|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
12
   |
Posted - 2016.01.08 05:57:00 -
[1] - Quote
I prefer getting rid of the whole procedurial generation of the maps and just go with fixed, pre-rendered maps with hardcoded structures modeled into them so that the PS3 and battle servers won't have to work so hard.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
12
|
Posted - 2016.01.08 06:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
Apocalyptic Destroyerr wrote:Maken Tosch wrote:I prefer getting rid of the whole procedurial generation of the maps and just go with fixed, pre-rendered maps with hardcoded structures modeled into them so that the PS3 and battle servers won't have to work so hard. I think if we do that, we get rid of like 4 Maps. Game is built around sockets remember?
I know. But I don't care about sockets anymore. The idea behind sockets was to create variety in every match. But it seems we have gained that variety at the expense of stability which as a result effect game performance and maybe server load.
By the way, there are 10 unique terrains in this game. None of them feel any different if one of the maps changes the sockets. As long as the terrain remains the same, the major city is in its typical location, and with the medium and small sockets in their usual spots, they will not feel any different no matter how many times those structures change.
I say get rid of procedurial generation and then hardcode specific cities and sockets into specific terrains and we're done. That way, the server won't have to deal with constant generation of a randomly designed map every time someone starts a search queue. Just randomly pick one of the ten static maps and it's ready to go.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
12
|
Posted - 2016.01.08 07:06:00 -
[3] - Quote
Shamarskii Simon wrote:Fully implement skins. Remove all the unnecessary models (e.g each nanohive is a different model, but they are all the same. Why not just reuse 1 nanohive model for ALL the nanohives.) why do you think it's lagtastic when a bunch of equipment is all in a small area?
Suits too. For just medium suits there are 10 models per race. And that's excluding APEX and BPO (not sure if those are separate models)
Fully implemented skins will free up SO much from the ps3.
CCP Rattati/Frame said that the Power Core idea (which does what you're looking for) is still an option on the table.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
12
|
Posted - 2016.01.08 14:29:00 -
[4] - Quote
Sequal's Back wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote:The tinfoil theory is that a port is too close to consider the necessary work not redundant. It's either too close or it's never gonna happen. In both ways, there're no points of developping Dust on ps3 anymore..
Considering that CCP still thinks that Power Cores is still on the table, I'm going to wager that perhaps it's either too close to when CCP has to make a decision regarding a port or CCP Rattati is waiting on Warlords 1.3 to be finished.
Overall, Warlords 1.3 is starting to look like it's going to be a very critical update for Dust 514 and its future.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
12
|
Posted - 2016.01.10 09:09:00 -
[5] - Quote
deezy dabest wrote:Maken Tosch wrote:I prefer getting rid of the whole procedurial generation of the maps and just go with fixed, pre-rendered maps with hardcoded structures modeled into them so that the PS3 and battle servers won't have to work so hard. Maps and sockets will be the same size whether the sockets are locked in or not. Getting rid of the sockets that are 1000s of meters in the redline on the other hand......
I'm more concerned about stability of a static map versus that of a procedurially generated map. Could a static one help mitigate fatal errors, reduce some terrain glitches, etc. compared to one that has to be auto-generated?
I'm sure the size of the models will not change, but that's not the point.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
12
|
Posted - 2016.01.12 02:35:00 -
[6] - Quote
Mobius Wyvern wrote:Maken Tosch wrote:Shamarskii Simon wrote:Fully implement skins. Remove all the unnecessary models (e.g each nanohive is a different model, but they are all the same. Why not just reuse 1 nanohive model for ALL the nanohives.) why do you think it's lagtastic when a bunch of equipment is all in a small area?
Suits too. For just medium suits there are 10 models per race. And that's excluding APEX and BPO (not sure if those are separate models)
Fully implemented skins will free up SO much from the ps3. CCP Rattati/Frame said that the Power Core idea (which does what you're looking for) is still an option on the table. What's been confusing is seeing CPM posts saying "don't count on it".
In what context did they say that? Did they mean don't count on it being implemented in Warlords 1.3 or never?
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
12
|
Posted - 2016.01.12 02:37:00 -
[7] - Quote
Banjo Robertson wrote:Apocalyptic Destroyerr wrote:Maken Tosch wrote:I prefer getting rid of the whole procedurial generation of the maps and just go with fixed, pre-rendered maps with hardcoded structures modeled into them so that the PS3 and battle servers won't have to work so hard. I think if we do that, we get rid of like 4 Maps. Game is built around sockets remember? each battle does take place on a planet in a district, what they need is a master list of each district, what the map is, and what sockets should be there, but like.. I dunno, take the best 26 combinations of maps and sockets and just mesh them into a combined thing for a complete seperate map. Allow skyboxes to still be changed based on planet/system whatever.
But my question here is which is more stable? A procedurially generated map or a static one?
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
|
|
| |
|