FPS in Warcraft.

[anetherond]

In how many frames per second works Warcraft 3?

 

[Eleandor]

I think you can see it by typing
/fps
in-game. Haven't tried though. I think I saw this in one of the latest patches.

 

[Nudl9]

I usually have from 60 - 30 when playing atleast and if really laggy spells or maps 25 fps...

 

[anetherond]

So, when animating to set the time to 60 fps?

 

[TheSecretArts]

no, 9024... or something like that. Its high up there.

 

[Nudl9]

Err... u cant change the FPS value, its auto all the time depending on lagg...

 

[Eleandor]

FPS means the amount of frames that are being rendered per second. If you have many complex models and effects on 1 screen, You'll have a low FPS as it's more complex to render 1 frame. Less complexity on 1 frame means higher framerate, also depending on what complexity your graphics card can handle. That's also why my average FPS is probably different than yours

 

[Jacek]

:/ guys, there is a difference between SCREEN FRAMES PER SECOND and MODEL FRAMES PER SECOND. FPS in models sets how fast they interpolate between one keyframe and another... and well, the value doesn't matter as long as it works properly check existing models what fps do they use

 

[anetherond]

:/ guys, there is a difference between SCREEN FRAMES PER SECOND and MODEL FRAMES PER SECOND. FPS in models sets how fast they interpolate between one keyframe and another... and well, the value doesn't matter as long as it works properly check existing models what fps do they use

Thank you... At last...

 

[TheSecretArts]

i think its supposed to be 9024 because that is the max framerate or something...

 

[BlinkBoy]

Wc3 uses 960 FPS, that's all.

 

[Guessed]

It uses 1000. Time it and you'll see.

 

[blazing-inferno]

so when animating do you have to set the time line to 1000 in order to animate properly? because ive animated a few small things under 100 in the time line and they worked fine in game.

 

[Deleted member 126647]

I work with 30 fps, it really doesn't make a difference.

 

[donut3.5]

In modeling programs, you choose depending on the exporter. I believe the MS3D exporter uses 32 fps, but then translates it into WC3's frames (1000 fps).
I think, but Guessed should know this..
--donut3.5--

 

[Rao Dao Zao]

Milkshape uses 24fps. (frame / 24) * 1000 = huzzah!

 

[donut3.5]

Oh blast, I thought it was 32 for reasons unknown.
--donut3.5--

 

[BlinkBoy]

It uses 1000. Time it and you'll see.

not really, that's an aproximation. If you export a model using art tools and do the conversion yourself, you'll notice that it actually uses 960.

 

[modler2]

i usualy use like 200 but that me

 

[Guessed]

not really, that's an aproximation. If you export a model using art tools and do the conversion yourself, you'll notice that it actually uses 960.

If you make a model that flashes over 1000 frames, then time 60 flashes, it will be 1 minute. It is 1000, not 960.

 

[BlinkBoy]

If you make a model that flashes over 1000 frames, then time 60 flashes, it will be 1 minute. It is 1000, not 960.

hmm, that's not a very accurate benchmark, you should apply theory of errors, plus it wouldn't explain why Art Tools (blizzard made) converts 30 frames/seconds to 960. That's why I'm sorry, but I'll stick with blizzard's conversation in this case.

 

[Guessed]

It is accurate enough. (I would need a more-than-1 second difference in reaction times between starting and stopping for it to be wronger than 960.) But to make extra sure, I made a map.

There are two models in it, each a one-minute clock. Global sequenced materials switch out textures so that the numbers switch. In one, the frames are based on 1000 fps. In the other 960.

GlobalSequences 4 {
	Duration 100,
	Duration 1000,
	Duration 10000,
	Duration 60000,
}

vs

GlobalSequences 4 {
	Duration 96,
	Duration 960,
	Duration 9600,
	Duration 57600,
}

I set up the map to start both models' animation, and then after a 1-minute timer elapses, to stop both. A correct timer would have looped to the starting. Here is the result. It is the same as I got with my stopwatch. I've also included the map if you still don't believe me.

 

[BlinkBoy]

ok looks very convencing for me now(sorry thought u made it more manually). But I still ask myself why blizzard used 960 on art tool's exporting?

 

[Mechanical Man]

Also in gmax 960 frames are needed when exporting for warcraft.

 

[Guessed]

I don't have either of those, so I can't test this myself, but the frames that exist in exported models show that, assuming they came from 30 fps, that they were exported to 1000 fps.

Take an example frame number: 4333. (I just got this from the footman.) I think it is safe to assume that this is the rounded version of 4333.33333. Treating it as in 1000 fps and to 30 fps, we get 130. Treating it as 960 and converting to 30, we get frame 135.416666666. The point is, that treating it as 1000 fps results in whole numbers on the other end. We know that the key was on a whole-number frame before it was exported.

If you more frames on the footman, 1000->30 is the only one that always produces whole numbers from among 1000->30, 1000->24, 960->30, and 960->24.