![]() But this is custom code Unity does not do by itself, which heavily affects performance.Īs for stuff far away, they're actually rendered separately, again with custom code and then layered ontop of the final image, again major performance impact. The trick KSP1 used, which is also copied to KSP2, is to move the universe rather than your vessel, so that the area around your rocket is always in the high percision region of whatever floating point representation you're using. any game is affected by this, some games use 64-bit double float to alleviate the problem that allows you to have planet scale, but still not system scale. Out of curiosity, where is the documentation stating that Unity is actually affected by this kind of thing? It would obviously be a floating point issue, so it makes sense that all you would have to do is change the frame of reference and cut things into chunks, which Unity is capable of. ![]() The first KSP hit many limitations because of Unity, common sense would suggest that the second one would avoid those limitations. All of these require custom engine, or heavy modification of existing engine. There is no game that supports map size of billions of kilometres, rendering objects from a million km away, or physics for custom build rocket. ![]() Or is it equally as fair to say that the game would probably still be in development for another 3-4 years if it were a different game engine yesĭepends on the skill of their programmers obviously, low skill programmers may never get it done. Is it safe to say then that the answer to the question is basically because it suits the devs better and not the game as a whole? Custom code for Unity use C# which is easier to write, but 3x slower than C++ the first one used Unity, a lot of the code can just be copied overĤ. it's generally the easiest to get startedĢ.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |