ID:2092667
 
(See the best response by Ter13.)
I'm planning on making a single-player game. Sadly, I keep going back and forth between using dms and dmf for my UI. I need some insight and reasoning behind why I should choose one over the other for this project.

If I use DMS, there's some drawbacks. Because it's a single-player game, I'd have to use CEF apparently. The user would also have to host the game via DreamDaemon for it to work.

If I use DMF the one drawback I have is some flexibility with the UI. The quality with the font, which I must say has improved over these last few updates, is lower with DreamSeeker than with WebClient. Also, to the best of my knowledge, features like scrollbars and masking items is either clunky or not that easy in DMF.

Any thoughts and explanations behind which interface type I should go with? Mind you, I tried wrapping a project in CEF through Visual Studios 2015 and I believe there were some issues with it. It's been a while but I'm just hesitant of having to set it up again.
Best response
IMO dms is a dead end.
In response to Ter13
Ter13 wrote:
IMO dms is a dead end.

I also wanted to point out something else, in reference to performance:
world
fps = 60
view = "40x23"
I also wanted to point out something else, in reference to performance:

You aren't going to get the webclient to run at 60fps with a 40x23 viewport. DreamSeeker is going to struggle to keep pace with that too.

DMS is a dead end because BYOND's structural decisions are hopelessly unoptimizable for the webclient. Dreamseeker can probably be salvaged, but not a day goes by where I don't consider migrating to another environment at this point owing mostly to a more full understanding of what's going on under the hood in the render cycle and why BYOND's appearance constraints themselves are rapidly becoming the kiss of death that ensures that professional looking games in the engine are more effort than they have any right being.

You know me. I'm one of the people that defends the fuck out of the engine. But I'm also one of the handful of people that seems to have spent enough time with my head buried in abstract portions of the environment to really have a grasp on what's going on. --I'm not tearing the engine apart without need, and I'm not saying it's an environment without worth.

But what I am saying is that there are realistic limitations that we're facing that need serious (and difficult to do) love from the sole engine developer. I am also saying that we're married to some poor decisions that were made over a decade ago... Decisions that made sense at the time, but don't any more.

If you want to make a game with BYOND, don't go into it worrying about performance. Otherwise you aren't going to wind up making a playable game in this engine.
In response to Ter13
Ter13 wrote:
You aren't going to get the webclient to run at 60fps with a 40x23 viewport. DreamSeeker is going to struggle to keep pace with that too.



While moving it gets 3%. Sitting still gives a reading of 1%. Doesn't change the fact that there's not many procedures going on in this project as of yet. Just basic movement, running, and assistant movement to help navigate around tight walls. Not to mention that this all runs on a single core. Definitely wouldn't be marketable to a wide audience since they'd need a pricey CPU rather than a crappy one. I've read up on Steam's statistics a while back and I believe the majority of people are on a GTX 970 (because of Oculus no doubt) with a 2.4 - 3.0GHz CPU? I can't remember. Most people either had a 2 core or quad core. 1% had a single core.

If you want to make a game with BYOND, don't go into it worrying about performance. Otherwise you aren't going to wind up making a playable game in this engine.

Had I not worried about it, I would have been disappointed with my results. :P I'll wait a few more months and make my next game on BYOND. Something that doesn't require high FPS and a good screen size to look good. In the meantime, this next project looks like it'll also be on Unity.