Question about tiling.

Started by
3 comments, last by Forcas 22 years ago
I''ve got a big background. Would it be any faster to split it into tiles and only blit the tiles on-screen? Storing the whole background on one surface seems to work pretty good, though.
-Forcaswriteln("Does this actually work?");
Advertisement
how big of textures are we talking about? If you are storing your whole background in one texture, thats bad. Many cards won''t support textures above 256x256, and if they do, it is probably killing your performance. I would look into a good tiled engine.

However, this is only advice, I always go with.. "if it ain''t broke don''t fix it"

good luck
---------------------------------"Without C, all we would have is Pasal, Basi, and obol.""Black holes are where god divided by zero."http://www.insodus.com
Actually, it''s 2048 X 8192..... and I''m making it in Direct Draw, so I''m not worrying about 3D cards. I guess I could test to see which way is faster.
-Forcaswriteln("Does this actually work?");
Tile maps work quickly because the tiles are help in video memory on-board the card and are blitted lightning fast from video->video. If you use a single bitmap then you need a card with lots of memory to achieve the same performance advantage.

This applys to all cards whether your using 3D or 2D on a Cirrus Logic 1mb or a GeForce3 64mb.

Don''t forget that you also have to store sprites, you will probably reuse the graphics for them but thats still additional memory.

Lastly tilemaps enable you to create levels without redrawing the entire screen (as an artist), and also you do not have to load new bitmaps for each level, only tile information.

,Jay
For a worms-style terrain engine, I wouldn''t really use any repeating tiles... so right now I can''t think of any benifits.
-Forcaswriteln("Does this actually work?");

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement