Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Maker3D - create your 3D RPG

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Geri View Post
    ,,basic 30 FPS''
    30 fps is far enough for rpg games.
    Sure. My point was simply that reaching 30 FPS for should be _easy_ for such games. Many RPGs suffer from an extensive overuse of inefficient techniques. Things like Bethesda's games and their facial animation technologies, for instance, despite the rest of the game's graphics being pretty run of the mill.

    (however, there is some rare fps bugs on some systems/driver combination that affects nvidia cards, that is a mutch bigger problem than fps problem on intel).
    Common with OpenGL. If you can, for Windows users at least, just include a D3D version. I have a list of OpenGL bugs in NVIDIA's drivers for which there are no work arounds and which NVIDIA has not fixed in over 2 years, which affects every OpenGL-using application on the system (including their own examples).

    ,,poorly implemented blur can really chow through the GPU's memory bandwidth''
    well, actually the shadowing is what causes this, as you mention it later.
    Yeah, that'll do it.

    ,,I don't see that your graphics are all that advanced compared to mainstream games''
    mainstream games for pc is mostly 2d flash games and simply 3d games like minecraft. my graphics is mutch more advenced than them.
    AAA industry for pc is dead for years now, and its not mainstream aniway.
    Steam and the actual PC games sales figures disprove that. When people quote facts about PC gaming dying, they look at figures like how the console share of the game market is growing and the PC share of the game market is shrinking. What they consistently ignore is that the actual number of PC games sales is still _increasing_. The market is far from dead in any way, shape, or form.

    An AAA graphics engine is written by 7-10 coders for 2-3 years, i cant reproduce that quality, so if you need that kind of graphics detail, maker3d is not meant for you.
    Never implied it was. Just saying that the graphics you do have should not be having significant performance problems, and it's probably something within your power to fix; it just requires identifying the problem and selecting a proper solution.

    It's usually just a few small things that are wrong. I work with a _lot_ of student programmers doing games, and I've seen a lot about what can cause performance problems, and I've also seen just how beautiful and gorgeous a game can be while still running on horrifically crappy little Intel-based netbooks, despite only having a tiny little student team working in a semester or two.

    If you're sure shadows are the primary culprit (does turning them off raise the performance on Intel GPUs to acceptable levels? does it raise the performance on the non-Intel GPUs?), there's probably some ideas we can generate on getting shadowing that's Good Enough for your game while having significantly better performance.

    Comment


    • #17
      reaching 30 FPS for should be _easy_ for such games. Many RPGs suffer from an extensive overuse of inefficient techniques
      yeah actually, its some kind of pandemic disease around us

      include a D3D version
      its included, but through an opengl to d3d wrapper -> so its mutch more slower and buggy.
      Swtiching from opengl to other thing is not possible, this is a crossplatform software. And newer versions of d3d does not even available to XP, and 9 are old and legacy.

      Steam and the actual PC games sales figures disprove that. When people quote facts about PC gaming dying
      Steam is not AAA-only. I didnt sayd that pc game industry is dieing. Its not. But the pc game AAA level industry does. Its market share decrases in every year, it was on the top around the year 2000, now its basically almost below the detectable statistical margin, when compared to the other segments of the game industry.

      identifying the problem and selecting a proper solution
      The long answer about maker's performance:
      yeah, some problems (like those that causing serious performance drop on some nvidia cards) can be probably fixed by just fixing a bit somewhere in a function. but as maker3d is created by me, there is some structural problems, those will probably never fixed.
      the reason is complicated. the multimedia base engine, that hosts the makers engine (lets call it base engine) is a huge fugly monolithic semi-modular crap that i continously develop since 2006. The size of thats source code is above 1,4 mbyte. So 1,4 mbyte (without comments) pure C code. This thing is basically the ,,server'' architecture, that hosts every work of me (not only maker), and covers the platform, the 3d, the hardware. This is some kind of a simply game engine. The maker3d itself is wrapped and compiled together over this server architecture. The maker also is around an 600 kbytes of source code. So its very huge. But its small, if i compare it to some modern game engines like doom3. The conception of my multimedia engine is like a new hand of me, a hand with that i can reach my goals easyer. It provides a good, masked, layered interface for me, to create softwares in it - like maker3d.
      This is why its slow: its totally a 2+ mbyte source code written in pure C, and even if i would optimise this mess for a month (sometimes i do it) i just can gain a ~10% performance incrase. Becouse the limitating thing is the engine itself. But it canot be bypassed, becouse without this, i would unable to writte things like maker. So the performance is sacraficed in the name of existence. And no, it would impossible to throw out my multimedia engine, and use some different bsd or publicdomain engine as core, becouse i would still need to create interfaces i previously mentioned that is actually goals to satisly my mentality and coding style. This would cause that totally its performance would be mutch worst than the current. The only thing that would help this situation if i would write a new multimedia engine (not just graphics engine) from scratch, with the knowledge of the modern gpu and cpu architectures. But that would be still not really faster than this, and it would need 5+ years to do it. However, i am not interested to do so. It runs playable. It does not matter if it runs 30 or 90 fps. So, as i mentioned, the performance is sacraficed in the name of existence. The other casual developers, who creates ,,bigger'' stuff, like this maker, also do the same. Its still good, becouse its playable. And can be switched to low quality, so intel gpus also can run it. So the performance is not a problem, the code can do what it should.

      Comment


      • #18
        part 2 (i was just off to eat )

        your first though, rpg-s are slower. yeah. rpg-s are slower than other games, imho becouse of these reasons:

        *there is 20-70 levels in a -for example- FPS. Those levels and maps can easilly optimised, even by hand.
        But there is 100-4000 map in an rpg game. those cant optimised by hands, only by very ineffective algorythms - to avoid that something disappear what should not. In a fps, the coders/mappers can use very effective and modern optimisation, and if something disappears, in a position, they just solving by creating a local script that keeps the object visible in the questionanle position. In rpg, this canot do, becouse there is so big amount of maps and variations that the map creators just map together. For this reason, an rpg renders mutch more content, if you would add the same map for the both thing.

        *an rpg is mostly puzzled together from blocks, just like as in my maker. in an rpg, you can have various settings on your hero, there is so mutch places - mentioned before - there is so mutch logic beyond the engine - ai, battle system, item system, magic system, the quests itself, the ability that everything interacts with everything, the scripts that handle the logic beyond the whole game and beyond the current map, wich is mutch more complex than the logic beyond an fps.
        keeping this together, managing it in the memory, while understanding that everything can be just simply loaded to the map avoids the optimisations wich can do in the graphics engine, basically forcing everything to be managed as dynamic content. running this whole thing, executing the code to maintain this and interpreting the code beyond this, the maps, and the logic itself, and managing the whole thing together causes so mutch cpu overhead that an rpg, or an rpg game engine, compared to an fps, will be ineffective in every possible cases. Just like an electric concrete mixer, the pot will rotate slowly.

        Comment


        • #19
          Hi, nice work

          I do agree Intel sucks, but ehi:

          niko@laptop ~ $ openarena +exec anholt 2>&1 | egrep -e '[0-9]+ frames'
          840 frames 12.0 seconds 69.7 fps 4.0/14.3/99.0/5.1 ms

          Openarena @1280x800 and VERY HIGH quality settings

          niko@laptop ~ $ cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep "model name" | head -1
          model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU U9400 @ 1.40GHz

          niko@laptop ~ $ glxinfo | grep "OpenGL renderer"
          OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Mobile Intel® GM45 Express Chipset


          GM45 is a 2008 (4 years old) laptop's vga and the cpu doesn't help because it's an 1,4GHz Ultra Low Voltage chip.


          Are you sure the problem are the Intel chips?
          Last edited by darkbasic; 01-09-2012, 09:30 AM.
          ## VGA ##
          AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
          Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

          Comment


          • #20
            @Geri

            Is there a good example RPG for your engine? I have got no time to create a new game.

            Comment


            • #21
              Kano:
              the maker has a built in game to show the handling of the engine. (you can load and run startloc.bas)
              i dont know about other games made with maker, becouse i dont folow my costumers. judging from the emails at my support address, there is 3-4 wich is actively developed, and may alreday reached demo stage (maker is not so old)

              darkbasic:
              thanks
              btw, openarena only uses the half of the vertexes than maker, and it does not even have shadows and postprocess.
              you can disable the shadowing and postprocess in maker, then it will run around 60 fps also.
              also, maker's graphics engine has proper multimesh control, q3 endine do not even have that.
              that engine would literally shit into his own pants from this content that maker needs to process...

              so yes, the problem is with intel gpus. dont troll
              (no, i will not disable these effects in default just becouse intel makes slow hardware)
              Last edited by Geri; 01-09-2012, 10:40 AM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Geri View Post
                yeah actually, its some kind of pandemic disease around us
                Seems a bit unfair to criticize Intel's hardware so much then if you know the fault is partly yours.

                Swtiching from opengl to other thing is not possible, this is a crossplatform software. And newer versions of d3d does not even available to XP, and 9 are old and legacy.
                Supporting both is actually a lot easier than most people think. The actual parts of a graphics API that are used are pretty small, and the APIs need to be wrapped up behind a graphics interface for any non-trivial renderer no matter what. Really the hardest part by _far_ is just porting the shaders between the two, but that's where things like Cg come into play.

                It is more work, yes, but on the other hand if you primarily develop on Windows and port later to OSX/Linux then you'll find that working in D3D natively will save you a lot of head-to-desk moments, lower your blood pressure, and let you keep more of your hair.

                Steam is not AAA-only. I didnt sayd that pc game industry is dieing. Its not. But the pc game AAA level industry does. Its market share decrases in every year, it was on the top around the year 2000, now its basically almost below the detectable statistical margin, when compared to the other segments of the game industry.
                I was just at a conference earlier this year (DICE) geared solely towards marketing and business in the games industry, and there was an entire talk by an Activision exec about the "PC gaming is dying" myth. It's an often quoted statistic that's simply based on a misinterpretation of the market numbers. The talk is of course based on actual sales figures from actual AAA games over the last few years; they are very concrete, very objective, and very difficult to argue with.

                AAA game sales for PCs have _increased_ since 2000. All that "market share" means is that for every new PC gamers, there's 3 new console gamers. It does _not_ mean that PC gamers are largely converting to console gamers nor does it mean that there are no new PC gamers. It's just a measure of rate of growth, and while both PC and consoles are growing, consoles are simply growing much faster. Both markets are growing, the console market is just growing much much faster, because it's an easier market to enter (parents are more likely to buy their children a $200 console than they are to buy them a $1000 mid-line game-friendly PC or a $2000 game-friendly laptop, and consoles don't require a high level of expertise and maintenance effort to keep working like Windows/OSX/Linux do).

                Keep in mind that as far back as 2000, gaming was still a "nerd" thing to a large degree. Here in 2012 it's not uncommon at all to see whole families playing games, to see popular highschool girls having gaming parties with their cheerleader friends, to see the low-IQ jock-stereotype "bros" getting together for Halo or Madden nights, for middle-aged men and women to be MMO addicts or to be clan leaders in online FPS games, and so on. Gaming is mainstream now, so there's more than enough room for consoles to grow 600% while PC gaming _also_ still grows, because the industry as a whole has exploded in size.

                This is why its slow: its totally a 2+ mbyte source code written in pure C, and even if i would optimise this mess for a month (sometimes i do it) i just can gain a ~10% performance incrase. Becouse the limitating thing is the engine itself. But it canot be bypassed, becouse without this, i would unable to writte things like maker. So the performance is sacraficed in the name of existence.
                This goes back to identifying the problem: I don't think the size of your engine has much to do with things on the GPU side. When it comes to graphics, the CPU side of your code is not going to have a huge impact, unless you're simply doing things on the CPU that should be on the GPU (e.g., like Skyrim's shadowing system, which is all CPU-side for some mind-fucking-insane reason). Point being, there may be some very small, simple things to rearchitect in your graphics pipeline to get very large increases in performance. Just have to identify if those do exist and if so what they are.
                Last edited by elanthis; 01-09-2012, 04:12 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  ,,Seems a bit unfair to criticize Intel's hardware so much then if you know the fault is partly yours.''
                  no, its not. ~35 fps on a middle class computer IS my ,,failure''
                  but 3 fps on intel gpu's are NOT, thats intel fault, only they :P:P
                  a same price/spec nvidia hardware, it can run 5-15x faster :P:P

                  ,,Supporting both is actually a lot easier than most people think''
                  yes, if you design the code with keeping your eye on multi-api compatibility. if not, its almost impossible.
                  btw as i see, d3d drivers are just making the same retardness like opengl drivers, so i would never develop any game for d3d at all.

                  ,,Activision''
                  i think, the incrase of the sales not really a helpfull parameter, especially when manufacturial costs are basically raping
                  the whole industry, becouse they are actually incrasing mutch more, than the sales...
                  so i think market share is a mutch better measure.

                  ,,while PC gaming _also_ still grows''
                  you are right. but what you telling there, is the total pc gaming market, not just the pc-AAA.
                  probably you alreday recognized, that farmville has more active players (80m) than the TOTAL steam registered users (40m).
                  a typical pc game is not an aaa game.

                  (a theory calims that the lizzards grows until they are die.)

                  ,,This goes back to identifying the problem: I don't think the size of your engine has much to do with things on the GPU side.''
                  yeah, i told that to explain, why it was hard to reach 30 fps on middle class gpu's.
                  its a different thing, its not related to the intel-gpu problem at all.


                  ,,like Skyrim's shadowing system, which is all CPU-side for some mind-fucking-insane reason''
                  oh wow, i didnt know that :3
                  a timid note: my next experimental graphics engine also does this, becouse its actually a software-only ray tracer

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    BTW, what about adding a benchmark to your software? it should be quite easy to implement
                    It is a completely new engine, if it will end up being inserted into the phoronix test suite you will earn a lot of free advertising...
                    Last edited by darkbasic; 01-10-2012, 02:38 PM.
                    ## VGA ##
                    AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
                    Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Geri View Post
                      Qaridarium: maker crashes with some intel gpus aniway since intels last driver update

                      since that on some systems my maker crashes on some random configs, and my app is forced to the lowest possible level of mipmapping from intel drivers, and aniso is turned off also. result: now runs with 4 fps in hq mode. very cool and interesting result, compared to an nvidia or ati laptop on the same price can push more than 30 fps in hq with proper aa and af
                      because of this i stay away from any intel solution.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        darkbasic: i dont plan to add benchmarking, but executing the game in debug mode shows the fps.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
                          BTW, what about adding a benchmark to your software? it should be quite easy to implement
                          It is a completely new engine, if it will end up being inserted into the phoronix test suite you will earn a lot of free advertising...
                          This. Other linux games would benefit from this too.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Geri View Post
                            ,,Seems a bit unfair to criticize Intel's hardware so much then if you know the fault is partly yours.''
                            no, its not. ~35 fps on a middle class computer IS my ,,failure''
                            but 3 fps on intel gpu's are NOT, thats intel fault, only they :P:P
                            a same price/spec nvidia hardware, it can run 5-15x faster :P:P
                            You'd be surprised. You can make both NVIDIA and ATI hardware slow to a crawl by doing something that seems reasonable but just happens to hit a weak point. Yes, Intel is much slower, but again, even AAA games can manage on it these days at playable FPS. There is probably a solution.

                            ,,Supporting both is actually a lot easier than most people think''
                            yes, if you design the code with keeping your eye on multi-api compatibility. if not, its almost impossible.
                            True enough. Lesson for the future, I guess.

                            ,,while PC gaming _also_ still grows''
                            you are right. but what you telling there, is the total pc gaming market, not just the pc-AAA.
                            Actually it _is_ just the AAA games I'm talking about. Web games are not counted as PC games, they are counted as Web games, specifically because they work on a wide multitude of platforms. Farmville can be played on an Android phone, for instance.

                            When counting up games like these, we specifically look at native executable titles. Mobile games specifically count games written specifically for Android, iOS, WP7, etc. Xbox games (obviously enough, in this case) only count Xbox games (which are all of them, as it has no Web browser or such). Flash and HTML5 games count as Web games.

                            The places that get tricky are games built with toolkits like XNA, which technically can run on three platforms: PC, XBLA, and WP7. However, there's like 3 games I can think of that have had any success at all that have been built with XNA, so it's not a huge problem for the statistic just yet.

                            ,,like Skyrim's shadowing system, which is all CPU-side for some mind-fucking-insane reason''
                            oh wow, i didnt know that :3
                            a timid note: my next experimental graphics engine also does this, becouse its actually a software-only ray tracer
                            Hey, experimental hobby projects are one thing. Platinum-selling AAA game engines built on existing game engine technology by professionals with years of industry experience are another thing entirely.

                            With any software, you have to know what your goals are when writing it. Experimental engines have very different goals generally than engines meant for mass-consumer-oriented distribution and acclaim. Hell, look at most of the IGF/IGC winning games: most of them are (being frank) pretty unfun games. The same goes for a lot of the demo scene games, which are interesting to check out but almost all of them become boring as hell within about 30 seconds. Not all games and game projects are about making the next Mario-esque classic that will endure for decades. So long as you are doing what you want to be doing and it's working out well for you, that's what matters most.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I can't launch it.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                chris200x9: you must give more information about your problem.

                                elanthis:
                                yeah, if i would get tons of money, i would hire a lot of professional programmers (5-6), i would command them, to write a graphics engine on AAA quality, they would probably create an AAA graphics engine... but engine without content makes no sense, so i would need to hire 5-6 professional modellers who can do models in brutal quality, etc etc... so that will be 12 people, working for 2 year, it would cost around 2*12*12*10000 euro ~= 2 880 000 euros.
                                or if somebody would invent a cloning machine, i can clone myself into 8230 geris, and i would code a brand new graphics engine within days, then i would occupy the world and free up every contry with them, or i would just massacre them after they do not need...

                                complitely makes sense

                                but... you know what? if i would have that money, i would buy an island somewhere in the sea, and girls. 10 girls with good ass, and with strict thighs.

                                aaapc isnt equal to pc games, it just a subset.

                                btw, in my viewpoint, experimental hobby project = work = experimental serious project = money = professional industry experience of years, in casual (game)dev. the best is to run 10-20 experimental projects simultanously, nobody knows, wich one will be possible to sold, wich one will be popular, wich one will bring you money. in the past 4 years, i had around 80 experimental projects. 4 survived, but only 2 finished.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X