It’s in Unity, isn’t it? So rather than multiplying the speeds by Time.deltaTime when you’re doing frame updates, you just don’t do that. Easy peasy. They’ve got that real “Japanese game devs from twenty years ago” vibe going.
Or even a decade ago. Dark Souls 2 had some enemies’ attack animations tied to frame rate, like the Alonne Knights. So they attacked incredibly fast on PC compared to console.
Minecraft has this wonderful mechanism where everything is dependent on game-tick/server-tick, which is independent of player FPS. Why do modern developers keep using FPS for game physics?
Thats great to hear. Not surprised about Starfield tbh, but I am surprised they fixed it for F76, considering it relies largely on the same tech as F4, which does have that limitation.
It’s in Unity, isn’t it? So rather than multiplying the speeds by
Time.deltaTimewhen you’re doing frame updates, you just don’t do that. Easy peasy. They’ve got that real “Japanese game devs from twenty years ago” vibe going.Or even a decade ago. Dark Souls 2 had some enemies’ attack animations tied to frame rate, like the Alonne Knights. So they attacked incredibly fast on PC compared to console.
Weapon degradation was also tied to framerate :(
Minecraft has this wonderful mechanism where everything is dependent on game-tick/server-tick, which is independent of player FPS. Why do modern developers keep using FPS for game physics?
Minecraft is different because it uses a client and server pattern, separating the physics and display loops completely
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
At least Gearbox isn’t spending a year+ denying that the problem exists.
Huh, now i know why that particular enemy are janky as heck in every aspect.
You mean “Bethesda to this day?”
They fixed that with 76, Both 76 and Starfield have physics untied from framerate.
Thats great to hear. Not surprised about Starfield tbh, but I am surprised they fixed it for F76, considering it relies largely on the same tech as F4, which does have that limitation.