Just wondering how others would view this…
If someone built a well made action game with Panda3D… I’m talking not a lot of excess code, attractive low polygon models for everything, minimum shader usage, larges texture sizes being 256 to 512 mostly (jpegs)…
Fps wise (frames per second), how should a Panda3D made game perform on a PC with 4 processors (quad) and a decent graphic card?
Lets say the P3D game created has just as much geometry on screen as a game like “Dark Siders.”
Would you expect the Panda3D game to fall closer to 30 fps because of the Panda Engine vs Other commercial engines or would you expect a P3D made game to run closer to 60 fps?
A question like this is pure opinion because some Panda users would take into account rather or not the game was scripted with C++ or Python. Personally I would not, because CPUs are much faster now than back in the days. I even read an article that talk about how Python was becoming more and more popular because PCs are faster now and developers don’t have to worry about a major speed difference resulting from the language used.
Besides, Panda3D executes in C++ from what I can tell, so I would conclude, Python wouldn’t be a major factor in fps loss unless it was over used, but I’ve already stated at the top, we’re imagining a well coded Panda3D game without a lot of unnecessary code.
I’ve seen on the internet that a couple of none MMO commercial games were made with P3D, but I do not know the names of these games or rather or not they are still obtainable. Besides, those games were probably written with some older form of P3D and I’m talking Panda 1.7.0 here.
I guess a topic like this would go unknown until someone from the Panda Community creates a true commercial quality title. I’ve been comparing performance lately…my P3D demo with other commercial games and found the difference in fps “thrown up in the air” so to say.
I ran my P3D game file that had a normal amount of geometry in it similar to that of the typical hardcore, commercial action game and found that the P3D engine out performed several games I tested it against. “Beyond Good and Evil”, “Dark Siders”, “DeadSpace” and “Tomb Raider Ann”, just to name some of them. “Beyond Good and Evil” was made some time ago, so seeing the fps of that game way lower than my P3D running app was no surprise, but Dark Siders and Dead Space really raised some questions.
Was P3D out performing those games because the engine is better written or was it because those games abused the use of shaders? Even when turning the shader input for Dead Space almost to none, the fps did not improve.
The difference with Tom Raider Ann is the fact, Laura Croft is like the only character you’ll be seeing on the screen most of the time. Tomb Raider is an environmental intense game more than anything and the visuals are really high polygon looking (which is probably due to some darn good shaders).
Tomb Raider Ann broke even with my P3D application. Since P3D seems to pull all the multisampling capabilities of your Graphic Card, I turned up the graphical quality of Tomb Raider Ann to get a better performance measurement.
I am currently building a commercial title myself, but it won’t get finished until the end of this year or sometime early next year. So far, I like what I see from P3D in terms of performance. I guess it will depend on what resolution P3D is ran on as well. I’ve noticed that P3D seems to drop fps more on higher resolution vs Tomb Raider Ann…which seemed to run fine even at high resolution.
Of course higher res mean more draw time for graphic cards…
I noticed this… When disabling the P3D controlled multisampling and manually moving the Nvidia quality sider to max quality…my P3D test application ran just as well as the Tomb Raider Ann at high resolution, but not while controlled by P3D itself.
I’m finding the wide screen resolution of 1280 x 768 is a good one and 1024 x 768 for a none wide screen. P3D’s fps is at max with these resolutions, even with 16xAA sampling.
Most other PC game applications I’ve played either seem to not be effected by resolution much or the fps is destroyed by higher resolution.
I wonder will developing something commercial with Panda 1.7.0 be worth it in the end? The worst thing to have happen is finish a game that only runs well with a Quad PC. I know, because I’ve done that before but then again, the engine I used was poor as hell; didn’t even have a global clock sync logic. Lol.
I don’t know why I’m getting that gut feeling… The one that says, “Panda will perform good while you develop and finish your project, but in the end…it’s going to leave you hanging.”
Would be awesome as hell if one day P3D apps were able to run on a console like Playstation 15. Lol, I’m going far in the future there.