Higher fps SuperFX emulation?

Delere · Post by **Delere** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 12:27 am

Hey there. I realize work on Super FX emulation isn't even done yet, and emu performance varies from game to game, but I was wondering if there were plans to run make it possible to run Super FX games at higher framerates. Star Fox, for example, runs at about 10 fps (right?). Since it uses polygons, it should theoretically be possible to pack more renderings of those polygons into each second, shouldn't it? I'm not talking about making the game run faster. Everything in the game should move as fast as it did in the original, and events should last just as long, etc. I'm not talking about speed--I'm talking about improving smoothness. Maybe 30 fps? Dare I say ... 60 fps? Would this be a ridiculous amount of work? Or does something inherent in the Super FX technology prohibit this? Do you guys see what I'm saying? Has this been considered before?

Cheers.

Magus` · Post by **Magus`** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 12:38 am

Uh... ? You get 10/60 FPS in SF?

Delere · Post by **Delere** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 12:52 am

No, I only get about 10 fps. I'm ASKING if it would be possible to program smoother emulation. I was asking FOR 60 fps. Or 30. Or something around there. Something better than 10.

(Yes, I can get 30 fps or so by fast-forwarding, but I'm not asking for that. I'm asking for regular play speed at a higher fps. Get it?)

HalfShadow · Post by **HalfShadow** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 1:00 am

I think the point Magus is making is if you're going that slow, it's probably not the emulator, it's probably you.

Delere · Post by **Delere** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 1:07 am

OK, maybe it goes up to 15 fps during normal gameplay. That's the way the original cart plays on the SNES, too. There's also the occasional slowdown.

Are you guys saying SF emulated should run from 30-60 fps at normal speed? Is this a feature that's already implemented into ZSNES? Kinda doubting that, here. And my comp can definitely handle it. (As I said before, fast-forwarding the game has the side-effect of raising the fps dramatically--in addition to making the game unplayable.)

Delere · Post by **Delere** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 1:18 am

Hrm, all right, I unwittingly exaggerated. I just played a little bit of it, and the fps might be closer to 20 or 25. Sorry about that.

But even that seems choppy, and my question is still valid, I think. Can the Super FX framerate be increased while keeping the gameplay speed constant?

Noxious Ninja · Post by **Noxious Ninja** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 1:24 am

Delere wrote:No, I only get about 10 fps. I'm ASKING if it would be possible to program smoother emulation. I was asking FOR 60 fps. Or 30. Or something around there. Something better than 10.

(Yes, I can get 30 fps or so by fast-forwarding, but I'm not asking for that. I'm asking for regular play speed at a higher fps. Get it?)

You're talking about in-game FPS, right? SuperFX rendering speed? Everybody seems to think you're talking about emulator speed, which should be 60 FPS.

If you hit F1 in-game and choose show FPS, does it always stay at 60/60?

ShadowFX · Post by **ShadowFX** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 1:25 am

As good as any SuperFX game you'll get 60/60 fps with a decent PC.

Delere · Post by **Delere** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 1:49 am

Noxious: yeah, the fps counter is usually always around 60/60. So SuperFX rendering speed and emu speed are two different things? (Star Fox THE GAME sure as heck doesn't look like it's running at 60 fps :/ )

Post by **Agozer** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 1:52 am

Are you using 1.40? Are you using image filters? What about Auto Frameskip?

Noxious Ninja · Post by **Noxious Ninja** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 1:55 am

Delere wrote:Noxious: yeah, the fps counter is usually always around 60/60. So SuperFX rendering speed and emu speed are two different things? (Star Fox THE GAME sure as heck doesn't look like it's running at 60 fps :/ )

Correct. The game only updates at 10 FPS or whatever it is, but it still sends 60 frames per second to the TV.

Delere · Post by **Delere** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 3:06 am

OK, thanks for clearing that up, Noxious.

To everyone else: I'm NOT having trouble with emulator speed. I'm getting 60/60. I'm asking whether the ZSNES coders could get SuperFX games THEMSELVES to run at higher fps.

(Sorry for the confusion ... but this can't be that hard to understand :p )

Joe Camacho · Post by **Joe Camacho** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 5:20 am

Delere wrote:OK, thanks for clearing that up, Noxious.

To everyone else: I'm NOT having trouble with emulator speed. I'm getting 60/60. I'm asking whether the ZSNES coders could get SuperFX games THEMSELVES to run at higher fps.

(Sorry for the confusion ... but this can't be that hard to understand :p )

There is a WIP build, I can't recall which one, that speeds up Star Fox, but the hack was removed in favor of the "More accurate emulation" argument, although feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Delere · Post by **Delere** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 5:57 am

Does it speed it up, or keep it the same speed but make it smoother? There's an important difference.

I guess this does kind of fall outside "accurate emulation." It's more of an enhancement. Then again, there's all sorts of little things implemented into ZSNES that enhance rather than faithfully reproduce the SNES experience. Ex: Super Eagle (or whatever it's called, I don't have the emu on hand), Hi-Res Mode 7. Why not hi-fps SuperFX?

Noxious Ninja · Post by **Noxious Ninja** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 6:07 am

IIRC, it sped up the gameplay as well. :/

As for accurate emulation, we had a big debate on that.

Dmog · Post by **Dmog** » Fri Jan 07, 2005 8:48 pm

Magus` wrote:Uh... ? You get 10/60 FPS in SF?

He means that Star Fox runs at (approximately) 10fps. Not the internal emulator fps but the fps in the game itself. The visual FPS in other words.

Basically he's asking if the Devs could (do not ask how) find a way to artificially boost the in-game fps by hacking the emulation...-without- speeding up the emulation...Basically he's asking to Zsnes++ it up. Bastardization to the Max.

To answer the OP, I think that would prove too difficult to accomplish.

"D00m on zsnes (btw i'm too stupid to learn the name of the emulator) playz slOwly!! I prefer the PC verzion!!! M8ke the Z.Nes (btw i am very dumb) play like the PC verzion!!!"

Well, just play the PC version, you idiot freak. Sorry about that..but what is wrong with these people? How about, "Make the announcer in 'Blade of Steel' (nes) sounds as clear as CD audio" while we're at it?

As I've said before, I'm personally against attempts to "ameliorate" the original systems/games...But my opinion is in the minority here, so who knows,maybe your sugestion will be considerate

Delere · Post by **Delere** » Sat Jan 08, 2005 12:23 am

Again, all this clearing up is great.

I wouldn't consider it "bastardization." What's wrong with overcoming technical limitations of the past? Sure, the developers of many SNES games worked within the limitations of hardware/software and made some really charming and surprising stuff, and lots of these games would lose their defining personalities if they were enhanced or ported to newer technologies or what have you. But there are some games for which little tweaks wouldn't be so bad. The low fps in Star Fox (and the other Super FX games) might be considered cute or whatever, but I'll bet the original developers of the game/the chip would have loved an fps boost. They might have -settled- on a paltry 10-15 fps, but they sure as heck knew the game could be a lot better, at least in this respect.

Don't get me wrong, now: I friggin' love Star Fox. It was one of my favorite games on the SNES, and one of my favorites to play emulated now. And I really don't -mind- the sluggish framerate. I'm just saying it would be nice to see how it would play at 30-60.

Higher-fps Super FX emulation wouldn't have to be on by default. It would be able to be toggled on/off, just like hi-res mode 7 and etc.

(By the way, I still haven't read the convo in that link posted above, so this might be a lot of rehashing.)

Joe Camacho · Post by **Joe Camacho** » Sat Jan 08, 2005 12:28 am

Delere wrote:(By the way, I still haven't read the convo in that link posted above, so this might be a lot of rehashing.)

In that link, you can find which build runs Star Fox faster.

Post by **grinvader** » Sat Jan 08, 2005 12:35 am

Delere wrote:I wouldn't consider it "bastardization." What's wrong with overcoming technical limitations of the past?

This doesn't fit the definition of accurate emulation.

If you want to play a 60 FPS starfox game, ask the current developper teams to make one for GC or something...

Neo Kaiser · Post by **Neo Kaiser** » Sat Jan 08, 2005 12:43 am

Well maybe a new custom version of the FX chip but ofcourse the purists will be against it because everything must be 100% accurate. But I think Star Fox
still runs faster than the 64 version anyway.

Delere · Post by **Delere** » Sat Jan 08, 2005 12:48 am

Joe: no, not faster, but smoother. I don't mind the speed at which things progress. If it were faster, the game would be harder. I don't want that. I want it to be less choppy.

grinvader: I went ahead and read that earlier debate. I'll repeat the very good points others made: if you really, truly want accurate emulation, you'll have to take out savestates, graphic and sound enhancements, speed changes, etc. You'll also have to add graphic noise, the need to take out your cart and blow the dust out, and random system shutdowns.

I'm not saying enhancements should be shoved down people's throats. They should be optional. If you want to play games exactly as you played them on the SNES, ZSNES can certainly let you do that. If others want to toggle on certain enhancements, they should be able to do that. What bothers you about the fact that an option exists? You don't have to use it. What do you care if others do? How does it affect you in any way?

Post by **grinvader** » Sat Jan 08, 2005 1:28 am

Delere wrote:grinvader: I went ahead and read that earlier debate. I'll repeat the very good points others made: if you really, truly want accurate emulation, you'll have to take out savestates, graphic and sound enhancements, speed changes, etc. You'll also have to add graphic noise, the need to take out your cart and blow the dust out, and random system shutdowns.

No. Let me explain why.
Savestates, graphic and sound filters, slow mode, fast forward, zmv acquisition, and all these features are extra and don't meddle with the emu core itself. The sound is reproduced faithfully (well, as much as we can), then filtered. Same with video. Save states are a way to cheat by changing all the SNES registers and ram to restore specific states - it doesn't require an emu core modification. Actually, the fact that restoring a state works proves that the core is untouched by this process.
Graphic noise, dust and random shutdowns are due to hardware issues - a perfectly working snes with proper cables in a proper place under normal conditions doesn't have these (I would know, since my snes is like that) and have nothing to do with the console itself - not emulated either.

Asking for extra frames to display when the game code itself can't produce it is asking for a core modification or a rom hack. Either aren't good. Because instead of waiting when the game says 'wait', zsnes would have to disobey the rom code and draw extra frames from out of thin air. And if the game never says 'wait', then zsnes would have to desync on purpose to find the extra time to draw the extra frames. Hmm, smells awful just writing about it.
Options are good, sure, but it's not the point here. Nothing prevents you from rewriting the core to make zsnes do what you want, but such a modified core doesn't exist right now. The extra work required for this would prevent other, more important stuff from being worked on and fixed.

Delere · Post by **Delere** » Sat Jan 08, 2005 1:40 am

All right, I see. Thanks for the explanation.

This does seem like a feature that will eventually be implemented, though. In the emulators themselves or the handful of Super FX roms out there, or both. If not by the main coders, then by others. I only know rudimentary Java and C++, so, er, it's not going to be me.

Anyway, buh, I guess I'm done here.

Dmog · Post by **Dmog** » Sat Jan 08, 2005 5:54 pm

grinvader wrote:
Delere wrote:I wouldn't consider it "bastardization." What's wrong with overcoming technical limitations of the past?
This doesn't fit the definition of accurate emulation.

If you want to play a 60 FPS starfox game, ask the current developper teams to make one for GC or something...

-Exactly-.

Alternatively, he could also the try the N64 version..I didn't play Star Fox adventure on GC, but from what I read, it's not a shooting game like the first one. (Anyone played SFAdventure? I might pick it up if it's a good game)

Graphic noise, dust and random shutdowns are due to hardware issues - a perfectly working snes with proper cables in a proper place under normal conditions doesn't have these (I would know, since my snes is like that) and have nothing to do with the console itself - not emulated either.

Good point again.

Dmog · Post by **Dmog** » Sat Jan 08, 2005 6:40 pm

Neo Kaiser wrote:Well maybe a new custom version of the FX chip

Didn't quite get what you meant.

If you mean that someone would go as far as to:
1) Actually develop a new chip (he could call it SuperFX Ultra or something)
2) Develop a Snes game that would take advantage of this new chip
3) He would then run the game/chip on a Snes with a copier or something
4) Then we would emulate this newly-created retro chip...
*edit

Then sure,I have nothing against that. No bastardization would take place. You emulate something that actually exist(even if it's not a liscensed product)..instead of just raping the emulation core.

The old, original SuperFX games would be left intact. They would still run like they originally did. Iow, you just emulate an additional piece of hardware. That does not impact whatever did not run on this hardware.

Now of course, I doubt anyone is going to develop a new chip for a dead system.

but ofcourse the purists will be against it because everything must be 100% accurate. .

I'm not against homebrew games. I'm not against developing new hardware (good luck) I'm just against -blatant- disregard for emulation accuracy and faithfulness.

*BTW Just saying: "No need to physically create the new chip. Just create it in software and that'll be allright" is too easy..Not to mention that 's not 'emulation' anymore...
You could also create an Ultra basterdized emulator (let's say 'Snes++Hyper') and just says it's a "custom" made Snes...but that would be a load of shit. It wouldn't be emulation anymore.)

'E-mu-la-ting' something that 'exist' (or existed) is sorta important..