Everybody Edits || Status of development

Era · 2022-07-04 20:15:48

The definition of "low end computers" keeps getting higher, "it rund chromeOS" is hardly a mark of low end hardware, maybe a mark of an incapable OS.
Anyway, unless this 'engine' is open source I don't expect it will ever get ported to anything other than MacOS or Windows, thus probably won't run on my computer.

No comment about EEU, there was no normal way to sign up so I couldn't try it.

N1KF · 2022-07-04 21:33:06

I do hope the game is very playable on lower-end hardware. I wonder if most of the lag in EE came from netplay, considering EEO usually runs around 30-40 FPS on this old laptop. It does seem to use lots of memory, like 280-330 MB even in the lobby. I'll probably do some more tests later.

Era wrote:

Anyway, unless this 'engine' is open source I don't expect it will ever get ported to anything other than MacOS or Windows, thus probably won't run on my computer.

Mutantdevle mentioned in an earlier post that the game will always be playable in a web browser, which probably includes your computer!

Satanya · 2022-07-04 21:47:17

Don't worry, optimisation and accessibility were one of the biggest priorities when deciding on what engine to use. That's actually why we used our own! Unity, and other such ready-made engines, tend to have some trade offs. They aren't the most optimised, some have memory leaks, others aren't as secure as we'd like.
Our engine was built with the idea that everyone will probably be playing this game on a potato. And our devs are very talented people! Unlike EE, where the code consisted of spaghetti, ours is as documented and as efficient as we can make it.

Era · 2022-07-04 21:58:11

Developing your own engine is quite simply a much bigger task than using a readymade one. I don't like unity and such either, but those aren't really suited for a project like this.

> that the game will always be playable in a web browser, which probably includes your computer!

Webrowsers are the oposite of "runs on a potato". Anyhow, if the requirements are webgl(2) and wasm it won't run, and I do 't want to spend that much work to fix this at the moment.

While it is nice that the goal is a potate I wonder if you really mean that.
For instance, do you intend to make a version for 32 bit computers that are still around? (or for any OS users might run to make these systems usefull again, like older versions of windows like 7 or some open source systems with 32bit support)

Documented code helps nobody if the source is closed, and thus dors not help the portability either.

Joeyjoey65

Satanya · 2022-07-04 22:20:17

Documented code helps nobody if the source is closed, and thus dors not help the portability either.

It helps future devs we bring on to sustain the game.

As for specs, that's not up to me, and I honestly don't know what the minimum target is. And as for our own engine, our devs knew what they were going into when planning and stepping into coding. I think there isn't any dev there with less than 25yrs of experience. I trust their judgement!

John · 2022-07-05 00:41:05

Era wrote:

The definition of "low end computers" keeps getting higher, "it rund chromeOS" is hardly a mark of low end hardware, maybe a mark of an incapable OS.
Anyway, unless this 'engine' is open source I don't expect it will ever get ported to anything other than MacOS or Windows, thus probably won't run on my computer.
No comment about EEU, there was no normal way to sign up so I couldn't try it.

I was referring to US school districts, who primarily purchase Chromebook devices for their students - for very cheap. They are low end computers. The game engine that they're working on is playable in the browser using like JavaScript (likely specifically WebGL).

Era wrote:

For instance, do you intend to make a version for 32 bit computers that are still around? (or for any OS users might run to make these systems usefull again, like older versions of windows like 7 or some open source systems with 32bit support)

Because the front end will be using web technologies, as long as it's a modern web browser it should work.

Different55 · 2022-07-05 13:15:06

Era wrote:

Webrowsers are the oposite of "runs on a potato".

I'm usually all on board the "web is bloat, return to native code" bandwagon, even going a step further to "80x24 oughta be enough for anybody" sometimes but... Web tech absolutely has its uses especially where development resources are scarce, it actually is pretty efficient if you are the tiniest bit mindful of your step, but most of all:

If your potato is of such quality that it can't run a browser, like, that pretty much kicks any kind of game that isn't text based straight out of the picture. And even some games that are text based. Web browsers run on every potato except fossilized ones, that's one of their main benefits.

EDIT: Wait, what are you doing on a 32 bit computer? Even Linux distros are dropping support for 32 bit. The last ones of those were made like over a decade ago, and they were horrible, horrible things barely suitable for word processing. The last 32 bit CPU worth anything is even older than that.

LukeM · 2022-07-05 13:32:36

I'd echo what people have said above.

EEU was built on custom physics/graphics engines and it performed very well. I was able to play it at 60fps on a phone released over a decade ago.

The web is excellent in allowing you to support a huge array of old hardware with very little effort, you can write one version of your app and the browser-makers will ensure that it supports Windows, MacOS, Linus, 32 bit, 64 bit, AMD GPUs, Nvidia GPUs, Intel GPUs, both integrated graphics and discrete, etc etc etc.

There *is* a small performance penalty for this, but the majority of the problem with the web is badly written code rather than an inherent problem with the technology. If you take care to write efficient code you can do surprisingly well.

WebAssembly and WebGL add to this by providing close to native performance, though as you say a very small minority of setups don't support these. To solve this some people write two versions of their app, one which supports these modern features and runs very efficiently, and one which uses older technology and runs slower, though since the percentage of people unable to use them is becoming increasingly tiny, and since this can usually be fixed with a simple software update on the user's part, this isn't always worth it.

Someone on their team can probably fill in the exact details about these things once they've decided on them, but until then it's probably a safe bet that it'll run pretty efficiently on almost all hardware.

Era · 2022-07-05 15:42:55

Different55 wrote:

EDIT: Wait, what are you doing on a 32 bit computer? Even Linux distros are dropping support for 32 bit. The last ones of those were made like over a decade ago, and they were horrible, horrible things barely suitable for word processing. The last 32 bit CPU worth anything is even older than that.

I really don't care what linux distros do, and it is very easy for us in the western world to simply go "buy a newer computer".
But quite simply many older machines are slower now because of incapable operating systems, not because the systems became slower over time.
Webkit supports 32bit computers yes, but while I can run my game just fine on these 32bit computers I don't really know if i want to spend all the effort to get webgl2 and wasm running "well" on those machines. Native code really is faster there, especially with modern browsers having a much bigger footprint every version.

And to answer your question of "what are you doing on a 32bit computer"
I would say: Why would I throw away a computer that runs *faster* with the OS I run on it than any windows 10 machine I have touched, if the garbage windows 10 calls an OS is enough speed for people than my 10 year old machine that runs faster ought to be enough easily.

TundrumMax · 2022-07-06 17:27:59

mf if you could run EE fine then I'm fairly sure you'd be able to run EE! fine as well. It's not like they're gonna add 4K textures and ray tracing to a pixel art game, I bet even my 11-12 year old laptop designed for windows 7 could run it (it has 32-bit windows 10 on it lmao).

also cap on your pc running faster fr

and also how do you run any other games if your pc is so bad

do you even play any other games

y u playing web games if web games can't run

Different55 · 2022-07-06 21:50:42

Era wrote:

Different55 wrote:
EDIT: Wait, what are you doing on a 32 bit computer? Even Linux distros are dropping support for 32 bit. The last ones of those were made like over a decade ago, and they were horrible, horrible things barely suitable for word processing. The last 32 bit CPU worth anything is even older than that.
I really don't care what linux distros do, and it is very easy for us in the western world to simply go "buy a newer computer".
But quite simply many older machines are slower now because of incapable operating systems, not because the systems became slower over time.
Webkit supports 32bit computers yes, but while I can run my game just fine on these 32bit computers I don't really know if i want to spend all the effort to get webgl2 and wasm running "well" on those machines. Native code really is faster there, especially with modern browsers having a much bigger footprint every version.
And to answer your question of "what are you doing on a 32bit computer"
I would say: Why would I throw away a computer that runs *faster* with the OS I run on it than any windows 10 machine I have touched, if the garbage windows 10 calls an OS is enough speed for people than my 10 year old machine that runs faster ought to be enough easily.

I am all for permacomputing but that's not something you can drag the rest of the world into. At some point you gotta realize that a machine has fallen behind and needs to be retasked.

And I didn't say anything about W10, I said 32 bit CPUs. You can run any OS you want. But again, the last 32 bit CPU was released more than 10 years ago and it was hot trash. The last good 32 bit CPU was released more than 15 years ago. You can take a modern chip and run old software on it. You cannot (indefinitely) take modern software and run it on an older chip. There's a reason the permacomputing movement focuses on creating new, efficient, portable software rather than adapting existing software.

Satanya · 2022-07-07 01:38:11

Word from Fixel.

One dev uses MacOS for development. Two devs are using Linux for development. One uses Windows 10 for development. WebGL client will run pretty much on a potato, and if that's not enough, native client is written on .net with such a minimum requirement that it runs mono framework and on all of those OSes. Mono executable is compiled as a fat binary so it is compatible with both 32 bit and 64 bit OSes. And if that's not enough, you're not our target demographic.
And keep in mind, game engine doesn't run on client. The client just acts as a remote IO (front-end). The engine runs on a Linux server written in highly optimised C++ code.

Minimania, mutantdevle, Snowester

N1KF · 2022-07-07 05:32:02

Fixel's comment is confusing me a bit:

Fixel wrote:

And keep in mind, game engine doesn't run on client. The client just acts as a remote IO (front-end). The engine runs on a Linux server written in highly optimised C++ code.

If I'm understanding this right, that raises lots of questions about the netcode. Does a back-and-forth connection need to be made every single frame, all before the new position of smileys can be rendered? If so then I imagine that would make the game even laggier than EE. Or is there a delay buffer between input and smiley movement? That would be smoother, but it would feel unresponsive. Rollback wouldn't be an option, since the client doesn't simulate the engine.

It's hard for me to imagine how the game could feel responsive if the client doesn't simulate the physics in some way.

Era · 2022-07-07 08:58:26

>The engine runs on a Linux server written in highly optimised C++ code.
That's not the engine, that's the server... A lot of the confusion probably comes from this use of wrong terminology.

anyhow, a .net client is "fine" in the portability sense... usually, that is aslong as the software uses no win32 code explicitly, anyhow.

Mono executable is compiled as a fat binary so it is compatible with both 32 bit and 64 bit OSes.

Hold up a bit, first it's a .net client that is native... (which isn't "native" because .net is a vm, like java, but not that important)
But in the next sentence you want to ship mono with a fat binary? Does the client require that much native code? I guess I will see how easily this can be run on other platforms that have mono, that are not linux.

If I'm understanding this right, that raises lots of questions about the netcode. Does a back-and-forth connection need to be made every single frame, all before the new position of smileys can be rendered?

I highly doubt that, if you run a 60fps game you have a timeframe for a back and forth of 16,7ms. Which is not that much time, especially if the server is a bit further away. so inquiries that are required to be answered within one frame doesn't make much sense to me.
It is possible it is "just" streamed in both directions, I suppose. (edit: that is, that input is streamed the way it is, and only the server acts on it. Kind of like how those game streaming services do it, though it is not that pleasant) The normal way of using prediction to compensate for network latency makes a bit more sense to me. Though then again if your connection is "local" enough it may not be neccesary, which is a bit cheaper to develop.

LukeM · 2022-07-07 11:16:13

Satanya wrote:

Word from Fixel.
One dev uses MacOS for development. Two devs are using Linux for development. One uses Windows 10 for development. WebGL client will run pretty much on a potato, and if that's not enough, native client is written on .net with such a minimum requirement that it runs mono framework and on all of those OSes. Mono executable is compiled as a fat binary so it is compatible with both 32 bit and 64 bit OSes. And if that's not enough, you're not our target demographic.
And keep in mind, game engine doesn't run on client. The client just acts as a remote IO (front-end). The engine runs on a Linux server written in highly optimised C++ code.

This is fairly unrelated to the performance issue, but I’m wondering a couple things:

Does this mean that things like the physics engine need to be duplicated between the two versions of the client? Or are you doing something similar to maybe Realm of the Mad God where a few times a second the server sends a list of new movements and the client just replays them?

Also on the .net front, is there a reason you’re not using .net core (or its successors .net 5 and 6), since those are natively cross-platform without the need for mono. I believe you can also compile in the .net runtime if running without any setup is a requirement, or you can bundle an installer with the executable like some popular games that use .net do.

I guess until fairly recently (possibly after you already started the .net port) they haven’t had a great way to create GUI applications, but with .net 6 there’s MAUI which I’ve heard good things about.

NoNK · 2022-07-12 16:01:28

MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT

Grilyon2

theoldinese · 2022-07-15 17:11:58

NoNK wrote:

MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT
MAKE SURE THE PHYSICS ENGINE IS GOOD OR I WONT PLAY IT

i didnt quite catch that, could you repeat that?

GravityDonut

N1KF · 2022-07-21 22:14:32

LukeM wrote:

EEU was built on custom physics/graphics engines and it performed very well. I was able to play it at 60fps on a phone released over a decade ago.

Performed "very well?" Maybe it got worse over time, but it's not working well for me. I just checked, and I can run Rivelka's EE Rewritten with nearly consistent 30+ FPS (Massive trolled world with hundreds of coins). Meanwhile EEU runs at around 5-7 FPS (Medium, fairly simple world), making it nearly unplayable, especially because the low framerate seems to eat up inputs.

Weirdly enough I remember EEU having smoother gameplay than EEF. I also remember people complaining EEF was laggy, so what's going on here?

If we're using EEU as a baseline for comparison, the new EE has some challenges that EEU never had to face. It's planned to have parallax backgrounds, animated smileys, moving blocks, normal maps, and custom lighting. I have a hard time imagining how that'll work without slowing down my browser. We'll just have to wait and see I guess.

Grilyon2

Raphe9000 · 2022-07-30 21:02:23

Meanwhile EEU runs at around 5-7 FPS

That's not the fault of any of the programming; that's just the Curse of Xenonetix.

Kiraninja

Kiraninja · 2022-07-30 23:35:06

Raphe9000 wrote:

Meanwhile EEU runs at around 5-7 FPS
That's not the fault of any of the programming; that's just the Curse of Xenonetix.

Hi Raphe, It's a pleasure to see you.

NoNK · 2022-08-04 17:23:36

Hello Raph, Hello Kiraninja, good morning sirs

Victoria · 2022-08-05 20:05:45

°. hi kirasus

NoNK · 2022-08-13 15:52:57

gm nighmore how are you today sir

Victoria · 2022-08-14 18:29:02

NoNK wrote:

gm nighmore how are you today sir

°. im not nightmore welp

NoNK · 2022-08-28 02:11:20

hello how are you

Official Everybody Edits Forums

#26 2022-07-04 20:15:48

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#27 2022-07-04 21:33:06

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#28 2022-07-04 21:47:17

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#29 2022-07-04 21:58:11, last edited by Era (2022-07-04 21:58:54)

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#30 2022-07-04 22:20:17

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#31 2022-07-05 00:41:05

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#32 2022-07-05 13:15:06, last edited by Different55 (2022-07-05 13:35:52)

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#33 2022-07-05 13:32:36

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#34 2022-07-05 15:42:55

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#35 2022-07-06 17:27:59, last edited by TundrumMax (2022-07-06 17:29:25)

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#36 2022-07-06 21:50:42

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#37 2022-07-07 01:38:11

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#38 2022-07-07 05:32:02

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#39 2022-07-07 08:58:26, last edited by Era (2022-07-07 08:59:38)

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#40 2022-07-07 11:16:13, last edited by LukeM (2022-07-07 11:16:40)

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#41 2022-07-12 16:01:28

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#42 2022-07-15 17:11:58

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#43 2022-07-21 22:14:32

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#44 2022-07-30 21:02:23

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#45 2022-07-30 23:35:06

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#46 2022-08-04 17:23:36

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#47 2022-08-05 20:05:45

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#48 2022-08-13 15:52:57

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#49 2022-08-14 18:29:02, last edited by Victoria (2022-08-14 18:29:39)

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

#50 2022-08-28 02:11:20

Re: Everybody Edits || Status of development

Board footer