Return to “Everything & Anything”

Post

Re: 10000 Asteroids Testlevel (WebGL)

#31
Damocles wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:18 pm

I dont plan to make it a highly competative multiplayer. The DEV galaxy is around 500 systems with around 8 planetary systems each (and their moons), and other places.
So enough space to have a nice singleplay exploration experience.
In the end, the features are not nailed down yet, still under change.

My plan is, that the player can choose to play in multiplayer, or singleplayer-mode.
Where the singleplayer is in the same galaxy, but more of a player in a "parallel" dimension. He can still see how the galaxy develops, see stations build by the online player, but is not a target of any sort. I know that online games can turn off - players who just want to enjoy a game at their own pace - by being placed in a competitive environment.
That sounds good to me, Damocles. :thumbup: Just keep those updates coming. :angel:
Post

Re: 10000 Asteroids Testlevel (WebGL)

#32
Technical:

Regarding movement: the ship controls will also have strafing (sideways and vertically), but more of a slow maneuvering movement, depending on the RCS modules (those little Trusters on the side).
And also a speed marker (Dev-GUI is ugly and skipped for now). For quick escapes or faster movement, the player can use boost, where steering will be limited.

The collision detection is quite poor. (eg, sinking a bit into an object) I will use different collision hulls (depending on the size of the objects) later.

I have to see if the engine can run stable on a (modern) tablet. And if the controls support that. Would be nice, but I dont see mobile support as a requirement for now.
Post

Re: 10000 Asteroids Testlevel (WebGL)

#33
Damocles wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:35 pm
My plan is, that the player can choose to play in multiplayer, or singleplayer-mode.
Where the singleplayer is in the same galaxy, but more of a player in a "parallel" dimension. He can still see how the galaxy develops, see stations build by the online players, but is not a target of any sort. I know that online games can turn off players - who just want to enjoy a game at their own pace - by being placed in a competitive environment.
just dont force it onto people like a certain other space game *cough*
Damocles wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:25 pm
Anyone found the "drifters" yet ;)
looks more like minmatar to me
Spoiler:      SHOW
Image
Post

Re: 10000 Asteroids Testlevel (WebGL)

#36
Very nice!

For the 10,000-asteroid version I'm getting a solid 60 fps in fullscreen as long as I don't move. The "worst" I've seen was 52 fps for a tiny fraction of a second while I was whipping my view around to see the planet and a full asteroid field.

  • Intel i7-5930K @ 3.5 GHz
  • 32 GB RAM
  • 2 GTX 980 Ti in SLI
  • Win 10
  • Brave browser :P

Some things I noticed (besides the "god rays" from the star):

  • If you zoom in on your ship, there's a bit of flashing fore and aft -- some kind of visual artifact.
  • Quite a bit of LOD popping, but so it goes.
  • The harsh lighting felt right for space. (Rodina does a good job of this, too.)
  • I liked the little RCS modules on the ship. :)
  • I wished I could fly faster relative to the asteroids.
  • The zoom-in/zoom-out wheel movement felt backwards to me.
  • Hey, this ship has a spotlight!
  • I concur with the others; that engine sound is awesomely good.
  • I did notice a couple of asteroids appearing and then whizzing quickly past me. Are those the "drifters?"
Post

Re: 10000 Asteroids Testlevel (WebGL)

#37
"I concur with the others; that engine sound is awesomely good."

Hehe, its basically a Brownian noise, mixed with a 60 Herz Sine wave, and then some filters applied.

For the demo, I have set the LOD to react at quite a short distance. This will improve when I have more metrics about the actual performance impact, better LOD model stages, and also way less asteroids at one spot.

An RCS is kind of needed in a space vessel. (How else can spaceships move?, "wings" are not much help in a vacuum).
I will try to keep everything halfway plausible... as long as it does not directly affect gameplay in a negative way. The speed will go up, but for technical reasons I dont want to have super fast movement. Also, the higher the movespeed, the smaller the world would feel. I have kind of a target "time" it will take players to travel within one location.
There are faster methods of movement between locations, but in order to explore a specific area, the player will need some time.

Visually, I like the (more realisitc) high contrast in space. There is no athmosphere to scatter light.
Near planets, the will be more ambient light, reflected by the planet. But in open space, there is just one (or two) lightsources from the local star, and the rest is, well, pitch black.

The drifters are something 'not an asteroid' ;)
Post

Re: 10000 Asteroids Testlevel (WebGL)

#38
Because I'm completely demented I tried it in Internet Explorer!

I got a whopping 12-16 frames per second on an i7-920 with a GeForce 980 GTX running full screen at potato resolution! That was looking at lots of asteroids. Look at an empty starfield and it goes up to 40 frames per second.

Of course, Internet Explorer is stupid, so I fired up Chrome and did the same thing. 72 fps for the empty starfield, and between 36 and 44 with lots of asteroids.

No testing of a web based thingy is complete without opening Firefox. Of course, Firefox decided to replace their dev team with a puddle of primordial sludge so I wasn't expecting miracles, but performance was more or less identical to Chrome.

So basically, it was playable on both of those two browsers, only load it in IE if you like pain :twisted: I'm guessing my performance is hobbled a bit by my old CPU, but it still performs reasonably well.
Image
Post

Re: 10000 Asteroids Testlevel (WebGL)

#39
HowSerendipitous wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 5:45 am
Because I'm completely demented I tried it in Internet Explorer!

I got a whopping 12-16 frames per second on an i7-920 with a GeForce 980 GTX running full screen at potato resolution! That was looking at lots of asteroids. Look at an empty starfield and it goes up to 40 frames per second.

Of course, Internet Explorer is stupid, so I fired up Chrome and did the same thing. 72 fps for the empty starfield, and between 36 and 44 with lots of asteroids.

No testing of a web based thingy is complete without opening Firefox. Of course, Firefox decided to replace their dev team with a puddle of primordial sludge so I wasn't expecting miracles, but performance was more or less identical to Chrome.

So basically, it was playable on both of those two browsers, only load it in IE if you like pain :twisted: I'm guessing my performance is hobbled a bit by my old CPU, but it still performs reasonably well.
Thanks for also testing on IE. I know that it has a shitty compatibility (used to be much worse though). I wonder how many people (at their workplace) are still forced to use it though. Having 10000 relatively detailed/lodded objects run reasonable well is actually more than I hoped for. This gives me at least the assurance, that it would not hog down at a more reasonable number (hundreds) of static entities. So the the 1000 Asteroid test is more the goal performance target. (regarding static entities with collision hulls).
Using WebGL has the drawback of running slower than a native application, and the download size must also be reasonably small.
On the positive side: it run immediately without installation... also on Linux (tested) and Mac (ok, I dont have a Mac, did anyone test it there?)

And: my self baked truster sound-loop seems not to be distracting. I will have a volume slider of course later.
... Now back to working at the logic, but keep the reports and ideas coming. :clap:
Post

Re: 10000 Asteroids Testlevel (WebGL)

#42
Damocles wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 10:28 am
HowSerendipitous wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 5:45 am
Because I'm completely demented I tried it in Internet Explorer!

I got a whopping 12-16 frames per second on an i7-920 with a GeForce 980 GTX running full screen at potato resolution! That was looking at lots of asteroids. Look at an empty starfield and it goes up to 40 frames per second.

Of course, Internet Explorer is stupid, so I fired up Chrome and did the same thing. 72 fps for the empty starfield, and between 36 and 44 with lots of asteroids.

No testing of a web based thingy is complete without opening Firefox. Of course, Firefox decided to replace their dev team with a puddle of primordial sludge so I wasn't expecting miracles, but performance was more or less identical to Chrome.

So basically, it was playable on both of those two browsers, only load it in IE if you like pain :twisted: I'm guessing my performance is hobbled a bit by my old CPU, but it still performs reasonably well.
Thanks for also testing on IE. I know that it has a shitty compatibility (used to be much worse though). I wonder how many people (at their workplace) are still forced to use it though. Having 10000 relatively detailed/lodded objects run reasonable well is actually more than I hoped for. This gives me at least the assurance, that it would not hog down at a more reasonable number (hundreds) of static entities. So the the 1000 Asteroid test is more the goal performance target. (regarding static entities with collision hulls).
Using WebGL has the drawback of running slower than a native application, and the download size must also be reasonably small.
On the positive side: it run immediately without installation... also on Linux (tested) and Mac (ok, I dont have a Mac, did anyone test it there?)

And: my self baked truster sound-loop seems not to be distracting. I will have a volume slider of course later.
... Now back to working at the logic, but keep the reports and ideas coming. :clap:
Weeeeell, at work they gave you IE as standard then you had to request any other browser. As a QA in IT, I was required to use other browsers for testing, so I could get Chrome and Firefox easily. business users on the trading floor, however, were stuck with IE for 'security reasons', whatever the funk that means. It also meant that most of them were put off the software I was testing because IE coped so badly with it.

Luckily, after a whole pile of wrangling they started deploying Chrome and their lives got easier. I still had to use IE to test it for external users though, hurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr....
Cody wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 10:44 am
HowSerendipitous wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 5:45 am
Of course, Firefox decided to replace their dev team with a puddle of primordial sludge...
<sniggers> Yeah, didn't they just. I've moved to Waterfox, which is better - kinda!
Yeah, it's shocking these days :squirrel:
Image
Post

Re: 10000 Asteroids Testlevel (WebGL)

#45
Talvieno wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:37 pm
Grumblesaur wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:30 pm
Got between 37 and 45 FPS. LOD transitions weren't very smooth, but I'm accustomed to that from Freelancer.
Yeah, me too. Actually, I had to go back and look again to see what you were talking about. Random: We have the exact same GPU! Neat! :D
I have a 1060 in my desktop, but I'm using my living room computer right now, so the whole thing was running fullscreen on a 40" TV.
Shameless Self-Promotion 0/ magenta 0/ Forum Rules & Game FAQ

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron