Finely Snapped - Demo.

[jph_wacheski]

still does not explain why for Ville and I it runs slower,. seems rather strange to me still,. I get 60fps on this demo when it is build on the non-VBO ver. and around 30 fps on the VBO ver,. . but when I lower the number of object to 3 it comes back up to 60fps,. so the performance is worse,. can the architecture of these chips all be that different as to explain these results? or it there some other bottle-neck,.

yeah I do hear doing buisness with the big console corporations is quite the struggle,. as is getting paid in some situations,. one developer told me of a DS release where the publisher manufactured just enouph carts to brake even,. so they expect to see no return,. . what fun.

Anywhy I was thinking more of a 'perfect world' senerio where I could develop for a HARD SET system of hardware and actually get paid for my work,. guess I expect too much, eh. Oh well I am still having some fun doing it,. just don't know for how much longer I will be able to try,. gotta be gold somewhere in those streams of bits,. .

[VilleK]

The GPU architecture and definitely the drivers can be different enough to give varied performance. I also read articles about using "display lists" which is another method of Open GL drawing that is old and supposedly obsolete but on some cards still gives better performance than other methods. So I'm guessing that on larger commercial PC engines they have to build in a list of configurations for a large list of cards, that tells the engine what technique to use on a card for best performance.

Let's try this vbo-stuff a while longer. It is easy for me to turn it off later if we don't get it to work properly. Maybe I can find a way to detect what kind of OpenGL driver is in use and turn it off automatically if it won't improve performance on that particular computer.

[kattle87]

solid 60 fps here, both VBO and non-VBO. Is there a frame limiter? I could not get more than 60 even with V-sync off.

[Kjell]

Off-topic

@jph: It's not all that unusual for publishers to only run a small print of a title they are not all that confident about. There is still a significant amount of money to burn on production / marketing / distribution once a developer delivers their master. And with right, they are the ones making the investments / taking the risks.

@Francesco: Did you try to increase your Refresh Rate? Otherwise try Ville's VBO experiment.

K

[jph_wacheski]

lol,. yeah that is the old argument,.
However it really dont fly, when they control all publishing on the systems,. in that they could just open it up! and allow anyone willing to 'take the risk' to release software for the systems (that are really the property of the people who bought them,. ). I am against all things corporate. anything that takes rights away from people in the name of private profits, and I always will be. It's the Anarchist side of my political bent.., not a big fan of patents or the copy righting of ideas either,. creative content should have some ownership rights for some limited time i suppose but that is just me allowing for a system of property and trade i really don't support,. so hipacritical as well,. .

here is a link to a good documentary that touches on this;
http://www.thecorporation.com/

[Kjell]

Things aren't always the way they should be indeed. Problem is that it probably takes money / time to change it ..

It's not entirely the publishers fault though. The platform holders control the requirements to obtain a publishing license to their consoles. And those requirements are often out of reach for developers without deep pockets ( hence the need for publishers ). But I guess manufacturing a console isn't cheap either ( couple of billion dollar )

PC / Mac / Linux / XNA / Dreamcast / iPhone is as liberal as it gets for now

I'll have a go at that docu, seems interesting.

K