Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

DarkBASIC Professional Discussion / New Versions of Dark Basic Pro Are ALWAYS Worse!!!!

Author
Message
Christopher Reeves
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Dec 2005
Location: Texas, USA
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 01:31
Why do I have more problems with the upgrades than I do with the older versions. It's like evertime I see an upgrade available for Dark Basic, I always hesitate to get it because I know I will run into worse bugs than I do with the current version I have. The only reason why I upgraded from my stable v6.3 is because I just got DarkShader and it wants you to have a later version. Of course now, I upgraded to v6.5, and I get brand new bugs, for instance, my whole computer crashes everytime I end my game I'm working on, didn't do this in my older version or in 6.4!
LD52
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2006
Location: Internet
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 03:41
Lol yeah i've read alot of complaints and bugs on v6.4 and 6.5 so i decided to stay with 6.3 as i find its stable not sure if 6.4 and 6.5 are worse but i haven't found any problems with 6.3 so im going to stay for now ... maybe i'll give it a go if some one can confirm how v6.4 and 6.5 are ...

223kb is WAYYY too big for your avatar - get it under 10 kb
GatorHex
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Apr 2005
Location: Gunchester, UK
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 10:59 Edited at: 10th Mar 2007 11:08
LOL, I'm sticking with 6.0 it runs at least 25% faster than 6.3



http://www.KumKie.com http://bulldog.servegame.com
IanM
Retired Moderator
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Sep 2002
Location: In my moon base
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 12:34
@Christopher Reeves

Quote: "my whole computer crashes everytime I end my game"


No-one else has this problem that I'm aware of, so it's something to do with your machine - Try upgrading your drivers.

@GatorHex,

Great ... now what in your code is slowing it down? Without something a little more concrete than screenshots, there's no way for TGC to narrow this down. It might be DBPro, but there's as good a chance that it's DirectX or your drivers causing this.

KuRiX
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Jan 2007
Location:
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 12:46
I am sorry i have the same issue.

I have gained 100 FPS in my game reverting to Update 6!

I am sticking with 1.06 too by the moment...

No pain, no gain.
Olby
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 13:02
I compiled same game under U6 and U6.5 and 6.0 run a lot faster than 6.5 version and I DIDNT CHANGE ANYTHING IN MY CODE and I also did not updated or removed any drivers or hardware. It is obvious that we are using a lot slower versions than before. TGC -1

AMD Sempron 3.1+ Ghz, 512MB Ram, ATI R9550 256MB Ram, Sound Blaster Live!, WinXP SP2, DirectX 9.0c, DBPro 6.5
http://www.myspace.com/producerolby
GatorHex
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Apr 2005
Location: Gunchester, UK
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 13:45 Edited at: 10th Mar 2007 14:15
It is the same code, the same DirectX, the same screen resolution, the same PC setup, the only difference between the two is I compiled in 6.0 and 6.3.

These tests were carried out straight after each other.

I would say to anyone who doesn't believe it.. TRY IT YOURSELF!. To prove something is true the experiment is repeatable and the results are the same! I was sceptical too once!

Some people have also noticed that delete objects takes longer also in later versions making it a nightmare to end your level.

Most of the updates are to enable addon packages so you don't need them unless you realy want to use these packages.

http://www.KumKie.com http://bulldog.servegame.com
Chris Ritchie
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Jan 2006
Location: Norn Iron
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 14:16
I am still using U6.0 b4 as all the updates after this cause a considerable frame rate drop with my game.


Lead programmer ULIDIA
Green Gandalf
VIP Member
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jan 2005
Playing: Malevolence:Sword of Ahkranox, Skyrim, Civ6.
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 14:24
Quote: "I would say to anyone who doesn't believe it.. TRY IT YOURSELF!. To prove something is true the experiment is repeatable and the results are the same! I was sceptical too once! "


I just have. Here are the results:

Program 1:
U6.5 FPS 145-155
U6.4 FPS 145-155
U6.3 FPS 145-155
U6.2 FPS 145-155
U6.0 FPS 145-155

Program 2:
U6.5 FPS 12-18
U6.4 FPS 12-18
U6.3 FPS 12-18
U6.2 FPS 12-18
U6.0 FPS 12-18

Perhaps I should have tried U6.1 as well?

[For the record they both used shaders and both worked with each upgrade tested. ]
GatorHex
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Apr 2005
Location: Gunchester, UK
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 14:30 Edited at: 10th Mar 2007 14:31
Are you sure you was running 6.0 ?

Be careful because if you click Launch.exe it will always load the latest version no matter which directory it was run from!

You have to run Editor.exe to get the different versions loaded. I always double check in help too just to make sure it says the right version number which is why I screen shotted it

http://www.KumKie.com http://bulldog.servegame.com
Benjamin
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 14:35
Quote: "Here are the results:"

Did you actually test it in all those different versions or did you make those numbers up? It's just that it's strange that they are all the exact same.

Tempest (DBP/DBCe)
Multisync V1 (DBP/DBCe)
Green Gandalf
VIP Member
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jan 2005
Playing: Malevolence:Sword of Ahkranox, Skyrim, Civ6.
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 14:57 Edited at: 10th Mar 2007 15:12
Quote: "Are you sure you was running 6.0 ?"


As far as I can tell.

I reinstalled each upgrade in turn over the previous one tested and checked the version currently being tested from the Help menu.

This has always worked before when I've wanted to demonstrate that a particular upgrade is bugged (as in my reports on problems with the sound/memblock commands).

Quote: "Did you actually test it in all those different versions or did you make those numbers up? It's just that it's strange that they are all the exact same"


Yes, no, and I thought it was a bit strange too.

Edit:

Quote: "Be careful because if you click Launch.exe it will always load the latest version no matter which directory it was run from!"


They were all run from the same directory - I don't keep multiple copies of DBP directories, but I do keep the upgrade executables for precisely this purpose of checking bugs in different versions. It only takes a few seconds to change version by running the executables.

2nd Edit:

Just did a confirmation re-install of U6.0 - and yes all the files, i.e. the DBP compiler, etc, were replaced by the old U6.0 versions. So I really was running the upgrades I thought I was running. As far as I can tell ...
Benjamin
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 15:03
Quote: "but I do keep the upgrade executables for precisely this purpose of checking bugs in different versions."

Ah ok, I believe you then.

Tempest (DBP/DBCe)
Multisync V1 (DBP/DBCe)
GatorHex
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Apr 2005
Location: Gunchester, UK
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 15:11 Edited at: 10th Mar 2007 15:12
Lol, has anyone noticed both versions of DBPCompiler.exe say v1.05 in the program properties? So it would be easy to get them mixed up

http://www.KumKie.com http://bulldog.servegame.com
Antidote
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Mar 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 15:12
I'm running 6.5 with absolutely no problems. The only thing I have to get used to from 6.2c (which is what I upgraded from) is that cameras are now created through indexing, not instancing, which was a minor annoyance at first, but it's not that bad.

As for the people who have gotten different FPSs for different versions, try running the later version first and 6.0 second.


Green Gandalf
VIP Member
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jan 2005
Playing: Malevolence:Sword of Ahkranox, Skyrim, Civ6.
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 15:53
Quote: "Lol, has anyone noticed both versions of DBPCompiler.exe say v1.05 in the program properties? So it would be easy to get them mixed up"


Look at the date - it's a bit of a give away. As you can see from the attached screenshot I haven't re-installed U6.5 yet.
Green Gandalf
VIP Member
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jan 2005
Playing: Malevolence:Sword of Ahkranox, Skyrim, Civ6.
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 16:28
Sorry, I take it all back!!

I have just tested an old object editing program of mine which uses large numbers of objects as vertex markers.

Here's the result:

U6.0 - FPS 43-46 (49 with 500 marker objects hidden). Exits instantly.

U6.5 - FPS 35-38 (49 with 500 marker objects hidden). Took ages to exit - and I had to resort to using Task Manager to close it.

The other programs I tested both had only one object, so it looks as if there is a serious issue with having many objects (the slow close-down has already been reported - but it looks as if in-game performance has indeed been hit as well).

Johaness
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Sep 2006
Location:
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 16:57
@Green Gandalf
I had a level of about 30,000 polygons divided into 10 objects. Running 6.0, FPS was 55-60. Polygon count showed 2000-3000 as objects were not in view.

After upgrading to 6.5. FPS dropped to 30-40. Polygon count showed 30,000 although objects were off screen.

I just figured that auto-culling was taken out hence the frame drop?
Roxas
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Nov 2005
Location: http://forum.thegamecreators.com
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 17:05
set camera range anyone?



GatorHex
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Apr 2005
Location: Gunchester, UK
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 17:19 Edited at: 10th Mar 2007 17:38
I just did some tests on a new project with 40 animated objects and there was no speed difference between 60 and 63.

It's wiered. Maybe it is only visible in high numbers

http://www.KumKie.com http://bulldog.servegame.com
Johaness
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Sep 2006
Location:
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 18:37
Mine is a top down view. Level is about 500x500 units wide. Camera is positioned 30 units Y and rotated 90 X. FOV 50. I did not set camera range so ought to default to Near=1 Far=3000(In this case I don't think it would make a difference).

Initially the level was single mesh 30k polys. Statistic command showed around 5-6k polys. I split the level up into 10 sectors for easier management and it had no effect,as expected. This was in 6.0.

After upgrading to 6.5, FPS dropped, Statistic showed 30k polys. Only when I hid the objects not in view did the polycount drop back down and FPS went back up.

Did a quick search on forums found a few guys were implementing their on culling and also some requests to turn auto-culling off. So figured it was removed in 6.5 instead of a bug. But haven't been able to test further since.
GatorHex
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Apr 2005
Location: Gunchester, UK
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 19:19 Edited at: 12th Mar 2007 02:50
Culling off / on would kinda make sense but I dunno I just tested a new project with 1000 objects and again no change, wierd.

Nice test though if you want to see how far you can push your graphics card try it

http://www.kumkie.com/dbp/how_fast_is_dark_basic_pro.zip 2mb - for the slow
http://www.kumkie.com/dbp/how_fast_is_dark_basic_pro.exe 4mb - for the lazy



http://www.KumKie.com http://bulldog.servegame.com
Olby
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 19:26
Hey Lee Bamber are you laughting about us. Why did you turn off auto frustrum culling? I just tried and noticed too that the poly count does not change even when all objects are not in screen. Darn.. I hate these situations now we have to code our own culling system just to go around this stupid new bug.

AMD Sempron 3.1+ Ghz, 512MB Ram, ATI R9550 256MB Ram, Sound Blaster Live!, WinXP SP2, DirectX 9.0c, DBPro 6.5
http://www.myspace.com/producerolby
Antidote
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Mar 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 19:27
Attached is my speed test


Roxas
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Nov 2005
Location: http://forum.thegamecreators.com
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 20:28
My speed test



Cash Curtis II
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Apr 2005
Location: Corpus Christi Texas
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 20:51
@Green Gandalf -
That has already been posted in Bug Reports, conclusively.


Come see the WIP!
Green Gandalf
VIP Member
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jan 2005
Playing: Malevolence:Sword of Ahkranox, Skyrim, Civ6.
Posted: 10th Mar 2007 23:24
@Cash Curtis

Quote: "That has already been posted in Bug Reports, conclusively"


Which "that" are you referring to? The slow shut-down or the slow running or something else - and which version?

The only relevant reports I can see are:

http://forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=101595&b=15

and

http://forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=101335&b=15

both of which I am well aware of.

In fact the slow shutdown is proving to be very annoying.
NA170425
User Deleted
Posted: 11th Mar 2007 01:17 Edited at: 11th Mar 2007 01:18
How about using delete objects or flush video memory to solve the slow object deleting?

I would worry about the bugs, TGC seems to fix bugs very fast, and this problem should be nonexistant in DBP X10.

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons...for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
Antidote
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Mar 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posted: 11th Mar 2007 01:34
In all honesty you may be waiting a while for X10. It's strange that there's such a performance hit just because of different versions. I hope this is marked as a high priority situation and is fixed quickly.


Hobgoblin Lord
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Oct 2005
Location: Fall River, MA USA
Posted: 11th Mar 2007 02:20
here is mine, still using 6.2 though, dont think it makes a difference for the exe.

Brain111
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Feb 2007
Location: In my own little world.
Posted: 11th Mar 2007 03:10
I used to have the newest dbpro, but the problem was you needed this rare December'06 version of DirectX that no one I knew except me had... So I couldn't make games and send them to my friends. I ended up reinstalling the one on the disk, which I just checked and is aparently 5.5
headcrab 53
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Jul 2005
Location:
Posted: 11th Mar 2007 19:22
@ Hobgoblin Lord
What speed did you really get, after the FPS is displayed properly?

There is an advantage to not having the automatic culling. The CPU doesn't have to do more work checking to see if each object should be culled. You'll have to do it yourself for the objects you can't see not to be rendered but it won't have to be done for every object in each frame.
Olby
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 11th Mar 2007 20:45 Edited at: 11th Mar 2007 20:45
SET AUTO CULLING mode

Mode
0 - off
1 - on

Anyone? I think this would be the best solution for now.

AMD Sempron 3.1+ Ghz, 512MB Ram, ATI R9550 256MB Ram, Sound Blaster Live!, WinXP SP2, DirectX 9.0c, DBPro 6.5
http://www.myspace.com/producerolby
headcrab 53
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Jul 2005
Location:
Posted: 11th Mar 2007 20:48
I don't think that would be the best solution for now. I think that would be the best solution forever!
NA170425
User Deleted
Posted: 11th Mar 2007 20:56 Edited at: 11th Mar 2007 20:57
@Brain111

Why don't you send them a link to the latest directX? It's right here:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/directx/default.mspx

Or you could just email them dxwebsetup.exe

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons...for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
Julius Caesar
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Apr 2006
Location:
Posted: 11th Mar 2007 21:26
or download the redistributable one and include it with your game?

Thats what I have done!

I came, I saw, I conquered. The die is cast. It is not these well-fed long haired men that I fear, but the pale and the hungry looking. Et tu, Brute?
-The Man Himself
Philip
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 11th Mar 2007 22:32 Edited at: 11th Mar 2007 22:35
Quote: "TGC seems to fix bugs very fast, and this problem should be nonexistant in DBP X10."


That was a gem CodeDragon.

I actually think that bugs are fixed very slowly. On average one bug week a year. But of course each update appears to introduce a slew of new bugs ... very frustrating!

As for this problem being nonexistent in DBP X10, well personally I'm not sure I buy that either. I remember when DBPro was introduced various bugs were included which had previously been included and then fixed in Classic. For example the object in screen command returning a 1 when an object was 90 degrees to the camera's view vector.

I really feel that there is too much emphasis on products being released fast by TGC and not enough on products being released after a suitable period of bug testing. Or, if its just a case of functionality being changed, rather than being actual bugs, I wish there would be some kind of file explaining exactly what functionality has been changed so that we know how to change it back!

I'm very sceptical about whether I'm going to buy X10.

Cheer if you like bears! Cheer if you like jam sandwiches!
"I highly recommend Philip" (Philip)
Brain111
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Feb 2007
Location: In my own little world.
Posted: 11th Mar 2007 22:50
That is a good idea to actually include the directx setup file. I'm gonna go update now.
sadsack
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Nov 2003
Location: here
Posted: 11th Mar 2007 23:21
I am still running 6.3 and most thing work (most). But I am looking around for something better than DBP. I don't like how it display the textures and some time the models. I don't like how it will not run on alot of computers. I been looking very hard at NF/NB. I have enjoy DBP for almost 4 years now and made alot of nice stuff with it. saying that I think it is time to move on for many reason.
renny
Alquerian
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Mar 2006
Location: Reno Nevada
Posted: 12th Mar 2007 00:57
Quote: "I been looking very hard at NF/NB."

Nuclear Basic looks promising, I hope that Matthew can come through for his anticipating followers. I am definatey going to work with NB/NF in the future, but I cannot safely say that I will leave DBP, even with it's mind-altering bugs . Unfortunately there isn't anything perfect in this world, if there was, we wouldn't have such a vast selection of languages, tools and never-ending plugins, now would we?

Quit planning to make a game and make a game.
LD52
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2006
Location: Internet
Posted: 12th Mar 2007 03:14
okay so um i want a DBPRO 6.0 version anyone have a place where i can down grade from 6.3 to 6.0 ?
sadsack
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Nov 2003
Location: here
Posted: 12th Mar 2007 04:19
your are right about that
LeeBamber
TGC Lead Developer
26
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Jan 2000
Location: England
Posted: 12th Mar 2007 05:50
If anyone wants to help out reproduce the version speed issue, then please take a look at the code I whipped up and modify it so that it shows a clear difference in spee between U6.0 and the current one:



I can confirm the object culling has a bugm, causing the objects not to cull when they should (bug in U6.5). I could not measure a difference in setup and freeing times, and indeed my U6.6 test came out faster than a few of the older versions. If you can provide code added to the above and emailed to [email protected] that will show me a very sharp difference, I can then reproduce it here and get right on it

"Small, smart, and running around the legs of dinosaurs to find enough food to survive, bedroom programmers aren't extinct after all "
Lost in Thought
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 12th Mar 2007 06:01
I believe most of the problems were due to the culling bug. It would be nice to have a flag to tell if the object was culled or not. This could speed up our own culling as well. As far as turning the culling off that was mentioned

Quote: "SET AUTO CULLING mode

Mode
0 - off
1 - on"


Didn't you make it so set object radius to -1 made it skip culling?

GatorHex
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Apr 2005
Location: Gunchester, UK
Posted: 12th Mar 2007 11:28 Edited at: 12th Mar 2007 15:28
I think if some people want no culling and some people do want auto culling then maybe there should be an option in the Exe Settings window to switch it on/off to keep everyone happy.

It's good to see Lee is looking at this issue

My results from Lees test

Version Fps.. Init.. Free
....6.0.. 45av 2703 18844
....6.3.. 12.... 2765 18625
....6.5.. 12.... 2406 10875
bold = good

Setup and Delete objects has improved with 6.5 but Fps/culling is a major issue.

Hope that helps

http://www.KumKie.com http://bulldog.servegame.com
Green Gandalf
VIP Member
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jan 2005
Playing: Malevolence:Sword of Ahkranox, Skyrim, Civ6.
Posted: 12th Mar 2007 17:44
Could some of you test the following code which I have just e-mailed to Lee. It is a slightly edited version of Lee's test code.

It runs fine and closes fine using U6.2 on my PC. But with U6.5 it takes forever to closedown and I seem to have to use Task Manager to close it. This is very similar to the symptoms Alquerian reported in the Bug Reports forum - except it doesn't use "clone object".

Don't forget to say which DBP upgrade you've used.

Randomness 128
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Feb 2007
Location:
Posted: 12th Mar 2007 18:03
I was using version 6.2
The framerate ranged from 170 to 330 in my current project depending on where you looked.

Using version 6.3, it was 170 everywhere.

Johaness
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Sep 2006
Location:
Posted: 12th Mar 2007 18:20
@Green Gandalf
U6.5 - Took about 4-5 secs to close. Ran it a couple of times.
If it makes a difference, my specs: P4 2.5, 1Gb Ram, FX5200, Win2k SP3.
Green Gandalf
VIP Member
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jan 2005
Playing: Malevolence:Sword of Ahkranox, Skyrim, Civ6.
Posted: 12th Mar 2007 18:40
Quote: "If it makes a difference"


It seems to. I've just tested the problem programs on my laptop and they close just as fast with or without the "delete objects" clean-up. (I used U6.4 and U6.5 on the laptop.)

The obvious differences between the PC and laptop are age and RAM.

Looks like some of us will have to live with this problem if it isn't easily reproduced on all systems.
Hobgoblin Lord
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Oct 2005
Location: Fall River, MA USA
Posted: 12th Mar 2007 19:17
Quote: "@ Hobgoblin Lord
What speed did you really get, after the FPS is displayed properly?"


I have no idea, is there a point that it waits till to display proper FPS? the soldiers had turned around about 7 or 8 times before I took the screen shot. They seemed pretty smooth.

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2026-06-10 10:07:33
Your offset time is: 2026-06-10 10:07:33