PC Developer Discussions: Alpha 17

Developer Discussions: Alpha 17

  • Newly Updated

    Votes: 1 100.0%
  • Check out the newest reveals by Madmole

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Over 100 new perk books with set collecting and bonuses

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1
Status
Not open for further replies.
Vitamin's assertions about 16 GB are simply wrong. In my house there are several computers, including mine (16 GB, 7ish years old) and another (4 GB, 10ish years old) that both can play 7DtD just fine. The older one does not play on ultra-high settings, obviously, and does not like to be the game host, but it does play fine.

 
I've been gone a month, what'd I miss?

(Scans posts)

Oh, nothing. Carry on.

Alpha, beta, omega, don't care, titles are meaningless, imo.

 
Wait a moment. CDproject is talking in this article about optimizations to their inhouse graphics engine. That engine was used in witcher and got further developed for cyberpunk. We are no longer talking about "early" for this engine. For the most part they are doing nothing else than continuosly optimizing the engine.
TFP has no engine to optimize. But they do have all the game code to take care of. So their work should even be simpler. One of the biggest issues people having with game is game stutter caused by garbage collection. Unity has very good writeup about that. To sum it up - do the right thing with regards to memory allocation.

It applies to any code that is a placeholder, intermediate step or an experiment. 7D2D was full of code like this until lately, I assume.
We haven't seen their code, but to some extent you are correct. However see above.

(cheap shot) Sounds a bit like a famous Bill Gates quotation starting with "640k" :smile-new: . Do you need 16G in vanilla or only with mods?
It's a two prong issue. We all know that 7D2D uses lots of memory. I had 16GB and ran everything fine, until 7D2D. However upgrading to 32GB didn't help much under Linux. Versions of Unity before 5.4 assert (crash) when trying to allocate more than 16GB. Unity 5.4 was release in July of 2016...

 
I don't believe that in a million years. Unless a Dev cares to explain..

Just gotta say I love the high frequency with which a statement can flicker between speculation, reality and wishful thinking here. LOL
The idea that fataal could not get pathing to work on a 1m scale (aka the most basic function of A*) is somewhere on the scale from facepalm to priceless.
So, no...it's not that it can't be done, or that TFP can't do it. Ergo...it's a design decision, one that revolves around ensuring that the 2-block path works correctly FIRST, then re-implementing the 1-block pathing, as it's easier to implement AND to correct.

Read. The. Posts.

 
Random thought on the map tool. Would be awesome if it could scrape/capture the text above POIs and dump it into a file.

That way you could quickly check if certain buildings were on the map, without having to visually search for them.

Would also allow those who don't really want to 'know' where something is, 'know' that it -is- there to be found.

 
TFP decision to not implement it is their choice in game design, not that they cant.
I don't believe that in a million years. Unless a Dev cares to explain..
I guess Gazz is not a "Dev" because he addressed this already.

The idea that fataal could not get pathing to work on a 1m scale (aka the most basic function of A*) is somewhere on the scale from facepalm to priceless.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The idea that fataal could not get pathing to work on a 1m scale (aka the most basic function of A*) is somewhere on the scale from facepalm to priceless.
So...

Where'd that land?

:popcorn:

My bet is on a look of joyous wonder... With a bright red forehead...

 
Having pathing for 2 block high paths and 1 block high paths is also a complexity issue.

Its probably more robust to have the calculations for both mode run in separate code, instead of combining that into one "dynamic" pathsearch.

But separate code also causes the whole ai code to gain in complexity (making it harder to debug and maintain).

I could see the 1 block high paths come into the game later, if that does not break other designs, such as the "dungeon" POIs designed not to allow zombies to pass 1 meter high passages.

(BTW: allowing the player to crouch and crawl though 1 m high blocks, would make players build very unappealing passages in their bases. This can easily end up into a crouching simulator for players optimizing their defensive designs)

 
Having pathing for 2 block high paths and 1 block high paths is also a complexity issue.
Its probably more robust to have the calculations for both mode run in separate code, instead of combining that into one "dynamic" pathsearch.

But separate code also causes the whole ai code to gain in complexity (making it harder to debug and maintain).

I could see the 1 block high paths come into the game later, if that does not break other designs, such as the "dungeon" POIs designed not to allow zombies to pass 1 meter high passages.

(BTW: allowing the player to crouch and crawl though 1 m high blocks, would make players build very unappealing passages in their bases. This can easily end up into a crouching simulator for players optimizing their defensive designs)
I would think 1 block egress would actually enhance the dungeon aspect imo.

Like:

Remove a 3m vent cover to gain access to certain rooms in a factory or skyscraper.

Hidden passage behind a picture or medicine cabinet ect,.

Enter a storm drain that has a loot cache deeper inside.

Bonus if the zeds can follow you into them or are placed in them.

Do you risk it and take the chance it's full of once survivors but now zeds?

 
The reason why the feature is not in the game yet, is not because they think it is better for the game to not have it.

No dev has corrected me on this yet :)

 
The reason why the feature is not in the game yet, is not because they think it is better for the game to not have it.
No dev has corrected me on this yet :)
No dev has corrected you on a lot of things, but that doesn't make them true.

For example, no dev has corrected your above sentence with its excessive use of the word "not," but that doesn't make it a well-constructed sentence.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top