tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27488238.post4535867202473407946..comments2024-03-22T11:34:45.165+01:00Comments on taw's blog: Short rant on video game usability and 3D accelerationtawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16972845140253292628noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27488238.post-62549485194806674292007-07-21T19:18:00.000+02:002007-07-21T19:18:00.000+02:00Jeff Atwood: That's truly awesome, thanks for info...Jeff Atwood: That's truly awesome, thanks for info. All games should work like that.tawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16972845140253292628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27488238.post-89015611211469921792007-07-21T01:53:00.000+02:002007-07-21T01:53:00.000+02:00> That's what game engines should do - monitor FPS...> That's what game engines should do - monitor FPS and increase or decrease rendering quality if FPS is not in some predefined range. But not a single game I know does so. Instead they all opt for providing "constant rendering quality" - maintaining some level of rendering quality whether the game gets unusably slow, or has a lot of free GPU cycles.<BR/><BR/>Actually, that's not true-- Shiny's Sacrifice uses dynamic rendering to scale the number of polygons on screen at any given time.<BR/><BR/>Very hard to find references, as the game was released in the ancient year of 2000, but you can see a forum post here:<BR/><BR/>http://www.rage3d.com/board/archive/index.php?t-7003.html<BR/><BR/>Pretty interesting stuff, but it never took off, as you note.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com