Before i start this off I want to make it 100% clear that i realize this is unoptimized and in alpha. However, when i booted into PA, my rig which normally runs 9 player games at highest settings (with 45-60 fps) was getting owned by the planetary editor (zooming was 2-5 fps) This just elicits some fear and i am concerned that the game is just going to get harder on computers. Again i realize this is totally unoptimized and alpha, but somehow im still concerned. Just looking for some reassurance from others that are having the same problem. I built this computer for PA so it would be a shame if it couldn't play it. PS. My rig Fx 8350 OC to 4.9 Ghz Two 660 Ti OC to 1200 Mhz 8 gb ddr 3 ram (1600 Mhz) Pleeeease don't take this the wrong way. This is not a pass at the devs, their progress, or any criticism. It is simply worry. BIG PLANET AWESOME! EDIT: Just did a test with openhardware monitor. Definitely my memory bottlenecking. Is 8 Gb enough?
Had some crashes to - it is to early to go these sizes. a find: we play now on 25km radius - right? that corresponds squarewise to a 88km (border length) square map (connecting to self at all borders though). a 100km radius would correspond to a 354km (border length) square map. huge sizes!
I wouldn't worry - this is the first pass of the planet editor, and it has been confirmed that there are a few memory leak problems with it. I'm sure that once it has been fixed and optimised it will run as smoothly as if you were playing the game with 0 players.
Don't panic if it becomes unresponsive, it may take 15 hard minutes (I'm not kidding) but if you wait it out, PA finally becomes responsive again.
The Immersion is just as gone if it was in Kms, because then you have Tanks the Size of Malls and Buildings the size of small towns and trees 500-1000 meters tall. Mike
I think there should be an adjustment in metering; or does a 2 meter high mountain offer more immersion?
The Immersion is just as gone if it was in Kms, because then you have Tanks the Size of Malls and Buildings the size of small towns and trees 500-1000 meters tall.[/quote] I think there should be an adjustment in metering; or does a 2 meter high mountain offer more immersion? [/quote] Question, when was PA meant to be realistically scaled? No mater what scale or unit of measurement you use, something will be off-kilter. Mike
The scale is way out in this game anyway, realism doesn't even factor into it. This is a galaxy where self-replicating robots fight for a forgotten cause - nothing has to be realistic. What's wrong with kilometer-tall trees or Matchbox robots? I'll roll with it =D
Just to clarify for anybody who it wasn't obvious yet. The numbers in the planetary editor aren't meters, kilometers or anything of that sort. They are a multiplier to a base number of the creation algorithm. So don't go about saying a planet is so and so size based on those numbers, as you'll be wrong.
Considering the game is coded in Meters(as said by Neutrino and shown in the Whitebox Pics) I think it's a fair assumption until stated otherwise. Mike
No its not. As had been stated by uber, the planet size we had until now was 300-700ish something meters. Which correlates to about 20 on the planet creator scale. It's a scaling number not a set number.
As long as everything sticks to the same convention, it really doesn't matter what the units are. They could be meters, kilometers, parsecs, microns, fathoms, furlongs, Planck units, feet, inches, angstroms or biblical cubits for all I care. The thing that matters is the relative scaling. Not the absolute length.
8 Gigabytes of Ram is not enough, Check out my video of RAM usage on the map builder. I think it peaked at about 21 GB, I think about 10 gigs or so of that was P.A. It swallows tons of RAM, Its kinda Awesome. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igJwaH8QAyc
