Undertow Games Forum

Posted: **Wed Feb 18, 2015 11:22 pm**

LORD DEATH wrote:How is the game supposed to be completed if Regalis has already moved on to other projects?

Nobody is entitled to a finished product here, considering the game's origins it's come very far; I think Reg is better off taking what he learned from CB and applying it to his future projects. IMHO CB overextendid its scope long ago and primary development should've stopped then.

Is version 1.1 going to be on B3D and if so how is one person (Regalis) supposed to fix all of these errors?

It's not like anybody besides Reg has ever worked on the bug fixes in CB before, right? /s

I would think that with the game and it's mess of "spaghetti" code and string issues, a port of some sort would HAVE to be used.

Contrary to the apparently popular belief among many of you who have never programmed before, software development doesn't work like this. Spaghetti code is rarely caused by the engine or programming language used, rather, it's often a result of poor planning and bad programming practices. Porting software is not some magical process in which a programmer is given a blank canvas to re-design a work of art; it's a frustrating, mind-numbingly tedious task that expects a deep understanding of both languages used to pull off well.

Posted: **Thu Feb 19, 2015 12:41 am**

I know that the new ports will require work and that the coding part is frustrating. I wasn't implying that porting is some magical process that fixes things. It's just that I agree on everybody else that B3D is outdated and a new port would seriously benefit the game. The only issue with this is that there are currently three people working on ports for the game and if we expect to see a finished product(that is if we DO manage to get to version 1.1) I would think that the better solution would be that instead of having 3 separate ports that are mainly to serve as spin offs, we would have an official completed version (1.1) of SCP Containment Breach. What I see you telling me is that the game is way to big for it's own good and that it should be abandoned. The ports will take care of the rest but there will be no "Official" complete game. Although I do agree that the game has way to many features for a F2P indie game. It's just that we've come way to far to give up now. I know it's not like I've payed for early access on Steam, I just don't want to see all of this effort go to waste and this good game get left with all of the other abandoned early access games.

Posted: **Tue Feb 24, 2015 3:53 pm**

hope it irrlicht (i hate unity)

Posted: **Tue Feb 24, 2015 4:02 pm**

yonzo_rikuo wrote:hope it irrlicht (i hate unity)

Unity is a powerful engine that is just abused by shitty teenagers.

Posted: **Tue Feb 24, 2015 5:46 pm**

Trialtrex21 wrote:
yonzo_rikuo wrote:hope it irrlicht (i hate unity)
Unity is a powerful engine that is just abused by shitty teenagers.

Yes but it still runs like crap on lower end computers, even on low settings. :/

Posted: **Tue Feb 24, 2015 5:50 pm**

Trialtrex21 wrote:
yonzo_rikuo wrote:hope it irrlicht (i hate unity)
Unity is a powerful engine that is just abused by shitty teenagers.

LORD DEATH wrote:Yes but it still runs like crap on lower end computers, even on low settings. :/

Code: Select all

ERROR: COULD NOT LOAD FILE: "doublethis.gif"

To be frank, ever since I got Jessie from Best Buy, Unity games aren't that problematic anymore.

Posted: **Tue Feb 24, 2015 6:10 pm**

LORD DEATH wrote:Yes but it still runs like crap on lower end computers, even on low settings. :/

Wouldn't a game's performance be based on how well the game itself is optimized? Rather than the whole engine?

Posted: **Tue Feb 24, 2015 6:14 pm**

CommanderPro100 wrote:
LORD DEATH wrote:Yes but it still runs like crap on lower end computers, even on low settings. :/
Wouldn't a game's performance be based on how well the game itself is optimized? Rather than the whole engine?

You... have a good point..

Though Slender with Fantastic Graphics and 1280x720 would make Betty vomit screws.

Not Jessie here though. So it is also dependent on the computer heritself. obviously.

CLstream: anthromorphisizing microwaves and desktop pcs since 2007

Posted: **Sun Mar 01, 2015 4:37 am**

CLgaming wrote:
CommanderPro100 wrote:
LORD DEATH wrote:Yes but it still runs like crap on lower end computers, even on low settings. :/
Wouldn't a game's performance be based on how well the game itself is optimized? Rather than the whole engine?
You... have a good point..

Though Slender with Fantastic Graphics and 1280x720 would make Betty vomit screws.

Not Jessie here though. So it is also dependent on the computer heritself. obviously.

CLstream: anthromorphisizing microwaves and desktop pcs since 2007

Agreed.

Posted: **Sun Mar 01, 2015 1:02 pm**

CommanderPro100 wrote:
LORD DEATH wrote:Yes but it still runs like crap on lower end computers, even on low settings. :/
Wouldn't a game's performance be based on how well the game itself is optimized? Rather than the whole engine?

Only to a certain extent. For example, let's say I wrote a game using DirectX 8 that supported 32 NPCs at once. But we're on DirectX11 now, so I start using more than 32 NPCs, even though I'm still using DirectX8. Even if my own code is very optimized and streamlined, DX8 was not capable of that many NPCs and as such, will cause slowdowns and FPS drops.

In the context of Unity, however, it is dependent on the game's optimization, because Unity is itself very optimized. If you experience low FPS on your standard Unity game (not talking about Kerbal Space Program, Slender or Rust), then stop trying to run games on your calculator.

Undertow Games Forum

Which port will most likely be implemented?

Re: Which port will most likely be implemented?

Re: Which port will most likely be implemented?

Re: Which port will most likely be implemented?

Re: Which port will most likely be implemented?

Re: Which port will most likely be implemented?

Re: Which port will most likely be implemented?

Re: Which port will most likely be implemented?

Re: Which port will most likely be implemented?

Re: Which port will most likely be implemented?

Re: Which port will most likely be implemented?