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.

Author
Message
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 02:51
Thinking my hallways were looking to narrow and claustrophobic, I thought I'd scale the map up with a scale level.

So I scaled everything up by, 2 or 5 or 10

Everything, camera-wise...still looked the same, even tho now the units could be up to 10 times their original size.

I was expecting the hallways to look "wider" the bigger I made the scale, but that isn't the case.

Any idea what I might need to look at?

simple map

wwww
w........ <---------------
wwww

w=wall
.=floor

no matter how big I scale the map objects, standing at the <--- and looking down the hallway, it always looks the same, it's not any wider. Even tho I made everything ,say, 10 units bigger.
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 03:53
So...weird.

I added a camera toggle (First Person or TopDown) to see if I could figure out what's wrong.

When I toggle and switch camera to top down view...everything looks as I expected, the hallways get wider the more I add to my scale value.

Yet, the First Person view always looks the same, no mater the scale.

I imagine then it's a camera setting in First Person view. I've played with different camera settings within the limit of my knowledge, but none seem to give me the look I want as seen in the Top Down view.
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 03:59
camera code, I don't see anything obviously wrong with the 3D camera, other than it never shows me the "scale" I'm expecting to see like the Top Down view shows me.

WickedX
11
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Feb 2009
Location: A Mile High
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 04:03
Try lowering the cameras field of view. Start out around 50 and go from there.
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 04:56
Messing with FOV, it makes things look very long or very short, doesn't seem to be what I want. doesn't seem to affect the "width" at all.

I'll mess with it more, but doesn't look promising.
sman512
5
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Nov 2014
Location: Russia
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 07:11
Zep, Did you try to play with camera aspect setings?
GS
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 07:17
Quote: "Zep, Did you try to play with camera aspect setings?
"


Yes, I just got finished experimenting with that in fact. It does appear to be what I want.

Just have to find a good value to use..it kinda stretches everything. And I can't figure out how to get the default setting back once I mess with it.

Like, for TopDown I want the default, for FirstPerson i currently set it to 0.6

The help says to get the default aspect divide screen width by the screen height, in 640x480, that calculation is off and doesn't give me what I started with for the aspect.



sman512
5
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Nov 2014
Location: Russia
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 07:26
Just save default config before you change aspect, somthing like this:
GS
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 07:34
Trying to stay away from DLLs at the moment
camera aspect is a M1U command.

But I figured it out, the help file is wrong, the aspect of 640x480 should be 1.33333. Not 0.75 as the help says which would be 480/640.

Well, the help file is 1/2 right it is 640/480, but the 0.75 they state is 480/600 which is wrong.

Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 07:39
Now for the First Person view (once i get a good aspect number I'm happy with)...I'm gonna have to figure out how to change that number for different screen resolutions.
sman512
5
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Nov 2014
Location: Russia
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 07:47
Yeah, without DLL's this wont be so easy. Good luck
GS
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 07:53
Quote: "Yeah, without DLL's this wont be so easy. Good luck
"


The default camera aspect is easy enough to calculate, just a simple divide, no need to load a DLL for that.

Now, if I start hitting roadblocks down the path, of course I'll consider using DLLs that solve a DBP problem or is faster.
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 08:23
So, the only "problem" I can see with adjusting aspect ratio is:

Say I have a door before this corridor, the door would be HUGE.

or

Every door would have to be a "Double Door" 1/2 the size of a standard unit each

Or

Rejigger my maps and forget aspect ratio entirely. I may just have to do this if I don't like the look. Which I'm undecided on right now.

I'm actually leaning to just rebuilding my maps at the moment. Too much Blur and Stretching going on with the aspect ratio "fix"

Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 08:58 Edited at: 26th Feb 2018 08:59
For example, the "blur"

Why is the front far wall more detailed than closer side walls? I don't like that.

Anyway to change this? I've tried turning mipmapping off altogether with the load texture commands, but it looks horrible.

Attachments

Login to view attachments
sman512
5
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Nov 2014
Location: Russia
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 11:15
Anisotropic filtering 100%
GS
sman512
5
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Nov 2014
Location: Russia
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 11:28
As far as I know, it will be more reliable than ever to configure an anisotropic filtering through a shader. Assign an object to the shader and specify the type of filtering you want in the shader settings. Well, or use dll =).
GS
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 11:33
Anisotropic Filtering shader, would I Iasign that per object, or the scene?

Where would I grab such a shader to try it out?
sman512
5
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Nov 2014
Location: Russia
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 11:40
It can be any shader from diffuse to paralax, its just need to apply to object and right setup.
For example you can take the evolved flashlight shader. http://www.evolved-software.com/shaders/lighting
GS
sman512
5
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Nov 2014
Location: Russia
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 11:57
Here some examples:
Anisotropic 16x flashlight effect.
GS

Attachments

Login to view attachments
sman512
5
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Nov 2014
Location: Russia
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 12:01
1 image - default dbro filter
2 image - linear (similar to dbro)
3 image - point filter
4 image - anisotropic filtering 16x
GS
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 12:08
I'll give that a try, I assume I just save it as an .FX file and include it in my project?
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 12:41
So, I tried that, just turned all my objects dark. guess it has to do with the flashlight part of the shader, which I don't need.

So...I guess it works if I knew how to use it.

Tried a "fire shader" I found, it deletes my object and puts a fire there..lol, not exactly what I was expecting.

I'll figure it out eventually.

Thanks, sman
sman512
5
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Nov 2014
Location: Russia
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 12:50
Maybe you can find an easier way, it's just the most reliable one.
GS
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 13:33
i'll play with the "tweaks" section and see if I can get the darkness off the objects I apply it to.
sman512
5
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Nov 2014
Location: Russia
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 13:52
Here what i found in DBPRO source from githib:

It's means that in teory you can set anisotropic filtering to object by comand "set object filter", but for some reason anisotropic that apply to object is level 1 and its cant be changed.! =(
GS
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 15:08
so, the fire thing I figured out I am supposed to apply it to a plane near or even in my object, not on my object itself.

i does look cool tho. Now I regret never messing with shaders 15 years ago when I started with DBP.

I think it's called GGFire.fx

Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 15:55 Edited at: 26th Feb 2018 15:56
I found this DLL for AF.

https://forum.thegamecreators.com/thread/159383?page=1

Looks like it's exactly what I am after (from the screenshots I've seen). Will give it a test tomorrow in the AM.
Ortu
DBPro Master
12
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Nov 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 16:57 Edited at: 26th Feb 2018 17:02
Kaedroho made a nice plugin for this:

https://forum.thegamecreators.com/thread/159383

Edit, lol I see you found it. I should finished reading the next page, but yeah it is simple to use and should sort out your issue.

The thing about a lot if Evolved's shaders is that they depend on light data from a lighting shader and not just a default dbpro light. Which is most likely why it is coming up black.
http://games.joshkirklin.com/sulium

A single player RPG featuring a branching, player driven storyline of meaningful choices and multiple endings alongside challenging active combat and intelligent AI.
Green Gandalf
VIP Member
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jan 2005
Playing: Malevolence:Sword of Ahkranox, Skyrim, Civ6.
Posted: 26th Feb 2018 16:59 Edited at: 26th Feb 2018 17:00
Quote: "so, the fire thing I figured out I am supposed to apply it to a plane near or even in my object, not on my object itself.

i does look cool tho. Now I regret never messing with shaders 15 years ago when I started with DBP.

I think it's called GGFire.fx"


Sounds like one of mine.

Let me know if you need help getting it working.

I agree that the most reliable way to get control over mipmapping, filtering, etc, is to use a shader - but it does require a bit more work to set up correctly (as you've noticed ).

I haven't used the set object filter method of getting anisotropic filtering to work but I agree that anisotropic filtering is what you need.
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 00:12
I was sitting here on the laptop contemplating some code and suddenly noticed the big red ATI logo in the corner...AH! Maybe I can test this in the ATI control panel first!

Took me a while to find it and I turned on AF 16x

Yeah, it's definitely what I'm looking for to stop the blur.

Quote: "Sounds like one of mine. "


Checked its demo again, yeah, def yours.
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 00:15
Quote: "Kaedroho made a nice plugin for this:"


Yeah, that's the one I got, just wish it was per camera instead of per object.

A shader on 1000+ objects sounds like an FPS killer.

But I'm about to give it a try.
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 01:02
Quote: "A shader on 1000+ objects sounds like an FPS killer."


And it was, I lost 150 FPS, and that was just applying the shader to my 600+ floor planes. Afraid to see the drop when I add the 1,200+ walls. When I enable from the ATI thing, I only lose about 20FPS.

I only have around 470 FPS free to play with right now (without the shader).

Beautification may have to wait until I'm back in the USA to my beefy machine, Right now I should focus on game mechanics and what not for those free cycles I still have.

That KD AF shader is exactly what I was looking for though.
Green Gandalf
VIP Member
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jan 2005
Playing: Malevolence:Sword of Ahkranox, Skyrim, Civ6.
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 01:16
It all depends on what the shader is doing. If it's doing only standard rendering plus AF then it shouldn't cause much, if any, of a slowdown. Also, it's the number of polys and pixels in the scene that matters not the total number in the whole game.
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 01:33
I'm currently using all Planes to build the levels. At first I was using cubes, but couldn't figure out a solution to the vertex fighting placing cubes next to each other. (Unsightly panty lines)

So, in theory, I should be using 1/6th of the polygons using the planes than with the cubes.
Mage
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Feb 2007
Location: Canada
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 01:36 Edited at: 27th Feb 2018 01:43
While polygons statistic(1) and pixels do matter, it's the draw calls statistic(5) that reign supreme.

Keep the draw calls low and you keep the frame rate high. This is the big bottle neck of DirectX 9 that was addressed in DirectX 10.

1 object with 100,000 polys can run really fast if there's only 1 draw call. Meanwhile 1000 objects adding to 10,000 polys will be around 1000 draw calls and perform much worse.

This is why using cubes or planes to build a level is not good. Each is going to use a draw call, the draw calls will be too many and frame rate will tank. You'll need to find ways to merge the cubes or planes into a larger mesh that uses fewer draw calls.
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 01:54
Quote: "This is why using cubes or planes to build a level is not good. Each is going to use a draw call, the draw calls will be too many and frame rate will tank. You'll need to find ways to merge the cubes or planes into a larger mesh that uses fewer draw calls."


I was thinking about this for the future. Eventually to merge all the wall floor objects into 1 giant object, or merge the floors into 1 object and merge the walls into 1 object.

Currently, it's easy for me to texture the individual Planes as needed. I'll have to see if merging things together retains the texture data.

I guess it would be something like (as I'm building the walls) ,"add limb to object" or convert to mesh and use the mesh commands to combine as I build walls/floors. Haven't played with either option yet.

Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 01:57
I'm about to lose power for 3 hours, as they work on the electrical system in my building. My old laptop cannot run more than 15 minutes on battery
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 05:03 Edited at: 27th Feb 2018 05:04
Quote: "While polygons statistic(1) and pixels do matter, it's the draw calls statistic(5) that reign supreme.
"


I threw those statistic checks in

draw primitives min 5 :: max 504 (min is in a far corner of the map looking towards the void)
poly in screen min 10 :: max 1178 (min is in a far corner of the map looking towards the void)

I disabled my SkyDome for this test. I think it's about 450 polys on its own. I plan on converting it to 4 (or 5) sky planes anyway.

Also, Yeah! For power
Mage
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Feb 2007
Location: Canada
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 14:17
Figure out ingenious ways to combine objects or Exclude Object On/Off to omit objects in order to get the draw calls down.

What ever trick you think you can get away with. Maybe this means arranging the levels in a specific way to section them, maybe you figure out a complicated but efficient method of combining things, maybe when loading you prepare a few optimizations, perhaps a combination of these and other things.
There's a whole world of study devoted just to optimizations. It's a very wide and deep topic in itself.


Also only use Exclude Object On/Off on an object once per Sync. So you need to be efficient. Don't try to make everything visible then run through and pick what to hide since you'll be running it twice on those objects and it won't work.
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 14:24
Quote: "What ever trick you think you can get away with. Maybe this means arranging the levels in a specific way to section them, maybe you figure out a complicated but efficient method of combining things, maybe when loading you prepare a few optimizations, perhaps a combination of these and other things.
"


My current levels are 40x40, 1 DBP unit planes (make plane 1,1,1), then stitch them together. The largest I expect them to get is 60x60, maybe 100x100.

So sometimes I get the feeling I'm trying to optimize something that doesn't really need optimizing.
Mage
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Feb 2007
Location: Canada
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 14:35
Tim Smalley wrote: "High API Overhead (The Small Batch Problem):
Every time a command is issued to the API from the application, DirectX has to talk to the display driver and process the command so that the hardware can understand how to execute it. This in turn limits the number of objects that can be rendered along with the number of unique effects that can be applied to a scene.

The number of objects that can be rendered is limited by the number of draw calls the API can handle, because each draw call carries a fixed overhead. In DirectX 9.0, you could render around 500 different objects in any one frame before you become completely CPU limited. Objects can be things like trees, non-playing characters, characters, guns, buildings, etc. "

https://www.bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/graphics/directx10_future_of_pc_gaming/2/

This is the core problem that you face when putting a large number of objects into a game.
Mage
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Feb 2007
Location: Canada
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 14:37
Zep wrote: "The largest I expect them to get is 60x60, maybe 100x100."

100x100 = 10,000. That's a huge number of draw calls. You'd need a mesh. Even if the squares are detached.
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 15:19
Quote: "The number of objects that can be rendered is limited by the number of draw calls the API can handle, because each draw call carries a fixed overhead. In DirectX 9.0, you could render around 500 different objects in any one frame before you become completely CPU limited. Objects can be things like trees, non-playing characters, characters, guns, buildings, etc. ""


Tim must have been using a 486 DX

I'm drawing close to 2000+ objects right now and nowhere near to being CPU Limited...well, not yet, and I'm on a 15 year old laptop with 768 MB of mem (shared! with the video card).

Seriously, how old is that article?
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 15:36
Quote: "100x100 = 10,000. That's a huge number of draw calls. You'd need a mesh. Even if the squares are detached.
"



I'll make a simple 100x100 tomorrow. And see what happens.

Draw calls only appears to be what the camera can see (and a little more on each edge)

So I don't expect it's going to be close to 10,000 (that would be the full map viewed at once, which is never going to happen in reality.

Maybe 4K or 5K, if that.
Mage
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Feb 2007
Location: Canada
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 16:12

https://forum.thegamecreators.com/thread/217855
For some comparison. I was able to track that the issue got worse on more modern hardware as individual cores are not as performing as single core CPU's (instead the multiple cores work better with multi-core workloads). This supports the idea of the issue being CPU bound. Once the draw calls were reduced with optimizations there was a dramatic effect increasing the frame rate as you see. So I have witnessed what the article is saying myself. I suspect if you reduced your draw calls greatly there would be an incredible increase in frame rate.

Zep wrote: "Seriously, how old is that article?"

2006, so 4 years after DBP was released and before Direct X10.
James H
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Apr 2007
Location: St Helens
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 16:13 Edited at: 27th Feb 2018 16:18
Everything Mage just said...and then some.

This may help http://www.nvidia.com/docs/IO/8228/BatchBatchBatch.pdf
Win 7 Pro 64 bit SP1, AMD A4-5300 APU 3.4GHz, 8GB DDR3, NVidia GeForce GTX 750 1GB GDDR5, ASUS A55BM-E
Green Gandalf
VIP Member
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jan 2005
Playing: Malevolence:Sword of Ahkranox, Skyrim, Civ6.
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 16:38
Also, you can use exclude limb as well as exclude object. A very large mesh can be made up of many different limbs which, in turn, can be individually culled before doing any rendering.
Mage
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Feb 2007
Location: Canada
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 18:36 Edited at: 27th Feb 2018 18:46
Just a small story behind that image:
(I was going to give this grand story about gradually building and face lifting a game from Dark Basic Classic in 2000 until now.)

Instead I'll just say that in that particular game (untitled) the world was built out of cubes on a grid for walls. I added different textures/heights/altitudes/transparency to the cubes. I could also replace the cubes with more detailed wall pieces at a later date (which as been done to a degree). This worked really well to make a level, there are some limitations to this approach but workload to make a level is really low. This also made a huge performance hit, especially in large (let's be honest pretty small) levels.

(skipping a lot of other grand stories and topics about this game.) (This takes place over many years.)

Phase 1:
I stopped using built-in cubes. Instead I modeled a collection of cubes with every variation of the sides culled. The game instead determines which is appropriate and loads that variation instead. This eliminated hidden polygons that didn't need to be drawn. This only helped a little bit.

Phase 2:
I decided that the number of objects in a level had something to do with the frame rate loss. So I made the game group wall sections that are next to each other into one of those sections stretched and texture scaled to look like the same thing. This had the effect of dramatically and automatically reducing the number of wall objects in levels greatly. This made a major improvement in performance.

Phase 3:
I read a statement by Gabe Newell Half-Life/Steam creator. He mentioned how important it was to group/reduce draw calls in directx 9. I also read the details of directx 10 which had the central feature of tackling the problem. So I created a portal/zoning system that was initially used on characters/furniture/etc and gave me good performance gains. However after a while with everything as lean as I could get it performance dragged. So I applied the zoning system to the walls of the level in an automatic fashion. This basically meant that when staring at a wall, finally the rest of the level behind there was empty. This is why in the last frame of the image the frame rate jumps to 500% of what it was. The draw calls falls from 1250 to 90.

Phase 4:
Eventually there might be a phase 4. If I find there is some way to group the remaining wall sections into even fewer draw calls. I am concerned this might begin to affect shaders and other effects though. I mentioned in another thread that I was looking at making a tool that reads/writes DBO files. So I think at this point I could probably replace the matrix ground system with a proper mesh. It's more about finding the time and the will power. I only work on DBP stuff a few months of the year on and off.

Oh yea I just remembered I was trying to make levels random generated. It's still in the works, I implemented into the level editor prefabricated level sections and I was looking at a way to get the game to load them, rotate them, snap them together, and make the ai pathing system link up. I also was looking at a way to get the zones of a level automatically detect if they can see each other since with randomized levels there's no person to manually set the values. I think I got that part done. it's been I while since I worked on this. When you're one person, random levels is a blessing since you don't need to make the levels and you get to experience surprises in the layout and explore things.

I'll also take time to mention that I have found putting a little effort in writing and improving development tools for a game, saves much more time then it uses. Level editors, script editors, character editors, etc.
Also one time I lost the source code for my level editor and I had to completely write the app.
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 27th Feb 2018 23:57
Quote: "I'll make a simple 100x100 tomorrow. And see what happens.
"


Building the 100x100 right now...Let's see what happens....
Zep
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2002
Location: From PA, USA. Currently reside in Hanoi, Vietnam
Posted: 28th Feb 2018 00:50
Quote: "Building the 100x100 right now...Let's see what happens....
"


100x100 is huge, HUGE!. I doubt I'd have the patience to fill that with stuff.

I do take a big FPS hit when looking at as much map as possible at 100x100. Typically, with 40x40 i'm running at around 452 FPS, 100x100 I drop to around 30.

So today, I'm planning on inserting the object combining code, combining floors and walls into 1 object, then I will test 100x100 again when it's just 1 object.

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2020-05-28 23:30:44
Your offset time is: 2020-05-28 23:30:44