Jump to content

Preparing Leadwerks for the Future

Josh

1,923 views

In this blog I am going to explain my overarching plan to bring Leadwerks into the future and build our community.

First, regarding technology, I believe VR is the future. VR right now is basically where mobile was in 2006. The big publishers won't touch it and indies have a small but enthusiastic market they can target without fear of competition from EA. I have an HTC Vive and it is AWESOME! After using it, I don't really want to play games on a 2D monitor anymore. I want to be in the game, but there is still a serious lack of decent content out there.

blogentry-1-0-27511900-1473171396_thumb.jpg

At the same time, I think Vulkan is eventually going to be the graphics API we want to migrate to. Although Apple still isn't supporting it, Vulkan provides the best chance at a real cross-platform graphics API in the future.

blogentry-1-0-75474400-1473172715_thumb.png

We eventually want to move everything over to 64-bit and drop all support for 32-bit Windows (which almost no one has nowadays).

None of these issues are pressing. In reality, a switch over to Vulkan graphics, if done right, would result in no apparent change in the user experience for you guys. This is more about future-proofing and performance gains.

There is one last big thing I can do that could have a huge increase in performance. Right now Leadwerks runs your game code, which calls rendering and physics calls when you choose. A concurrent architecture would have four threads running your game logic, physics, rendering, and AI in separate threads, all the time, constantly. The data exchange between these threads is a complicated matter and would likely involve some restrictions on your code. It would also break backwards compatibility with our existing API examples. So this is probably something to discuss with Leadwerks 5, and may be quite a ways off in the future.

However, it's important that we start developing now with a clear idea of where we want to go. If information changes between now and then I can always change our course in the right direction.

Where we are today:

  • OpenGL 4.0
  • Windows API / GTK / Cocoa
  • 64/32 bit
  • Sequential architecture

Where we are going:

  • Vulkan 1.0
  • Leadwerks GUI on Windows, Mac, Linux
  • 64-bit
  • Concurrent architecture

What if VR Flops?

It doesn't matter. Developing for VR simply means adding in the OpenVR SDK and focusing on performance gains. This isn't like mobile where there's a completely different API and texture formats. VR will not hold back Leadwerks on the PC. It will help it. VR needs a solid 90 FPS, (although it's perfectly fine to lower your quality settings to achieve that). So developing for VR means focusing on performance gains over flexibility. We have a good idea now of how people use Leadwerks and I think we can make those decisions wisely now.

How to Begin?

I just outlined a plan to replace some of our low-level APIs and a major architectural change. However, I'm not willing to go back and do that until I feel like we have really polished Leadwerks Game Engine and given the users what they need. There's always a temptation to go back to the low-level details, but that just makes you an eternal tinkerer. Leadwerks is good because it's the easiest way to build your own games. That is the whole reason for Leadwerks to exist and we mustn't forget that.

If you read our reviews on Steam, it is pretty clear what the user needs. We are sitting right now with a solid 75% ("positive") approval rating, and a community that is actively churning out games. We are almost all the way there, but Leadwerks needs to take one last step to really connect with what the user needs. In my opinion, Leadwerks Game Engine is only as good as the default templates that come with it. If we can't provide polished game examples that look and feel like a real commercial game, it isn't fair to expect the end user to come up with one. I plan to add the following game templates to Leadwerks:

  • Shoot-em-up space side-scroller
  • Contra-like side scroller
  • Simple racing game against AI opponents (like 4x4 Evo)
  • RPG / dungeon crawler

Next, I plan to add built-in offline help documentation and video tutorials. By default, the editor is going to open the new help system automatically when the program starts. Too many people come on the forum asking questions about YouTube videos from years ago and don't go to the official tutorials still.

If we are going to make video tutorials, and I know that at some point we are going to revise the GUI, then it makes sense to revise the GUI first. Otherwise we will end up with a lot of video content that looks obsolete once we switch over to a new GUI. This is why I am working on Leadwerks GUI now. (Leadwerks GUI will also make it easier for us to switch the editor over the BlitzMaxNG, so that it can be compiled in 64-bit mode as pure C++.)

blogentry-1-0-42161000-1473174576_thumb.jpg

The revised GUI, built-in help system, and additional game templates will raise our approval rating on Steam up to 80%, which is considered "very positive". Once I have a game development system with an 80% positive rating and (by then) 20,000 users on Steam, that gives us quite a bit of leverage. Success breeds success, and I can use those figures to our advantage when negotiating with third parties.

Here are the steps we will take, in order:

  1. Leadwerks GUI
  2. Add Mac support
  3. Built-in offline help with videos
  4. New game templates
  5. Achieve 80% approval rating on Steam

Once we hit the 80% mark, that's when I know Leadwerks is really giving the end user what they need. I can then go back into some of the internals and work on our next iteration of technology:

  1. Move completely over to 64-bit
  2. Vulkan graphics
  3. Concurrent multithreaded architecture

This plan gives us a path forward into emerging technologies, in balance with the needs of the end user and the realities of the business. We won't have a major interruption of development and the game tournaments will continue as this is happening.

As always, this plan is subject to change and I may decide to do things differently depending on how circumstances develop.

  • Like 1


10 Comments


Recommended Comments

Everything sounds great Josh, looks like other engines also have plans too migrate or support Vulkan with can also helps achieve higher FPS on VR games.

 

I am pumped for the next tournament.

 

Any oficial words about native networking support?

 

Keep the good work :)

Share this comment


Link to comment

As Josh wrote, even if VR becomes a flop, the normal engine usage will still gain from this. So I wouldn't worry

Share this comment


Link to comment

I really like the ideas you suggested here... recently been doing a lot of work with Vulkan, and although it takes a lot of code to accomplish anything with Vulkan it's well worth it.... easy to optimize, and without doing a whole lot you'll see huge performance gains on AMD cards, and decent ones on Nvidia cards as well... also the framerate seems to be more steady in general when using Vulkan.

 

Been doing some work with physics on a separate thread where the loop is executed at a fixed interval and it's been really nice so far... plan to do some work with threading the creation of sub-buffers on Vulkan as well so looking forward to seeing where LE goes with this, I think it'd be a huge step for the engine.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Do four threads require CPU with 4 cores?

No, but 4 cores or more is better, even with our current design.

Share this comment


Link to comment

I think the expectation is that there will be pressure for dual cores to disappear from new machines when AMD Zen is out (late 2016/early 2017?) as I don't think there is going to be a dual core Zen and I *think* even the most basic Zen is expected to be significantly better than any current dual core Intel (which wasn't the case previously).

Share this comment


Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Blog Entries

    • By Josh in Josh's Dev Blog 8
      You might have seen this graphic comparing the size of the world in different games. I've played Fuel, and never reached the end of the world in that game. You can drive for a very long time on those roads.

      We want to use the new engine for realistic simulations of air and ground movements. At normal cruising altitude of a commercial airliner, the pilot has a view range of about 400 kilometers. The image below shows that area (800 x 800 km). You can see the areas of the biggest games ever fit neatly into the corner of just our visible area.

      The gray space above is not the total world size, it is just the area you can see at once from high altitude. The total world size is about 50 times bigger.
      This is what I am working on now.
    • By Josh in Josh's Dev Blog 26
      Gamers have always been fascinated with the idea of endless areas to roam.  It seems we are always artificially constrained within a small area to play in, and the possibility of an entire world outside those bounds is tantalizing.  The game FUEL captured this idea by presenting the player with an enormous world that took hours to drive across:
      In the past, I always implemented terrain with one big heightmap texture, which had a fixed size like 1024x1024, 2048x2048, etc.  However, our vegetation system, featured in the book Game Engine Gems 3, required a different approach.  There was far too many instances of grass, trees, and rocks to store them all in memory, and I wanted to do something really radical.  The solution was to create an algorithm that could instantly calculate all the vegetation instances in a given area.  The algorithm would always produce the same result, but the actual data would never be saved, it was just retrieved in the area where you needed it, when you needed it.  So with a few modifications, our vegetation system is already set up to generate infinite instances far into the distance.

      However, terrain is problematic.  Just because an area is too far away to see doesn't mean it should stop existing.  If we don't store the terrain in memory then how do we prevent far away objects from falling into the ground?  I don't like the idea of disabling far away physics because it makes things very complex for the end user.  There are definitely some tricks we can add like not updating far away AI agents, but I want everything to just work by default, to the best of my ability.
      It was during the development of the vegetation system that I realized the MISSING PIECE to this puzzle.  The secret is in the way collision works with vegetation.  When any object moves all the collidable vegetation instances around it are retrieved and collision is performed on this fetched data.  We can do the exact same thing with terrain   Imagine a log rolling across the terrain.  We could use an algorithm to generate all the triangles it potentially could collide with, like in the image below.

      You can probably imagine how it would be easy to lay out an infinite grid of flat squares around the player, wherever he is standing in the world.

      What if we only save heightmap data for the squares the user modifies in the editor?  They can't possibly modify the entire universe, so let's just save their changes and make the default terrain flat.  It won't be very interesting, but it will work, right?
      What if instead of being flat by default, there was a function we had that would procedurally calculate the terrain height at any point?  The input would be the XZ position in the world and the output would be a heightmap value.

      If we used this, then we would have an entire procedurally generated terrain combined with parts that the developer modifies by hand with the terrain tools.  Only the hand-modified parts would have to be saved to a series of files that could be named "mapname_x_x.patch", i.e. "magickingdom_54_72.patch".  These patches could be loaded from disk as needed, and deleted from memory when no longer in use.
      The real magic would be in developing an algorithm that could quickly generate a height value given an XZ position.  A random seed could be introduced to allow us to create an endless variety of procedural landscapes to explore.  Perhaps a large brush could even be used to assign characteristics to an entire region like "mountainy", "plains", etc.
      The possibilities of what we can do in Leadwerks Engine 5 are intriguing.  Granted I don't have all the answers right now, but implementing a system like this would be a major step forward that unlocks an enormous world to explore.  What do you think?

    • By Haydenmango in Snowboarding Development Blog 6
      So I've been researching snowboarding lately to get an idea of what animations and mechanics I need to create for my game.  I have learned lots of interesting things since I've only seen snow once or twice in my entire life and have never even tried snowboarding or any other board sports (skateboarding, surfing, etc.) for that matter.
       
      Snowboarding tricks are quite interesting as they are mostly derived from skateboarding.  Snowboarding tricks pay homage to their equivalent skating tricks by sharing many concepts and names.  For example basic grabs in snowboarding share the same concepts and names as skateboarding: indy, mute, method, stalefish, nosegrab, and tailgrab.  Something interesting to note is in snowboarding you can grab Tindy or Tailfish but this is considered poor form since these grabs can't be done on a skateboard (due to the board not being attached to the skaters feet) and grabbing these areas is generally something a novice snowboarder does when failing or "half-assing" a normal grab.  Check out this diagram to see how grabs work -
       
       
      So, after reading lots of text descriptions for tricks I was still confused by what all these terms meant and how they were actually applied.  So my next step was to look up these tricks actually being done and I found some really cool videos showing off how to do various tricks.  This video in particular is the best reference material I've found as it contains nearly every trick back to back with labeled names and some tweaks -
       
      Sadly my rigged model doesn't handle leg animations with the snowboard that well so I can't animate as many tricks as I want to.  Regardless there will still be around 15 total grab/air tricks in the game.  Now it's time for me to stop procrastinating and start animating!  
×
×
  • Create New...