Everyone knows it wasn't a good port.

Isn't there the GOGmix functionality for such things? https://www.gog.com/mix

Or a dedicated thread?

I don't think so. I was thinking of doing it myself and I still might but I'm not sure if I have the patience to catalog every game.

There's nothing wrong with creating a list of games that don't run at 60fps for those interested, however:-

1. It makes more sense on Steam since people generally get far more annoyed at modern games being unnecessarily capped at 30fps due to bad console port than +25 year old MS-DOS game which simply didn't have the horsepower at time of creation (made way back when 2D Video Cards, 3D accelerators, MPEG2 hardware decoders, sound cards and I/O controllers all came on separate cards...)

2. Stuff like 40fps frame-rate cap in Adventure Game Studio engine don't really count because it's there due to the sprite animation rate being lower than the render / refresh rate anyway and it has long been accepted as part of the genre's charm, art style and feel. Same reason no-one complains of 320x240 / 640x480 "blocky" pixel art in modern WadjetEye games. The only way of getting "real" 60fps in a lot of sprite based games is to redo all the art assets (which a lot of people don't want even if the devs could be bothered).

"Stacking" is another game that's 30fps locked due to the way it's animated at a certain rate (according to the devs). Baldur's Gate (at least the originals) animations were 30fps. Age of Empires and Rise of Nations (non HD) "run" at 60-120fps but it's obvious the unit animation is far lower. Diablo 2 was 24/25fps. Anything old and isometric with "sprites" in is often sub 60fps but doesn't necessarily lose anything vs FPS titles.

3. Some games like The Neverhood / Armikrog / Neighbors From Hell, etc, run at 20-30fps because that's how the "claymation" (stop-motion clay modelling) animation works. 60fps would just be repeating the same 20-30fps source animation 2-3x over per second with no increase in fluidity. Again, people don't want this particular art style changed for the same reason TV shows like Wallace & Gromit would lose half their charm if they were treated as rendered Pixar titles.

4. Some FPS games actually improve over time. Eg, Doom Engine games (Doom 1&2, Heretic, Hexen, etc) played with the original engine via DOSBox were capped at 35fps (and is painful to play like that today anyway due to lack of mouse-look). However, drop those WAD files into a modern OpenGL source-port engine (eg, GZDoom / Doomsday Engine) and you'll get up to +144Hz if you wanted.

I can understand why you asked, but for older games the situation is a little different than Steam's endless "consolitis" and so many exceptions would have to be made that it wouldn't really mean the same "to be avoided" thing as "curators" lists on Steam.

Actually, aside from the frame-rate issue, I've had no issues with it but who knows? Maybe, I'm just un-picky.

No, but my point was that 24fps is clearly fast enough for persistence of vision and traditionally animated films have no motion blur either. I also don't see how interactivity figures into it, our vision isn't good enough to make use of the extra reaction time that might be afforded by a higher frame rate (hence persistence of vision).

It's probably fixed here, but the game had a massive massive massive quirk with CPU speeds impacting game speed (if memory serves). Plus the game performs like trash, and a myriad of bugs.

There's no reason why older games can't still be including though just so people know.

for points 2 and 3 for Adventure games I'll admit that framerate probably not a big deal,but I wish to point out that even if the animation is locked at a certain frame rate a higher rendering frame rate will make the game more responsive. It's it's menus and alike. So they should still be rendered at a higher frame rate even if the sprites are fixed.

For your final point, I think simply having a list of known FPS issues might be better. Not really trying to shame anyone or anything, but for example Duke Nukem is locked at 85fps and there's nothing that can be done about that. So if you have a 60hz display you're going to get screen tearing. That would be a listed issue as well.

Many would disagree, particularly pro-gamers. There is a reason why all fighting games run at 60 fps.
And just because something is considered sufficient doesn't mean it shouldn't be better. In many cases monochrome image is sufficient, yet I don't remember many black and white movies recently.

You sir are simply wrong. Factually wrong and incorrect. It has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that people can tell the diffrence between 60 to 100 and even up to over 160hz; let alone 30 to 60.

I don't even think it's important outside of super fast paced things, but even I'll acknowledge there is a noticeable difference. It takes me like 5-10 minutes to adjust in some cases.

Sometimes thats less the framerate and more that a lot of point n clicks have incredibly awful engines.

Sometimes, yeah.

Well I see people here were pretty right about you are probably one of those annoying STEAM 60fps zealots, but lets give you a margin of doubt and lose 10 of my minutes to clarify you some things.

A) If someone made MARIO64 run at 60FPS wasn´t my friend, demonstrated by the people in that thread and accepted it by him. MARIO64 is hardcoded at 30FPS or less, but beyond who achieved that or not, we are talking about someone that couldnt even play in hist words at 59FPS, and was talking about how GREAT was playing MARIO64 at 60FPS, when in fact, as people demonstrated and he accepted it, he was playing at normal MARIO framerate. I have proof in posts of both things.

So no, you didnt or you didnt want to get the point.

B) What the hell are you saying about people dying and getting diseases? LOL

C) There is nothing special in want to run like a Zealot all games in 60FPS, and yes, I get mature. (Replying to your "difficult to believe a Quake player"