Lower Resolution Texture Packs

[SapioiT]

Well, I know some people will be against it, but since there are so many users with "weak" PCs, I suggest having lower texture pack resolutions available in the game. For example, instead of just 64, 128 and 256, also 32 and maybe even 16. The difference, for the old computers, is rather significant! Mostly when loading 2 or more planets at the same time!

What do you gals&guys think?

 

[FunnyBunny14]

Reduce the max segments drawn and you'll be fine. Reducing the textures even further would just be a waste of time and effort that could be spent elsewhere. Just make you own texture pack if you really want a 16x16 texture pack.

 

[der_scheme]

Just make you own texture pack if you really want a 16x16 texture pack.

The game has no support for anything below 64.

 

[Lecic]

The game has no support for anything below 64.

I could have sworn some of the old texture packs used x16 and x32. Or did they just have pixel clumps, where even though it looks like a smaller resolution, it's really clumps of 2x2 making a x64?

 

[der_scheme]

I could have sworn some of the old texture packs used x16 and x32. Or did they just have pixel clumps, where even though it looks like a smaller resolution, it's really clumps of 2x2 making a x64?

Exactly this. I failed to find a source for my above statement within 10 seconds, but I have a source for this one:

Most of the default textures are a 32x32 texture just scaled up to fit the rest of the 64x64.

 

[SapioiT]

So... for now: 10% pass, 40% to keep it unchanged and 50% to lower it...

 

[Ketran]

I don't understand why anybody would vote for no change, adding lower resolution texture packs would have no effect on whether or not you use 64, 128 or 256.

It seems few people remember that this game initially had x32 textures.

 

[Lecic]

I don't understand why anybody would vote for no change, adding lower resolution texture packs would have no effect on whether or not you use 64, 128 or 256.

It seems few people remember that this game initially had x32 textures.

Weren't they just double pixeled, though? As in, 2x2 clumps of pixels so that it looks 32x32 but is actually 64x64?

 

[Ketran]

I'm not sure, I definitely remember an update long ago where some new textures were added and it was cool because they were x32 though.

 

[SapioiT]

7 people to reduce it, 6 to leave it alone. Too bad not many people like this idea...

 

[Viridis00]

I'm not really against the idea of lower res packs, but if you can't run 64 bit well, I'd really suggest getting a new graphics card because even a 4 year old card could support this game on medium settings with 64 bit textures and maintain good FPS under normal circumstances.

That being said, if the game will support less than 64 bit textures, downscaling the current textures is a good solution. Not like quality even matters at that point or anything. Not really high priority, but it really wouldn't take much time either. I feel fairly neutral on the matter.

 

[SapioiT]

I'm not really against the idea of lower res packs, but if you can't run 64 bit well, I'd really suggest getting a new graphics card because even a 4 year old card could support this game on medium settings with 64 bit textures and maintain good FPS under normal circumstances.

That being said, if the game will support less than 64 bit textures, downscaling the current textures is a good solution. Not like quality even matters at that point or anything. Not really high priority, but it really wouldn't take much time either. I feel fairly neutral on the matter.

Actually, a graphics card which was top-notch 4 years ago could, but if you bought a $700 PC arund 7 years ago, or cheaper a few years ago, you'll have problems running even 64x64. Also, one other thing which shall be changed, in my opinion, is the size of the core. I mean, we have big planets with only 3-5 layers of blocks than the huge core...

 

[jayman38]

Would a non-animated texture pack help at all? I think it would involve bitmap sheets where the subsequent frame bitmaps would simply be the same image. (Example: static images for all four frames of the reactor block, power storage, shield capacitor, shield generator, etc.) I'm thinking older card drivers might be able to tell that the images on the sheet are same, and create a new, smaller texture sheet in video RAM.

 

[ltmauve]

I think it would involve bitmap sheets where the subsequent frame bitmaps would simply be the same image.

It won't help. The computer has no common sense whatsoever. If you don't want animated textures, open up data/config/BlockConfig.xml and find/replace <Animated>true with <Animated>false. And even then it's a minescule performance improvement.

 

[SapioiT]

It won't help. The computer has no common sense whatsoever. If you don't want animated textures, open up data/config/BlockConfig.xml and find/replace <Animated>true with <Animated>false. And even then it's a minescule performance improvement.

Maybe a tiny performance for a good system, but for a low-end system, the animations are a great deal of resources. And the same goes for the texture's resolution.

 

[NeonSturm]

I agree with

That being said, if the game will support less than 64 bit textures, downscaling the current textures is a good solution. Not like quality even matters at that point or anything. Not really high priority, but it really wouldn't take much time either. I feel fairly neutral on the matter.

I guess the game could be optimized a bit more by having 1 texture (or color) per chunk or 1/8 chunk for chunks that are not fully loaded.

That would save a lot of GPU memory (damage level + textures = >2/3) AND chunks wouldn't appear out of nowhere that often.

 

[lazarus78]

Maybe a tiny performance for a good system, but for a low-end system, the animations are a great deal of resources. And the same goes for the texture's resolution.

No really, not much performance gain at all. My work computer, a Dell 960 with an added GT630 graphics card runs the game just fine. You just have to tweak the settings.

The game doesnt have many blocks loaded into memory like, say, Minecraft does, so its performance hit is very minor overall. Not to mention the game will become naturally more demanding as it progresses in development, so if you are having trouble now, you won't see much, if any, improvement down the road.

I agree with



I guess the game could be optimized a bit more by having 1 texture (or color) per chunk or 1/8 chunk for chunks that are not fully loaded.

That would save a lot of GPU memory (damage level + textures = >2/3) AND chunks wouldn't appear out of nowhere that often.

The game already uses Mipmaps, which cuts down on the GPU memory.

 

[SapioiT]

But what if you'd have an dual core with an integrated graphics card? Does that let you play that game with that many FPS? While reducind the resolution of the textures will really make the game run smoother.

Because what I say doesen't applies for the systems where the game runs "just fine", but for the systems where the game barely runs if it runs at all!