Game development

[PoetPhilosopher]

For fun, I wanted to talk about the specific challenges I will face developing a 3D video game for the Pi 4 or the NVIDIA Jetson Nano board. Comparing the two boards, the Pi 4 has twice the CPU performance as the Nano, while the Nano has 6x the GPU performance of the Pi 4.

With the Pi 4, I will have plenty of CPU power for building the actual game, designing the 2D and 3D art for it, and having quick compiling times compiling the game. The characters will be 3D, but for the environment, rather than shaping each part of it, it will probably have many parts "painted on" due to the GPU probably not being able to handle a lot of on-screen polygons. So you've got 3D characters in 3 dimensions but with very "faked" more or less 2D environments. Then I will probably need to run the game in 640x480 given the limited GPU (which isn't really that uncommon).

For the Jetson Nano, I have my concerns that 3D modelling software will not work the greatest given the CPU of the board isn't really any more powerful than the CPU of a Pi 3B+. However given the generous GPU power, once the content is created in powerful 3D tools, it will be able to run real-time. I will probably not only be able to pull off a 720P resolution for the game, but will have additional GPU power for more modelled objects rather than putting all the detail in a flat texture (which really only looks good from a distance). If any power is left by the time it's all said and done, I may be able to create better-looking water in the environment than what the Pi 4 could run.

I had a Pi 4, but it had audio issues, so I'm now "upgrading" to a Jetson Nano.

 

[ChristineM]

What 3D software will you be using?

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

What 3D software will you be using?

One of the unofficial compiled-for-ARM versions of Blender.

If for some reason that doesn't work well on the Jetson Nano when I get it, I have a few other options.

I'm going to keep things small like 4,000 polygons per model, unless the platform really impresses on what it can handle. We will see.

 

[ChristineM]

One of the unofficial compiled-for-ARM versions of Blender.

If for some reason that doesn't work well on the Jetson Nano when I get it, I have a few other options.

I'm going to keep things small like 4,000 polygons per model, unless the platform really impresses on what it can handle. We will see.

Blender is an ok tool, probably the best available. Used it myself but prefer Maya or 3DSMax running in a shell with Unreal for 3D work . I don't know about these small machines, id develop with more power then port it

 

[lewisnotmiller]

For fun, I wanted to talk about the specific challenges I will face developing a 3D video game for the Pi 4 or the NVIDIA Jetson Nano board. Comparing the two boards, the Pi 4 has twice the CPU performance as the Nano, while the Nano has 6x the GPU performance of the Pi 4.

With the Pi 4, I will have plenty of CPU power for building the actual game, designing the 2D and 3D art for it, and having quick compiling times compiling the game. The characters will be 3D, but for the environment, rather than shaping each part of it, it will probably have many parts "painted on" due to the GPU probably not being able to handle a lot of on-screen polygons. So you've got 3D characters in 3 dimensions but with very "faked" more or less 2D environments. Then I will probably need to run the game in 640x480 given the limited GPU (which isn't really that uncommon).

For the Jetson Nano, I have my concerns that 3D modelling software will not work the greatest given the CPU of the board isn't really any more powerful than the CPU of a Pi 3B+. However given the generous GPU power, once the content is created in powerful 3D tools, it will be able to run real-time. I will probably not only be able to pull off a 720P resolution for the game, but will have additional GPU power for more modelled objects rather than putting all the detail in a flat texture (which really only looks good from a distance). If any power is left by the time it's all said and done, I may be able to create better-looking water in the environment than what the Pi 4 could run.

I had a Pi 4, but it had audio issues, so I'm now "upgrading" to a Jetson Nano.

Excuse my ignorance...do you need to create the content on the platform?
I was thinking creating it on a third party platform then porting to the Nano could give the best of both worlds...

(But I've not got the least idea whether that is even possible in this case)

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Blender is an ok tool, probably the best available. Used it myself but prefer Maya or 3DSMax running in a shell with Unreal for 3D work . I don't know about these small machines, id develop with more power then port it

Dammit, you already have my answer!
This is why I should read responses before hitting reply on an OP!

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Excuse my ignorance...do you need to create the content on the platform?
I was thinking creating it on a third party platform then porting to the Nano could give the best of both worlds...

(But I've not got the least idea whether that is even possible in this case)

Well, it's possible if you don't mind transferring files back and forth.

My real reason is I really like Linux, and the best computer I own, which has a Core i3 and a 1050 Ti graphics card, was the storebought variety with a specialized motherboard which just doesn't want to play nicely with Linux.

I've always found Windows to cause me problems.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I've always found Windows to cause me problems.

A more under stated understatement I have not seen in decades.



On the flip side? I really wanted to learn Linux, but the learning curve was too steep, and I've been Windowing since 3.11... way back.

It has been said, and I agree, that Windows it the absolute worst operating system of all time... except for all the others.

IMO? Win10 is what Windows 95 was supposedly gonna do. Alas, the hardware wasn't up to speed, was it? Then again, neither was the OS up to what was promised.

Here we are-- two decades later-- and Micro$oft finally more or less got it up to what they promised all those years ago. I like Win10. I also loathe it with a passion.

So sorry to derail your most excellent thread. Please forgive... I was just so impressed with your understatement I could not resist making a comment or five on the subject.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

A more under stated understatement I have not seen in decades.



On the flip side? I really wanted to learn Linux, but the learning curve was too steep, and I've been Windowing since 3.11... way back.

It has been said, and I agree, that Windows it the absolute worst operating system of all time... except for all the others.

IMO? Win10 is what Windows 95 was supposedly gonna do. Alas, the hardware wasn't up to speed, was it? Then again, neither was the OS up to what was promised.

Here we are-- two decades later-- and Micro$oft finally more or less got it up to what they promised all those years ago. I like Win10. I also loathe it with a passion.

So sorry to derail your most excellent thread. Please forgive... I was just so impressed with your understatement I could not resist making a comment or five on the subject.

I'll make a comment or five as well, heehee. I have a laptop with a little less than twice the raw power of the Pi 4 which has Windows. Yet the laptop can't even run too well running Wordpad, while the Pi 4 I could make full charts and graphs with text.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I'll make a comment or five as well, heehee. I have a laptop with a little less than twice the raw power of the Pi 4 which has Windows. Yet the laptop can't even run too well running Wordpad, while the Pi 4 I could make full charts and graphs with text.

yeah.... And JE Pournelle once pointed out? Windows has always been "ahead" of the hardware, to the detriment of actual users.

What he means, I think, is that for any given version of windows, if your hardware is older than the release of the software? It's "too old" i.e. lacking the "horsepower" to run the program.

Pournelle also pointed out an accurate thing about Windoze: It's a singing pig. It's bloated. It's stinky. It's a righteous pain to get stable, sometimes.

But.

It's an actual singing pig. You can understand the words... and it's (more or less) on pitch... most of the time...

And that's kind of amazing: If you consider the sheer variation possible on PC's and that windoze had to be made to run on them all? And it mostly does? It's pretty spectacular. Android and Apple should be so good-- their's is an entirely closed ecosystem. Zero hardware customization.

I have always seen Linux as a kind of middle ground. I do envy people with Linux skills, in truth-- because of the level of customization possible, my inner OCD loves the idea of all of that.

But. If your hardware is weird, or funky, or not mainstream? It's difficult to figure out how to fine tune it enough to make it work. I admire people who can actually do that. At least that's been my experience. YMMV.

Every few years, I try again-- my current project is one of my late father's old, abandoned PCs. They work. They are from the early 'oughts, and one goes to the late '90s. They are up and running Linux. But I cannot get the video beyond real basic settings, and the wireless? Forgetaboudet. They are fun to tinker with, though.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

yeah.... And JE Pournelle once pointed out? Windows has always been "ahead" of the hardware, to the detriment of actual users.

What he means, I think, is that for any given version of windows, if your hardware is older than the release of the software? It's "too old" i.e. lacking the "horsepower" to run the program.

Pournelle also pointed out an accurate thing about Windoze: It's a singing pig. It's bloated. It's stinky. It's a righteous pain to get stable, sometimes.

But.

It's an actual singing pig. You can understand the words... and it's (more or less) on pitch... most of the time...

And that's kind of amazing: If you consider the sheer variation possible on PC's and that windoze had to be made to run on them all? And it mostly does? It's pretty spectacular. Android and Apple should be so good-- their's is an entirely closed ecosystem. Zero hardware customization.

I have always seen Linux as a kind of middle ground. I do envy people with Linux skills, in truth-- because of the level of customization possible, my inner OCD loves the idea of all of that.

But. If your hardware is weird, or funky, or not mainstream? It's difficult to figure out how to fine tune it enough to make it work. I admire people who can actually do that. At least that's been my experience. YMMV.

Every few years, I try again-- my current project is one of my late father's old, abandoned PCs. They work. They are from the early 'oughts, and one goes to the late '90s. They are up and running Linux. But I cannot get the video beyond real basic settings, and the wireless? Forgetaboudet. They are fun to tinker with, though.

This is why I like small computer boards like the Pi and its competitors. Food for thought, the industry calls them SBCs. Anyway, if they say they'll run Linux or a form of it, then they'll run it almost flawlessly. Whereas I could even build a PC and if I get say, the wrong brand of motherboard, the PC may not work well with Linux.

 

[ChristineM]

Well, it's possible if you don't mind transferring files back and forth.

My real reason is I really like Linux, and the best computer I own, which has a Core i3 and a 1050 Ti graphics card, was the storebought variety with a specialized motherboard which just doesn't want to play nicely with Linux.

I've always found Windows to cause me problems.

Linux can usually be installed in a partition and a duel boot system set up. That's what i have on mine using windows 10 and Mint.