 60fps is only true way..." .

[Hristo Itchov]

You people must be blind if you can't see the difference...  

*sigh* All systems (and monitors especially) react differently, so what may be a huge difference on yours, JA's, and brr's, may only be a negligible-to-slight improvement (as on mine).

Spending the time and effort to ensure that your system is responding optimally is an investment that many naysayers have not chosen to do ("It doesn't work perfectly out of the box, all I can do now is throw my hands up and slag it to anyone who will listen" [hi, JR]), but calling them blind may not be the inducement they need.

What I don't understand is those who admit the advantage of SAFER online racing yet still say, "There's no point", or, "Because minor errors are not punished to ridiculous extremes (this includes lag contact, over which we have no control) it'll be more dangerous".

I've played games for decades, on many different systems/monitors... A difference in fps is always obvious, regardless of the monitor. It's how smooth the animation is, simple as that. It's just a fact that when someone says they don't see a difference, it's their lack of sensitivity and nothing to do with the hardware configuration. Unless of course their PC isn't actually reaching those increased fps LOL! Maybe that's the case with some people?

[DLogan]

...nothing to do with the hardware configuration...

Not in my experience, or in others. As I mentioned, the 60fps WOULD NOT EXIST AT ALL IF BRR'S MONITOR DID NOT HAVE SERIOUS PROBLEMS WITH 36.

If yours doesn't (mine doesn't), good for you, but stop with the "they must be blind" crap, ok?

[Hristo Itchov]

...nothing to do with the hardware configuration...

Not in my experience, or in others. As I mentioned, the 60fps WOULD NOT EXIST AT ALL IF BRR'S MONITOR DID NOT HAVE SERIOUS PROBLEMS WITH 36.

If yours doesn't (mine doesn't), good for you, but stop with the "they must be blind" crap, ok?

What serious problems? Do you even know what you're talking about? You can't even explain how it is hardware related, yet you keep on repeating the same nonsense.  

Frames per second is the refresh rate of the game's 3D engine for its visual representation. The more frames you have, the smoother the animation is, REGARDLESS of your monitor.

I said it's down to how sensitive to fps people are because I have "real life" friends who are also rather insensitive to difference in fps. For example they can't recognize the difference between low fps in a modern game when they run heavy graphics, like 30-40 fps, vs. 80-100 when they reduce the game's details. They say they don't see a difference, yet it makes a huge difference in my personal experience. It's rather subjective, but in terms of how easy it is on the eyes and how much feedback you get (especially from something like a race sim), more fps is always better.