feipoa wrote on Today, 17:16:
Are you guys aiming for 60 fps on vintage DOS games? On my hyper 486's, I get average 17 fps in Duke Nukem 3D with sound enabled (640x480). It feels good enough for me. My kids can't stop playing it and never said anything about it feeling slow. Neither myself, nor my children, have any experience with modern day action games, so we aren't expecting life-like movement.
My software mode Duke Nukem 3D benchmark results are here, Re: The Ultimate 486 Benchmark Comparison
Anyone know if this Duke3D benchmark will work with the Voodoo3 patch?
As someone who played Duke3d quite a lot on a 486 when it came out, 17 fps is rather unbearable. Did you have your kids compare with 320x200?
Of course people tolerated low fps back in the day. Go back to 1989 and play Mechwarrior and you'll be satisfied with 5 fps.
Once games like Quake and Descent came out, and with online play, there was certainly more discussion about sufficient frame rate. You can read all of this discussion from 1996 still on Usenet. For Duke3d, I see a lot of Usenet comments suggesting 25-3o fps minimum is ideal.
Once 3D hardware started taking off in 1997 and gaming benchmarks started becoming more common alongside sites like Anandtech, then the push for 60 fps really entered the industry consciousness.
But I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a serious Duke3d player from 1996 who preferred 17 fps 640x480 vs. 60 fps 320x200. The game is simply much harder to play at low fps.