View Full Version : The Wonderful End of the World Trial - Stress Test!

12-26-2007, 08:05 PM

Hola. We're about to release our 12th title, The Wonderful End of the World (http://www.dejobaan.com/wonderful), for Windows PCs. Here's a release candidate for the demo (DX9, 256MB 3D card required):

www.dejobaan.net/dl/wonderful/wonderful_end_of_the_world_trial.exe (http://www.dejobaan.net/dl/wonderful/wonderful_end_of_the_world_trial.exe)

Right now, I'm in that "zombie" state that you reach towards the end of a project, so I may have forgotten something -- screenshots? download link? Mmph. I'm also chomping at the bit to move onto our next project!

Anyway, just wanted to see if the durned thing ran at all. :) Website will come up on 1/1/08, if all goes well. Thanks!

- Ichiro

Desktop Gaming
12-27-2007, 09:33 AM
I don't mean to sound rude, and this is based on the screenshots only - why in the hell does it need a 256mb graphics card?!

12-27-2007, 10:03 AM
Good question -- we toss a lot of polygons onto the screen, and while that doesn't directly require 256MB of video RAM, it'll generally be cards with 256MB memory that are fast enough to support that smoothly.

I figured we'd get the product out there -- if people like it, we can refine it in future iterations. If nobody likes it, and it's a complete failure for reasons other than the system requirements, we can turn our attention elsewhere.

12-27-2007, 10:06 AM
Congratulations Ichiro!

12-27-2007, 11:03 AM
Eeeek 2565 MB video?

Naturally being RICH, I have a 768 MB card ( I think), and it runs just fine, but that needs some serious optimizing, because you *have* to get that lower.
Worked absolutely fine on my PC, Geforce 8800 GTS I think.

12-28-2007, 02:09 AM
On my old GeForce 4 Ti, objects appear black instead of textured. It's a 128 MB card, though. The game otherwise ran fine, the static world was coloured and the menus appeared correctly.

12-28-2007, 12:12 PM
Thanks, guys. I think we can lower the requirements to "DX9 Compatible 3D Card." And we're trying to bump up the framerate.

Man, the weirdest stuff slows things down. The big one right now is collision detection.

Grey Alien
12-28-2007, 02:23 PM
Hey is the indie game podscast still going? I haven't checked for months...

12-29-2007, 08:44 AM
It's been on hold while we create the game. I'd like to continue it, as it was pretty well-received. But I'm trying to figure out how to make the durned thing not take an entire 8-hour day to create.

12-29-2007, 09:34 AM
The big one right now is collision detection.This is always "the big one" in any games of non-trivial scene complexity.

There is a very simple scheme for breaking up a level for quick ray-casting, called "BVH" for (B)ounding (V)olume (H)eirarchy. Of all the many methods for this task (BSP, KD-Tree, etc) this one is almost the fastest for general cases and it's key advantage is that unlike the others, it's a piece of piss to implement.

We had it going in a single afternoon and we've never looked back. Definitely give this one a go (if you're not already).

12-29-2007, 11:52 AM
That's a good thought, thanks. I wonder if we could even simplify it further based on our particular case...

Damned framerates. ;)

12-29-2007, 03:54 PM
The point with BVH is that it doesn't really need simplifying tbh. All of the various wheezes to speed up collision detection are basically centred around quick-outing raycasts that clearly aren't going to hit objects, and a ray to OBB is almost as easy as they come with lots of samples out on t'interweb.

I like this method because you can make BVH's per object without too much overhead, so they can be used on your dynamic scene content as well as just 'the world'

01-07-2008, 09:47 AM
Just to follow up, I've managed to get the framerate up (now 53FPS at a particular point at which it was previously 12FPS). The thing runs reasonably well on a card with 64MB memory. Thanks, all. :)