« it begins | Main | the solid-state era can not come soon enough »
September 29, 2005
framerate
cpu constraints force me to most of the time only release full framerate (usually 59.94 fps in ntsc and 50 fps in pal) video in the hq. and for 2d games that likely employ 60 hz blinking effects (basically every 2d game ever made up until a few years ago) i have to cut the framerate down even further to 19.98 fps (ntsc) or ~16.67 (pal) in the mq/lq to avoid invisible sprites/no blinking. that means that even though the mario 2 run has issues, the hq still looks way better. imo, once you get hooked on full framerate, you can't go back.
when it's possible (i.e. i have enough cpu time), i try to release a fourth quality retaining the full framerate, but usually having half the bitrate of hq. this won't help more people play it, as it's the framerate that is usually the problem, but it will cut the download time in half. this is never done with d1 runs as i feel they need all 4 megabaud to look decent. in situations where i release all four qualities, the new quality steals the name 'high quality' (so ~2 megabaud), while what used to be high quality becomes 'insane quality' (~4 megabaud). can't remember if such a run has actually been released on the site as yet. it should become more common, as submissions have starkly dropped in the past few weeks.
also, if you've had trouble playing hq in the past, you might try downloading hq of a d4 run (320x240 in ntsc; usually anything done on a system released before 1999 except saturn) to see if that plays, as even my ancient power mac g4 dual 1 ghz (using only one of the cpus) can play that fine, while it chokes on d1.
Posted by njahnke at September 29, 2005 6:19 PM
Comments
What the heck is "d4" and "d1", or are those terms really really complicated?
Posted by: Yoshi348 at September 29, 2005 9:46 PM
pretty much what i say in the entry ... d4 is small resolution (usually 320x240 ntsc/352x288 pal) and d1 is full resolution (usually 640x480 ntsc and 704x576 pal). use those terms to avoid having to write 20x more stuff every time i talk about them. they're useful because the difference in how the two are encoded is quite extreme. d4 is just field split and encoded, while d1 has to be corrected with smart bob after it's field split, because it bobs (because every line has unique information).
Posted by: nate at September 30, 2005 6:34 AM
Okay. I assume you've always used d4 when you can, so there's no older run booby-traps?
And heh, I didn't even know I had upgraded to a 1ghz+ processor. How bad is that?
Posted by: Yoshi348 at September 30, 2005 12:55 PM
only thing i can think of is that some of the older stuff from gbp might be d1 due to a misunderstanding on my part about the nature of gbp video. (newer stuff is d4.) actually, the cropping may even enable more people to play old gbp d1 stuff. not sure.
as for 1 ghz, i think that should be fine for d4 hq. don't quote me on that, though.
Posted by: nate at September 30, 2005 1:05 PM
Heh, I just realized that I was a little ambigous on that... I meant "how bad is that" reffering to me not knowing what my computer's speed is, not the 1ghz itself.
Posted by: Yoshi348 at October 1, 2005 3:55 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)