UnrealEd Problems (And quantum thingies! :D ) New Problem :(

[FrostInks]

I fired up UnrealEd to discover this:


The windows that normally displayed the maps have gone.
So, what did I do?

Woah, this turned to a massive discussion
My shape builder dimensions are toally screwed up, any help?

[GenMoKai]

Simple, Just go to: View -> Viewports -> Configure

And then just select wich window you want to have

[JackGriffin]

An addendum: Occasionally I have seen the menu get "stuck" as you try to do this. If it does hit the "alt" button on your keyboard.

[UT Sniper (SJA94)]

Yes that window prob is anoying i get that a lot also does anyone know the cause of the problem ? at least its an easy fix.

[JackGriffin]

I can't believe no one has patched it by now. Honestly it starts to fall into one of those endearing bugs that you grow so accustomed to that it becomes part of the experience. Even if you released a patch today I'm not sure I'd use it since the white screen has been so much part of the use of UEd, strangely enough I'd likely miss it.

At the OP, if you are seriously considering learning the ed, I teach some basics via my teamspeak. I have several people I'm currently helping and you are welcome to participate. Be warned I am NOT a good mapper but I understand the basics as well as anyone and I don't mind taking the time to answer questions. In a couple of evenings I can get you rolling if it's something you might enjoy.

[UT Sniper (SJA94)]

its somethink i would be interested in but from now on i don't think i have much time to map(more of a coder now) and what not i have to get ready for 2 tests a interview and if i pass i got a 5 mouth course thanks anyway .
Lol you would miss a bug i know what you mean if i got a better pc i would not be able to get use to it being able to run anythink good.

[>@tack!<]

sometimes even viewports->configure doesn't work for me, then i just delete the editor's ini file.

[Hook]

Problem is - your computers are too new LOL!
My old PentiumIII 852mhz 128 k ram comp runs UEd just great.
It was all coded for the old comps.
Never seen that "bug".

[UT Sniper (SJA94)]

@ >@tack!< try view-viewpoints-closeing all, then config them thats what works for me.

lol hook i thoght my pc is old i went from 3.00ghz intel duo core 2 4gb ram to this one 2.80ghz 1.5gb ram(nothink really works on this not ut3, udk, GTA4) i miss my old pc when i get a job i will have to upgrade a lot at least if i get this course i will be learning how to rebuild pc and learn windows 7 funnctions off topic now so i will shut the hell up now .
you might have a point about the computers being to new my older pcs i had when i was young were similer to yours they were fine also

[SzGergo]

hmm. Mine was very good when i bought it ~5 years ago. Core 2 duo was just introduced.
It seems to me computers did not get much faster and better since then. Upgrading from some old pentium to the intel core2 with decent motherboard and fast DDR2 rams, also a 7600GT videocard was a huge leap. Now when i sit down to a new pc, i dont feel that big difference. Power is consumed by the newer OS's and programs that are even more resource-intensive. Win vista is a joke. And why does it take twice as much time for my Archicad 14 to start up than the Version 13? Apart from the team work, they are almost the same.
Just take a look at the Playstation 2. It was introduced in 2000. Now take a look at such fantastic games like Shadow of the Colossus, or the Psychonauts. They were released around 2005. Developers must have optimized those for a given 5 year old console. They cannot speculated about newer and stronger hardwares. Still, both games are looking pretty awsome in 2011 too.

Not like some shit Crysis "yes we know the whole capacity of the CERN is not enough to run that crap in the highest resolution, but it is somewhat enjoyable on the newest generation of PC-s, so please buy one. Oh, btw the game is a pile of mild shit, but those palm leaves are casting awsome shadows to the other leaves, aren't they?" Duh.

Btw i dont have that bug in ued too.

[JackGriffin]

Interesting direction this thread is taking.

One of the defining problems for the processor chip is the speed of light (of all things). They have approached the minimum limits of die size on wafers, trying to shrink ever-farther the distance that the light signal must travel on the chip. Less distance traveled = faster processing. Die sizes are now around 45nm and reaching the lower limit of what is feasible for cost vs. performance. This is part of the reason we are breaking away from keeping Moore's Law going.

Video acceleration is suffering this same fate. Cards haven't really gotten "faster" in a while, they have simply gotten stronger. More pipelines, more memory, etc. That's why games of a few years ago still look the same(ish). There hasn't been a profound improvement in things in a while, they've just slammed more horsepower into the card.

[UT Sniper (SJA94)]

i disagree yes games are not improved as much like they were 2000-2005 but if you played ut99 and then gears of war 2 there is a huge upgrade in graphics enging and gameplay. i bet if you got a intel i7 core processor extream edition you will know how fast it is but £600-900 is too much i5 is around £90 ive seen and 6gb ram is around £60-100+. lol have you not thoght about gta sanandreas to GTA4 3 year difference most improvement i have ever seen.

[Feralidragon]

One of the defining problems for the processor chip is the speed of light (of all things).

I have to correct something here because that's a huge misconception of things, because I think you're not seeing how fast light travels, it's 300.000 Km per SECOND (or 186.000miles/s, slower of course in circuitry, but just slightly). Light is not "that" slow at all and is NOT the reason why a processor is faster or slower, 200 years or more will still pass until we reach the point that we get limited by that.

What limits above all the speeds within a processor or any chip for that effect, are the semiconductors themselves, since they have a response time.
For instance, perfect square clock signals do not exist, as a perfect clock signal would go instantly up and then down forming a perfect square in the sign change, perfect 1 and 0 if you prefer, but in reality they take some time to go up and then down at those moments, and that is the response time of a semiconductor component, and that is what limits any signal processing nowadays (there are other factors, like interference and the way you turn lines within a circuit because of electric fields, but this one is the biggest).

If the speed of light was limiting this, I sure you that running 10 or 20 or more instances of UT3 in one of those processors would take less time to process than an "Hello world" output in a today's i7 using machine code. In a processor where the light speed is a limit, running any heavy program nowadays would be a joke to that kind of processor.

By shortening the distances, they get less loss in the signal, a better response time, less unwanted electric fields, because there's less material that influences this timing. Plus, at those sizes the electric current is minimal, precise and prone to losses, so less distance also means less power which leads to less heat and more stability, because any nm of connection makes a difference at extremelly low current usage.

Another big misconception is about electricity itself: when you turn up the lights you just turn a stopped highway of electrons to move again, because electrons aren't free, they are actually fighting for a spot in valence electron locations for an atom, and since you create a diferencial of voltage, and the the whole system has to balance again, so it's all bound to the response time of the material itself in a closed circuitry. What many people think, and wrongly, is the "signal" has to reach some point first, but this is not a pipe system and water flow, nor light itself, electricity works differently.
An electron may move at the speed of the light, but it doesn't need to reach the other side so you can get an electric signal, you just need electrons to move.

Sorry for the big post

[UT Sniper (SJA94)]

@ Feralidragon
you know your stuff im very impressed you must of listened well in school and what not, i bet most students in my ict and science class would not have a clue what you are on about(Most of them playing online games thats why they was a year behind in course work) i started in year 11 and did 1 years of it work in 3 mouths . And now im hopeing to get into a it company called "Zenos" im crapping my self about the interview but if i pass 5 mouth course and then into a job £14'000+ year. it dont matter about the big post it was very interesting to read
another good thing about modern pcs they are cheap i read that in the 1950s a hard drive with 5mb of storage was £50'000

[Hook]

@ Feralidragon - Yes, I agree with UT Sniper (SJA94)
I loved reading your post.
It is very interesting to me.

PS: my cousin used to be a lead person in the intel chip lab.
He chatted about some real cool stuff indeed.