[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/vr/ - Retro Games

Search:


View post   

>> No.8405823 [View]
File: 2.93 MB, 720x810, quake remaster blows - physics.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8405823

>>8405814
>>8405806
>>8405797
>>8405064
still more

>> No.8054305 [View]
File: 2.93 MB, 720x810, quake remaster blows - physics.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8054305

>>8054021
have you seriously not read about the input lag, inaccurate physics, and shitty netquake multiplayer?

>> No.8050057 [View]
File: 2.93 MB, 720x810, 1629414227403.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8050057

repostan from /v/

>They fucked up with the physics.

>I can't remember the specifics, but because of rounding errors and physics being tied to framerate, the best framerate for quake 1 was 72 FPS. In the new engine, there's 2 FPS related commands. One is cl_enginefps, which regulates the RENDERING framerate, and the other is cl_enginehz, which regulates the game logic. This implies they separated the physics and rendering framerates. However cl_enginehz caps at 60, and lower values just have a timescale effect. I recorded a short clip in vanilla and remaster client that shows how different jumping and air acceleration is. I thought I had just gotten awful at strafing, however after hopping on joequake and hitting this strafe first try I realized it was the shitty client lmfao. I should run some more tests in vanilla clients at different framerates too, I guess. cl_enginefps doesn't seem to have any effect on physics.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]