News Guides Resources Streams Forum Statistics
Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Forum  /  Regarding the frame limiter restriction (Locked)
(edited: )

Post videos of you taking off in a VCN Helicopter (holding W) with closing the door, and a rough approximation of your framerate uncapped + your CPU and GPU. I used dxtory to see my framerate but it wasn't captured, but ideally framerate would be shown.

Approximately 100-120 fps. Intel Core i7-2600, GTX 650.

I never really cared about the community consensus to ban turning off the frame limiter and just adhered to it. However, in the past year I've begun taking the opposite stance and today some conversation between some of us runners has arisen again on the topic, so may as well see what people think now, and how big of an advantage one's system specs would give if this rule were removed. This, as far as I know, was the single reason as to why the rule existed to begin with, but we may as well see the actual difference for ourselves.

edit: I'm wrong, 100 fps compared to 300 fps is a bigger difference in gameplay than I figured, but I stand with the rest of my points.

Removing this rule would bring new routing opportunities to the three major categories (aka faster), with all the pros and cons of having frame limiter on or off. Off, and your game will crash more often and behave more unpredictably (to us) with regards to physics, with faster heli takeoffs and slower boat movement and whatever else. On, and everything is normal, with slower heli takeoffs and whatever else. It's definitely worth more exploration. Besides, we allow using ramdisks and SSDs to improve load times, so complaining about pay to win is not a valid argument.

Post your videos/thoughts below.


around 40-50fps (dont ask)

100% agree with what anti said


You can see FPS on a video. i7-3770k and running on Intel HD 4000.

(edited: )

170-ish with i7 4770 & GTX760. (I play full screen 1920x1080 btw)

Goes well above 200 if I look at the buildings in front/left side.

Edit: For some reason I got 100 fps more after a while. Weather and day/night seem to impact this too.


A problem I can see with the "pay to win" nature of the thing is if strats themselves become pay to win. Meaning that you need to have at least X framerate to get a strat to work. If the worse hardware accounts for only slightly less significant timesaves with the same strats, then I think that's okay.

One thing that would annoy me very much if allowing uncapped FPS led to externally controlling FPS of the game. Meaning that you only uncap FPS on heli sections with a hotkey. This is for the same reason that I don't approve of mandatory loadless livesplit times: I don't think external software should become an integral part of the speedrun. I am fine with this for Source game for example, since capping FPS can be bound to in-game keys. But that's not the case here.

Other than these issues, I'd be fine with this, as restricting the run to have the limiter is exactly as arbitrary as not doing that. And if you don't restrict the FPS with the limiter, you still have the option to use the in-game limiter anyways.

For III it would be easier to allow uncapped FPS, as it has no apparent advantages, as far as I know. But that's different for VC and SA.

hoxihoxi, Mhmd_FVCMhmd_FVC and 39daph39daph like this. 

i5-4430, gtx 660 2gb

What about limiting fps to like 60fps?


I don't vouch for allowing external limiters as it stands now, lev


Limiting to 60 with nvidia inspector or Rivatuner with proper frame sync might be a good middle ground for everyone since it doesn't introduce severe fuck ups to physics and you still get a smoother experience.


didn't even say why, shaking my dang head

(edited: )

i5 4440, AMD Radeon R9 270X

allowing frame limiter off is a bad idea imo

(edited: )

f¤ck yeah (not really)

around 400 up to 600 - reversing & setting up a slide is impossible, also have fun deathwarping^
(ended up having to kill it via task manager, who knows how long it takes)

ZachoholicZachoholic and hoxihoxi like this. 

Frame limiter is a built in option of the game and should be allowed to be toggled on and off via the game menu the same way that changing languages was a strat in the past. As long as it is all done within the game, it should be allowed.

I agree it's not fair but speedrunning doesn't have to be fair. If the community wants fairness then just leave the rule as is in order to avoid in-fighting and a steady baseline of what is acceptable in runs. I don't really give a shoot, just my 2 cents.

DerpethDerpeth, GaëlGaël and 4 others like this. 

Allow frame limiter toggling ingame and allow the use of a program limiting framerate / enabling vsync. The first will cause inconsistency on different computers, the second will bring fairness into it. It's not like you have to pay for MSI afterburner and you probably don't go to the library to upload your runs. Obviously I don't mean toggling the framerate during a run, but setting it to a certain framerate for the entirety of the run. This is a 14+ year old game, obviously modern computers will run it at hundreds of FPS which causes it to become unplayable. But you could get better results from the game running at a controlled framerate, like say around 100 FPS. Showing the framerate on screen could be a way to make verification easier.


I've just found out about this thread, I'm not home so i can't make videos
My opinion on this is that you should be able to toggle frame limiter on/off during runs BUT not use external software to limit it to XXXfps

Latest News
View all
No news
Recent Threads
View all
Thread Author
Reasonable estimate for 100% run?
Last post
3 replies
Mobile terminal JURY FURY missions skip
Last post
0 replies
Suni's losted Any% (SSU) run on the boards
Last post
7 replies
How do you do the 1 frame strat
Last post
[Deleted user]
2 replies
VC Instapasses & Stuff Megathread
Last post
11 replies