The future of graphics processing

[Druid_]

Based on this article and speech by Nvidias Tony Tamasi I hope that ED takes note and consider an engine rebuild for the DCS series.

 

i.e. offload the CPU and get the GPU doing what it was designed for. GPUs are advancing quicker than CPUs and if developers are reluctant to utilise multi core and/or multi-threaded processing then start looking ahead to the future GPUs coming our way.

 

I know that there would be a huge amount of work involved in redesigning a graphics engine, but DCS would benefit immensely if it brought its current engine up-to-date with todays and possibly tomorrows technology. Maybe ED just don't have the resources to do so, but I for one would love to see DCS running at 30 fps min with levels of realism that just 5 years ago could only have been imagined.

[xXstubbifiedXx]

30fps? I'd like 60fps at least.

 

Either way, I'd definitely love to see more graphical updates to the series. If ED is looking for a new employee *cough* I'm available *cough* ;)

 

Definitely looking forward to future products regardless.

[Druid_]

Well, you watch tv & films at 30 fps! If its a steady 30 fps then it will be fine.

 

Given the fact that it will be at least a year until the next DCS release I really hope that they will take a serious look at updating their engine, and I don't just mean porting it to DX11.

[Pyroflash]

Well, you watch tv & films at 30 fps! If its a steady 30 fps then it will be fine.

 

Given the fact that it will be at least a year until the next DCS release I really hope that they will take a serious look at updating their engine, and I don't just mean porting it to DX11.

 

Wrong, TV standard NTSC actually plays at 29.97 FPS, not 30.

 

And a complete re-write of an engine doesn't necessarily make it better. Constantly updating the engine can eventually produce the same results.

[xXstubbifiedXx]

Well, you watch tv & films at 30 fps! If its a steady 30 fps then it will be fine.

 

Not really. Film is one thing. But if you play two games side by side one at 30 and one at 60, you can easily see the difference. 30 is by no means horrible (95% of all console games run at 30fps), but 60fps gives you a fluidity and snap to the controls that really can't be beat. It's definitely the butter zone if you want the ultimate experience. Anything beyond 60 is pointless though.

[HiJack]

I would like FPS of 60+

[Frostiken]

The big stinker for me is the terrain level of detail.

 

Yeah, a flight sim doesn't need uber-detailed terrain, but at the same time, giant 100 square meter blocks angled around is a bit dated-looking.

 

That or vividly detailed cities :p

[xXstubbifiedXx]

I think the cities have adequate detail, but I agree with the terrain. It's absurdly low poly most everywhere.

[Druid_]

Wrong, TV standard NTSC actually plays at 29.97 FPS, not 30.

 

And a complete re-write of an engine doesn't necessarily make it better. Constantly updating the engine can eventually produce the same results.

Hmmn ok. Who said anything about rewriting the engine? I did say update.

 

30fps min, of course I'll take anything higher !

[flybye]

>10fps = Unplayable

10-30fps = Tolerable but barley playable

30-60fps = Certainly playable reaching fluid like as we get to 60fps

>60fps = Fluid motion. Anything more and we just can't tell the difference

 

I've played a lot of first person shooters in my life, and I can tell you, you do not want to fall anywhere under 30fps. Minimum any hardcore sim/gamer should shoot for is 60. Anything above that is the buffer zone. You want to be able to at least play the game 100+fps in most instances so that it can drop down 10-40fps during the action filled scenes to maintain that fluidity.

 

Believe me you will be very annoyed if your machine skipped a frame causing you to lose your shot.

 

I can't explain why Movies and TV look perfect with high action at 30fps and I won't pretend I do other than that I think its due to no processing being done. TV is just a slide show as opposed to the increase/decrease in polygons that have to be calculated in a game amoug other things going on like shader calculations, lighting, movement, etc.

[Druid_]

I can't explain why Movies and TV look perfect with high action at 30fps and I won't pretend I do other than that I think its due to no processing being done.

 

In a word, well two, "Motion Blur". Shake your your hand in front of your face and you get the idea. It is one of many effects that is starting to be introduced into games and the latest VGA cards and engines (e.g. Unreal, Crytek) can produce.

 

If motion blur was introduced into the DCS engine it would allow smoother visuals at much lower fps. e.g Peripheral vision of trees/buildings etc when flying at low-level could be blurred. In fact wherever there is motion above a certain speed at a certain distance there will be an amount of blurring, this helps the fluidity of 1 frame blending into the next. In fact its possible from what I have read to produce smooth motion at as little as 18fps.

 

30 fps is fine when the fps does not vary. i.e. It stays fixed at 30. If the graphics are done correctly with AA, good texturing, detail, lighting etc etc then you'll not notice the difference between 30 and 60, or if you do it will be very small. Given the choice between 60 fps and low detail or 30 fps (fixed) and high detail, I will alwys take the latter. If done correctly of course.

 

p.s. Its also a fact that many people dont think about setting their frame rate in sync with their monitor refresh rate. Having a 50hz monitor (just an example btw) with your game pushing out 60 fps is a waste of time as 50hz = 50fps. So if you have say a 60 Hz monitor you are better off setting the fps (in a config file or sometimes in a gui game menu) to a multiple e.g 30 or 60 fps. This has been hammered out in other threads so I shalln't go into any more detail other than to say that thinking High FPS is the answer to smooth viewing is incorrect.

[Boberro]

30 FPS is enough but this feeling depends of personal experience. For me 30 is OK, more important is not to let them to jump, shuttering is terrible... I hate when once I have 40, once 60 and other time just 25. I always try to set constant FPS value in games, in LO I had 30.

[flybye]

In a word, well two, "Motion Blur". Shake your your hand in front of your face and you get the idea. It is one of many effects that is starting to be introduced into games and the latest VGA cards and engines (e.g. Unreal, Crytek) can produce.

 

If motion blur was introduced into the DCS engine it would allow smoother visuals at much lower fps. e.g Peripheral vision of trees/buildings etc when flying at low-level could be blurred. In fact wherever there is motion above a certain speed at a certain distance there will be an amount of blurring, this helps the fluidity of 1 frame blending into the next. In fact its possible from what I have read to produce smooth motion at as little as 18fps.

 

30 fps is fine when the fps does not vary. i.e. It stays fixed at 30. If the graphics are done correctly with AA, good texturing, detail, lighting etc etc then you'll not notice the difference between 30 and 60, or if you do it will be very small. Given the choice between 60 fps and low detail or 30 fps (fixed) and high detail, I will alwys take the latter. If done correctly of course.

 

p.s. Its also a fact that many people dont think about setting their frame rate in sync with their monitor refresh rate. Having a 50hz monitor (just an example btw) with your game pushing out 60 fps is a waste of time as 50hz = 50fps. So if you have say a 60 Hz monitor you are better off setting the fps (in a config file or sometimes in a gui game menu) to a multiple e.g 30 or 60 fps. This has been hammered out in other threads so I shalln't go into any more detail other than to say that thinking High FPS is the answer to smooth viewing is incorrect.

 

Unfortunately, I have not had much experience with motion blur. And when I did, it just simply felt like it made things worse almost like if there was a delay between mouse movement and my cross hairs. And this did happen to me in UT3. I haven't tried Crysis as nothing has been able to excite me as much as Unreal Tournament 2004 did, but that's another story. :music_whistling:

 

I actually found motion blur pretty annoying and completely disliked it when first introduced to it. Actually, everyone I knew trying to make the transition from UT2k4 to UT3 found it annoying. Maybe it's juts an old gamer thing. I don't know. :joystick:

 

It's funny that you brought up refresh rates. As most people have LCDs now, it is a waste of time to try to reach over 60hz as that is what I think most LCDs cap at. I'm still running a Sony 24" 16:10 wide screen CRT with my refresh rate tweaked at 95hz. :D

 

But even so, I believe 100fps is a good "average" amount just to make sure you will not drop below 60 or 50 during a high motion/high action scene. Or do you think that with motion blur, a fixed scene at 30fps will stay at 30fps the moment a lot of action is put into play and not cause any frame drops?

[flybye]

30 FPS is enough but this feeling depends of personal experience. For me 30 is OK, more important is not to let them to jump, shuttering is terrible... I hate when once I have 40, once 60 and other time just 25. I always try to set constant FPS value in games, in LO I had 30.

I think it is also fair to say much of it is based on user perception.

 

Kinda like how some people can't tell the difference between regular milk and skim, some people can't tell the difference between different frame rates. :)

[swift]

http://frames-per-second.appspot.com/

[flybye]

http://frames-per-second.appspot.com/

Yeah thanks a lot. That's all I've been playing with now and god knows how long I'll still be at it. :P

 

Yep, I remembered how much I hate motion blur.

 

Neat little test, though. :)

[Druid_]

excellent link swift.

 

However, how motion blur is implemented by the graphics engine is important to the end user experience. Over doing the periphery for instance gives you the feeling of riding in a tunnel. Distant object should have less motion blurring that close objects etc. The other problem for a developer is getting the effect to work close to real life on a 2D screen.

 

Never played UT3 but I can imagine it being annoying in a first person perspective shooter, in a flight sim the effect could add to the experience. Might be better however when used in a 3 screen config as the 1 & 3rd screen are a little more in the periphery than a single screen. Oh the limitations of 2D and single screens! 10 years from now we'll all have high res pocket sized projectors with kinect ver3 and uber vga cards, only trouble is I'll be too old to appreciate it.

Edited May 12, 2011 by Druid_

[Cali]

I'm in the same boat as Bob, 30 fps is fine for me. My game runs smooth, but of course higher is better. Also First Person Shooter are a different beast from Flight sims.

[hesynergy]

While the presentation of a-10 is absolutely convincing, I gotta agree....wouldn't the inclusion of Nvidia's PHYSX be really cool to see the bad guys naughty bits fly to random kingdom come as our Mavericks and GBUs nail 'em??

 

How about the physics of a depleted uranium core traveling at 3500ft/sec hitting a turret, or concrete???

 

How about the lovely secondary explosions as the ammo locker cooks off...the visual possibilities are endless.

 

EyyyyyyyyyyyyCandy as the just rewards for training so hard!

 

After all, destruction is all about physics...yes?

 

....grinnnnn

 

Chas

Edited May 21, 2011 by hesynergy
De-dumassing

[Frostiken]

Ammo already cooks off, and looks pretty good.

 

Me, I just want the game world to look more like ArmA 2 with smooth rolling hills and cities that are more than a satellite picture of a town with some buildings plopped on it.

 

Not likely, but it'd be nice if the game world looked that convincing.

[Bushmanni]

Motion blur creates an illusion of smoothness with low frame rates but it's suitable option only for movies and such non-interactive visuals. Interactivity requires better fps to provide lag free control.