Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => FS2 Open Coding - The Source Code Project (SCP) => Topic started by: DrunkenPirate on September 14, 2004, 10:25:01 pm
-
First off, congrats on making one of my favourite games ever even better than I imagined. I only discovered this SCP project a few weeks ago but have not had the chance to test it out fully. I have managed to install everything successfully as stated in the various read-me's and things seem to be working properly. I was about to post about a bug I keep getting with the "engine failure" but have just seen a thread about it and downloaded/installed the fix. Bug#1: I do however seem to be getting horrible lag whenever the Hatshepsut (Vasudan) destroyer is in the mission. If I look away from it all is fine but if I look directly at it the frame rate slows down to almost annoying unplayable rates. Have I configured too much "eye candy" or is this a known issue with this vessel? I have run the launcher and just selected "All Features On".
Bug #2: The radar is non-functional with unless i uncheck the "-radar reduce" flag. I have no idea if this some kind of feature or bug or not.
My apologies if any of this has been mentioned before.
GA7VAXP Ultra mobo
XP3000 barton
9800pro
-
:welcome:
-
Bug#1: I do however seem to be getting horrible lag whenever the Hatshepsut (Vasudan) destroyer is in the mission
Even with all of the eye candy turned off and using the "lite" MVeffects it cuts my framerates in half whenever it shows it. Even when it is the only thing showing.
-
Don't use "all features on." A good number of those features should only be turned on specifically if you want them (cell-shading, the orb, radar-reduce, probably the shield-piercing options, pcx32, etc). Go through each of the lists and turn on what you want. Glow and spec come highly recommended (and jpgtga is a must if you're using new art), but besides those everything else is a matter of personal taste.
And I think the Hat has ever-so-slightly dodgy pof data somewhere. It seems to be the source of way more than its fair share of errors.
-
I feel its time everyone started using DDS more often. It works wonders with loading times and ingame performance. Especially on low end cards like Geforece MX's. PCX32/JPG and ESPECIALLY TGA textures really suck up video memory and impact fps.
-
LS is gona beam you for saying that, even though it's true
-
Originally posted by Kosh
Even with all of the eye candy turned off and using the "lite" MVeffects it cuts my framerates in half whenever it shows it. Even when it is the only thing showing.
Yes this problem of new rendering engine is confirmed by multiple pilots (including myself). It is said that HT&L "should" run faster but honestly even without any additional media and all features turned off it runs slower than original FS2 rendering engine... (this post surely grants me at least another 10 "hate" points from SCP developers... as soon i get over 100 i guess i get ban ;))
But hang on, huge change is incomming! Keep and eye "Request: Old Engine Client" thread. :) (another +5 "hate" points :D)
-
Originally posted by Svizel
Yes this problem of new rendering engine is confirmed by multiple pilots (including myself). It is said that HT&L "should" run faster but honestly even without any additional media and all features turned off it runs slower than original FS2 rendering engine... (this post surely grants me at least another 10 "hate" points from SCP developers... as soon i get over 100 i guess i get ban ;))
But hang on, huge change is incomming! Keep and eye "Request: Old Engine Client" thread. :) (another +5 "hate" points :D)
Simply put you must be missing a thing for another one.
For instance I have played FS when the new features were coming out including shinemapping ect. It was a huge drain on the system - escpecially on my older system.
When HTL came out you experienced a huge performance boost - however the modelers and texturers quickly took advantage of it - somewhat even more so than it could have been.
That's the reason that even the best systems are shaken when forced to deal with the ultra-detail textures and ultra-polycount ships that were included in some of the new media data.
Lightspeed's latest endevour - a lower res./more optimised version of all the new media is a good promise for better and more fluid performance.
-
Hey DrunkenPirate, welcome to HLP. ;)
:welcome:
-
Originally posted by Flaser
Simply put you must be missing a thing for another one.
For instance I have played FS when the new features were coming out including shinemapping ect. It was a huge drain on the system - escpecially on my older system.
When HTL came out you experienced a huge performance boost - however the modelers and texturers quickly took advantage of it - somewhat even more so than it could have been.
That's the reason that even the best systems are shaken when forced to deal with the ultra-detail textures and ultra-polycount ships that were included in some of the new media data.
Lightspeed's latest endevour - a lower res./more optimised version of all the new media is a good promise for better and more fluid performance.
No offense but i'm afraid it's time to get more "hate" points... :D
First of all please read my post before quoting it, if you did so please read again... :) I'm afraid it is actually you who is "missing a thing for another one".
I'm comparing vanilla FS2 render engine with current SCP HT&L render engine, you are comparing SCP non-HT&L engine with SCP HT&L engine. It "seems" that DirectX-8 implementation to SCP engine made it kinda "slower by default" no matter if HT&L is turned on or not. This leads to curent speed comparision where vanilla FS2 engine i fastest, followed by slower SCP HT&L and slowest is SCP non-HT&L. There is no way you can even notice this slowdown on fast PCs but on older ones it's very noticable.
Also you are mentioning performance drain cause by new models, textures and effects, i was speaking of plain engine speed with all features off. I'm afraid we can't ever agree on anything as long i keep comparing two apples and you keep comparing two pears, can we? :)
And about Lightspeed's new media... no offence but did you even look on them? Did you ever opened any of new fighter or bomber textures? Yes they are more performance-friendly than old TGA versions but for sure they are not lowres... Actually it's me who's working on "lower res./more optimised" version for them. :)
-
Yes, my point is nothing low-res. :wtf:
Heck, if you want low-res, untick the "use large textures" and use retial stuff.
-
You know you are extremist? ;)
I'm trying to find balance... Nice eye-candy while keeping it on reasonable performance usage... neither retail nor 1024x1204 textures :)
-
Originally posted by Svizel
It is said that HT&L "should" run faster but honestly even without any additional media and all features turned off it runs slower than original FS2 rendering engine...
that was done with the first htl version of fs_open (3.55):
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,18777.0.html
IIRC Lightspeed also made many (better) performance tests
-
Well... correct me if i'm wrong but if i read the thread correctly you are comparing there SCP non-HT&L(DX8) with SCP HT&L(DX8)... I'm comparing vanilla FS2(DX5) with SCP HT&L(DX8)...
-
at the time of those tests the dx8 pre htl FSO version was considered faster than the vanilla fs2 by the coders, but I haven't tested it personally.
Can't remember if someone else checked it (fps counter...)
-
Well... i don't even need FPS counter for that, it's quite easy and obvious test...
Look on Sathanas in Breaking the Seal - vanilla FS2 - smooth :)
Look on Sathanas in Breaking the Seal - SCP HT&L - choppy :(
The problem is you won't notice that unless you have older PC (and it seems non of coders have one). I'm pretty sure that on new PC both would hit FPS max cap...
-
Originally posted by Omniscaper
I feel its time everyone started using DDS more often. It works wonders with loading times and ingame performance. Especially on low end cards like Geforece MX's. PCX32/JPG and ESPECIALLY TGA textures really suck up video memory and impact fps.
Does DDS support alpha-layered transparency?
-
Yes it does. ANOTHER reason to use it over TGA's. Lightspeed has noticed some compression artifacts over color gradiations, but negligable texture glitches are forgivable if it boosts performance by 20 fps (GeforceMX in particular).
Svizel, I understand what you're trying to do with balance and all. But also understand that "balance" becomes futile when it begins to impede progress. When I first joined the community, I was like DrunkenPirate. I was excited with what the SCP has done for Freespace2. With the doors they've opened for the modders, I felt its up to us to utilize their gifts to bring FS2 to a new plateau.
Back in Dec '03, I saw HT&L's potential and was pissed that few people at the time was really giving it a real shakedown to let the programmers how well their efforts are working. I was hoping to break the cycle of skepticism with the HT&L that was under development by putting a 15k poly model (TNG enterprise) in the game. I got critisim about having such a high poly model in game and that its a waste of my time to attempt it. Out of contempt for that criticism, I put to gether a massive fleet battle of 50+ starships to prove that HT&L kicks major ass and that people should start pushing the model limits of old.
I wonder what those same people have to say now about that fabulous high-poly Fenris and Hercules and the trek conversions I've worked on.
Complacency has no place in a project that is in continual evolution.
Thank YOU SCP!!!!
-
This probably isn't the right thread for this, but I need to say it somewhere. All I know is that there are two distinct camps involved here. One (which I am a proud member of) wants to push the limits of the engine, even if it means that older systems like the Voodoo's are left by the wayside. This camp's biggest argument on those grounds is that if you're serious about a game, you really should have upgraded by now. The other camp insists that the SCP stay within the confines of the original system specs. This group seems to consist largely of older multi vets, who looked to the SCP as a replacement for the multi servers. And they too have a point, but they have come in here lately demanding to have their cake and eat it too. The graphics people aren't going to take well to demands to scale back on graphics, and the multi players don't want to lose their vaunted performance. There's been little effort to compromise from those demanding changes (or those defending them), while the staff (short-handed though they are) tries to make all parties happy. Keeping within specs for those cards is something that is hardly even possible 6 years after release, and reverting the necessary changes is extremely difficult, but there are efforts in the works to rectify the problems.
I guess my message to the multi crowd is this: the SCP staff is trying to be accommodating, and all the thanks they get is continued complaining. Chill out; when someone says "I'm working on it" then they are, so continuing to point out old bugs and to demand the same changes is not appropriate, nor is it more likely to get any further attention focused on the subject.
To Omni (and Lightspeed, and anyone else who continues to push the graphical envelope): keep doing what you are doing. Your upgrades remain purely optional, so lower-end users don't have to use them if their system won't support it. But try to sympathize with their requests, as they are legitimate users of the SCP as well and deserve the same attention that our graphical goodies do.