What in the world is it about the game that makes it so badly optimized?
Claeric:
I have recently been playing the demo for "Just Cause 2".
There aren't as many objects in an immediate area to load as there are in The Sims 3, but this game is abso-fucking-lutely gorgeous, and it runs flawlessly on my computer, streaming fantastically in real time as I drive at high speeds, jump from cliffs, outrun 3 helicopters shooting missiles and just barely avoiding smashing into 4 sets of armored cars, and explode gas stations in the process.
So what in the hell is it about The Sims 3 that makes it have to load things for a few seconds when you look at them? That makes the game lag just from watching a car drive from A to B? That prevents Patterns from being saved in cache and loading immediately when opening CAST? That makes extremely low LOD lots in the distance a necessity instead of an option (since I can't honestly imagine the game would explode if the crappy lots were pre-loaded and streamed properly)?
I wasn't really that frustrated with it before since I figured I just wasn't the owner of as good a computer as I thought I was, but playing this game (And a few others) makes me really damn confused, because I don't understand why The Sims 3 can't stream a world a thousandth the size of the one in Just Cause 2.
Jonni:
I've been thinking the exact same thing. My system runs Crysis on a steady framerate, all settings on high, beautiful textures, lighting etc. The Sims 3 is nothing in comparison yet I still experience the annoying lag or slow loading pattern at every hurdle. All I can do is wonder because i'm not really a techy person but I, of course, blame EAXIS!
Anach:
Actually I was thinking that the game is remarkably well optimised to run at the framerate it does, with all the objects that we cram onto our lots, all of which are close proximity and appear in high detail. However, A bad mod, too many mod files or a memory leak can half your framerate. I usually have to reboot once a day when playing Sims to keep the FPS constant.
Want to see a poorly optimised game, look at GTA4.
J. M. Pescado:
There are several reasons for this.
1. Unlike Sims, things in shooters are pretty much entirely static. Every single texture and object has already been pre-rendered before the game shipped. Because the world is mostly static, lighting and other fancy things can be precomputed during level creation. The user is not empowered to arbitrarily level and reconstruct entire buildings or replace every single piece of visible scenery. Static things get to undergo a lot of precompiled optimization.
2. Unlike in the Sims, the camera of a shooter tends to move very slowly. Your camera, generally "you", can only move at the speed of a running man. Some rare games let you even move at the speed of a car! In any event, however this motion is fairly predictable and constrained. In the Sims, you can move faster than the speed of light, or at least, try to, given that the camera can instantaneously teleport to an arbitrary location at will, making it impossible for the computer to predict where you might go next. If you lock yourself on a sim and move ONLY at sim-speed, performance wouldn't be so bad, either.
3. Unlike the Sims, the number of objects the camera can see in a shooter is typically fairly small. Your field of view is typically maybe about a 90-degree cone centered around the player character's head. This is rather unbig, really.
4. Unlike the Sims, shooter engines are highly optimized, written as masturbatory exercises in speed by developers showing off their e-peens. The Sims lacks this masturbatory e-Peen element, so there is not much of an incentive to try too hard. Shooter engines are then reused repeatedly in games, whereas the Sims engine will basically only find use in Sims.
Mosquito:
Motion to put the term "masturbatory e-peen" in everyday usage/MATY terminology.
Who`s in favor?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page