Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Asmodeous]

Considering that if you tap a magma pipe or river and have to move the fluid a long distance even the strongest computer drops to a stupidly-low unplayable framerate, I would suggest that this not being on the list to instead have a whole bunch of stuff added to the game when the game could be considered possibly broken by this factor is doing the game and community a disservice.

I understand wanting to add new stuff to DF, I want to have new stuff in DF, but I've got one hell of a beast of a computer that doesn't even twitch when running some of the highest-end games at framerates that tear the screen if I don't turn on an FPS cap, and can play DF on a 10x10 with 120 dwarves in it at 70-90fps. . . . until I tap the magma or water. . .

just because it costs more doesn't mean it is strong.  just because graphic heavy games run smooth doesn't mean that it can process operations quickly.  only in the 'gaming' community would someone mistake a high end graphics card for strength in computational power.  hence a strong computer might not be able to meet the minimum requirements needed to play 'high-end' games.  i am not saying that optimization isn't needed, or desired, but what i am saying is that you have illustrated the main reason as to why most people play DF.  DF walked away from super graphics, in order to focus on what a computer is really good at, computing.  too many people have been fooled to think that their 'super' computer is good, as a comparison my computer was first built by me 9 years ago, and i have not added any components to it in the past 6 years, yet with the maximum embark area, 200 dwarfs, magma and water falls from magma pipes and underground rivers, with tunnels spanning the entire map, along the x,y, and z axis, i end up with fps of 15-18 on 40d (not 40d# mind you).  when i first embark on a normal sized area i have about 37-41 fps, typically i play around 30 fps.  most computers nowadays don't perform as well as some older ones under continuous strain, as a result they perform well on benchmark tests, but are in fact weak computational devices (or computers for short).  anyone can create a fast game with little to no content, currently he is adding back in content that was lost due to needed changes to get zlevels, the next major release i believe will be the optimization release, hence it is a high priority, in fact a much higher one than most game developers, as most never truly optimize their graphics code, which is why one needs such a massively expensive and delicate component that some people forget that it isn't the entire computer.

I can run Crysis with everything on max detail while running folding@home in the background (in CPU mode) and still run Crysis at over 140fps.

While you may say to yourself "more expensive does not mean it is strong" to use as a defense, I once again stress 140 dwarves on a 10x10 (which I might mention I pointed out first because of the fact that I knew this argument would come up which is wrong) at 70+fps.

This machine is not weak. I am running a powerhouse of a machine that can handle bloody well anything you can throw at it without a hitch, CPU or GPU is irrelevant. This computer is no slouch. This is why I mentioned that 80 dwarves more on a larger map 5-6 years in I still get 70fps (give or take 5), as compared to on a small map just by making water or magma flow - which dumps to 22fps.

Trust me here. My computer is strong. I build it for strength, not for cost. I did not say "I have a really expensive computer". I said "I have a beast of a machine". These are two entirely different statements.

That being said:

The primary way he's made aware of them is Eternal Suggestion Voting, on which "Improved Pathfinder" stands at #4.  Toady's going to work through the top 10 ESV items after this release, and since he's going to also "think about the underlying problems/desires that many players have associated to those suggestions," it's likely that he'll end up working on other longstanding performance issues at that time.

So yes, optimizations are coming.  We have about as firm a timeline as one could ask for on this issue.

Thank you, Footkerchief, this is exactly what I wanted to hear.

[Retro]

Just for fun, here's a question about the release after this one :p
Given that dwarves often find occasion to vomit, will the next release include something like a vomitorium? Possibly a zone designated like a meeting room or a garbage dump?

No offense, but the color people use for dev questions is limegreen text.  The red highlighting is like visual screaming.  Anyway, did you mean the upcoming release that Toady's working on, or the ones after that?

It looks like he means the release following the one Toady's currently working on.

[Totaku]

What are the chances that the new version will be incompatible with the advanced tilesets, like the Mayday one ?

The new version will include the 40d# material, so on the most part the tileset should work in the new version, the only think you'll likely have to do is go through the graphics file and if needed reconfigure some things to that the graphic sprites will be placed accordingly in the new version.

Other than that, well, there will be new monsters, like Unknown Beasts, new Titans, a new underground critters, plus new dwarf classes so if anything.... you'll have to make new graphic sprites for the new things being added in.

[Neonivek]

What are the chances that the new version will be incompatible with the advanced tilesets, like the Mayday one ?

The new version will include the 40d# material, so on the most part the tileset should work in the new version, the only think you'll likely have to do is go through the graphics file and if needed reconfigure some things to that the graphic sprites will be placed accordingly in the new version.

Other than that, well, there will be new monsters, like Unknown Beasts, new Titans, a new underground critters, plus new dwarf classes so if anything.... you'll have to make new graphic sprites for the new things being added in.

Thus incompatable

[Footkerchief]

What are the chances that the new version will be incompatible with the advanced tilesets, like the Mayday one ?

100%

It might not be that dire.  All that's changed is that a) entity positions are different now and b) you can have a different sprite for each caste (which might cause a parse error in a current graphics file, depending on how it's done).  But yeah, it's certain that they'll need some adjustments at least.  Mike Mayday's always on the ball with that, though.

The new version will include the 40d# material, so on the most part the tileset should work in the new version, the only think you'll likely have to do is go through the graphics file and if needed reconfigure some things to that the graphic sprites will be placed accordingly in the new version.

Other than that, well, there will be new monsters, like Unknown Beasts, new Titans, a new underground critters, plus new dwarf classes so if anything.... you'll have to make new graphic sprites for the new things being added in.

Thus incompatable

"Incompatible" for graphics isn't necessarily a true/false thing.  I'm guessing that about 90% of the graphics will still work, but that really depends on the caste selectors.

[smjjames]

Mayday already has a version for 40D16, so it shouldn't be too hard to transfer over. I've heard that some tileset creators have already made a medical dwarf icon in prep for the new version.

So, I may have to use ASCII for a while. I would really like to have the economic stone thing and use Dwarf Therapist in the new release though.

[Neonivek]

Well it depends what you mean. (He said "Chance" not "How much")

If you mean "Can I use my old graphic packs on the game" the answer is no as the files are outdated with all the new improvements.

If you mean "Will the graphics themselves still work" the answer is yes (with some absenses)

I assume that the person who asked is really asking if he downloaded a graphics pack and applied it to the next version... would it work? and the answer is of course no unless he/she/it/maniac wants to do it tile by tile (which is doubtful)

[Totaku]

What are the chances that the new version will be incompatible with the advanced tilesets, like the Mayday one ?

The new version will include the 40d# material, so on the most part the tileset should work in the new version, the only think you'll likely have to do is go through the graphics file and if needed reconfigure some things to that the graphic sprites will be placed accordingly in the new version.

Other than that, well, there will be new monsters, like Unknown Beasts, new Titans, a new underground critters, plus new dwarf classes so if anything.... you'll have to make new graphic sprites for the new things being added in.

Thus incompatable

Only if your not willing to take a hour or two of your time putting in the tags to tell the graphics to go here and there. (plus whatever time you want to make other graphics, but I guess that can be expected out of some people.

So to those who would rather want an instant fix, they'll have to wait, otherwise, you can fix it yourself.

(I plan to fix up Suika Fortress for the new release once it's out.)

[smjjames]

Well yea, since the cat mouth thing is going to be fixed, not to mention all the material and tissue stuff.

However, if you just take the graphics (without anything else) and paste them into vanilla, it should work.

For stuff that it doesn't have graphics for, it reverts to the default.

[Orkel]

Well I see he went the simple route like some of us perdicted, so I guess that'll solve the "climbing down issue" for now.

Anyways, it's now "perdiction time" as I promised!

*wall of text*

I can't help but think that you're being too pessimistic about Toady's workspeed, or that I'm being too optimistic, but I personally hope to see a release in 2-3 weeks.

[quinnr]

Underground is done! 

[Sizik]

I can run Crysis with everything on max detail while running folding@home in the background (in CPU mode) and still run Crysis at over 140fps.

Folding@home runs at low priority by default, so that doesn't say much.

[Sean Mirrsen]

I can run Crysis with everything on max detail while running folding@home in the background (in CPU mode) and still run Crysis at over 140fps.

While you may say to yourself "more expensive does not mean it is strong" to use as a defense, I once again stress 140 dwarves on a 10x10 (which I might mention I pointed out first because of the fact that I knew this argument would come up which is wrong) at 70+fps.

This machine is not weak. I am running a powerhouse of a machine that can handle bloody well anything you can throw at it without a hitch, CPU or GPU is irrelevant. This computer is no slouch. This is why I mentioned that 80 dwarves more on a larger map 5-6 years in I still get 70fps (give or take 5), as compared to on a small map just by making water or magma flow - which dumps to 22fps.

Trust me here. My computer is strong. I build it for strength, not for cost. I did not say "I have a really expensive computer". I said "I have a beast of a machine". These are two entirely different statements.

Well, you probably have a quad-core then, and something akin to a SLI GPU setup, plus a load of RAM. Out of all that, DF benefits only from the RAM, and one of the cores. There are no graphics to speak of, and Toady didn't have the skill to start making DF with multicore CPUs in mind, so your "beast of a machine" is no better for running DF than a medium-level office machine with a 3GHz dualcore, four gigs of RAM, and a crappy videocard. Indeed, my laptop may be more efficient at it if I double the RAM in it (and if it actually worked, but that's beside the point).

Hm, somehow I started this reply without wanting to start an argument. Well, anyway. DF is vastly different from any commercial game in its requirements. Especially from Crysis. And the fact that flowing water and magma bring DF to a crawl on a small map means that DF doesn't like your PC for some reason. My feeble old desktop manages to keep working at acceptable speeds when flows are involved. I don't remember the exact number, but embarking on a narrow waterfall in a 4x4 area gave me around 30 fps. I gotta check that again btw, it's been long since I ran DF on this rig. Maybe I'm even wrong.

edit: yes, wrong, and in a good way. Just embarked on a 4x4 site with a crossing of three minor rivers, meaning two waterfalls. The large space between the rivers constantly fills up with water, I'm digging channels around to let even more water through (creating Niagara falls, as it were), and I'm still constantly above 85 fps. This is on a rig so outdated it ain't funny - a 2GHz P4, with 512mb RAM and a GF4MX440. Which means that if you suffer terrible lag with flows, something is wrong between DF and your computer.

[Shoku]

Will the final stretch contain any optimization code?  For example fluid dynamics and pathing?

Those being fairly major systems and not being on the list makes that question answer itself.

Considering that if you tap a magma pipe or river and have to move the fluid a long distance even the strongest computer drops to a stupidly-low unplayable framerate, I would suggest that this not being on the list to instead have a whole bunch of stuff added to the game when the game could be considered possibly broken by this factor is doing the game and community a disservice.

I understand wanting to add new stuff to DF, I want to have new stuff in DF, but I've got one hell of a beast of a computer that doesn't even twitch when running some of the highest-end games at framerates that tear the screen if I don't turn on an FPS cap, and can play DF on a 10x10 with 120 dwarves in it at 70-90fps. . . . until I tap the magma or water. . .

On a 6x6 if I am moving magma long distances, my framerate drops to an entirely unplayable framerate with forty dwarves of 22fps.

This, one might suggest, is hardly acceptable. "It's an alpha" is the expected answer, because that is the response of those that are not critical of games they are fans of.

I don't get that ridiculous a hit from it- are you trying to get the water to flow from a river through a ten wide hallway?

I can't even see a hit it it's a single wide corridor.

[Martin]

Well, anyway. DF is vastly different from any commercial game in its requirements. Especially from Crysis.

Not to mention the small fact that Crysis had a budget of $22 million to create by what would be considered a small army of programmers from the perspective of games less than 10 years ago, compared to one guy trying to land a consistent $5,000 in donations each month.

Hell, Crysis had an entire team of people just dedicated to getting the physics code accurate and optimized over the course of 3 years. Toady likely knocked it out in a couple of weeks.

My tip to Asmodeous would be to find the $21.95M that Toady doesn't yet have in his budget and I'm sure he'll find a way to get water flow modeling onto the GPU, or at least a 2nd core.