Topic: 360 Hd Revisited (Read 919 times)

mikeandbandit · « **Reply #45 on:** October 10, 2005, 04:16:00 PM »

QUOTE(Devedander @ Oct 10 2005, 07:19 PM)

I wish you could have convinced the Halo 2 guys the importance of this

mikeandbandit · « **Reply #46 on:** October 10, 2005, 04:21:00 PM »

QUOTE

Since Mikeandbandit is apparnetly not returning I guess we can't ask him why this was even brought up since it's agree it's not really a load time reducing issue.

He answered your question already

QUOTE

however... this DOES NOT reduce loading times unless the system IS designed around it heavily ie ... when its in the distance and just appearing on screen... load C... load B asychronously such that as you get closer you CAN do C->B... load A... etc etc... you get the picture.

which is what i have said 100x already if it was originally designed for the 360 it could have been implemented without the use of the hard drive since it wasnt if, (according to them) they wanted to implement it they would be forced to recode the entire game.

QUOTE

I like how you also totally left out all the parts where I clearly showed you contradicting yourself...

Which parts were these i missed them

QUOTE

I have actual programming experience. I am not by any means a programming genious but have no doubt a better understanding of the fundamentals than you do.

which may be true however you certainly lack basic common sense of compelling information in regard to how games are made now.

Devedander · « **Reply #47 on:** October 10, 2005, 05:05:00 PM »

QUOTE(mikeandbandit @ Oct 11 2005, 12:32 AM)

He answered your question already

Devedander · « **Reply #48 on:** October 10, 2005, 05:13:00 PM »

DUPE POST

Devedander · « **Reply #49 on:** October 10, 2005, 05:18:00 PM »

Quote from: mikeandbandit,Oct 11 2005, 12:32 AM

mikeandbandit · « **Reply #50 on:** October 10, 2005, 06:23:00 PM »

QUOTE(Devedander @ Oct 10 2005, 08:21 PM)

What is realtime LOD adjustment? I am not familiar with that term. Are you suggesting there is some other kind of LOD? A prerendered LOD perhaps? What are you talking about?

m_hael · « **Reply #51 on:** October 10, 2005, 06:23:00 PM »

The reason LOD CAN and does improve Load times in a streaming world is due to the rendering requirements....

1. you're in Area A... you can see Lod1 of Area B and NONE of Area C
2. you approach area B the engine begins Loading area B(Lod0) and Area C(Lod1)
3. you continue.. the engine begins Loading area C(Lod0) and unloads Area A(Lod0) and Area B(Lod1).

as you approach an area the game loads the assets it requires... this is what I meant by the game will only benefit from this in terms of load times IFF its designed from the ground up to take advantage of it.

Devedander · « **Reply #52 on:** October 10, 2005, 07:20:00 PM »

QUOTE(m_hael @ Oct 11 2005, 02:34 AM)

The reason LOD CAN and does improve Load times in a streaming world is due to the rendering requirements....

mikeandbandit · « **Reply #53 on:** October 10, 2005, 07:51:00 PM »

QUOTE(Devedander @ Oct 10 2005, 10:12 PM)

First off before we start calling people petty let's not forget who brought this out of the world of the civilized first:

Devedander · « **Reply #54 on:** October 10, 2005, 09:00:00 PM »

QUOTE(mikeandbandit @ Oct 11 2005, 04:02 AM)

m_hael · « **Reply #55 on:** October 10, 2005, 09:48:00 PM »

mikeandbandit · « **Reply #56 on:** October 11, 2005, 08:41:00 AM »

I will also note in your big long example the only usable application is for environmental data. HOWEVER at that point with the level of texture and geometric detail it is not an issue of data accessibility but rather the RENDERING ability. again what you are talking about require TREMENDOUS rendering power which is NEGATED by using LOD adjustment which also happens to use a small ram footprint. Thus having the the cpu power to actively do LOD adjustment conserves ram usage and takes stress off the GPU. Thus the need for large dynaminc storage is no longer neccessary, and if used as "virtual ram" would actually be slower as it takes an unneccessary step to render more then it needs and cache the data in the HDD. But no programmer would do it that way as it would not make sense. Basically what you are suggesting is equivilent to going 5 miles down the road jumping on the expressway, getting off at the next exit and turning, when all we needed to do was go around the corner.

To recap a game designed around the 360 would use LOD adjustment and various other techniques by default in order to get the best performance. A game not using this technique would suffer from short draw distances and slow down even if caching to the HDD. A game designed to use BOTH LOD adjustment and the HDD would find caching to the HDD irrelevant as it offers no performance increase from streaming the data off of the DVD into ram and the ram footprint would be small to start with thanks to the active use of LOD. Thus a game properly designed would have huge draw distances, high detail, a smaller ram footprint, and no load times between sections, EVEN WITHOUT THE USE OF A HDD.

jaskerzada006 · « **Reply #57 on:** October 11, 2005, 01:14:00 PM »

I have to agree with DEV.

Ofcourse we won't know the true potential whilst the HDD not being standard.

No brainer.

Just like Doom3 on xbox would have been impossible if the HDD was optional.

mikeandbandit · « **Reply #58 on:** October 11, 2005, 05:48:00 PM »

QUOTE(jaskerzada006 @ Oct 11 2005, 04:25 PM)

I have to agree with DEV.

m_hael · « **Reply #59 on:** October 11, 2005, 07:03:00 PM »

20 versions.. erm... no.

every game I've ever worked on has used a MAXIMUM of 5.. most use 3; High, Medium, Low.

Author Topic: 360 Hd Revisited (Read 919 times)