Graf Zahl wrote:Geforce 1060 it's at 26-27 fps
Kinsie wrote:Ryzen
RockstarRaccoon wrote:(And interestingly enough Graf, that must be a pretty new, high end computer, seeing as this development machine I just bought uses a 1050ti, the previous model)
RockstarRaccoon wrote:It's not the models, Wiiw, it's the resolution of their textures. I could barely make out the pixels on this one rock on the beach when I was playing C1M2 the other day, and that was sticking my face up against it at fullscreen resolution. There is a fine line between attention to detail and overdoing it.
Wiw wrote:Would reducing the texture resolutions really make that much of a difference?
RockstarRaccoon wrote:Ok, I think this probably feels like we're attacking, and that's not the intention, so I'm gonna go ahead and back out now. It's a good project guys,
great work so far, we're just saying it would benefit from framerate optimizations.
Ozymandias81 wrote:Yet no one still said to me if you compare actual TITLEMAP and January one (check my previous comment) you notice significant improvements, at least all BoA team members noticed that.
Graf Zahl wrote:I think if you can replace this one portal with a traditional Boom sector to sector teleport somehow it'd make the map a lot more playable already. What's left after that needs to be done through engine-side adjustments, but I can outright say that the portal alone will be enough to prevent 60fps in the village, even if the engine side changes can eliminate 90% of the processing time.
Rachael wrote:All effort is being focused on the visual aspects of it, but literally none is being made toward the things that really matter: what the player finds fun and engaging, as well as running with at least 30 FPS on an average system that GZDoom runs on. I think the team really needs to realize that it's okay to sacrifice visual quality for the other two things. It would do something that's taken such a monumental effort, as this clearly has, some real justice, and ensure that none of that effort goes to waste.
Graf Zahl wrote:Just removing the crossbeam bridges and replacing them with 3D floors makes it run at over 60 fps on my home system and 40 fps on my work Mac with an integrated Intel chipset.
RockstarRaccoon wrote:The saddest part is, last night I downloaded and played Tormentor's Refinery, and that map was even more intricate and detailed than any of the maps in this game, with detailed areas beneath complicated catwalk bridges, and a section where you fall through a floor to go through a giant worm thing which goes beneath another floor and pops out in the yellow key room, which is surrounded by detailed hallway. All of that looked amazing, and was done without any portal abuse, just a bunch of 3D floors, which, by the way, use a relatively small amount of resources, even if they are transparent or sloped.
Tormentor667 wrote:For my understanding, 3d floors are more performance-intensive than portals - or did I get something wrong?
Return to TCs, Full Games, and Other Projects
Users browsing this forum: cosmos10040 and 9 guests