Tweet hints at FPS numbers

[Stew]

Yeah thats a great news ad some 200 to 600 people in there and the game will run at 60 FpS just fine

[Snipefrag]

Originally Posted by CyclesMcHurtz

You can also have strange effects due to poor multi-CPU usage. If a theoretical n00b coder puts the game code into four distinct functions, each around the same time and runs them on four different CPU's, the frame rate may be fast but since each function depends upon the result of the previous function - and that's going to take four whole frames to process. The result is that if this theoretical system was running at our 20fps, then with the 3 pre-rendered frames queued up and the four-frame latency in place you are looking at (4 cpu + 3 GPU + 1 display)*50ms latency - almost a HALF SECOND from when you clicked fire to when the shot happens on screen. The frame rate is STILL 20fps, however.

It adds a completely new level to coding when your working in a real time environment, I work in the broadcast industry on the software that controls tv channels (including some big ones over in America which i wont name) where the standard is 25fps, (40ms timeslices to process each frame or tick). A lot of time is spent making sure that we don't break through that 40 ms timeslice... If we do schedules for that station can slip, and it generally makes everyones jobs a bit harder. Some of our systems have upwards of 15 tv channels and all of their real time devices (think video playout, logos, graphics, up/down scaling, audio processing) running on a single server, so it can be a challenge at times.

I guess making a game is similar in that respect, intelligent use of threading (and not just threading for the sake of it) must play a vital role.

One question i have is with regards to frame rate, in my job i KNOW that i'm going to be afforded 40ms for all the framework, drivers and components to process everything for that frame. We have a purpose built scheduler tailored around this fact, in a game engine such as forgelight my guess is that your client side scheduler will try and be as greedy as possible with regards to framerate like a normal FPS game, taking as much CPU as possible to give the highest framerate you can.. Is this scheduling solely a reactive thing client side, or is the data received from the server (such as when you are just about to fly over a base with 300 troops in) used to project and smooth out these spikes that might cause things to slow down?

[headcrab13]

Originally Posted by CyclesMcHurtz

You should be even more excited - Motion Blur is not new technology for video games. It started appearing in around 2005 and has been in some games and not others. Gears of War, Sonic the Hedgehog, and Mirrors Edge are just a few of the better done ones (not referring to game-play, just motion blur).

[ Warning - technical content below ]

Awesome explanation; it's so badass to see you guys sharing something almost every day, whether it be coding examples or gameplay concepts or screenshots or 3D models. Very cool stuff!

[headcrab13]

Originally Posted by cryosin

Its a laptop so i can't upgrade =.

I have an old desktop with an 8800gt but it needs a mobo/cpu/ram upgrade(and probably a PSU along that).

I dont have $700+ to spend on a new comp but i really wanna lag free PS2 experience =(

No worries, you've got plenty of time to save up, and you probably won't even have to spend $700. Most people suspect that PS2 will launch in 2013, so that gives you at least 7 months to save.

Mow a few lawns, deliver a few pizzas, and you'll be good to go by next year.

[CyclesMcHurtz]

Originally Posted by Snipefrag

... One question i have is with regards to frame rate, in my job i KNOW that i'm going to be afforded 40ms for all the framework, drivers and components to process everything for that frame. ...

The big difference is that you can predict the hardware you will be running on with greater certainty than a PC game developer. Console developers have the same advantage - the platform is fixed. PC developers, not so much. There are some tricks we could do that would be awesome on the extreme monster 6 core/12 thread processors that would definitely make the lesser processors struggle.

The goal is to have CONSISTENT frame rate on a VARIABLE platform. It is far easier to play a game at a CONSISTENT fps and input lag than at a variable fps with also variable input lag. Nothing sucks worse than trying to fire your weapon right when a huge CPU/GPU workload spike hits. This level of optimization is not done at the last minute, it has to be designed in from the start.

With that in mind, scheduling work on the CPU's is done by knowing what's important and what isn't. I'm sorry, but we're not going to animate the tank treads for the guy half-way across the map. It just doesn't matter. It DOES matter than when you shoot at him, you HIT him (or miss him) correctly. If that means we're not animating all the fingers for the people on the other side of the wall, we might be forgiven.

For fun, you should find a buddy to play any of the current hot titles at medium settings and watch over their shoulder for:
- People popping in and out
- guns firing at strange angles
- people "ice skating" as they run around
but I warn you, once you start looking it cannot be unseen ... just like the famous bit in Star Wars (the original) when Luke returns from blowing up the death star
[ LEA ] "Luke!"
[ LUKE ] "Carrie!"

And (to get back to the original topic here) while me flying around the map at max settings and getting super frame rate in a little window (yes, it was a LITTLE window - this was purely a CPU test with very low player counts) is great the key is to get everyone the ability to set up the system for a CONSISTENT frame rate with LOW input latency.

<begin personal note>
and on a PERSONAL note - I think we would all be very interested to hear what you folks think of as a mid-level machine
and NO, I won't be commenting on system specs until AFTER SOE announces the requirements
<end personal note>

[Aaron]

Phenom II x4 940 3.00 GHz
Radeon HD 6770
4 GB RAM

On BF3, it recommends high settings for me. Is that something like mid-level? Am I in PS2 range?

[Coreldan]

Originally Posted by Aaron

Phenom II x4 940 3.00 GHz
Radeon HD 6770
4 GB RAM

On BF3, it recommends high settings for me. Is that something like mid-level? Am I in PS2 range?

This would sound like fairly mid-level for PS2 in my head overall.

I only have a bit better rig (I recall comparing 5770 and 6770, difference is minimal), considering about getting a new GPU for PS2 so I can keep on recording gameplay.

Phenom II x6 1090T 3,5ghz
Radeon HD5770 1gb
8GB of DDR 1333mhz RAM

[basti]

Originally Posted by CyclesMcHurtz

The big difference is that you can predict the hardware you will be running on with greater certainty than a PC game developer. Console developers have the same advantage - the platform is fixed. PC developers, not so much. There are some tricks we could do that would be awesome on the extreme monster 6 core/12 thread processors that would definitely make the lesser processors struggle.

The goal is to have CONSISTENT frame rate on a VARIABLE platform. It is far easier to play a game at a CONSISTENT fps and input lag than at a variable fps with also variable input lag. Nothing sucks worse than trying to fire your weapon right when a huge CPU/GPU workload spike hits. This level of optimization is not done at the last minute, it has to be designed in from the start.

With that in mind, scheduling work on the CPU's is done by knowing what's important and what isn't. I'm sorry, but we're not going to animate the tank treads for the guy half-way across the map. It just doesn't matter. It DOES matter than when you shoot at him, you HIT him (or miss him) correctly. If that means we're not animating all the fingers for the people on the other side of the wall, we might be forgiven.

For fun, you should find a buddy to play any of the current hot titles at medium settings and watch over their shoulder for:
- People popping in and out
- guns firing at strange angles
- people "ice skating" as they run around
but I warn you, once you start looking it cannot be unseen ... just like the famous bit in Star Wars (the original) when Luke returns from blowing up the death star
[ LEA ] "Luke!"
[ LUKE ] "Carrie!"

And (to get back to the original topic here) while me flying around the map at max settings and getting super frame rate in a little window (yes, it was a LITTLE window - this was purely a CPU test with very low player counts) is great the key is to get everyone the ability to set up the system for a CONSISTENT frame rate with LOW input latency.

<begin personal note>
and on a PERSONAL note - I think we would all be very interested to hear what you folks think of as a mid-level machine
and NO, I won't be commenting on system specs until AFTER SOE announces the requirements
<end personal note>

Low end:
E8400
Gefore 9600 GT
2 GB Ram

Mid:
Q9550
GTX 280
4 GB Ram

High:
Some Fancy I7 or I5
GTX 480 and Above
8 GB Ram.





Got myself a Q9550, 4 GB of DDR2 Ram, and about to switch my GTX 280 for a GTX 570 (currently in shipping ). Hope i can run the game with rather high settings. :/
Will add another 4 GB of ram at some point, but the CPU cant be changed without a new Main Board, and then i need new Ram as well. :/

[SniperSteve]

Mid level is really hard to define.
I would say it would be less than 8GB of memory, A pre-500 series Geforce card, And at best a lower end quad core.


You didn't ask for it, but:
High End System:
Upper end quad core, and any hex core I would consider a higher end system.
Anything above the basic 500 Geforce I would consider a higher end card.
8+GB would also be high end.

Low End system:
Dual core I would consider a low end (except a few really top-notch dual core CPUs that might be considered a mid-level CPU)
<4GB I would consider low end
Pre 400 series I would consider low end (except the high end 300's that might be considered a mid-level GPU)

[SpirosRonto]

Mid level should be good dual cores(also oc'ed)
like the E8400 3.6 i have now and quad cores
a gts 450 or an 6770
4gb ram recommended

[Goku]

Originally Posted by SpirosRonto

Mid level should be good dual cores(also oc'ed)
like the E8400 3.6 i have now and quad cores
a gts 450 or an 6770
4gb ram recommended

I don't really consider C2D even overclocked to be midranged these days as you can get cheap quad cores now even with a midrange budget. Only dual core I consider midrange is the Core i3 2100.

Anything GTX 260/280, HD 4800, and 5770/6770/7700 I would consider lower midrange. You can get cheap 6800 cards/GTX 560 Ti cards these days is all and many see that as the current midrange cards.

[Snipefrag]

Originally Posted by CyclesMcHurtz

The big difference is that you can predict the hardware you will be running on with greater certainty than a PC game developer.

Thats for certain, we provide the hardware so its consistant. Sounds like a interesting technical challange for sure !

[Fenrys]

Originally Posted by CyclesMcHurtz

I think we would all be very interested to hear what you folks think of as a mid-level machine

Upper Low:
Pentium 4
2 GB DDR2 800
Radeon 9800 XT /// GeForece 6800 GS

Lower Mid:
Athlon II X2
3 GB DDR3 1066
GeForce 8800 GS /// Radeon HD 3850

Upper Mid:
C2D E8400
4GB DDR3 1333
GeForce 9800 GTX /// Radeon HD 4770

Lower High:
Phenom II X4 (OC'd) /// i3-540 (OC'd) /// i3-2100
4GB DDR3 1333
Radeon HD 5770 (maybe X-fire) /// GeForce GTX 260 (maybe SLI)

Upper High:
i5-2500k (OC'd)
8GB DDR3 1600
Radeon HD 6870 (OC'd, maybe X-fire) /// GeForce GTX 560 Ti (OC'd, maybe SLI)

Extreme:
i7-3960X (OC'd)
16GB DDR3 2666
GeForce GTX 680 (3-4x SLI) /// Radeon HD 7970 (3-4x X-fire)

[Immigrant]

I guess my machine is just somewhere between upper low and lower mid group atm. However I'm going to invest some money to upgrades components to meet at least upper mid category when PS2 comes out.

[Captain1nsaneo]

I've always thought of my rig as either mid range or slightly below... but I'm not the best with hardware.

Q8200
8GB Ram
GTX 570 and 9800 GT

I've got friends with crazy SLI rigs that make me feel emasculated but then again most of them only have 1 or 2 screens.