I realize double posting is considered bad etiquette, but since it's been over a month and nobody else has posted...

I've uploaded 2 videos to YouTube to demonstrate my point. When viewing them, please click 'more' and read the video info.

Video transitions on my Pentium III at correct speed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OhZPrv5CSA

Video transitions on my Pentium 4 in DOSBox:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sj6rsQkVuAw

-----
You can see examples of too-fast scrolling transitions in the following:

Someone else's video of SQ1 VGA Intro:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ex2a_xuU8LM

Someone else's video of QG2 Intro:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3paeeD_dqgY

Lazerith_444 wrote:

I am trying to get smoother and slower screen scrolling transitions in Sierra games. I just compared QG1VGA and QG2 in DOSBox on my P4 machine to my 500MHz P3 Win98 machine (without turbo adjustment or patches) and had to set the DOSBox CPU cycles at 2800 to get the same speed/smoothness as the P3. Is there someway to thottle down the video processor speed inside DOSBox?

you answered your own question 🤣, to throttle down speed you lower the cpu cycles.

In addition, you have a wide range of speed settings within most of the Sierra games, too.

you answered your own question Laughing Out Loud, to throttle down speed you lower the cpu cycles.

Hah! Hah! Hah! Real funny! Did you even watch the videos? 😒 The screen transitions ARE NOT supposed to move that fast!!! If I put the CPU cycles at 2500, the GAME RUNS AT SNAIL PACE!!! The games ARE NOT supposed to move that slow! Watch the videos!!! - Again I repeat: Screen transitions ARE NOT supposed to move that fast!!!

In addition, you have a wide range of speed settings within most of the Sierra games, too.

There ARE NOT ANY speed settings in Sierra games that affect screen transitions!!! The speed settings affect animation speed ONLY. (Okay, sometimes text speed, sometimes arcade speed, sometimes day/night cycle speed, but NEVER transition speeds!!!)

Then raise a little higher than 2500 until it IS at a comfortable pace for your own pickiness. 🙄

Then raise a little higher than 2500 until it IS at a comfortable pace for your own pickiness.

I realize that I'm being very nick picky, yes I realize this. I'm not expecting any magic cures or anything. I'm simply trying to point out that it doesn't emulate VGA 100%. I know this, you know this. But this 'collector' guy keeps acting like I'm just some loony troll making crap up! I am pointing out that this is a REAL discrepancy between DOSBox and a DOS machine. And it would be nice if someday, when someone with the know-how fixes the problem. I say again: it's a minor quibble, I know this. But since an emulator is SUPPOSED to emulate the original as closely as possible, I thought I'd point it out and add it to the "DOSBox Wishlist Forum". But then this dick comes a long acting all like "Oh, you're just some stupid nube that doesn't know what he's talking about." THIS IS A REAL PROBLEM!!! God FORBID I point this out so that somebody can fix this a year, two or ten down the road!!! I'm sorry if I have offended you, but I thought my request was legit. It is after all a WISH LIST.

For space quest 1 vga i would use 3000 cycles and push ctrl f8 10 times.
3000 cycles and 10 frameskip.

Using frameskip is a horrible idea, especially with such a large number.

Why is frameskip 10 a bad idea. It's my favorite feature in dosbox.

I appreciate your help, but I guess I'm trying to hint at a long term, permanent solution, not just a quick-fix. The transitions by themselves aren't what's important. (Although, I really would like to see them!) It's the potential underlying problem that DOSBox emulates VGA way to fast that scares me! I don't think I can stress this enough: These transitions are not fast because of too fast CPU cycles, but because the video part (I believe) has been programed to process video way too fast.

When setting the CPU to say, 2000 cycles, the only reason it moves so "smoothly" is because the CPU is sending the info to the video part slower than the video engine can process it. If you go to my P3, for example, you realize that the P3 has no problem sending info to my video card super fast. BUT, my video card is designed to only process X amount of info per cycle, and no more. Despite this (intentional) limitation, it can handle high demand games like Quake and Doom in VGA mode like a piece of cake. So why then does DOSBox not have this speed cap? You see, it's not the pretty transitions I'm so much after, but the stability of the established VGA standard. I want to be able to harness and control the video speed just like the CPU speed.

Everyone knows what happens to games when the CPU is too fast. Well, these transitions are ONE of the many potential side effects of the video being too fast. I just don't think the video should be given a carte blanche like that. AND.... The fact that these transitions cause the audio (mostly the FM Synth for me) to skip, indicates that they have been given just that: unrestrained power.

I don't think it's wise to plow on, full steam ahead into the DOSBox project, without considering putting some kind of an optional cap on the video. So, to go back to my original question: Is there a video speed cap on DOSBox, and if so, how do I activate/lower it?

Sierra's transitions depend on video memory transfer speed. I assume DosBox only adjusts the CPU speed, but neither the ISA bottleneck, nor the single-ported nature of video memory.

Thank you, I knew it, I knew it, I knew it!

Sorry everyone, I don't mean to gloat, but:

I knew it, I knew it, I knew it! I am smart after all! 😁

yea sorry, i misunderstood what you had meant by "slower screen scrolling transitions".

Sierra transitions look normal in DOSBox and in the real world they ran at different speeds on different machines. Sierra was a very smart company when they started out in AGI and SCI and they knew that the target range of machines would vary so even their earliest games had speed control - leaving it up to the user to find a speed setting that felt the most comfortable to them.

I've played a whole bunch of Sierra games recently in DOSBox (both the Space and Hero Quest collections) and haven't noticed any skips whatsoever using using the FM synth or MT-32 drivers.

It would be helpful would be if the specs of the skipping machine could be posted.

Oh, Jesus... Dude, you just don't get my point...

Okay, I'll humor you:
1. I have a Dell, if you want to my processor speed watch my videos like I told you to.
2. Video card is a GeForce FX 5900 AGP
3. Sound card is a Sound Blaster Live! value Dell OEM
4. Network Card is a 3Com 10/100 Ethernet
5. 768 MB RAM
6. 250 GB HD
7. Windows XP Pro
8. NAV 2005, only because I paid $40-50 for it before I knew any better, so by God, I'm going to use it for as long as possible, even if it does suck!
9. Office XP Pro
10. Mozilla Firefox
11. Roland Virtual Sound Canvas

I don't see how you can disagree with me now that NewRisingSun has commented. NewRisingSun is only like THE supreme deity when it comes to the SCI engine. Okay, I gave you my specs, what's your diagnosis?

NewRisingSun is only like THE supreme deity when it comes to the SCI engine.

Oh, shut up. 😜

Please.

Lazerith : Your specs weren't very useful. Humouring me without telling me the speed of your CPU or the driver version of your FX5900 is more like going NYAH NYAH I'M SMARTER SO I'M NOT TELLING, rather than trying to get something fixed. NewRisingSun was making a point, I'm not sure that he agrees with you. I have a Dell too and it's P3 CPU wouldn't be able to run DOSBox driven SCI games without skipping so yeah, your specs are as clear as mud...

My Dell Dimension 4500 is clocked at 2 GHz. Sorry.

Oh yeah, driver version: The newest I believe. Ah, Fx 5900, 6.14.10.9371, the newest as of March, 'cause that's when my last hard drive crashed.

NewRisingSun was making a point, I'm not sure that he agrees with you.

Okay, I have to ask it now: NewRisingSun do you agree with me?

I can't tell how other games run on that system but your CPU seems a little slow as it's only marginally faster than an Athlon 1.4 ghz which makes is very slow by today's standards. This makes sense as your machine was released in late 2002, early 2003. I have a Pentium Core2Duo running @ 2.66ghz CPU which is easily twice as fast as your CPU and as I said I've noticed no extra speedy transitions, nor have had any skips in sound in any game, Sierra or otherwise. I've been really pushing DOSBox too in running MT32, GUS and SB16 emulation all at the same time whilst utilisng utilities like the GUS's playmidi (an horrendously coded app which just EATS cpu cycles like no tomorrow or did when I used to use it on a real GUS back in 93/94) and games like Wing Commander III. I seriously haven't seen DOSBox skip a beat, not even once.

I played my way through most of Space Quest IV and some of Space Quest III recently and found them both to run really well with Space Quest III running even better then it had on my real 486 DX4 100/DX2 66 (I upgraded the CPU from 66 to 100) back in the day and even smoother than FreeSCI could manage.

I'm guessing that DOSBox is having some issues keeping a consistant framerate on your machine which in turn is causing SCI's timing to go all out of whack. Just a guess.