Game stuck at 60 FPS

[Xeanoa]

Hey, been looking around the forums, but couldn't find a solution.

The game refuses to run above 60 FPS for me. Which is kind of annoying, because it results in a choppy and blurred image on my 144Hz Freesync display, which unfortunately doesn't handle low framerates very well.

I'm using build 0.12.29 through Steam on Windows 10 x64, i7-5820K, R9 290X.

Does anyone know how to change the FPS to something appropriate? I'm missing the usual settings in the ingame menu.

[Loewchen]

I remember this being asked before (search is not working atm so can not link it) and the reason given was, that higher fps would not be possible as the frame frequency could not be higher than the tick frequency which is 60/s and fundamental to the game (?).

[Supercheese]

If you want FPS higher than 60 you'll need to increase the game speed (Updates per second -- UPS).

Code: Select all

/c game.speed = 2

That will give you 120 FPS/UPS if your rig can handle it.

Code: Select all

/c game.speed = 2.4

Should give you 144 UPS.

(These are console commands, of course.)

[Xeanoa]

That, for obvious reasons, isn't working. While that makes the image smooth and crisp, the game is now running at a way to high speed.

I want the game to draw 2.4 frames per update period, not update 2.4 times faster.

[Supercheese]

That, for obvious reasons, isn't working. While that makes the image smooth and crisp, the game is now running at a way to high speed.

I want the game to draw 2.4 frames per update period, not update 2.4 times faster.

I don't believe the game can do that. Maximum FPS is tied to maximum UPS.

[keyboardhack]

That, for obvious reasons, isn't working. While that makes the image smooth and crisp, the game is now running at a way to high speed.

I want the game to draw 2.4 frames per update period, not update 2.4 times faster.

It might be possible to program factorio to do 144 fps but there would be nearly no point. Factorio only updates 60 times/sec which means that all animations update 60 times/sec. Increasing the fps might make the players movement smoother, but all the animations would still only update 60 times/sec so they would look no different from what they do now.

[Xeanoa]

It might be possible to program factorio to do 144 fps but there would be nearly no point. Factorio only updates 60 times/sec which means that all animations update 60 times/sec. Increasing the fps might make the players movement smoother, but all the animations would still only update 60 times/sec so they would look no different from what they do now.

Not exactly. Instead of, say, a piece of coal on a belt getting 60 position updates a second, it would get 144. The belts - continuous motion - is one of the most visible cases of how a higher refresh rate results in MUCH smoother motion and sharper images on the screen. If you've seen the difference once, you'll never want to go back.
Another similar example is scrolling with the mouse wheel on a page full of text. On a 60Hz display, I can not read the text while scrolling, it becomes to blurry, jumps to many pixels a time to follow. On a 144Hz display, I can still read the text while scrolling down the page.
Also, it noticeably reduces display lag, mouse delay.

I don't believe the game can do that. Maximum FPS is tied to maximum UPS.

And I can't believe devs still do that in 2016. I'm going to have to ask for a refund, because this is utterly unacceptable.

[Rseding91]

I don't believe the game can do that. Maximum FPS is tied to maximum UPS.

And I can't believe devs still do that in 2016. I'm going to have to ask for a refund, because this is utterly unacceptable.

This isn't CS-GO: > 60 FPS would make literally zero difference for Factorio unless the tick rate was also increased.

Tick 0 frame 0 and 1 would be identical - you just see the same frame twice. Tick 1 would then happen and the game state would change and so frame 2 and frame 3 would be identical to each other. It makes no sense to try to have a higher frame update rate than the game tick speed when the frames would be identical to each other between game ticks.

[DaveMcW]

It's possible to increase the frame rate for some things, like items on a belt. They move a lot faster than 1 pixel per frame at 60 FPS.

Whether the devs feel like doing the work is another matter.

it results in a choppy and blurred image on my 144Hz Freesync display, which unfortunately doesn't handle low framerates very well.

Why don't you ask your monitor manufacturer for a refund?

[Xeanoa]

This isn't CS-GO: > 60 FPS would make literally zero difference for Factorio unless the tick rate was also increased.

Tick 0 frame 0 and 1 would be identical - you just see the same frame twice. Tick 1 would then happen and the game state would change and so frame 2 and frame 3 would be identical to each other. It makes no sense to try to have a higher frame update rate than the game tick speed when the frames would be identical to each other between game ticks.

There are a lot of intermediate positions that can be displayed. The item is moving at a fixed speed. Estimating its position 1/2.4ths of a tick later is trivial.
Oh, and by the way games like CS:GO traditionally used even lower updates per second. Not sure about CS:GO, but many on the older FPS like Quake or the original CS would only receive 20 ticks per second from the server, and they still handle 144Hz or more very well.

Alternatively, they could just make the game run at a fixed 144 ticks per second. That'd be very easy to implement, they'd just have to increase the duration in ticks for everything by 2.4 and increase game speed by 2.4. 60 Hz displays could just drop the additional frames, and displays with >144Hz are arguably non-existent. Hell, they could do that with a variable and make it a slider in the options menu. Wouldn't handle variable frame rates very well unless the speed was dynamic, but hey, the game expects stable frame rates already, so that's not a big deal. And we'd get a slider that allows us to change the number of updates per second based on personal preference.

Why don't you ask your monitor manufacturer for a refund?

Because I didn't spend 1100 Euro on a 144Hz display for good 60Hz performance. There are better options for that. I pay for premium hardware because it feels better when you use it. And if some lazy dev can't be bothered to separate game and render threads and implements an FPS cap, the game is dead for me. That's not acceptable any more. Not only are 120/144Hz display commonplace now, VR also requires at least 90FPS to not induce vomiting in users.
That said, it's possible to change the settings of my display to make it run well at 60Hz, but you'd sacrifice your performance at 144Hz. It's mainly changing the Freesync range and Overdrive settings.

[Klonan]

This isn't CS-GO: > 60 FPS would make literally zero difference for Factorio unless the tick rate was also increased.

Tick 0 frame 0 and 1 would be identical - you just see the same frame twice. Tick 1 would then happen and the game state would change and so frame 2 and frame 3 would be identical to each other. It makes no sense to try to have a higher frame update rate than the game tick speed when the frames would be identical to each other between game ticks.

There are a lot of intermediate positions that can be displayed. The item is moving at a fixed speed. Estimating its position 1/2.4ths of a tick later is trivial.
Oh, and by the way games like CS:GO traditionally used even lower updates per second. Not sure about CS:GO, but many on the older FPS like Quake or the original CS would only receive 20 ticks per second from the server, and they still handle 144Hz or more very well.

Alternatively, they could just make the game run at a fixed 144 ticks per second. That'd be very easy to implement, they'd just have to increase the duration in ticks for everything by 2.4 and increase game speed by 2.4. 60 Hz displays could just drop the additional frames, and displays with >144Hz are arguably non-existent. Hell, they could do that with a variable and make it a slider in the options menu. Wouldn't handle variable frame rates very well unless the speed was dynamic, but hey, the game expects stable frame rates already, so that's not a big deal. And we'd get a slider that allows us to change the number of updates per second based on personal preference.

Why don't you ask your monitor manufacturer for a refund?

Because I didn't spend 1100 Euro on a 144Hz display for good 60Hz performance. There are better options for that. I pay for premium hardware because it feels better when you use it. And if some lazy dev can't be bothered to separate game and render threads and implements an FPS cap, the game is dead for me. That's not acceptable any more. Not only are 120/144Hz display commonplace now, VR also requires at least 90FPS to not induce vomiting in users.
That said, it's possible to change the settings of my display to make it run well at 60Hz, but you'd sacrifice your performance at 144Hz. It's mainly changing the Freesync range and Overdrive settings.

Would you kindly watch your tone. We are not lazy devs, we just focus on gameplay and mechanics rather than framerates. If you dislike our product for its lack of 144hz support, you should not have purchased it.

[SyncViews]

Actually, the fact that the game updates at 60 ups is quite surprising, and likely a challenge for the devs over 20 or 30. 16.6ms is a really small time slice to develop code within, things that seem simple like path finding a group of 500 biters could easily exceed the single frame limit. Going to 144 ups, or 7ms would be drastically harder and significantly push the system requirements up.


They could interpolate positions of objects (would only be movement and view scroll, animations are pre-rendered or hand made i believe) to decouple the frame rate from logic (some games do this, others use variable step updates) but thats still not that simple, for limited gain I think in Factorios case.


Id question why your monitor has problems. What happens when you try to play videos? Most TV and Movie content is around 24 fps. Hand drawn 2D animated content often doubles up frames to give 12fps, and background objects often even less.


And why can it not just run 60Hz fullscreen?


EDIT: And this is a 2D game. What does the need for a high frame rate have to do with VR? There game has no way to display the 3D effect anyway.

[Xeanoa]

Would you kindly watch your tone. We are not lazy devs, we just focus on gameplay and mechanics rather than framerates.

I apologise for my words. However, I'd rather devs focus on creating a good engine/base for the game first. I've seen so many good/promising games go down the gutter over the years because of performance issues, because devs put to much focus in gameplay and scaling the game up.
Take SoaSE for example. The gameplay got better with every update, but eventually the game succumbed to its engine's limitations. It just wasn't playable any more, it turned into a stuttering mess when a game went on for more than 2-3 hrs.

If you dislike our product for its lack of 144hz support, you should not have purchased it.

There was no mention of this anywhere on your Steam product page. How should I have known beforehand?

I don't see this thread going anywhere useful from here on...

Your post certainly helped.

things that seem simple like path finding a group of 500 biters could easily exceed the single frame limit

That's probably why they move them in packs, not single units.

They could interpolate positions of objects (would only be movement and view scroll, animations are pre-rendered or hand made i believe) to decouple the frame rate from logic (some games do this, others use variable step updates) but thats still not that simple, for limited gain I think in Factorios case.

The biggest advantage would be that you wouldn't feel every hick-up/delayed tick as stutter. 144 or 60Hz, doesn't matter, the game is everything but running smoothly. And this will probably get worse, as more content is added and existing content is being refined.

[Klonan]

Would you kindly watch your tone. We are not lazy devs, we just focus on gameplay and mechanics rather than framerates.

I apologise for my words. However, I'd rather devs focus on creating a good engine/base for the game first. I've seen so many good/promising games go down the gutter over the years because of performance issues, because devs put to much focus in gameplay and scaling the game up.
Take SoaSE for example. The gameplay got better with every update, but eventually the game succumbed to its engine's limitations. It just wasn't playable any more, it turned into a stuttering mess when a game went on for more than 2-3 hrs.

If you dislike our product for its lack of 144hz support, you should not have purchased it.

There was no mention of this anywhere on your Steam product page. How should I have known beforehand?

The biggest advantage would be that you wouldn't feel every hick-up/delayed tick as stutter. 144 or 60Hz, doesn't matter, the game is everything but running smoothly. And this will probably get worse, as more content is added and existing content is being refined.

We are very focused on making our engine as stable and efficient as possible. However the update rate is irrelevant in this, and we chose 60UPS by design. This game isn't meant to be cutting edge technologically, we want a wide range of systems to be able to run the game, and for this 60UPS is a good mid range, allowing a lot of older machines run the game, while staying crisp and stable for more modern PCs.

The game is running smoothly on your system, at 60UPS. The engine is stable. Just because you have a higher refresh monitor, doesn't indicate any issues.

I am going to lock this thread now, as there is no further useful discussion that can be had on this topic.

The game runs are 60UPS/FPS

If that is unsatisfactory, ask steam for a refund