having the maps preloaded I thought might make a difference, too, as the initial load might be longer, once in, everything seems smooth. Josh has done some pretty amazing maps with it, see his stream or this thread, but I still thought that that even with an intricate map, it is better to let FGU do it because the software is handling it all on the client side. Personally, if you don't already have a preferred mapping program, then just learn mapping in FGU if you don't need more than what it provides. Maybe cpinder might have some thoughts, but it's not a simple issue and is going to be dependent upon each use case.
Josh has done some pretty amazing maps with it, see his stream or this thread Then MAYBE that will require more processing than an image made externally that doesn't have overlapping image entities (because once exported, it's just one pixel for each pixel). Very fast, much faster/less RAM usage than if I create that same 20x20 map in something else and import it (assuming same asset resolution/number of pixels).īut, if instead in FGU take that same map as above and add a few thousand different elements to it (stamps, brushes, etc) to detail out the walls, furniture, bushes and everything else. FGU only has to load those 5 different image assets.
But it can go either way.įor instance, say you make a map in FGU using 5 different tiles for a map that is 20 x 20 tiles (so maybe 200 x 200 squares).
I was going to ask the same thing - why not just make them in fgu? is there a performance hit using the software to do it all?There can be.
0 kommentar(er)
