Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

Update 01.154 DEV - Configurable Block Limits & Performance Warnings

Discussion in 'Change Log' started by Drui, Sep 22, 2016.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. SilentSymphony Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    201
    the block limits are fully configurable for singleplayer created worlds but only if you edit the world file sandbox.sbc in an editor like notepad++ and it isnt terribly friendly unless you are used to dealing with servers for the game.

    the performance issues are likely due to keens profiler and with no option to turn it off RIP Fix by rexxar!

    And those are just the tip of the iceberg, a large number of small and large grid blocks dont have proper SubtypeId's meaning you cant limit them in the block limits anyway, you can limit TypeId's but that limits the entire TYPE of block.
    The fixes for most of it literally takes a few minutes in a text editor, no joke.
     
    Last edited: Sep 23, 2016
  2. Mr Engineer Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    467
    Wow, that hanger door! Has Christmas already come? Interesting update, like the level previews. Kinda reminds me of Alien Isolation.
     
  3. Devon_v Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,602
    I really like that, in the odd event that you get a side view of it, there's actual space for the doors to collapse.
     
  4. TyDale Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    4
    Hotfix today, any idea what issues have been resolved?
     
  5. Stardriver907 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,990
    I agree with this in principle, but the truth is that most rented servers are just glorified laptops. A server that can run SE with lots of players doing what they believe they should be able to do has to be robust, and you're not going to rent one of those for twenty bucks a month. Multiplayer was envisioned to be hosted on a player's computer and the other players were to be friends of the the host. When MP became a thing in SE many people leaped from hosting a game for friends to attempting to be the World's Premiere Space Engineers Destination. That's why they're always upset over an update that takes down their server. They're afraid their "customers" will go elsewhere. SE is not a server based game and it doesn't act like one. If Keen intended for the game to handle scores of players they would have written it to run on Linux. In my opinion, block limits were not instituted to help get the game to run on my pc. They are intended to help the game run on an Xbox. The beauty of consoles is that they are inexpensive compared to pc's and any game you put in it will run. The downside is that the game can only be as good as the console can handle. If your pc can't handle a game you can increase its capabilities, and if you like the game enough you will do whatever it takes.

    I just recently made the decision to spring for an actual gaming rig to run SE (I currently run it on a Dell 990 workstation which is far from a gaming pc). There's no point if SE is going to be an Xbox game.

    It goes without saying that it should be way easier than that. If Keen really wants SE to run on servers, they should make a server edition. If their intention is to have a game you can play on your pc by yourself or with a few of your friends then the game needs to be able to recognize and use every core on your motherboard and maximize the capabilities of whatever graphics card(s) you have plugged into it. Space Engineers will not be a good Xbox game and they really should just give that up.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Cirtex Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    24
    can p please ask why the hell the dev teams have ignored the elephant in the room about multiplayer? i mean ya they made minor changes in this patch. but im scratching my head as to why they havent looked at the source of the problem: the fact that everything is loaded serverside. it was the "soultion" to rubber banding. to make the server adjust the clients postion.... which is actual definition of rubber banding...
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Burillo Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    648
    i'm sure they're just that stupid.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. rexxar Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,530
    http://blog.marekrosa.org/2016/08/opening-search-for-ceo-senior-producer_29.html
     
  9. Harrekin Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,077
    We've been through the multi-core thing before, there's only so much you can do and even less for a game that (allegedly) isn't feature complete yet.
     
  10. Kienata Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    118
    I just wanted to weigh in and say that I LOVE that the block limits have finally made there appearance. The control this gives server admins is fantastic and the performance gain this will offer in the long run will be really incredible. Thanks keen.

    E
     
  11. Stardriver907 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,990
    Well, my point was that block limits don't necessarily address the performance issue. The fact that the game is not feature-complete is part of my point. They're still adding features that server admins may have to go in and disable just to keep their servers running. This means if you're on a server you may not get a feature-complete game.

    I'm waiting to see how server "customers" are going to respond to being on a server that only gives a fraction of what they can have on their own pc:

    "Sorry, dude. You get one refinery, one assembler, and one drill. You have 997 blocks left to build your ship with. Don't yell at me, man. I have to worry about performance."
     
  12. zDeveloper10 Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    742
    servers do (or did a few months ago) already do that through scripts. though,that seemed to cause a lot of confusion as people would forget or not be aware of the limit(on less verbose servers) or accidentally merge stuff and have it go poof.haha
     
  13. Harrekin Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,077
    I think the block limits is an effective temporary solution until more extensive optimisation can be done, when the game is feature complete.
     
  14. Outfrost Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    273
    Crashes occur sometimes as well (though not nearly as often as they used to, which is much appreciated), but for me it's mostly the epic freezes that are a big issue. You know, 4 seconds of rather smooth 30 fps flying over a planet followed by 4 minutes of a frozen screen and unresponsive PC.
    It boils down to the same thing though. More VRAM = less need to move data to RAM. More RAM = less need to move data to pagefile.
    I have it on an SSD as well, and that is precisely the reason why I have to keep myself from playing SE with planets right now. Flash memory can withstand much less writes than magnetic hard disks, and with the amount of data Windows has to write to the pagefile because of SE, I'd be wearing those flash chips out rather quickly. Of course, Windows is also to blame here, because for some retarded Microsoft reason you can have no pagefile at all, but if you want one, you HAVE TO have it on the system drive. No matter how you try to tell it not to create a pagefile on C: and to make one on B: (or D: or whatever) instead, it will flip the bird at you and refuse to listen.
    I'm hoping to build myself a new PC kinda soon, with a minimum of 32GB of RAM, but for now I'm definitely stuck with what I have, especially since 8GB is the memory support limit on my motherboard (and it's DDR2).
    I can't fathom what the game is gonna be like for console peasants, but one thing is certain... They will remain console peasants :p
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. posthy Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    117
    Block limit is fine, since it can be turned off for creative SP, but something went in the wrong direction. I have a huge space station I started to build a few months ago, it has currently 79k block (way above the limit :) ) and still far from finished. At that time I had 0.4 sim speed, and ~15 fps. After a while yesterday I loaded the world again and I still had 0.4 sim speed but only 3 fps I cannot continue to build it this way. I wonder what could cause this?
     
  16. Devon_v Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,602
    @turbo pascal VRAM may be it then, because we otherwise seem to have very similar computers. I do have DDR3 RAM though.

    I've been running my page file in SE and Skyrim (which can't address more than 3GB and is forced to thrash very quickly) and XCOM2 all with tons of mods for over two years and the capacity loss has been minor. The on board controler automatically quarantines cells which have worn out, and modern SSDs are much heartier than early thumbdrives.
     
  17. Stardriver907 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,990
    I don't think block limits is a solution to anything. The optimizations are occurring and must continue anyway. Block limits only hide the fact that the optimizations are currently not sufficient. Those of us that tend to build big are not fooled. It might be easier to swallow if you could trade limits. For example I was thwarted when I wanted to place more than 24 refineries. Game said I couldn't have any more of those but I could still place 24 arc furnaces. I have no need whatsoever for even one arc furnace. Could I swap 8 arc furnace slots for 8 more refineries? NO. At least not without digging into the code, which I would likely screw up.

    Effective solutions, temporary or not, are things like the ability to turn off oxygen or pressurization. Block limits are not effective, especially if you use mods. I've had horrendous performance disappear just by replacing modded blocks with vanilla blocks, not by trying to get away with less blocks. Block limits don't effect block rendering, much less things like conveyors and scripts. I have a ship using the holographic radar mod and I'll tell you right now I could remove most of the blocks on that ship and still have performance issues when that thing is running. If you're running a radar script and TIM and nanites and that block damage mod and all those LCDs with text updating all the time can you blame the block count for performance issues?

    This seems to have been mostly a server problem, and server admins apparently have already been capable of imposing limits on their servers. So what was the point of making limits the default on my offline world? Perhaps to get new players used to the Xbox experience?

    The only limits should be the computer the game is running on.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  18. Harrekin Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,077
    Apologies, I was under the impression it was an optional feature.

    If it's mandatory, f*** that then.

    I ain't been playing much, bored of the vast nothingness of 6.6AU of empty space.
     
  19. Outfrost Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    273
    It is an optional feature. Well, not 'optional' by the traditional meaning - and this I think is the main problem. It's enabled by default, on both new and pre-existing worlds. But you can turn it off. Again, the issue is that suddenly, to continue playing the way you used to, you have to go into some options that might not even be immediately obvious and change a new setting.
     
  20. Devon_v Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,602
    Having it enabled on existing saves was dumb.

    @Stardriver907 It's not meant for SP really, it's a server option, part of the ongoing process of merging all of SESE's features into vanilla. I think they set it on by default to limit new players builds until they learn that there are costs associated with various block types, and that you can't just build as big as you want on any machine. Some people still try to go all out on a potato and assume that just because the graphics look simple, the game must be easy to run.

    Edit: Actually, I think it's possible to set it up to restrict based on block type, not ID, so you could have a limit of 40 Refineries, which would include Arc Furnaces, trace miniral extractors, gravel crushers, etc.
     
  21. DustinMVille Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    17
    as of this update i am having problems with space engineers hogging all my ram. 98% (total usage of all programs not just space engineers) when in a world with 3 grids and a planet. and my ram usage was 80-90% before. and that is just the start of my issues the real problem starts when i save and quit. when i save and quit my computer freezes for a bit because no free ram and all my hard drive bandwidth is being used. i have 8gb of DDR3 but its closer to 7.5gb because my integrated GPU shares memory with my CPU and i have 512mb of Vram
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2016
  22. Stardriver907 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,990
    Well, as @turbo pascal said, it's optional but if you don't know that it may bite you in the butt. My real problem with it is that it's just not necessary. Server admins have the ability to limit blocks, although they need a mod to do that. Point is that if a server admin decides there is a problem with too many blocks, they have the means to rectify the situation and if they are interested is having a reliable and popular server they will do what they think is best. I don't need any such limits for my personal offline solo game. My particular solution to poor performance is upgrading my computer. This is also true for servers as well. If you're going to have an open public server, that server should be up to the task. If keen wants the game to run on public servers the answer, temporary or not, is not imposing a block limit. We should all be aware that at some point what we build will cause issues. Up to this point, in my personal experience, it's been more about what blocks you use rather than how many you have. If keen concentrates on efficient transfer and storage of data the block count thing will sort itself out.

    Incidentally, since the update I have been asking around in other people's twitch streams about their opinions on block limits, and the consensus seems to be that it's a good move in preparation for getting the game to run on an Xbox.

    SE will suck on an Xbox. Xbox gamers dont really play games like SE. Minecraft? Sure. Space Engineers? Um, no.
     
  23. Outfrost Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    273
    It seems to be a somewhat common problem. I'm experiencing heavy freezing when loading a planet or moving around one, and my rig has a bit more VRAM than yours (I think?). I've mentioned it in some previous posts in this thread, and back in the early days of planets I also described it a bit more extensively ~here~ (though that thread is old now, and I've since added 2GB of RAM to my system). Basically the aggressive hard drive activity you're seeing is most likely related to memory paging - that is, data being transferred back and forth between physical RAM and the pagefile (sort of 'virtual memory') on your HDD, because of the sheer amount of that data.

    Again, here's hoping that the Developers can maybe minimise these issues in the near future ;-) Until then, I think I'll be joining nomads in the Asteroid Belt ;-)
     
  24. DustinMVille Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    17
    i have 512 of dedicated VRam but due to the shared memory my gpu can use up to 4gb out of 8gb ram (0.5gb dedicated for gpu 3.5 of shared and 4 of dedicated working ram) i have more system info in my signature.
    my issues are not as bad as yours described in your thread but i have had my computer completely freeze once (yesterday) not even the caps light would do anything but my anti-malware also decided to run a scan when i had no free ram so i cant blame that completely on space engineers.
     
  25. Harrekin Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,077
    Is buying and installing more RAM an option for you?

    Because I'd recommend more RAM because it's only gonna get progressively worse

    (Or you could at least use a SSD for your pagefile).
     
  26. Aracus Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,911
    One sneaky fix seems to have been that the cockpit recipe doesn't show all the time anymore when you're sitting in said cockpit.
    Good riddance I say, my cockpit was already limited in its peripheral vision, the recipe/blueprint taking up a bit less then a 1/9th of my monitor did not help.

    So GJ Keen! One quality of life bug fixed! :)
     
  27. DustinMVille Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    17
    if i could get the money and find compatible RAM then i could but i think i would get a better increase from buying a proper gpu
     
  28. Aracus Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,911
    I can only speak for myself here but when I bought my new rig, the 32gb of ram and the 390x with 8gb of vram was porobably a godsend even if I can't get everything out of the game since the recent turn to favoring the nvidia crowd. (the 6700k skylake probably didn't hurt either)
     
  29. Harrekin Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,077
    Honestly, people heavily overrate the GPU use in this game.

    I've said it probably 100 times but I was getting 40fps on max settings (foliage density at 2.0) at 1080p on Skylake integrated graphics, ie no discrete GPU (for the record Ive bought a Asus GTX 1060 since then)

    But there's probably no point in investing in a new GPU either way if you're going to be bottlenecked by the rest of your system.
     
  30. Burillo Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    648
    i've been getting memory leaks since the last update. The game starts at about 6-7 GB RAM, then over time it goes up (at about 1MB per second), and the game eventually crashes (i've seen the game use up 28GB of RAM). is it just me or is it a common problem?
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.