Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

phantom

Member Since 15 Dec 2001
Offline Last Active Private

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Are Third Party Game Engines the Future

Yesterday, 01:54 AM

Unreal is not built for computational efficiency. It's built for efficiency of content creators -- which in the AAA space is a very good thing. If you're spending $100M to make content, you don't want those people wasting half their time on bad tools and end up having to spend $200M. But in that trade-off, they give us a lot of other things to ridicule :P


I think the mistake people make is thinking that the Unreal Engine or Unity have been 'designed' in any coherent way at all. The scars and problems are what happens when you take an engine which was developed in the late 90s and continue to build on it for 20 years. What is cutting edge then is not cutting edge now, or indeed the right way to do it - trade offs change but when you've baked your data structures it is very hard to make that change without giving significant time to rewriting things.

(Do not believe the much repeated lie that UE4 was a complete rewrite - this is PR bullshit; segments of the engine were redone but the vast majority of the code didn't change between UE3 and UE4)

Unity suffers from much the same problem, while there is certainly a push towards better data centric designs (for example, the new job system) it requires time to swing the engine around from what was a good idea 10 years ago to how things work now.

It's rare you get a chance to gut everything and start again; I've experienced it once at Codies during the switch between Ego2 and (planned) Ego3 (Don't believe the lie which is the Ego Engine wiki page either ;) ) but it is a rare thing to do and even then was limited to graphics and resource loading for the most part, the former because Ego2 was a great XBox360 engine but kinda got worse the further you moved from that hardware :D

In Topic: Do you usually prefix your classes with the letter 'C' or something e...

26 May 2016 - 01:59 AM

1) Prefix class names with 'C'
2) Type 'C' in an IDE with code completion
3) Regret 1 as your code completion list fills up with a billion unrelated class names
4) ...
5) End up being found 2 weeks later, living in a cave as far from the coast as possible ranting about the ocean coming to get you...

In Topic: what good are cores?

24 May 2016 - 05:22 PM

Honestly, the fact you think this means you are a good 15 years behind the curve right now - threads have been a pretty big deal for some time and far from 'bling bling'.

Threads and cores are two different things imho; having hundreds of threads doesn't imply you need many cores.


Well, it seems like he isn't using threading at all, so that's the 15 years bit.
But yeah... I was kinda still thinking in line with what Hodgman said as my mental setup is basically the same where 'working threads' == 'cores' (more or less) so I tend to get sloppy with my wording.

I believe it's actually pretty hard to usefully use more than 1-2 cores full time.


Disagree.
Arrange your data correctly and things flow nicely; when combined with a job system you can scale pretty well.
(There is a degree of 'hard' in doing that... but.. again... see '15 years' comment as people have been working on and solving this problem for a while; PS3 was the poster boy for 'jobs', and today the 'jobs' mentality extends beyond the CPU cores and to GPU compute work too.)

In Topic: what good are cores?

24 May 2016 - 09:07 AM

so, what good are cores (at this point in time)? can they do anything truly useful? or just more BS bling bling chrome on high end machines?


Honestly, the fact you think this means you are a good 15 years behind the curve right now - threads have been a pretty big deal for some time and far from 'bling bling'.

In Topic: USC Canceled Video Game Panel For Too Many Men

13 May 2016 - 04:29 AM

Funny thing; I'm at a hack week right now, around 300 people from the same company from all over the world (fun fact; there is nothing more distracting than people speaking French when you are trying to focus when you know a tiny amount of the language and keep trying to scan for words you know).

Most of the people are, of course, white and male.
Followed by white and female.

Black people? Vanishingly small... like maybe 3 people in the whole group?

Thinking back over the last 8 years my own experience mirrors this to some degree; I've worked with more women ( both as artists and coders) and more people from the LGBT community than I have black people.

So, this event was canned because 'no women' but was fine despite 'no blacks'?
Me thinks people are focusing on the wrong things...

PARTNERS