Return to “General”

Post

Re: The General Unhappiness Thread

#152
JoshParnell wrote:Notami has clearly voiced his/her opinions on my competency. Let's leave it at that. No need for a thread lock, but no need to beat a dead horse either.
I tried to be neutral for a long time but in the last days, there are things that I just don't understand. Notami has a point, that, I guess, a few others share. It's his opinion, he brings an example and arguments while others bring their own examples. Why shut this down? Because it's uncomfortable?
Praising of "the Josh" isn't shut down, although it's repeated over and over, even after all that went wrong. People write things in the sense of "how can random people [concerning open source] solve things that even Josh couldn't". This shouldn't be a religion.
Demands like the cited one make me more and more unhappy. I kind of understand your situation, but just accept that not everyone is happy about what's going on -- even after some very long post of yours.
Post

Re: The General Unhappiness Thread

#154
I gave my thoughts of the recent mega update thread. I think I need to expand on them somewhat more here though.. (oh oh.. it's the Unhappiness Thread...)

Respectfully to Josh, but the news he gave us could only have been worse if he had told us that Limit Theory has been cancelled.

Stuff happens, I get it. He has way more skill than I do, and more than most. I don't fault him for trying. I certainly don't fault him for giving us bad news, bad news is better than no news. There is one fault that I just have to point out however...

Why hasn't he reached out for help?

I mean, there has to be others out there who have run into similar issues in the past who could have looked at what he has done and pointed him in the better direction? Heck, even hiring someone more experienced on for a month to assess the situation and to give you pointers on how to get past these walls might have worked. Though nothing JUST like Limit Theory has been created before, certainly someone has done something sort of similar on some level.

Again Josh, I mean this as constructive as possible. I really think brining in outside help may have done wonders. (and still might)
My Signature
Post

Re: The General Unhappiness Thread

#155
Zanteogo wrote:Why hasn't he reached out for help?
I was reading for some sign in Josh's update that he has learned the value of doing the doable; I didn't find it. A couple of sentences amid that wall of text would have been enough, an acknowledgement that plan B is not unthinkable. How many features would need to get cut, how far would ambitions need to be scaled back? Instead he gave it a name, FPLT, in order that we might better visualise his heroic struggle against this beast and cheer him on. Well, phooey to that.

Some things are bigger than they look from a distance. Hard won knowledge, that.

I'm glad Josh is safe and well, and I sincerely wish him the best. But I think I'm done expecting anything to come of this project.
Experiencing a significant gravitas shortfall
Post

Re: The General Unhappiness Thread

#157
Zero Gravitas wrote:
Zanteogo wrote:Why hasn't he reached out for help?
I was reading for some sign in Josh's update that he has learned the value of doing the doable; I didn't find it. A couple of sentences amid that wall of text would have been enough, an acknowledgement that plan B is not unthinkable. How many features would need to get cut, how far would ambitions need to be scaled back? Instead he gave it a name, FPLT, in order that we might better visualise his heroic struggle against this beast and cheer him on. Well, phooey to that.
Made a post about the same and ask what feature he could drop that is causing the performance problem but one would also have to look at what hardware he is testing because I dont agree with that it has to run on a 10 year old crap pc.

Doing the doable or in other words not every problem needs a solution one can sometimes drive around them. But this is where I think that it goes strictly against his nature and where he could need guidance by older more experienced developers.
Post

Re: The General Unhappiness Thread

#158
Lemar wrote:Made a post about the same and ask what feature he could drop that is causing the performance problem but one would also have to look at what hardware he is testing because I dont agree with that it has to run on a 10 year old crap pc.
Guys & Gals, you're all missing the point: it's not a *feature* that's causing the performance problem, it's literally everything that isn't the graphic renderer of a system.

So, if he wanted to cut it out, he'd release a game that had no AI of any kind, no entities would exist (like NPCs, or your own spaceship), possibly no planets or asteroids depending on how that's coded, and no ability to display a HUD either.

He's trying to work out how to put a game onto the renderer, not how to make warp rails work, or anything like that.
--
Mind The Gap
Post

Re: The General Unhappiness Thread

#159
Lemar wrote: Made a post about the same and ask what feature he could drop that is causing the performance problem but one would also have to look at what hardware he is testing because I dont agree with that it has to run on a 10 year old crap pc.
The computer Josh is getting < 20 FPS on is a decent one, not ten years old. LT as it exists right now likely won't run on most machines at a "decent" framerate - at least, not decent by gaming standards. That's not really acceptable, especially when he hasn't even finished adding content.
Have a question? Send me a PM! || People talking in IRC over the past two hours: Image
Image
Image
Post

Re: The General Unhappiness Thread

#160
Ringu wrote:
Lemar wrote:Made a post about the same and ask what feature he could drop that is causing the performance problem but one would also have to look at what hardware he is testing because I dont agree with that it has to run on a 10 year old crap pc.
Guys & Gals, you're all missing the point: it's not a *feature* that's causing the performance problem, it's literally everything that isn't the graphic renderer of a system.

So, if he wanted to cut it out, he'd release a game that had no AI of any kind, no entities would exist (like NPCs, or your own spaceship), possibly no planets or asteroids depending on how that's coded, and no ability to display a HUD either.

He's trying to work out how to put a game onto the renderer, not how to make warp rails work, or anything like that.
This cannot be true because we have seen the game in action running at decent FPS with most of this already added. (I know it's been several years since we have seen a dev video..)

It was something he added afterwards that caused the issue.
My Signature
Post

Re: The General Unhappiness Thread

#162
Ringu wrote:it's not a *feature* that's causing the performance problem, it's literally everything that isn't the graphic renderer of a system.
Plan B in my mind would be writing pure C code and keeping the codebase under 100K lines. That version of LT would be less than was promised, certainly. The AI would be less nuanced, but how many of us would notice or care? There would be no modding support, which was not promised in the Kickstarter. Out-of-system simulation might be reduced to a few weighted dice rolls and a lot of fudging. But it would be a game, a real actually existing game that the backers could play.

There's nothing intrinsic to Limit Theory that requires Josh to reinvent programming. People create games, sometimes very complicated games, in C (I know you know this, Ringu - not trying to condescend). The two opposing problems Josh faces are of his own making: he can't do it all with a fast language because he lacks the experience to write manageable code at that scale, and he can't do it partly with a high-level language because the performance is inadequate. Plan A is making the high-level language faster which he is trying for the nth time, Plan B is asking what subset of the game he can deliver in pure C before his codebase ties in knots, Plan C is doing it all in C and getting good very quickly at managing a very large C codebase.

Anyway it's water under the bridge. He's doing what he's doing, and I'm out.
Experiencing a significant gravitas shortfall
Post

Re: The General Unhappiness Thread

#164
Zanteogo wrote:This cannot be true because we have seen the game in action running at decent FPS with most of this already added. (I know it's been several years since we have seen a dev video..)
I just want to point out that it's very easy to make things look like they run at a higher FPS than they are, especially when you have access to the code.

Suffice it to say that my computer isn't capable of recording TurBoa at 60fps yet somehow I still have 60fps video of it. ;)
Games I like, in order of how much I like them. (Now permanent and updated regularly!)
Post

Re: The General Unhappiness Thread

#165
Talvieno wrote: The computer Josh is getting < 20 FPS on is a decent one, not ten years old. LT as it exists right now likely won't run on most machines at a "decent" framerate - at least, not decent by gaming standards. That's not really acceptable, especially when he hasn't even finished adding content.
No its not

http://forums.ltheory.com/viewtopic.php ... gtx#p20511

"GTX 560 my best rig"

Do you have any newer update about the used hardware? We even dont know if he tried it on the laptop as I assume his best rig is a desktop....
Ringu wrote: Guys & Gals, you're all missing the point: it's not a *feature* that's causing the performance problem, it's literally everything that isn't the graphic renderer of a system.
By feature I mean for example the limitless universe...if it adds to the number of entities, background simulation then drop it or more like cut it down to 3-4 galaxies and 5-7 sectors per galaxy. He mentioned once that he would like to have 256 AIs per sector, drop it, try 128, 64 and so on. I don't mean drop the AI but maybe make it more stupid less reasoning.
Last edited by Lemar on Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:59 am, edited 2 times in total.

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest

cron