General Purpose 3D Renderer
#41
Posted 09 February 2016 - 01:08 AM
#42
Posted 25 May 2016 - 06:24 PM
#43
Posted 25 May 2016 - 07:42 PM
#44
Posted 25 May 2016 - 07:46 PM
Edited by SquidDev, 25 May 2016 - 07:46 PM.
#45
Posted 26 May 2016 - 03:49 PM
SquidDev, on 25 May 2016 - 07:46 PM, said:
I know right! It's so hard to do it fast enough..... Well maybe..... there is a way because he can do it, why can't we?
#47
Posted 01 June 2016 - 02:00 PM
Do you think it'd be possible to make a game similar to Crash Bandicoot, although heavily simplified (atleast on the graphics side)?
You don't really have control over the camera, and you just have two buttons, excluding movement.
Can't wait to when you release it
#48
Posted 06 June 2016 - 03:47 PM
RatcheT2497, on 01 June 2016 - 02:00 PM, said:
Do you think it'd be possible to make a game similar to Crash Bandicoot, although heavily simplified (atleast on the graphics side)?
You don't really have control over the camera, and you just have two buttons, excluding movement.
Can't wait to when you release it
You guys seeeriously need to stop that. Of course it's possible! May be hard, may be laggy, may be buggy, may be against the law, may explode, whatever. It's still possible.
Speaking of Crash Bandicoot, it's a full triple-A game. Its controls'n'stuff are pretty simple, but we're still talking about !BLINDLY! remaking a full game.
Also, why simplify the graphics at all? A PlayStation's CPU is about 30MHz, and the GPU is obviously much slower, plus it had only 2MB RAM.
Today's computers though, have ~2-4GHz CPUs, GPUs capable of rendering photorealistic 3D images and 4-16GB RAM.
The only problem here is that this runs purely on the CPU, so you have to split power with even Minecraft itself (very CPU intensive [cuz java]), plus Lua is running from Java which is extremely slow and CPU intensive.
CCEmuRedux doesn't fix it, it just makes it worse! It's also made in Java, and it's slower than Minecraft itself for some reason. Maybe the original ccemu works?
Edited by Bomb Bloke, 07 June 2016 - 01:26 AM.
#49
Posted 07 June 2016 - 01:41 AM
jv110, on 06 June 2016 - 03:47 PM, said:
Similar ~= the same.
jv110, on 06 June 2016 - 03:47 PM, said:
The Playstation can handle 640x480 output frames utilising 24bit colour. The average ComputerCraft display can handle 51x19 frames with 4bit colour (or 102x57 frames, with colour depth effectively reduced further). They're not even in the same ballpark.
Then there's the overhead you get for trying to run an interpreted language through another interpreted language alongside Minecraft and via a client/server mash-up. It's huge.
But still, yeah, anything's "possible". It's more a question as to whether it's "practical".
#50
Posted 17 June 2016 - 10:43 PM
Bomb Bloke, on 07 June 2016 - 01:41 AM, said:
Bomb Bloke, on 07 June 2016 - 01:41 AM, said:
But still, yeah, anything's "possible". It's more a question as to whether it's "practical".
I thought I said that?
EDIT:
It takes constant 42 ticks (2.1 seconds) to render a single Crash Bandicoot model (loaded from an .obj), at X 0 Y -2 Z 0 (best pos), without texture. That should be because of the extremely low optimization of VertexGL. Again, my computer isn't very good (i3 2.1GHz/HD GFX 3000, can barely run Minecraft at 60FPS).
Would be great if Yevano saw this and ran it on his renderer!
EDIT2:
With the update, rendering at 328x243 takes 94 ticks, 4.7 seconds.
Edited by jv110, 20 June 2016 - 04:10 PM.
#51
Posted 09 July 2017 - 05:33 AM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users