Hi,
I use ScummVM on an old 350Mhz PC with Windows 98 and an 8MB graphic card. The engine runs very efficient, I have no problems with speed or other graphical glitches and the games runs in original speed...
... but the problem is the screen shaking. The screen shaking (for example in "Day of the Tentacle" in the room of green tentacle when you switch-on the radio or in other LA games) is not in original speed. On my system the shaking is very slow and snatchy. It's no enjoyment to see this.
Is this a "time control"-bug?
screen shaking - wrong speed
Moderator: ScummVM Team
-
- ScummVM Team Member
- Posts: 377
- Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 12:25 pm
- Location: Austria
Re: screen shaking - wrong speed
You can't expect ScummVM to run 100% in Real-Time on a machine below 1-2GHz.Lebostein wrote:Hi,
I use ScummVM on an old 350Mhz PC with Windows 98 and an 8MB graphic card. The engine runs very efficient, I have no problems with speed or other graphical glitches and the games runs in original speed...
Is this a "time control"-bug?
Although it still works on your machine, not every little detail can be perfect on slow machines.
Best regards
Joachim
- eriktorbjorn
- ScummVM Developer
- Posts: 3550
- Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:39 am
Re: screen shaking - wrong speed
Huh? That's nonsense. I've been running ScummVM on a 450 MHz PIII for years. With the 320x200 games, the CPU load stays fairly low most of the time, even when using the fancier graphics scalers. (Running the 640x480 games with fancy scalers is noticeably slow, but these games rarely benefit from fancy scalers anyway.)joachimeberhard wrote:You can't expect ScummVM to run 100% in Real-Time on a machine below 1-2GHz.
The speed of the screen shaking is related to the speed of the game itself. The shake position is, I believe, updated once every iteration of the main loop, i.e. if you run the game in fast or very fast mode, the screen will shake more rapidly.
Since I only played the games with ScummVM (well, I did some testing with DOS emulation, but that hardly counts), I can't really say how this compares to the original behaviour, however.