3 ms·
Iterating over 100 items doesn't take 16ms. I'm not sure where he got that figure from. But your example is a bit exaggerated. I guarantee you that an RTS like
by jcromartie 14y ago
Iterating over 100 items doesn't take 16ms. I'm not sure where he got that figure from.
But your example is a bit exaggerated. I guarantee you that an RTS like Supreme Commander doesn't update the physics simulation or game logic at 60 frames per second. It's probably more like 10 FPS with the rendering engine interpolating objects at 60 FPS.
- saurik 14y agoI can corroborate this: in the large video game project I worked for once, we definitely had a different notion of "physics frames" vs. "render frames", and they updated at different rates. If nothing else, the graphics system is not necessarily deterministic in speed, and missed frames should just get dropped, but a physics simulation is often something where if you skip a frame you might miss a collision.
- jules 14y agoIt's true that simulation speed is independent of graphics speed in Supreme Commander. The game lets you adjust the simulation speed, although of course if there are too many things happening your CPU can't keep up and it slows back down. If you have a fast computer or there are not many things happening you can run the simulation at 100 ticks per second if you want (although it will be hard to play because everything goes too fast). That figure comes from the presentation linked to by this post, but I'm not sure where it came from before that. In any case the team had performance problems for a comparatively trivial amount of processing work. Looking at the game you could easily run that game logic at 10000 updates per second when you implement it in C/C++.