Brian Fisher wrote: > Also running graphics at a different > rate than game stuff lets you make game stuff run at a consistent rate > with respect to time, which is good. I've seen this argument before on the pygame list and I don't really understand it. It seems to me that in my experience, when I play a game which I don't have the CPU for, I get slideshow framerates, and it's pretty unplayable regardless of whether these slides are one "tick" apart or more. Of course, sometimes a player only has "not quite enough" CPU. So what happens if the game needs 110% of the player's CPU? If you decouple the visual update from the physics update, the player is "flying blind", and I think this makes the game much more difficult. If you don't, the game slows down, and this might make the game easier. This might be a problem if you like making very difficult games (I do!) but I think it would just be better to just abort and say "Sorry guy, you don't have enough CPU". I guess when it comes down to it, a good game engine has the physics decoupled from the graphics in the code, and so decoupling the updates for each shouldn't be that much more difficult. But I don't really see the point. Ethan
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature