Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Win a Copy of 180 for iPhone!

37 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

Well, if your display target was 1080p, you might render at 2160 internally so that you get free full screen anti-aliasing when the scaler chip does it's magic to provide your output.

It's a perfectly legitimate way to increase your render rate, since you get to turn off all the AA features on the iPhone, sparing you clock cycles to do fancy lighting effects etc. You've got a shit load of pixel throughput on that sucker in every clock cycle, so any time you get more cycles, you can do more in terms of using your shaders. This was a pretty common strategy on the Dreamcast (though it didn't have "shaders," it was fixed-function).

1080p 180 confirmed.

===

Back of the envelope math here: 3,840x2,160 = 8,294,400

Approximate iPhone pixel fill rate per second: 4 gigapixels = 4,294,967,296 pixels

4,294,967,296/8,294,400 = 518 (this happily ties to the iPhone's clock speed of 500 mhz)

518 / 60 = 8.6 (or 500 / 60 = 8.333 )

So, you get 8 safe passes per frame at that resolution, and you get FREE full screen anti aliasing, so you can ignore all that sort of stuff on the iPhone.

Note that at 720p, you get 19 passes using the same strategy. Angry Birds probably had the opportunity to use 38 passes since it ran at 30 frames per second instead of 60. Gee, I wonder why it looked so fantastic?

===

I just noticed that the 4 gigapixels thing includes multiple samples. So you can probably multiply that figure for passes by like, four, eight, or possibly sixteen if they completely turn off antialiasing. Doing it on the scaler is the best way to maximize effects.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I have an iPhone and I will have an iPad 64Gig-3G on May 28th...YEEEE-HAWWWWWW!!!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I'd love a code, but I'm afraid these are US store only..

Pssst...just create an account on the US store...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The contest has ended!

Thanks to everyone who entered. A good, old fashioned random number generator has determined our two winners:

juanster and Shakey Steve

Congratulations, gentlemen. Be sure to check your private messages for your promo codes.

And a special thanks once again to Headcase Games for providing us with these promo codes to give away. Even if you didn't win, be sure to check out 180. It's a very fun game, and at $1.99, it's a darn fine deal.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I feel I should point out a flaw in the manner you used to choose the winners. Random number generators you download on the Internet aren't true random number generators (TRNGs), rather they are psuedo-random number generators (PRNGs). As the word 'pseudo' suggests, pseudo-random numbers are not random in the way you might expect, at least not if you're used to dice rolls or lottery tickets. Essentially, PRNGs are algorithms that use mathematical formulae or simply precalculated tables to produce sequences of numbers that appear random. A good example of a PRNG is the linear congruential method. A good deal of research has gone into pseudo-random number theory, and modern algorithms for generating pseudo-random numbers are so good that the numbers look exactly like they were really random.

The basic difference between PRNGs and TRNGs is easy to understand if you compare computer-generated random numbers to rolls of a die. Because PRNGs generate random numbers by using mathematical formulae or precalculated lists, using one corresponds to someone rolling a die many times and writing down the results. Whenever you ask for a die roll, you get the next on the list. Effectively, the numbers appear random, but they are really predetermined. TRNGs work by getting a computer to actually roll the die — or, more commonly, use some other physical phenomenon that is easier to connect to a computer than a die is.

PRNGs are efficient, meaning they can produce many numbers in a short time, and deterministic, meaning that a given sequence of numbers can be reproduced at a later date if the starting point in the sequence is known. Efficiency is a nice characteristic if your application needs many numbers, and determinism is handy if you need to replay the same sequence of numbers again at a later stage. PRNGs are typically also periodic, which means that the sequence will eventually repeat itself. While periodicity is hardly ever a desirable characteristic, modern PRNGs have a period that is so long that it can be ignored for most practical purposes.

These characteristics make PRNGs suitable for applications where many numbers are required and where it is useful that the same sequence can be replayed easily. Popular examples of such applications are simulation and modeling applications. PRNGs are not suitable for applications where it is important that the numbers are really unpredictable, such as data encryption and gambling.

Therefore, I demand you choose another winner.

http://www.random.org/randomness/

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I feel I should point out a flaw in the manner you used to choose the winners. Random number generators you download on the Internet aren't true random number generators (TRNGs), rather they are psuedo-random number generators (PRNGs). As the word 'pseudo' suggests, pseudo-random numbers are not random in the way you might expect, at least not if you're used to dice rolls or lottery tickets. Essentially, PRNGs are algorithms that use mathematical formulae or simply precalculated tables to produce sequences of numbers that appear random. A good example of a PRNG is the linear congruential method. A good deal of research has gone into pseudo-random number theory, and modern algorithms for generating pseudo-random numbers are so good that the numbers look exactly like they were really random.

The basic difference between PRNGs and TRNGs is easy to understand if you compare computer-generated random numbers to rolls of a die. Because PRNGs generate random numbers by using mathematical formulae or precalculated lists, using one corresponds to someone rolling a die many times and writing down the results. Whenever you ask for a die roll, you get the next on the list. Effectively, the numbers appear random, but they are really predetermined. TRNGs work by getting a computer to actually roll the die — or, more commonly, use some other physical phenomenon that is easier to connect to a computer than a die is.

PRNGs are efficient, meaning they can produce many numbers in a short time, and deterministic, meaning that a given sequence of numbers can be reproduced at a later date if the starting point in the sequence is known. Efficiency is a nice characteristic if your application needs many numbers, and determinism is handy if you need to replay the same sequence of numbers again at a later stage. PRNGs are typically also periodic, which means that the sequence will eventually repeat itself. While periodicity is hardly ever a desirable characteristic, modern PRNGs have a period that is so long that it can be ignored for most practical purposes.

These characteristics make PRNGs suitable for applications where many numbers are required and where it is useful that the same sequence can be replayed easily. Popular examples of such applications are simulation and modeling applications. PRNGs are not suitable for applications where it is important that the numbers are really unpredictable, such as data encryption and gambling.

Therefore, I demand you choose another winner.

http://www.random.org/randomness/

Too bad sucka! I already used the code :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Words, words, words.

http://www.random.org/randomness/

But I used the "True Random Number Generator" at Random.org (the website you link to in your spoiler) to determine the winners...

:unsure::unsure: :unsure:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I fail to see how a die is a true random number generator when they only allow selections of a limited, pre-determined set of numbers. To be truly random, nothing should be pre-determined in advance.

Also, congrats to the winners. It's a wonderful game and I've really enjoyed playing it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I fail to see how a die is a true random number generator when they only allow selections of a limited, pre-determined set of numbers. To be truly random, nothing should be pre-determined in advance.

Also, congrats to the winners. It's a wonderful game and I've really enjoyed playing it.

I see your point, but in the context of computers a die is only truly random because the outcome of a die roll isn't generated by an algorithm. If you know the algorithm, it's possible you could predict the result of a random number generator.

But I used the "True Random Number Generator" at Random.org (the website you link to in your spoiler) to determine the winners...

:unsure::unsure: :unsure:

I only copy and pasted the first few paragraphs of the link in my spoiler. I didn't read much more of the site than that. Yeah, I'm lazy, wanna fight about it?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I fail to see how a die is a true random number generator when they only allow selections of a limited, pre-determined set of numbers. To be truly random, nothing should be pre-determined in advance.

Also, congrats to the winners. It's a wonderful game and I've really enjoyed playing it.

It's great, though quite addictive. So addictive, in fact, that my wife pulled an Elin Nordegren and grabbed my iPhone because she thought I was texting to someone all morning :(

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Hey, fuck you, Phil!

I'm sorry. That was... that was just out of line. Please forgive.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Thanks, Phil! This game is fun and worth buying.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0