5 ms·

>I ask again, what is so impossible about just rendering the 60fps Are you asking why renders can't maintain perfectly steady frame rates without going above o

by KVFinn 13y ago

>I ask again, what is so impossible about just rendering the 60fps Are you asking why renders can't maintain perfectly steady frame rates without going above or below 60fps, regardless of WHAT they are rendering on screen or what is happening in the simulation? You can't see how that's a 'non trivial' problem? The most notable example of a game using dynamic tradeoffs to maintain a solid 60FPS is ID's Rage engine -- written by Johh Carmack, one the people on stage at this very presentation, who was lauding this technology and saying he has been pushing GPU and monitor manufacturers to implement this for years. Carmack notes that while they were able to stay at 60 with an incredible amount of work, if they had been able to target 90% of 60fps with this technology there would have been little visual difference but the gameplay and visual complexity ceiling would have been vastly higher.

TheZenPsycho 13y ago
It's "non trivial" is all you have? I'm asking someone to explain this. because I don't get it. Isn't meeting the frame deadline kind of more important than scene complexity?
- barrkel 13y ago
  Meeting the frame deadline is a function of scene complexity.
- jblow 13y ago
  Look into what is involved in modern 3D rendering of high-detail scenes. It is NON-TRIVIAL, and I can tell you this as someone who has done 3D programming for 17 years. Pro Tip: If an entire industry of experienced people finds something very hard, and you don't know anything about the topic but you don't see why it would be hard, maybe the relevant factor here is the "you don't know." It reminds me of my mom who said on multiple occasions "All these rockets are dangerous and they explode; I don't see why the scientists don't just use the majestic forces that keep the planets in their orbits to move the rocket."
  - TheZenPsycho 13y ago
    Yes, I don't know. that's what I am saying. I am not in this thread saying "You're wrong and I'm right", and I'm not asking you to say to me "no, you're wrong" I am asking you to explain it*. not just say "well, it's hard, and this guy and this industry says it's hard" and call it a day. do you understand? "because it's hard" is not an interesting answer. It's a boring and contentless answer.
    - jblow 13y ago
      Well, I left the start of an explanation in another reply. But the problem is that you are asking a question where it takes years to really understand the answer, and certainly hours for a commenter to write a summary. For someone to put that much effort in, they have to be motivated to put in the effort; but you are coming across in a very unpleasant way, and not offering anything in return, so why would anyone put in the effort just for you?
      - TheZenPsycho 13y ago
        I have no control over how you perceive my posts. I write them in a neutral way, produce text, and it's up to you to read in a tone of voice and mood. You are free to perceive anything about them you want. You are certainly welcome to refuse to reply to them and you always were. I was apparently pleasant enough for you to give glib responses but not enough to reply with anything much of substance more than "you're asking a stupid question and you can never be as smart as me HAHAHA!!" I mean, if that's your answer then you probably are better off not responding to me at all, leaving my question hanging, and not polluting the conversation with such negativity. As for the start of an answer, what was wrong with just .. starting with that? What was the point of all the other stuff you wrote? Think about it. what is your mission here? to be informative or just to attempt to make me feel bad for being curious?
        dandelany 13y ago
        The mission is to make you a little more self-aware of how your posts are being read and perceived. "why am I explaining this again? is it really hard to understand? why?" does not sound like a neutral tone to most people, it sounds condescending, which is confusing when (as you admit) you are the one who is asking for an explanation for something you do not understand.

by KVFinn 13y ago

TheZenPsycho 13y ago

It's "non trivial" is all you have? I'm asking someone to explain this. because I don't get it. Isn't meeting the frame deadline kind of more important than scene complexity?

barrkel 13y ago
Meeting the frame deadline is a function of scene complexity.
jblow 13y ago
Look into what is involved in modern 3D rendering of high-detail scenes. It is NON-TRIVIAL, and I can tell you this as someone who has done 3D programming for 17 years. Pro Tip: If an entire industry of experienced people finds something very hard, and you don't know anything about the topic but you don't see why it would be hard, maybe the relevant factor here is the "you don't know." It reminds me of my mom who said on multiple occasions "All these rockets are dangerous and they explode; I don't see why the scientists don't just use the majestic forces that keep the planets in their orbits to move the rocket."
- TheZenPsycho 13y ago
  Yes, I don't know. that's what I am saying. I am not in this thread saying "You're wrong and I'm right", and I'm not asking you to say to me "no, you're wrong" I am asking you to explain it*. not just say "well, it's hard, and this guy and this industry says it's hard" and call it a day. do you understand? "because it's hard" is not an interesting answer. It's a boring and contentless answer.
  - jblow 13y ago
    Well, I left the start of an explanation in another reply. But the problem is that you are asking a question where it takes years to really understand the answer, and certainly hours for a commenter to write a summary. For someone to put that much effort in, they have to be motivated to put in the effort; but you are coming across in a very unpleasant way, and not offering anything in return, so why would anyone put in the effort just for you?
    - TheZenPsycho 13y ago
      I have no control over how you perceive my posts. I write them in a neutral way, produce text, and it's up to you to read in a tone of voice and mood. You are free to perceive anything about them you want. You are certainly welcome to refuse to reply to them and you always were. I was apparently pleasant enough for you to give glib responses but not enough to reply with anything much of substance more than "you're asking a stupid question and you can never be as smart as me HAHAHA!!" I mean, if that's your answer then you probably are better off not responding to me at all, leaving my question hanging, and not polluting the conversation with such negativity. As for the start of an answer, what was wrong with just .. starting with that? What was the point of all the other stuff you wrote? Think about it. what is your mission here? to be informative or just to attempt to make me feel bad for being curious?
      - dandelany 13y ago
        The mission is to make you a little more self-aware of how your posts are being read and perceived. "why am I explaining this again? is it really hard to understand? why?" does not sound like a neutral tone to most people, it sounds condescending, which is confusing when (as you admit) you are the one who is asking for an explanation for something you do not understand.