/ > /fap/ > Thread 11521 Age: 103.77d Health: 0% Posters: 18 Posts: 36 Replies: 33 Files: 2+3
>> Ctrl-z Tails Samp 50705 A new one! Those one showing off that the girls will have varying expressions. if the increased preference of these is any indication it seems work on the flash is going a head quickly and smoothly but im just guessing on that [IMG] 1498544170.ctrl-z_shadsamps2[1].swf (63.3 KiB) 1024x768, Compressed. 116 frames, 45 fps (00:03). Ver15, AS1/AS2. Network access: Text: Bitmaps: Audio: Video: <METADATA> [find in archive]
>> Anon 50709 Surprise butt sex!
>> Anon 50710 Gotta love the one with tongue sticking out <3
>> Anon 50711 This is really good. I'm assuming that facial expressions won't change as often in the finished version, if not, that's the only gripe here. Kudos to you. ...we're still going to fix all the discolored penises though <3
>> Anon 50714 Why cap it at 48fps? Why not make it glorious 60fps?
>> Anon 50721 she has the same position as one of rouge's will this game have other duplicate scene? that would be a shame.
>> Anon 50726 jesus christ how do i zoom out
>> Anon 50727 >># change the size of your window
>> Anon 50728 Why does it jump between her ass and her pussy? Did you think we couldn't see?
>> Anon 50733 >># it's actually capped at 45 but why settle with 60? >mfw flash has been supporting 120 FPS for several years before youtube was even envisioned
>> Anon 50736 Is all this prepping for the 3rd game in his series or something?
>> Anon 50745 >># Refresh rate of most monitors is 60Hz.
>> Anon 50760 >># >># Stretch it vertically, not horizontally. I got this image by telling my computer that my 3 monitors where verticall stacked on top of each other. The top monitor was a white screen at this point so I just cropped it out. [IMG]2814.png
>> Ctrl-Z 50772 I was checking out different frame rates which can change the speed of the animations, not just simply make them look smoother. Had to redo some early stuff when I changed it from 30 to 60. People are going to love what this sample is from. Might release it on it's own entirely.
>> Anon 50774 >># A game running at 120 fps is smoother than a game running at 60 fps in a 60 hz monitor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjWSRTYV 8e0
>> Anon 50779 >># Can I find you on e621 or something? You go by enormous or ctrl-z?
>> Anon 50780 Dude just set up a strawpoll for how the game should play on his FA. http://www.strawpoll.me/13312653
>> Anon 50790 >># Nope, a game running at 60fps constant in a 60hz monitor (no fps drop) run same as a game running at 120fps in a 60hz monitor. The "smoother sensation of 120fps" it's because fps drops are more noticeable under 60fps-60hz than 120fps-60hz because you only view 60fps in that monitor.
>> Anon 50795 >># No, its runs better at higer fps. Even if the monitor can display only 60 frames, the image will be more fluid and accurate if it has 120 frames to choose from. You didnt watch the video I linked, here its with the timestamp if you are too lazy to watch the whole thing: https://youtu.be/hjWSRTYV8e0?t=118 Im not saying this just because I saw this video, I tested it with different monitors by playing video games and watching videos. I have a normal 60hz monitor/tv. A 140hz XL2411z. And a 240hz XL2540.
>> Anon 50798 >># I run this game at 30,60,120 and 60-120fps looks same under a common 60hz monitor (without any aditional technology). If you use a monitor/tv with "virtual 120hz technology" as trumotion, clear motion or similar postprocessing you can see a smoother image. But in the reallity, 60/120fps has the same perfomance under 60hz monitor. Basically the refresh rate in the monitor is limiting the viewable fps. Hz (Viewable) in monitor/tv is the refresh rate measurement on how an static image can change in one second . FPS (Virtually) is the measurement on how an static image can change in one second depending of the system perfomance. You can run a game as much fps as you pc can, but you only view a certain amount of fps depending of the monitor refresh rate. Furthermore, you can perceive as smoother and fluid image if you pc run a game at 120fps and drops to 110-100fps in a 60hz monitor. all the time you see at constant 60fps. but if you run a game at 60fps an drops to 53fps in a 60hz monitor, you can perceive as minus smoother.
>> Anon 50800 >># How many times do I need to post the video? Are you gonna ingnore it again if I post it a third time? Refute this part: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjWSRTYV 8e0&feature=youtu.be&t=118
>> Anon 50801 >># Like i said, i run this teaser game running at 60-120fps and looks the same way, no variations. 120fps is no more smoother than 60fps under a 60hz standard monitor, not only a variation. Another concept is force hw or low the graphics quality to run at high fps constantly in a 60hz monitor, to obtain stable 60fps an no drop of fps (like the video said). Or even input lag.
>> Anon 50802 >># And if you ask how i run this game in 30/60/120fps when crtl-z released on 45fps. I used the sw adobe flash cs6 to change refresh rate. Do the same as me; , edit the swf file. then. use a standard common monitor running at 60hz without aditional postprocessing tech. And run this teaser. you can see the same "smooth" in 60 or 120fps.
>> Anon 50803 Im giving you a technical explanation of why it is not the same and you answer with a "it looks the same to me". How do you feel it or how it looks the same for you is not relevant, some people cant even notice the difference between a 60 and a 140 monitor but thats no reason to not buy a monitor with a higher refrest rate and in no way it means there is no difference. What you perceive is irrelevant against technical facts.
>> Anon 50812 >># Ignorance is bliss, Anon.
>> Anon 50813 >># Running a game under a 60hz monitor or a 144hz monitor is not the same. Obviously 144hz is more smoother, but if the game run at 120fps or 60fps in a 60hz monitor make no difference because the monitor limit the refresh rate.
>> Anon 50815 >># >people cant even notice the difference between a 60 and a 140 monitor but thats no reason to not buy a monitor Yes, that is. You sound like a audiophile retard, if you can't notice the difference, there is no point in the difference. And yes, I bet my ass you can't see that autismal difference between 120fps and 70 fps(to avoid fps drop) on a 60Hz monitor in a blind-test(a.k.a. not knowing which one is which when playing it).
>> Anon 50820 >># No, you are wrong. Go read previous posts. >># I was referring that is not a reason for the ppl that do notice a difference. You can bet whatever you want in your imaginary test, but you still didnt answer to the techincal fact. And I do notice the difference between 70 and 120, go to sleep with that in mind. Also my dick is bigger than yours.
>> Anon 50821 >># What monitor running at 60hz are you using to test? If has a postprocessing tech (i.e, interpolation), has a trick. 60hz monitor can only display a certain amount of images in one second. Fps is the perfomance of the system. aren't the same thing In a standard led monitor at 60hz without postprocessing tech or any sw/hw aditional configuration, there no difference between 60/120fps. Also. a monitor with +60hz (i.e 75,120,144hz) Is more smoother and fluid than only 60hz or even 30hz. But even so, if you had a 60hz monitor running a 500fps game, you don't notice the extra 440fps, because your monitor can't process all of the pc rendered image. If you are too sure about you say. do the test using a standard cheap notebook using it's display (standard notebook display only run at 60hz) and see what happens.
>> Anon 50823 https://youtu.be/hjWSRTYV8e0?t=116
>> Anon 50824 It's input lag not refresh rate what he explains. Test this swf file running at 60/120fps in a notebook, you can't view the difference, because hasn't one.
>> Anon 50825 >># The Hz in a monitor is the scanning time between an static image change to other in one second. The fps is the change of an static image in one second depends of the system configuration (i.e pc parts, sw/hw configuration, driver, etc) No depends of hz in monitor. A pc can run a game as many fps can handle. but if the monitor run at low refresh rate as 60hz. only shows 60fps. Independent of ms or input lag.
>> Anon 50827 >># >># >># I don't know if YOU watched the video, but he says it's a millisecond difference that would affect input. You wouldn't visually notice the difference; the display would simply show a more "live" frame. His whole thing at the end is basically telling you to test it yourself to FEEL THE DIFFERENCE. You wouldn't be able to see a difference. Besides, FPS does affect flashes in that the animation runs way faster - it only gets smoother if more frames are actually physically animated inbetween. It doesn't change how many frames there are, but how quickly it displays them for flash. You are all comparing high-end video games to Flash...they render frames completely differently.
>> Anon 50828 >># >Why not make it glorious 60fps? >it's actually capped at 45 but why settle with 60? >Refresh rate of most monitors is 60Hz. >A game running at 120 fps is smoother than a game running at 60 fps in a 60 hz monitor. A game is a game and in this case. I test the swf file under three different framerates in a standard monitor, 30fps looks slow, 60 and 120 are more fluid, but both of them looks same. even one has a twice framerate. Independent of the renders process. You can view the animation, as a high end game or a swf tiny teaser game. The video says about input lag in ms, no about refresh rate. Aren't the same thing You can always watch at 60fps but if you had a input lag, you can "perceive" as minus smoother because the monitor has a slow time to react to changes (5ms or more), than using run at 120fps in a 60hz with less input lag (3ms or less), but in all time the game was running at 60fps. In other words, depends of the monitor inner tech and input lag what "smoother sensation gave to you", not of the hz or fps. because 60Hz=60fps. And if you had a fps drop or input lag. you can really perceive under 60fps than 120fps in a standard monitor. Do you test this swf teaser as i say? In a notebook?.
>> Anon 50838 >># I think he wasn't only technically discussing the amount of fps, but also input lag and all other effects that would affect the visual end result. So yes, 60 fps is 60 fps and never more, but a standard monitor just can handle 120 fps better, because there won't be as much (barely but still) visible input lag. Then again, I personally would never be able to tell the difference of anything more than 55 fps. So it really is a moot point.
>> Anon 50840 Neeeeeerds.