Frame-rate Issues - Caused by Inefficient Texture Handling?

  • 0 replies
  • 1170 views
*

Offline KickAir8P

  • *
  • 26
  • ˙ʇɥƃᴉs ɟo ʇno ʇsnɾ 'ɹoɹɹᴉɯ ǝɥʇ ɟo ǝpᴉs ɹǝɥʇO
    • View Profile
Just heard something that may mean PlanCo's base (not caused by Toolkit content) frame-rate issues are being caused (at least in part) by needlessly inefficient texture handling that makes rendering of scenery-heavy parks much harder than it has to be, which was news to me.   :o   Disclaimer:  I'm not a game designer, I'm barely a 3D artist, but most of what I'm saying here is googleable (examples here, here, here, and here).

Bit of background:  in 3D game design getting the content to show up on the screen quickly and smoothly while spending minimal system resources is a primary consideration.  Every time the game program reads a texture file for a 3D object it costs system resources that could otherwise go to frame-rate -- it's therefor considered best-practice to reduce the number of times the program has to do that by putting the textures for multiple (sometimes all) 3D objects into a single big image file (often called a texture atlas) instead of a lot of smaller image files.  This is important in first-person shooter games where level creation is done by developers with an eye on system resources -- far more so in a game where players using lots of diverse scenery to make a beautiful park is much of the point.

The Frontier developers are professional game designers with decades of experience, so of course Planet Coaster's content was made using carefully optimized texture atlases for nearly all of it, right?  Right?



That's from a topic on the PlanCo forums here, the posts on texture atlases start here.  Hearsay, not clearly sourced (of course), and ambiguous, but (IMHO) disturbing nontheless.