Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.
Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).
I was just wondering if anyone knew how much increasing the map sizes in Coldstone games would change the system requirements. I'm thinking about having the maps in The Island be the size of 500x500 with normal PoG movment tiles and tile sizes.
------------------ Thanks, GrahamVH graham@vhpublications.com http://www.warcraftc...t/CGD/home.html
Graham, I don't know if anyone here can answer your question with respect to changes in system requirements. I do not see any reason why 500 x 500 maps would not work. However, when you tab to the overhead map to see where you have been, the map size may be too big to display properly on the computer screen. I suggest you experiment with a very simple map and see how it renders itself in the overhead view.
I do know that if your map is a rectangle rather than square, the overhead view will stretch it to fit a square thereby elongating the stamps which are on that map. If you want maps which are not square, build them on a square and just don't use all the available area.
------------------ My Doctor said I was having too much wine, women, and song - so I gave up singing because 2 out of 3 is not so bad. The (url="http://"http://www.evula.org/rduck/")Kingdom of Garendall(/url) sectional map is easily printed from gif format pages. (url="http://"http://www.ambrosiasw.com/cgi-bin/vftp/dl-redirect.pl/damsels.sit?path=pog/addons&file;=damselsV1.1.sit")Damsels in Distress(/url) - A plugin for PoG. (url="http://"http://www.evula.org/rduck/RD-DEL.jpg")RD-DEL(/url)
I'm not sure about system requirements but I do know that it will take longer to load. Shouldn't be that much longer though. It only has to place the stamps more times.
And does this mean you are re-doing ALL you maps? Cause last time you said the numbers you said you had over 1000 maps. Is it me or do you just like developing the island and are never gonna release it because you'll keep changing it
------------------ Pilky (url="http://"http://www.mcubedsw.com")M cubed homepage(/url) (url="http://"http://www.mcubedsw.com/network")M cubed Network(/url)
Quote
Originally posted by Pilky: **I'm not sure about system requirements but I do know that it will take longer to load. Shouldn't be that much longer though. It only has to place the stamps more times.
**
I'm just trying to make it easier for myself. After spending hours setting up locations I wanted an easier way (I hate setting up locations). With bigger map sizes there would be fewer locations.
All of my "exterior world" maps are 150 x 150 with 30x30 movement tiles and 96x96 ground tiles. They are, however, very detailed. Watching them load, I would not want to go any bigger. There's enough to do and explore in each map, I think, to make the stay in the map worthwhile, and the load time is, in my opinion, at its maximum. I have a system in place, though, to allow the Player to transport across several maps to the edges of the world or to the center of the world.
If your maps are very simple, then the large size should be fine.
(edit) It took me over a year to make the exterior world maps. That's working on it when I'm able.
------------------ -- Debra Danillitphil Productions (url="http://"http://www.danillitphil.com/graphics/index.html")www.danillitphil.com(/url)
(This message has been edited by Debra (edited 06-08-2004).)
How many maps do you have? I'm thinking of 300+ for space, each 32x32 ground and movement tiles. And that is just for out doors and only for the main planet. You are talking 1-2 more for the space station, 5-6 for the space flight, 10-15 for the streets on earth and another 5 for the very last part. Plus there'll be an indoor map for almost every outdoor map with a building
The only real system effect of making the maps larger and/or more complex is RAM requirement. The more stamps added, and the larger the maps are made, the more RAM is needed to load the map quickly. Of course, it'll load eventually - it'll just take longer. CPU speed can be a bit of an issue too, but you'll probably want to stamp a G3+ logo on the game anyway, as below that it gets a little too slow, I think. Nowadays, anyway.
There's no real way to figure it out though - I suppose the best you can do is just add up the size requirements of all your stamps and think about how much RAM is needed to load them all into. I don't think there's any way to guess with the RAM that the map will require - if you can drop into OS9, you could do a test though. Create a map with a predetermined number of stamps (ie: figure out the size of them all) and say, 100x100 in size. Load up the map in OS9 in a window and go Apple > About this Computer and see how much RAM the game is using. Replace it with a new map that's 500x500 with the exact same stamps and see how much it changes.
Of course, the flaw here is that it's in OS9, and if you're developing for the OSX market, the RAM usage is different, especially in application allocation of RAM. Might give you some rough ideas at least - and do keep in mind that when running OSX, the system requires around 64MB of RAM to page through, and that Classic pushes that to 128MB - hence the minimum requirements for the system.
Eh. I'm rambling. Something to consider, perhaps.
-Andiyar
------------------ "Any good that I may do here, let me do now, for I may not pass this way again"
(like an advertisement)Presenting Activity Monitor! Found in Applications->Utilities, Activity Monitor will allow you to monitor the memory AND CPU usage of all running processes! This marvelous tool comes built-in to OS 10.3 and is therefore absolutely free!!!(/ad)
Anyway, you can check RAM usage in OS X. By the way, I'd be careful to check it while your game is the ACTIVE application (therefore, I'd run it in a window and move things around so that you can see the activity monitor entry for it while you're in the game), as OS X gives active applications more memory.
------------------ Cha0s (url="http://"http://www.world-of-cha0s.hostrocket.com")The Homepage of Cha0s(/url)
Originally posted by CI-Ia0s: **(like an advertisement)Presenting Activity Monitor! Found in Applications- >Utilities, Activity Monitor will allow you to monitor the memory AND CPU usage of all running processes! This marvelous tool comes built-in to OS 10.3 and is therefore absolutely free!!!(/ad) **
And that will all be available to you after the update as a slight technicality means you can't run your games in 10.3. While you wait for this wondrous product please browse for Process Viewer in 10.2
Originally posted by CI-Ia0s: **(like an advertisement)Presenting Activity Monitor! Found in Applications- >Utilities, Activity Monitor will allow you to monitor the memory AND CPU usage of all running processes! This marvelous tool comes built-in to OS 10.3 and is therefore absolutely free!!!(/ad)
I tried this out on a Tibook 400Mhz with a Map Size of 1000x1000 and it ran at 20% of 384MB of RAM and 86.4% of CPU speed. I purposely cluttered as many different NPC's and Stamps as I have. However on a Powermac G4 Dual 1.25GHz and 1024MB of RAM with the same map and game it ran at 5.8% of RAM and 106.60% of CPU speed. I find these results a bit confusing.
Edit: Both Computers are running OS 10.2.8 ------------------ Thanks, GrahamVH graham@vhpublications.com (url="http://"http://www.warcraftcentral.net/CGD/home.html")http://www.warcraftc...t/CGD/home.html(/url)
(This message has been edited by GrahamVH (edited 06-10-2004).)
Chaos: Heh. I totally forgot about Process Viewer/Activity Monitor. Blame it on my exams, I guess. But then, I use MenuMeters anyway - far more useful. It's a suite that shows CPU/RAM/HD/Network stats in your menu bar. It's on VersionTracker, and is free.
Originally posted by GrahamVH: **I tried this out on a Tibook 400Mhz with a Map Size of 1000x1000 and it ran at 20% of 384MB of RAM and 86.4% of CPU speed. I purposely cluttered as many different NPC's and Stamps as I have. However on a Powermac G4 Dual 1.25GHz and 1024MB of RAM with the same map and game it ran at 5.8% of RAM and 106.60% of CPU speed. I find these results a bit confusing.
Edit: Both Computers are running OS 10.2.8**
I don't know enough about DP computers to be sure, but could this be an indication that it's threading off onto the second processor, as well as utilising the first? I don't believe that Coldstone games are AlitiVec optimised, so I guess the difference between your 400mhz TiBook and an equivalent G3 wouldn't be major - but I'm not sure about that dual issue.
(This message has been edited by TarnΔlion Andiyarus (edited 06-10-2004).)
Originally posted by Pilky: **And that will all be available to you after the update as a slight technicality means you can't run your games in 10.3. While you wait for this wondrous product please browse for Process Viewer in 10.2:D
Yea... well... You can try it in classic and use Activity Monitor.