Comment on Are those of us who grew up on older games more attuned to latency?
RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 1 day agoOcarina of Time ran at 20 fps as a compromise for it having the largest draw distance of any game on the Nintendo64.
Comment on Are those of us who grew up on older games more attuned to latency?
RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 1 day agoOcarina of Time ran at 20 fps as a compromise for it having the largest draw distance of any game on the Nintendo64.
criss_cross@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Oh absolutely
I say that less as a knock on the game and more that there were technical compromises made back in the day as well. Nostalgia sometime last hits and people assume everything ran blazing fast.
RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 1 day ago
The Nintendo64 did run blazingly fast. Comparatively, even modern consoles are a step down in terms of power compared to Nintendo64 hardware for its time.
Had the draw distance been lowered in Ocarina of Time, its performance would have been at minimum a steady 30fps, as Ocarina of Time runs in a more optimized Mario 64 engine. Which, naturally, is less optimized than what Kaze has done to Mario 64’s engine, but Kaze also has like 20 years worth of more coding and computer knowledge learned, making comparison pretty unfair.
Framerate is also not the only metric in determining if a game’s performance is bad. Ocarina of Time runs at 20fps (unless you are in PAL region, then it runs at 17fps because of PAL standards, oof), but it never misses a frame. It is extremely consistent at 20fps. The frametime is perfect even on original hardware. The same cannot be said about most modern AAA games, even Nintendo games. Modern games might mostly run at 60 or 30 fps, but they very often dip below that and even more often have hitching and stuttering due to inconsistent frametime. Even though the fps may be high, the playability of the game is worse than Ocarina of Time.