I am programming a game using Visual C++ 2008 Express and the Ogre3D sdk.
My core gameplay logic is designed to run at 100 times/second. For simplicity, I'll say it's a method called 'gamelogic()'. It is not time-based, which means if I want to "advance" game time by 1 second, I have to call 'gamelogic()' 100 times. 'gamelogic()' is lightweight in comparison to the game's screen rendering.
Ogre has a "listener" logic that informs your code when it's about to draw a frame and when it has finished drawing a frame. If I just call 'gamelogic()' just before the frame rendering, then the gameplay will be greatly affected by screen rendering speed, which could vary from 5fps to 120 fps.
The easy solution that comes to mind is : calculate the time elapsed since last rendered frame and call 'gamelogic()' this many times before the next frame: 100 * timeElapsedInSeconds
However, I pressume that the "right" way to do it is with multithreading; have a separate thread that runs 'gamelogic()' 100 times/sec.
The question is, how do I achieve this and what can be done when there is a conflict between the 2 separate threads : gamelogic changing screen content (3d object coordinates) while Ogre is rendering the screen at the same time .
Many thanks in advance.
If this is your first game application, using multi-threading to achieve your results might be more work than you should really tackle on your first game. Sychronizing a game loop and render loop in different threads is not an easy problem to solve.
As you correctly point out, rendering time can greatly affect the "speed" of your game. I would suggest that you do not make your game logic dependent on a set time slice (i.e. 1/100 of a second). Make it dependent on the current frametime (well, the last frametime since you don't know how long your current frame will take to render).
Typically I would write something like below (what I wrote is greatly simplified):
float Frametime = 1.0f / 30.0f;
while(1) {
game_loop(Frametime); // maniuplate objects, etc.
render_loop(); // render the frame
calculate_new_frametime();
}
Where Frametime is the calculcated frametime that the current frame took. When you process your game loop you are using the frametime from the previous frame (so set the initial value to something reasonable, like 1/30th or 1/15th of a second). Running it on the previous frametime is close enough to get you the results that you need. Run your game loop using that time frame, then render your stuff. You might have to change the logic in your game loop to not assume a fixed time interval, but generally those kinds of fixes are pretty easy.
Asynchoronous game/render loops may be something that you ultimately need, but that is a tough problem to solve. It involves taking snapshops of objects and their relevant data, putting those snapshots into a buffer and then passing the buffer to the rendering engine. That memory buffer will have to be correctly partitioned around critical sections to avoid having the game loop write to it while the render loop is reading from it. You'll have to take care to make sure that you copy all relevant data into the buffer before passing to the render loop. Additionally, you'll have to write logic to stall either the game or render loops while waiting for one or the other to complete.
This complexity is why I suggest writing it in a more serial manner first (unless you have experience, which you might). The reason being is that doing it the "easy" way first will force you to learn about how your code works, how the rendering engine works, what kind of data the rendering engine needs, etc. Multithreading knowledge is defintely required in complex game development these days, but knowing how to do it well requires indepth knowledge of how game systems interact with each other.
There's not a whole lot of benefit to your core game logic running faster than the player can respond. About the only time it's really useful is for physics simulations, where running at a fast, fixed time step can make the sim behave more consistently.
Apart from that, just update your game loop once per frame, and pass in a variable time delta instead of relying on the fixed one. The benefit you'll get from doing multithreading is minimal compared to the cost, especially if this is your first game.
Double buffering your render-able objects is an approach you could explore. Meaning, the rendering component is using 1 buffer which is updated when all game actions have updated the relevant object in the 2nd buffer.
But personally I don't like it, I'd (and have, frequently) employ Mark's approach.
Related
I'm learning basic frame independent movement, but I have a necessary need in the implementation.
Right now, I'm searching for C++ code, but I need a complete example inside a GameLoop that allows an increase in speed. Not a gradual increase, but just the ability to move my sprite faster. I have to translate the C++ code to vb .net since there are not many examples. So let me be clear about this ->
I have a simple GameLoop. In the GameLoop, I have two calls to functions
Update()
Render()
I understand that for the Update() function I should put a deltaTime parameter. So it should be
Update(deltaTime As double)
Since this is how most examples on the web are shown, I just copied the idea but I don't have an actual frame independent setup yet.
How can I set this up and call the Render function.
Please keep in mind, that if it works, that's fine - I cut and paste a different example like that before, but there was no way to increase the speed of the moving sprite. I don't even know where to begin with this?
Please note if you only have C++ code, I will do my best to translate it, so for me it's acceptable.
I wont give you code, cause I'm positive that you will be able to fix this with a proper description, but I will gladly explain how to move your sprite without frame rate dependency.
As you said, you already pass a delta-time in to the function.
The delta time is the time that it took between now and the last time the function was called (a frame).
When you move your sprite, you probably move it by a specific number of pixels, instead of doing this every frame, you should multiply the pixel range with the delta time.
This will make into a quite simple formula:
DetlaTime * TheNumberOfPixelsToMoveInASecond.
If you mul it with 10, then the sprite will move 10 pixels in one second. Mul it with 100, it will move 100 pixels in one second.
That deltaTime idea is to allow your game to run in a way where the perceived speed of the gameplay is constant no matter how fast or slow the machine and environment are that are running the game.
You might notice if you run some poorly coded games designed for old hardware on hardware much newer that the gameplay goes way too fast and becomes unplayable on those fast machines without deliberately slowing things down. There are actual slowdown utilities just to deal with that problem, like Mo'Slow and Cpukiller. This is because these old games were coded in a way where things were being changed by a constant amount every frame instead of a variable amount based on the time that has passed.
So to avoid this problem, you move all your sprites each frame by numbers that are multiples of deltaTime. That'll give you the sense of consistent speed regardless of the speed of the machine/environment.
Now if you want an adjustable game speed on top of that where you want to allow users to deliberately make the game faster, then you introduce a second variable on top of deltaTime that you also multiply by, like gameSpeed. So your sprites should move in Update by a multiple of both deltaTime and gameSpeed.
Coming from a basic understanding of OpenGL programming, all required drawing operations are performed in a sequence, once per frame redraw. The performance of the hardware dictates essentially how fast this happens. As I understand, a game will attempt to draw as quickly as possible so redraw operations are essentially wrapped in a while loop. The graphics operations (graphics engine) will then be optimised to ensure the frame rate is acceptable for the application.
Graphics hardware supporting Vertical Synchronisation however locks frame rates to the display rate. A first question would be how should a graphics engine interact with the hardware synchronisation? Is this even possible or does the renderer work at maximum speed and the hardware selectively calls up the latest frame, discarding all unused previous frames..?
The motivation for this question is not that I am immediately intending to write a graphics engine, instead am debugging an issue with an existing system where the graphics of a moving scene appear to stutter onscreen. Symptomatically, the stutter is slight when VSync is turned off, when it is turned on either there is a significant and periodic stutter or alternatively the stutter is resolved entirely. I am somewhat clutching at straws as to what is happening or why, want to understand some more background information on graphics systems.
Summarily the question would be on how one is expected to interact with hardware redraw events and if that is even possible. However any additional information would be welcome.
A first question would be how should a graphics engine interact with the hardware synchronisation?
To avoid flicker modern rendering systems use double buffering i.e. there are two color plane buffers and after finishing drawing to one, the display readout pointer is set to the finished buffer plane. This buffer swap can happen synchronized or non-synchronized. With V-Sync enabled the buffer swap will be synchronized and the rendering thread blocks until the buffer swap happened.
Since with double buffering mandates buffer swaps this implicitly introduces a synchronization mechanism. This is how interactive rendering systems lock onto the display refresh.
Symptomatically, the stutter is slight when VSync is turned off, when it is turned on either there is a significant and periodic stutter or alternatively the stutter is resolved entirely.
This sounds like a badly written animation loop that assumes constant framerate locked onto the display refresh rate, based on the assumption that frames render faster than a display refresh interval and the buffer swap can be issued in time for the next retrace to happen.
The only robust way to deal with vertical synchronization is to actually measure the time between frame renderings and advance the rendering loop by that amount of time.
This is a guess, but:
The Problem Isn't Vertical Synchronization
I don't know what OS you're working with, but there are various ways to get information about the monitor and how fast the screen is refreshing (for the purposes of this answer, we'll assume your monitor is somewhat recent and redraws at a rate of 60 Hz, or 60 times every second, or once every 16.66666... milliseconds).
Renderers are usually paired up with an "Logic" side to the application: input, ui calculations, simulation running, etc. etc. It seems like the logic side of your application is running fast enough, but the Rendering side - i.e., the Draw Call as its commonly summed up into - is bounding the speed of your application.
Vertical Synchronization can exacerbate this in that if your Draw Call is made to happen every 16.66666 milliseconds - but it takes much longer than 16.666666 milliseconds - then you perceive a frame rate drop (i.e. frames will "stutter" because they're taking too long to produce a single frame). VSync - and the enabling or disabling thereof - is not something that bottlenecks your code: it just says "hey, since the Hardware is only going to take 1 frame from us every 16.666666 milliseconds, why make more draw calls than just one every 16.66666 milliseconds? As long as we do one draw call once for every passing of this time, our application will look as fluid as possible, and we don't have to waste time making more calls than that!"
The problem with that is that it assumes your code is going to run fast enough to make it in those 16.6666 milliseconds. If it does not, stuttering, lagging, visual artifacts, frozen frames, and other things manifest themselves on screen.
When you turn off VSync, you're telling your Render Call to be called as often as possible, as fast as possible. This may give it some extra wiggle room alongside the Logic call to get a frame rendered, so that when the Hardware Says "I'm gonna take a picture and put it on the screen now!" it's all prettied up, just in time, to get into posture and say cheese! (though by what you say, it barely makes it).
What To Do:
Start by profiling your code. Find out what functions are taking the most time. Judging by the stutter, something in your code is taking longer than is expected and is giving you undesirable performance. Make sure to profile first to find the critical sections of where you're burning away time, and figure out how to keep it correct and make it just as fast. You may want to figure out what's being called in the Render Call and profile the time it takes to complete one cycle of that specifically. Then time the Logic call(s) and see how long it takes to execute those as well. Then, chop away.
Good luck!
I guess I have some explaining to do:
I'm fairly new to game programming, so please don't get mad if I don't understand a concept immediately
The game makes use of DirectX 10 and is written in C++
It's very simple 2D game
The situation: Despite of being very simple in both game logic and graphics, it still takes my CPU and GPU load to 100%. Even the menu is displayed with more than 2000 frames per second.
My problem is not that the game runs too fast. I already timed sprite animations and game logic using the QueryPerformanceCounter function.
The actual problem is that the game calculates the same code numerous times without anything happening on the screen, therefore putting a massive load on my hardware.
In what ways can I decrease the hardware load of my game? I feel like using Sleep is "cheating".
Thank to Damon for pointing me in the right direction, I looked into the present function. (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/bb174576(v=vs.85).aspx)
All it took to solve both CPU and GPU load problems was changing
swapChain->Present(0, 0);
to
swapChain->Present(1, 0);
Just a quick suggestion:
Everytime you enter the game loop calculate the time passed since the last time you entered.
If this time is below a given threshold just return without processing anything.
Is there any way to calculate how much updates should be made to reach desired frame rate, NOT system specific? I found that for windows, but I would like to know if something like this exists in openGL itself. It should be some sort of timer.
Or how else can I prevent FPS to drop or raise dramatically? For this time I'm testing it on drawing big number of vertices in line, and using fraps I can see frame rate to go from 400 to 200 fps with evident slowing down of drawing it.
You have two different ways to solve this problem:
Suppose that you have a variable called maximum_fps, which contains for the maximum number of frames you want to display.
Then You measure the amount of time spent on the last frame (a timer will do)
Now suppose that you said that you wanted a maximum of 60FPS on your application. Then you want that the time measured be no lower than 1/60. If the time measured s lower, then you call sleep() to reach the amount of time left for a frame.
Or you can have a variable called tick, that contains the current "game time" of the application. With the same timer, you will incremented it at each main loop of your application. Then, on your drawing routines you calculate the positions based on the tick var, since it contains the current time of the application.
The big advantage of option 2 is that your application will be much easier to debug, since you can play around with the tick variable, go forward and back in time whenever you want. This is a big plus.
Rule #1. Do not make update() or loop() kind of functions rely on how often it gets called.
You can't really get your desired FPS. You could try to boost it by skipping some expensive operations or slow it down by calling sleep() kind of functions. However, even with those techniques, FPS will be almost always different from the exact FPS you want.
The common way to deal with this problem is using elapsed time from previous update. For example,
// Bad
void enemy::update()
{
position.x += 10; // this enemy moving speed is totally up to FPS and you can't control it.
}
// Good
void enemy::update(elapsedTime)
{
position.x += speedX * elapsedTime; // Now, you can control its speedX and it doesn't matter how often it gets called.
}
Is there any way to calculate how much updates should be made to reach desired frame rate, NOT system specific?
No.
There is no way to precisely calculate how many updates should be called to reach desired framerate.
However, you can measure how much time has passed since last frame, calculate current framerate according to it, compare it with desired framerate, then introduce a bit of Sleeping to reduce current framerate to the desired value. Not a precise solution, but it will work.
I found that for windows, but I would like to know if something like this exists in openGL itself. It should be some sort of timer.
OpenGL is concerned only about rendering stuff, and has nothing to do with timers. Also, using windows timers isn't a good idea. Use QueryPerformanceCounter, GetTickCount or SDL_GetTicks to measure how much time has passed, and sleep to reach desired framerate.
Or how else can I prevent FPS to drop or raise dramatically?
You prevent FPS from raising by sleeping.
As for preventing FPS from dropping...
It is insanely broad topic. Let's see. It goes something like this: use Vertex buffer objects or display lists, profile application, do not use insanely big textures, do not use too much alpha-blending, avoid "RAW" OpenGL (glVertex3f), do not render invisible objects (even if no polygons are being drawn, processing them takes time), consider learning about BSPs or OCTrees for rendering complex scenes, in parametric surfaces and curves, do not needlessly use too many primitives (if you'll render a circle using one million polygons, nobody will notice the difference), disable vsync. In short - reduce to absolute possible minimum number of rendering calls, number of rendered polygons, number of rendered pixels, number of texels read, read every available performance documentation from NVidia, and you should get a performance boost.
You're asking the wrong question. Your monitor will only ever display at 60 fps (50 fps in Europe, or possibly 75 fps if you're a pro-gamer).
Instead you should be seeking to lock your fps at 60 or 30. There are OpenGL extensions that allow you to do that. However the extensions are not cross platform (luckily they are not video card specific or it'd get really scary).
windows: wglSwapIntervalEXT
x11 (linux): glXSwapIntervalSGI
max os x: ?
These extensions are closely tied to your monitor's v-sync. Once enabled calls to swap the OpenGL back-buffer will block until the monitor is ready for it. This is like putting a sleep in your code to enforce 60 fps (or 30, or 15, or some other number if you're not using a monitor which displays at 60 Hz). The difference it the "sleep" is always perfectly timed instead of an educated guess based on how long the last frame took.
You absolutely do wan't to throttle your frame-rate it all depends on what you got
going on in that rendering loop and what your application does. Especially with it's
Physics/Network related. Or if your doing any type of graphics processing with an out side toolkit (Cairo, QPainter, Skia, AGG, ...) unless you want out of sync results or 100% cpu usage.
This code may do the job, roughly.
static int redisplay_interval;
void timer(int) {
glutPostRedisplay();
glutTimerFunc(redisplay_interval, timer, 0);
}
void setFPS(int fps)
{
redisplay_interval = 1000 / fps;
glutTimerFunc(redisplay_interval, timer, 0);
}
Here is a similar question, with my answer and worked example
I also like deft_code's answer, and will be looking into adding what he suggests to my solution.
The crucial part of my answer is:
If you're thinking about slowing down AND speeding up frames, you have to think carefully about whether you mean rendering or animation frames in each case. In this example, render throttling for simple animations is combined with animation acceleration, for any cases when frames might be dropped in a potentially slow animation.
The example is for animation code that renders at the same speed regardless of whether benchmarking mode, or fixed FPS mode, is active. An animation triggered before the change even keeps a constant speed after the change.
I made a program (in C++, using gl/glut) for study purposes where you can basically run around a screen (in first person), and it has several solids around the scene. I tried to run it on a different computer and the speed was completely different, so I searched on the subject and I'm currently doing something like this:
Idle function:
start = glutGet (GLUT_ELAPSED_TIME);
double dt = (start-end)*30/1000;
<all the movement*dt>
glutPostRedisplay ();
end = glutGet (GLUT_ELAPSED_TIME);
Display function:
<rendering for all objects>
glutSwapBuffers ();
My question is: is this the proper way to do it? The scene is being displayed after the idle function right?
I tried placing end = glutGet (GLUT_ELAPSED_TIME) before glutSwapBuffers () and didn't notice any change, but when I put it after glutSwapBuffers () it slows down alot and even stops sometimes.
EDIT: I just noticed that in the way I'm thinking, end-start should end up being the time that passed since all the drawing was done and before the movement update, as idle () would be called as soon as display () ends, so is it true that the only time that's not being accounted for here is the time the computer takes to do all of the movement? (Which should be barely nothing?)
Sorry if this is too confusing..
Thanks in advance.
I don't know what "Glut" is, but as a general rule of game development, I would never base movement speed off of how fast the computer can process the directives. That's what they did in the late 80's and that's why when you play an old game, things move at light speed.
I would set up a timer, and base all of my movements off of clear and specific timed events.
Set up a high-resolution timer (eg. QueryPerformanceCounter on Windows) and measure the time between every frame. This time, called delta-time (dt), should be used in all movement calculations, eg. every frame, set an object's position to:
obj.x += 100.0f * dt; // to move 100 units every second
Since the sum of dt should always be 1 over 1 second, the above code increments x by 100 every second, no matter what the framerate is. You should do this for all values which change over time. This way your game proceeds at the same rate on all machines (framerate independent), rather than depending on the rate the computer processes the logic (framerate dependent). This is also useful if the framerate starts to drop - the game doesn't suddenly start running in slow-motion, it keeps going at the same speed, just rendering less frequently.
I wouldn't use a timer. Things can go wrong, and events can stack up if the PC is too slow or too busy to run at the required rate. I'd let the loop run as fast as it's allowed, and each time calculate how much time has passed and put this into your movement/logic calculations.
Internally, you might actually implement small fixed-time sub-steps, because trying to make everything work right on variable time-steps is not as simple as x+=v*dt.
Try gamedev.net for stuff like this. lots of articles and a busy forum.
There is a perfect article about game loops that should give you all the information you need.
You have plenty of answers on how to do it the "right" way, but you're using GLUT, and GLUT sometimes sacrifices the "right" way for simplicity and maintaining platform independence. The GLUT way is to register a timer callback function with glutTimerFunc().
static void timerCallback (int value)
{
// Calculate the deltas
glutPostRedisplay(); // Have GLUT call your display function
glutTimerFunc(elapsedMilliseconds, timerCallback, value);
}
If you set elapsedMilliseconds to 40, this function will be called slightly less than 25 times a second. That slightly less will depend upon how long the computer takes to process your delta calculation code. If you keep that code simple, your animation will run the same speed on all systems, as long as each system can process the display function in less than 40 milliseconds. For more flexibility, you can adjust the frame rate at runtime with a command line option or by adding a control to your interface.
You start the timer loop by calling glutTimerFunc(elapsedMilliseconds, timerCallback, value); in your initialization process.
I'm a games programmer and have done this many times.
Most games run the AI in fixed time increments like 60hz for example. Also most are synced to the monitor refresh to avoid screen tearing so the max rate would be 60 even if the machine was really fast and could do 1000 fps. So if the machine was slow and was running at 20 fps then it would call the update ai function 3 times per render. Doing it this way solves rounding error problems with small values and also makes the AI deterministic across multiple machines since the AI update rate is decoupled from the machine speed ( necessary for online multiplayer games).
This is a very hard question.
The first thing you need to awnser yourself is, do you really want your application to really run at the same speed or just appear to run the same speed? 99% of the time you only want it to appear to run the same speed.
Now there are two problems: Speeding up you application or slowing it down.
Speeding up your application is really hard, since that requires things like dynamic LOD that adjusts to the current speed. This means LOD in everything, not only graphics.
Slowing your application down is fairly easy. You have two options sleeping or "busy waiting". It basically depends on your target frame rate for your simulation. If your simulation is way above something like 50 ms you can sleep. The problem is that when sleeping you are depended on the process scheduler and it works on average system at granularity of 10 ms.
In games busy waiting is not such a bad idea. What you do is you update your simulation and render your frame, then you use an time accumulator for the next frame. When rendering frames without simulation you then interpolate the state to get a smooth animation. A really great article on the subject can be found at http://gafferongames.com/game-physics/fix-your-timestep/.