• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Plethora

A question about the word "rendering"

6 posts in this topic

So the specific context here involves SFML2 and sf::RenderTexture, but I think there is some generality here.

 

So I have a tile map and up until now I've been sending invidual draw commands for each and every tile.  I've read here and other places that this is generally considered bad form and that you're much better off putting together everything on your screen to be drawn and then sending one draw command.  That makes sense and I understand the reasoning behind it just fine.

 

My question is, can I assume that if I'm not actually drawing to the screen that I'm not actually rendering anything?  Or is this completely false?

 

Consider this:

 

sf::Sprite tile1;
sf::Sprite tile2;
sf::RenderTexture builder;
sf::RenderWindow screen;

builder.Draw(tile1);
builder.Draw(tile2);

screen.Draw(builder);

 

 

I know that code is incomplete, I just wanted to get my point across.

 

So in this case, am I "rendering" 1 time?  or 3 times?  Am I accomplishing my goal of only drawing to the screen once?  Or not?  

 

The additional question is, if I'm not, how would I do it instead?

 

thanks for the help!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is false.

 

Reasoning behind drawing everything in 1 draw call is CPU usage. When you draw driver has to make sure all resources are correct, perform error checking & other things which eats reasonable amount of performance.

 

You say you draw to "screen", but actually you draw into texture, just later on it gets sent into the screen, so the difference between your current code and in this post is that you send different texture to screen.

 

What you want is called instancing. You'll have to search through SFML documentation how to use it, but general idea is that you set model's buffer (in your case tile), then set 2nd buffer which is an array of positions for those tiles, then draw 100 tiles and it'll merge those buffers, allowing to draw 100 tiles with single call.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I have a tile map and up until now I've been sending invidual draw commands for each and every tile.  I've read here and other places that this is generally considered bad form and that you're much better off putting together everything on your screen to be drawn and then sending one draw command.  That makes sense and I understand the reasoning behind it just fine.

Usually when people are talking about that, they are referring to when drawing millions of 3D triangles or hundreds of thousands of 2D particle effects. A few thousands tiles shouldn't slow down your program much - is your program running abnormally slow?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, not at all.  The reason I brought it up is just because I'm revamping some aspects about how I draw everything already for unrelated (mostly code manageability) reasons and just thought that if there was a more "standard" way to do this that this would be a good time to learn it.

 

Would you say proceeding as I have been is a-ok?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0