DLC Classic Terra Big Mac Map

[babba]

FUN FUN FUN ! One can dig and dig and dig and dig and dig...

All the resources one can win in the seed resource lottery, its mega fun to play ...and one does not have to worry about being thirsty !

Oil, nat gas, gold, lots of cold water, hydrogen, oxygen emergency vents etc. - It can all be won.

   babba Fun rating 8.89/10 ( 88.9% )

Do you want radioactive Regolith ? What do you miss or want ?

[ATM Reaper]

I think 1 big map would kill too much of the DLC content. I would be happy with 2 half sized instead of the many asteroids so the DLC content is still valid and applicable.

[babba]

14 minutes ago, ATM Reaper said:

I think 1 big map would kill too much of the DLC content. I would be happy with 2 half sized instead of the many asteroids so the DLC content is still valid and applicable.

In the big dlc terra classic map basic renewable resources like oil, nat gas, basic metal volcanos, co2, sulfur, lots of water at various temperatures etc. can be found. I find your idea of 2 half sized (asteroids?) interesting. 

[ATM Reaper]

Just now, babba said:

In the big dlc terra classic map basic renewable resources like oil, nat gas, basic metal volcanos, co2, sulfur etc. can be found. I find your idea of 2 half sized (asteroids?) interesting.

I'm pretty sure Klei will launch much more starter worlds in the future

I just cant think af any other way to preserve the rocketry element of the DLC if they are to introduce a classic variant. With just 2 you minimise the nause while preserving the essence of the DLC. I personally would defo play this type of scenario as it allows for all the big mechanic gameplay that has been removed by the many asteroids scenario.

[gnatsum]

The DLC terra classic map is the first time I have been excited about playing the DLC. The multiple asteroids with set geysers and other items felt too scripted in DLC.  I would always start and quit maps from lack of interest.  I like the large main base with the multiple random geysers and having to use rockets to get top end materials. Having the two different options in the DLC is smart.

[melquiades]

On 4/18/2021 at 6:18 PM, babba said:

What do you miss or want ?

What i want/need is a quantum computer that could run 10 512x512 asteroids and 100 dupes @140fps.

[SharraShimada]

1 hour ago, melquiades said:

What i want/need is a quantum computer that could run 10 512x512 asteroids and 100 dupes @140fps.

A quantum computer cant do this at all. It can simulate the game a few thousand times and tell you, which run would most likely the best for your, if you would be able to find a computer that can actually run it.

[melquiades]

@SharraShimada Don't tell me what my quantum computer to-be can do or can't do )=

[ATM Reaper]

1 hour ago, melquiades said:

@SharraShimada Don't tell me what my quantum computer to-be can do or can't do )=

Yeh Im not being funny but I bought myself a nice shiny new system late last year, Im talking Ryzen 9 5950x processor, RTX 3090 GPU, 64GB DDR4 RAM, ROG Strix X570-F mother board and SSD's that make the eyes water and it still slows down in game with ONI. Im not sure anyone short of NASA or perhaps extraterrestrial life may have the required intellegence to produce a system capable of belittling this games requirements.

[babba]

8 hours ago, ATM Reaper said:

Yeh Im not being funny but I bought myself a nice shiny new system late last year, Im talking Ryzen 9 5950x processor, RTX 3090 GPU, 64GB DDR4 RAM, ROG Strix X570-F mother board and SSD's that make the eyes water and it still slows down in game with ONI. Im not sure anyone short of NASA or perhaps extraterrestrial life may have the required intellegence to produce a system capable of belittling this games requirements.

General ONI cpu info, sharing my experiences...

For ONi 2-4 cores with the latest cpu tech developments and max level 1/2/3 cpu cache is optimal. More cores on top are of good use also for other applications and are nice to have for other uses

CPU hungry games and CPU focussed games tend to optimize for a games minimum spec, which in case of this game is 2 cores. So 2 cores with the max possible cpu clock rate and latest cpu tech is good for ONI, with perhaps 1 or 2 more cores for the OS on top, in combo with fat modern cpu cache. Klei will focus on 2-4 cores, until they would change the games min spec ( unlikely IMHO ).

In the last 20 years there has been seldom exceptions that cpu games make use of all cpu cores. Nowadays there is players which even come along with 128 core cpu`s. Too many cores often share too many cpu resources. I know how your tech anger feels my friend, been there myself one million times in the last few decades.

ONI - One needs to cpu max out the games cpu min spec + 16gb ram running as fast as possible, with fastest connection to the cpu, my input. IMHO modern cpu 4 cores at max clock rate are ideal for ONI and choosing the cpu being fastest in single threading benchmarks - Which your CPU is You have a good CPU choice for ONI.

... lets pray together for further Unity Engine/Klei improvements, amen. Big hugs

---------------------

DLC Classic Terra Seed Lottery Update

[Oxygenbreather]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl's_law nothing new under the sun and not even game specific.

BTW: With Spaced Out I first thought, oh that's genius, you can run each planetoid in it's own thread (and thus core) because there is minimal interaction between them (Mutex/Semaphore). However as far I can tell, the game doesn't actually take advantage of this.

[Gurgel]

8 minutes ago, Oxygenbreather said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl's_law nothing new under the sun and not even game specific.

BTW: With Spaced Out I first thought, oh that's genius, you can run each planetoid in it's own thread (and thus core) because there is minimal interaction between them (Mutex/Semaphore). However as far I can tell, the game doesn't actually take advantage of this.

Same here. I am sure Klei has looked at doing this and decided against it after estimating the effort needed and the risks involved. Maybe we will get something with an engine update eventually.

[babba]

neighbour

1 hour ago, Oxygenbreather said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl's_law nothing new under the sun and not even game specific.

BTW: With Spaced Out I first thought, oh that's genius, you can run each planetoid in it's own thread (and thus core) because there is minimal interaction between them (Mutex/Semaphore). However as far I can tell, the game doesn't actually take advantage of this.

The game runs as one big map, it fakes and makes people believe its running the maps in separate instances...but it does not. Its possible to see this without using the sandbox editor by having buildings damaged in a neighbour colony and then zooming out ( ALT+S). Currently you will then see red broken items "in the dark" of the neighbour-hood colony. In the entire one big map, Klei shows you visually only a small section and defines this as a colony - Klei allows you to only see a small portion of the map at once, in survival mode.

This makes it possible for the player to fastly switch from one colony to the other, as its all running in one big map and "all there".

I normally don`t get in too much engine or sandbox details, but I find its really good to now that its running as one giant big map. If someone know how the rockets are handled ? Would be nice to know if the rocket interior spaces are also added to the big map during play ? How are rocket interiors handled map wise ?

[Oxygenbreather]

You could switch fast if it would running on different cores...  Sorry, you're technically off here.

The likely thing that happened is, they just didn't want to change the engine too much.  That's all.

[babba]

48 minutes ago, Oxygenbreather said:

You could switch fast if it would running on different cores...  Sorry, you're technically off here.

The likely thing that happened is, they just didn't want to change the engine too much.  That's all.

The advantage of having everything ( or most ) running in a big map is that crashes can be easily tracked down and game play bottlenecks and fps killers can be identified. I don`t want to go through 1 or 2 years of new game crashes again, my opinion.

Also, every time a newbie or experimental person at Klei tries out a new way to multi thread something ( on the same core ), the fps is usually totally borked and there is lots of new crashes. With the new big dlc terra classic map there will be lots of performance complaints, if the dlc sells more. Fully built and with some automation one can take it down to 1 fps just by fully building in the start map, so the fps slowdown can be fast observed by the casual gamer. That is the price of the awesome flexibility this game allows for players, a lot of things have no game-play limitations.

Klei does regularly improve the games performance, it just often is not recognized as a big performance improvement at once. 

On the Crysis development the R&D department constantly added new fps drains to the game, it was always a challenge to keep the game running at decent performance. The company owners wanted to permanently have new tech features added, so I had to change the development schedule the whole time. Its hell working with 120 staff on a game, its nice just to play ONI as a regular gamer. Its a bit similar to this game, as long as so many things are changed and added...Klei`s fps improvements are hard to feel, recognize and value by the players.

It just want to enjoy the game as a normal player, no more dev work. That I know that the game is running in one big map is actually already too much detail for me, I find it nice just to be a game consumer. On the other hand I want to play at a good frame rate, so I had to read a bit to find out . There is some real tech experts on this game, there was some interesting in depth forum reads about ONI`s map tech somewhere in the past and some guys regularly dig game files and stuff...

@mathmanican knows so much about the actual simulation, it would totally stress me out

[Oxygenbreather]

Yes certainly I agree that multithreaded systems are a pain to debug and if you do it wrongly it can actually reduce performance (as in too many mutex everything). And I also agree it's just much less development time using one single map/thread. Also economically speaking it can be an argument if the dev time is worth it. Yes, yes, yes. And yes, company owners / sales always want new features, I'm burned by this as well, it's really hard to argue to your superior you need a few months feature freeze while you redo a lot of stuff so it gets more fit for future updates, improves performance or is just better maintainable. People outside of software development don't understand you can busy for months or even years without a noticable change, yet much improves under the hood.   

But just saying you couldn't switch fast between planetoids if it wasn't one big map in background is nonsense tough. The right answer is tough, "we didn't want to put the work in". (As in the dev team itself or the superiors who don't see the economic value in it)

[babba]

Its a very small team. Gamers will always ask for everything anyway and complain lots One of my first ONI posts a few years ago was actually a multi threading complaint and core use rant in the forum.

Before I read about the dlc map tech change I actually thought they would run asteroids on different cores. I think its what most people first come up with. The games min spec is 2 cores, IMHO the devs work with the assurance that players have 2 cores. Would be nice if some more cores could calculate something without important dependencies, if players come along with more cores.

Currently the dlc game runs for me practically nearly crash free...That is really nice. It took Klei 2 years to fix some of my crashes with the base game ( took Klei till dec 2020 ) .

I could not continue playing my great save file since then and had no real ONI fun for half a year, because they changed the entire map tech. Now the game is fun for me again and good, took nearly half a year waiting.

Wishing you a nice time in ONI, dear @Oxygenbreather Keep the requests coming

[Oxygenbreather]

About stability: sorry to say, in my case after about 1000 cycles it keeps crashing every few cycles on daily save. IMO it's the RAM issue once again. Removing a lot of buildings and killing critters eases it somewhat. With the base game the Mod "Fast saves" removed the issue for me, since it removed the usuage data of station (which eats a lot of RAM).. but for the DLC it doesn't run stable either. PS: I got now 16 GB instead of 8, and still..

 

 

[ATM Reaper]

Todays the day folks finger crossed............

[Gurgel]

On 4/21/2021 at 7:12 AM, Oxygenbreather said:

About stability: sorry to say, in my case after about 1000 cycles it keeps crashing every few cycles on daily save. IMO it's the RAM issue once again. Removing a lot of buildings and killing critters eases it somewhat. With the base game the Mod "Fast saves" removed the issue for me, since it removed the usuage data of station (which eats a lot of RAM).. but for the DLC it doesn't run stable either. PS: I got now 16 GB instead of 8, and still..

Maybe you have some stability issues with your RAM? I have almost zero crashes now, even with the latest builds. But I do run mentest86+ for at least a day whenever I change RAM. 

Not saying this is the cause, but I spent a lot of time running down stability issues with RAM in the past. Worst was one where memtest86+ needed about 20 hours to find a problem, but actual computations failed within 10 minutes or so. Was a "weak bit" in an Infineon module. One of 48 such modules I had in my research cluster (about 15 years ago ), all the others were perfectly fine.

On 4/21/2021 at 6:38 AM, babba said:

Its hell working with 120 staff on a game, its nice just to play ONI as a regular gamer.

While I don't have anything like your dev experience in the gaming sector, it is nice to see and understand what complexities are involved and then to think "I do _not_ have to solve / fix that !".

[ATM Reaper]

22 minutes ago, Gurgel said:

Maybe you have some stability issues with your RAM? I have almost zero crashes now, even with the latest builds. But I do run mentest86+ for at least a day whenever I change RAM. 

Not saying this is the cause, but I spent a lot of time running down stability issues with RAM in the past. Worst was one where memtest86+ needed about 20 hours to find a problem, but actual computations failed within 10 minutes or so. Was a "weak bit" in an Infineon module. One of 48 such modules I had in my research cluster (about 15 years ago ), all the others were perfectly fine.

While I don't have anything like your dev experience in the gaming sector, it is nice to see and understand what complexities are involved and then to think "I do _not_ have to solve / fix that !".

I still encounter crashes periodically but find clearing up debris helps this. Also mods can contribute to crashes so maybe worth deselecting some and see if it still crashes. I have found the DLC mods to be more unstable (understandably) than the classic game mods.

[Oxygenbreather]

@Gurgel fair idea, tested memtest86 for an hour. It's fine.

Nah I'm pretty sure it's same issue as in the base game. Just uses a lot of RAM until the Windows/Linux kernel kills it to survive itself. Best indicator is that sometimes the crash is straight to desktop, not even the crash handler.

Also I don't use any Mods.

As said in the base games, the mod "fast saves" solved the issue, since it removed a lot of pretty unnecessary RAM usage, but indeed the mod itself has issues with the DLC, so it doesn't work anymore. A little disappointed they didn't yet address that. And yes, multi coring also doesn't make sense until you data is better structured in RAM and pretty compact at this, since what most people forget who talk about cores, you still only have one RAM bus, so unless the core works within it's cache they all would have to wait for each other to get access on the one RAM bus anyway..

PS: The standard maps had were 256x385 tiles wide ~= 10.000 Cells. The game easily eats 12 GB now (and it crashes due to low RAM in late games for me with a 16GB laptop now). With 12 GB It's 1.2 Megabyte RAM usage per cell. I still call this... pretty non optimal. However, yes infact actually the cells don't take so much RAM, it's mostly stations.. I really hoped they would address that issue before going forward with more content.

[babba]

6 hours ago, Gurgel said:

While I don't have anything like your dev experience in the gaming sector, it is nice to see and understand what complexities are involved and then to think "I do _not_ have to solve / fix that !".

After Crysis I was 1 year in therapy. Its nice to be an arm chair general now and to just play ONi.

I hope you find your joy with the new big map dear Gurgel.

[JRup]

8 hours ago, Gurgel said:

I spent a lot of time running down stability issues with RAM in the past.

I, for one, welcome the fact that DDR5 will be ECC enabled from the get go - I hope (business made me sell the rig and downgrade to regular DDR3 from DDR4-ECC ... I miss it.)

Next map I start will be smaller somewhat.

6 hours ago, Oxygenbreather said:

Best indicator is that sometimes the crash is straight to desktop, not even the crash handler.

Had that happen recently. At least 1 cycle autosaves were there to save the game's bacon.

Next map I start will be small-ish, I'm still building in vanilla and testing DLC occasionally.  I wonder if anyone has had the out of tags dance happen in DLC...