I will use the transducer because I do not speak English very well.

I have been seeing several issues for the graphical quality and performance of the engine.
My question is, the update that is going to take place by the end of the year near Christmas, brings what will really bring?
Better performance, less load time, better graphics, shaders and intelligence?
I would like to know in the concrete that changes, if they are talking about better shadows and illumination I would like to see the differences. I have seen the progress of the updates but I do not see much change.
I have a gtx 1050 and an amd apu a8 7650k 3.3 ghz and I have a map of several kilometer round that goes to me 20 - 25 - 30 fps. With the update, will it reach 60 fps at least?
I know that the engine is not developing hundreds of people or anything, but there are videos that are seen around 60 zombies on the map without any other object and the fps fall as if it were a game of last generation, and that they are only models of low poly zombies of 2005 without any other object in the map and the fps fall as if you had put a model with many polygons.
The game I'm doing is stalker type, basically has the graphics of a 2006 game and the performance is like a game of 2020 ....
My final question is, are you really going to have many improvements that make you have everything they say? Is it going to be better than before? Are you really going to notice the change?

Thanks..

Hi themegapolice 96 ,
if you have an Nvidia card you might
want to go into NVIDIA CONTROL PANEL
if you haven't already and tweak some of the setting
to see if it makes some difference.
I have done it with a gtx 670 card and for that alone
it seemed to make a big difference in smoothness and FPS.

UNIRD12B

I do not mean to win a couple of fps anymore, I mean if the upgrade is going to be as much as we all expect.
In nvidia options I have everything disabled and put into performance.
I want my game to look good, I do not want to put a few objects to make it go a little faster. I just want to know if the update will really improve the engine or if it will continue to be so badly optimized.
Because if so, I could only make a low poly game.

I'm sure the update will be great, much faster, nicer looking graphics, better lighting. Just be patient and get used to what we have now, and when the update is bug free and released, you will be surprised i'm sure.

Just get used to Gameguru as it is for now, learn a bit of lua maybe, and you will find it very very easy to use.

Its developed by one person, technically with some assistance on assets.





Stalker has no more than a quarter of the enemies on screen at any given time that you are referencing. The zombie models do not have LOD stages for poly count reduction. 60 of them is a bit ridiculous for a 32 bit engine. Keep in mind that their collision geometry is another set of polys. This means you technically are using 120 models. I don't know of any games in 2005 that had 60 active zombies in a game. If you want to give me examples, let me emphasize "ACTIVE" zombies.

Please refer to my response here for more information about why 60 on screen active enemies is ridiculous.
https://forum.game-guru.com/thread/218792

yes, I understand ... but it's been several years since gameguru came out and so far poor performance remains a problem.
I really hope it changes a lot and you notice the difference.
Here I uploaded a video to youtube showing a part of the map of my project, the fps range from 5 to 25 with distance to 5%, some physical objects deactivated and all objects are low polygons.
[video=youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vKWywfLqoI[/video]

do not explain me well, I did not mean low polygons, I meant that they are low polygons compared to the models of today's games.

If you switch your grass quality to Medium instead of Highest and does it give you more FPS?

Occlusion should work too. You have it set to 100, does it help when you reduce it? Though I believe each object's FPE has to reference if they affected by the occlusion distance. I see the problems you are talking about if that is the case... that the objects are simply not properly optimized.



Games of today are not running on a 32 bit engine. Also games of today have many different methods for handling high volumes of active models that have running scripts associated with them. That is why I gave a reference link to how Left 4 Dead was made.

I said stalker about the subject of graphics.
I know that objects do not have lods and always have the same amount of polygons, which is bad, but not that they are models of a call of duty, they are simple models and enough squares for a game of today.
I said 60 for an example of quantity testing the engine. I would never put 60 zombies at a time in gameguru.
And most of the map objects, at least, that I have in gameguru, are fairly square and simple. The distance is 5%, physical deactivated in the middle of the objects and still the engine continues going slow with a gtx 1050.
As it looks and the fps that it has, I would have to go with a geforce 8400gs and a dual core.

Hopefully the the update helps. I believe its expected for December?

The last thing...

My project has:
1) _ Graphics of a game of the 2006/2007.
2) _ Simple models of low polygons compared to current game models.
3) _ Few enemies at a time, also simple.
4) _ Physical objects deactivated and vision distance to 5% of 100%.
5) _ It goes from 10 to 25 fps with a gtx 1050 and a quad core 3.3 ghz.
That currently that video card runs the gta V in ultra and 1080 at 50 fps.
The engine is not perfect, but it has a terrible optimization.
With the graphics that the game has, the quality of the models and how small the map is,
it would have to go at least 100 fps with a geforce 8400gs and not with a GTX 1050.

I know that there are one or two people working in the engine, but still, rather than concentrating on visual quality, they would have to concentrate on
performance. Do you remember fps creator x9? It was designed to create simple alien vs predator 1 style shooting games and required a computer for
make doom 3 walk in ultra. Now it's the same, only in gameguru.
You play a game of call of duty modern warfare graphics and require a computer to run the call of duty infinite warfare.
From 2013 the engine could be used, even before ... We are almost in 2018 and the engine is still poorly optimized.

I know it is not very good how to optimize the engine and make it work at 100%, but still, still working very poorly.
Because I want to make big maps with several things and I'm tired of not being able to put what I like for bad optimization.
The day I take out a demo of my project, people are going to be furious about not being able to play it because they need a great computer to play a game with mediocre graphics for today.

I have a very large map full of detail and objects and I get about 25 to 30 fps on med grass quality. So I think we are both in the same situation. Let me know what your performance is after reducing the grass shader to either "High" or "Medium".

No other game editor I know of opens a new map with such a high poly, shader heavy, fps sucking terrain off the bat. Perhaps this has a lot to do with new users first impressions of the engine. All the same there are a great many horrible games made with Unity and UE and it would be a more honest comparison if folks compared those made in same engine, instead of their own in GameGuru and AAA games made by people that know what they are doing.. Usually the problem is down to the creator and not the engine but in this case I will give props to those that do anything decent in GameGuru as it is now.
You will find that there are a few levels and games around for GameGuru that do run decently, even now. Maybe look at those and compare to your own instead of the usual "AAA game plays just fine on my comp", of course it does it was created by a bunch of skilled and knowledgeable folks. This is the major drawback for a game creator software which promises you will be up and running right away with no knowledge whatsoever .


I always thought characters...player or npc.....used capsule collision so not sure about doubling up those character counts in that way.

I really do recommend bringing down the grass shader quality. As the "Highest" references the sun position and illuminates the grass even if blocked by a wall from the sun. If you want your game to look a bit more realistic its actually wiser to bring down the shader quality for grass. It will help with performance and visuals.