This community sure is amazing, 10/10
I've been banned from the general forums for years now (12 year olds with a ban button don't like it when you point out just how 12 years old they are). Lummox has now banned me from his page for pointing out with a scam the game hes trying to scam thousands of dollars for is, and saying this engine needs improvement, and the makers of that game we're even quicker to ban.
Me: [message deleted] (The message pointed out that they're using 20-40% world.cpu for a single idle player, in a game they claim they're going to have 300 players per server and thousands of players overall)
[...]
Chance_a: The CPU is high because the webclient has yet to be optimized. It's very early in its BETA
[...]
Me: the web client has nothing to do with performance? CPU is a server-side thing in BYOND, even the web client is hosted from, most likely, and instance of deamon. If you're using a minimum of 20% per player, a seemingly idle player, that means you could handle a total of 5 people in a server before it hit 100% and lagged into the ground o.O
You are permanently banned from talking.
ID:1862038
 May 30 2015, 6:04 pm (Edited on May 30 2015, 6:27 pm)
|
|
|
May 30 2015, 6:06 pm
|
|
Rod5
 |
But how do you really feel.
|
Doesn't matter too much, that kickstarter is guaranteed to fail. Even if they manage to make enough money, which they most likely won't, the backlash for failing to deliver on practically every promise on the page will hopefully fall all the way onto BYOND, and take it down with them. Then again, kickstarter is basically a "lie your way to free money" scam, so maybe people won't even care.
| |
Lol lets keep this topic going I want to see all the comments it'll get *gets out popcorn*
| |
While you're here Falacy, can you put up the host files for your AoE game? I really liked that game =(
| |
Lugia319 wrote:
While you're here Falacy, can you put up the host files for your AoE game? I really liked that game =( Don't know which one you're talking about? | |
I don't remember the title but you had planned a mode for it with a dragon wrecking stuff. It had stick figures and it was the first game I ever saw on BYOND with a working minimap. I'm pretty sure you used some AoE sound effects in it like "Nay enough wood milord"
| |
Lugia319 wrote:
I don't remember the title but you had planned a mode for it with a dragon wrecking stuff. It had stick figures and it was the first game I ever saw on BYOND with a working minimap. I'm pretty sure you used some AoE sound effects in it like "Nay enough wood milord" Sound effects from Stronghold. Don't know if I even still have the files for that one, was 100 years ago and never really got going. Can't remember what it was called either. | |
Have you considered the 20% could come from global loops or ai, not player initiated? I don't get why you're such a an assumptive ass all the time.
Edit: I do agree their fund goal is a little much, though. | |
Kumorii wrote:
Have you considered the 20% could come from global loops or ai, not player initiated? I don't get why you're such a an assumptive ass all the time. lol cause I've wasted 10+ years on BYOND, and am better than everyone else at it, and have never seen it work that way. world.cpu is almost always multiplied by player counts, with minimal "background noise". Not to mention, they're using the newest version of BYOND (for the "mobile" web client), which means they have the multi-threaded version, which means its likely topping out multiple cores, which is just ridiculous nonsensery, and likely means they won't be able to host several servers from a single machine. Gonna get expensive to maintain the player base they claim to be supporting, especially when only 5 people can fit in a server without lag =P Edit: I do agree their fund goal is a little much, though. Yea, I never understood why people set high goals on kickstarter, if you don't reach them, you don't get any of the money, might as well just set it to 1 dollar and take what you can get, the 6k they have now would be better than the nothing they'll likely end up with lol | |
Kumorii wrote:
Have you considered the 20% could come from global loops or ai, not player initiated? I don't get why you're such a an assumptive ass all the time. It was actually due to the game being played locally while streaming, though the webclient is more taxing at the moment. As Lummox has indicated in recent posts, however, that's being worked on. Obviously it's not going to cost 20% CPU per player when the webclient is a huge step in optimization, what with things like client-side UI. There's no reason why there can't be a MMORPG built with the engine. | |
Pixel Realms wrote:
Obviously it's not going to cost 20% CPU per player when the webclient is a huge step in optimization, what with things like client-side UI. There's no reason why there can't be a MMORPG built with the engine. Using top-down physics and not platformer I don't see how you couldn't get 200+ at least per server at least o-o | |
Pixel Realms wrote:
It was actually due to the game being played locally while streaming, though the webclient is more taxing at the moment. As Lummox has indicated in recent posts, however, that's being worked on. And as I pointed out (here, because you banned me before I could in the stream), the web client has absolutely nothing to do with world.cpu, which is purely server-sided. Obviously it's not going to cost 20% CPU per player when the webclient is a huge step in optimization, what with things like client-side UI. There's no reason why there can't be a MMORPG built with the engine. I don't see how they're going to implement client sided UI, unless they completely redesign the engine. Offloading the generation of icons/rendering is one thing (the only meaningful client-sided performance increase I know of in the entire time I've been here), as the client can just read those settings and create the graphics - instead of making the server do it and downloading the results (this is more or less all the current client does in all cases), but doing this for UI elements would require processing of code, which you would somehow have to be able to specify off to the client, as well as having it read potentially server relevant only variables. AFAIK, the current client isn't even aware of the game's actual code, no less capable of running it. If they're going to make UI client sided, they might as well make it available to every part of the language - I don't see how or why they would do one without the other. But yes, if they ever do manage to add full client sided processing (UI would help, but certainly isn't the most expensive thing to process), like any sane engine, then it would be (more) feasible to make an MMO with BYOND - a graphically lackluster, nearly impossible to distribute, inferior 2D one, but performance would be less of a concern. Kozuma3 wrote: Shuuuuuuuunhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRB8Jor8tPs | |
I don't have the energy to compose a coherent and elaborate response for someone like you (who's proven time and time again to completely not know what they're talking about), so I'll just say this:
No. You're wrong. The stream was running 20% CPU because I was streaming at 1080p in the background, and because the webclient is extremely unoptimized at the moment - which I acknowledge Lummox is attempting to resolve currently. If I run the game on DreamSeeker, it runs at about 0-1% cpu at all times, even with a bounty of AI units active. | |
Doohl wrote:
I don't have the energy to compose a coherent and elaborate response for someone like you (who's proven time and time again to completely not know what they're talking about), so I'll just say this: No. You're wrong. Examples? I can only think of one. The stream was running 20% CPU because I was streaming at 1080p in the background, and because the webclient is extremely unoptimized at the moment - which I acknowledge Lummox is attempting to resolve currently. Unless they've changed how world.cpu is calculated (which is possible, since I haven't used the multi-threaded version), it doesn't take other processes into account. So streaming, or doing anything else on your computer, shouldn't make a difference to what it reports. If I run the game on DreamSeeker, it runs at about 0-1% cpu at all times, even with a bounty of AI units active. You're saying you can run/host the game directly from web client mode? | |
I'm saying the game uses 0-1% cpu (assuming only one person is connected) when not on the webclient.
This will change soon, once the webclient is, and I quote Lummox, "DS-ified". | |
Whatever floats your goats. At least it looks like BYOND will get a game released for once.
| |
which means they have the multi-threaded version, which means its likely topping out multiple cores, which is just ridiculous nonsensery, and likely means they won't be able to host several servers from a single machine. the DM code interpreter only runs on one core. You just plain don't know what you are talking about. Yet another example of you not reading anything. The multiple cores only function as a part of viewport sending. And as I pointed out (here, because you banned me before I could in the stream), the web client has absolutely nothing to do with world.cpu, which is purely server-sided. Yet another. Web client performs gliding on the server. (Or at least it did until recently). Quite a lot of what the web client does right now really hits the world CPU hard. The web client averages 4-5% CPU PER PLAYER in a relatively empty project. DS can handle over a hundred players if your programming isn't shit. | |
