Cube game on GameCube https://xitter.cf/t.co/LR9G8eSGG0

Far lands
Joined March 2024
Meanwhile, Meese Engine can stream from disk at hypersonic speeds on an office laptop, at a pure 60 FPS with a render distance of 64 chunks.
Wait until Casey reads GitHub literally 2 -> 10 fps victory lap
31
124
8
4,557
526,499
A Flock of Meese retweeted
"The N64 shipped with the NEC VR4300: a single core, in-order execution, 93.75 MHz CPU. It was paired with the 'Reality Co-Processor' (RCP), running at 62.5 MHz, for acceleration of audio and graphics computations. It supported 4 MB of RAM (later expanded to 8 MB with the Expansion Pak). Game cartridges for the N64 were, at most, 64 MB. "By today’s standards, this is incomprehensibly underpowered. You, the reader, in your pocket—or perhaps in your hand, while you read this—likely have at least four out-of-order execution cores, running somewhere from 2 GHz to 4 GHz. That’s something like 20-40 times more cycles per second than the N64’s VR4300, spread across 2-4 more cores. Each core is vastly more capable of higher throughput in doing useful work, given their out-of-order execution, deeper pipelines, new caching layers, and numerous other hardware optimizations that I’m not qualified to even attempt to explain. This magical device in your pocket also has 8 GB of RAM—three orders of magnitude more than what the N64 offered. It also can have something like 32, 64, 128, 256, 1024 GB of cold storage—several thousands of times larger than the N64 cartridge size. "Needless to say, computing technology has progressed in countless ways since the 1996 release of the N64. But the belief in the constant of progress over time is a privilege unique to modern civilization, and this belief can blind to concrete examples of regress over time. "Despite the aforementioned mind-boggling computing hardware advancements, there remains enormous love for the N64, and other old computing devices. The Analogue 3D, an FPGA implementation of original N64 hardware, released in 2025. Similarly, the ModRetro M64 (another such implementation) released in 2026."
2
23
2
147
24,406
A Flock of Meese retweeted
“Near the zero point” — unstructured stream rambling about my excitement for N64 (M64) programming, demoscene & retro dev, LLMs / vibecoding, modern programming culture, and where useful / interesting work lies
56
53
16
843
90,690
A Flock of Meese retweeted
Replying to @BlueHarvey1
Deep specialization in gamedev creates an echo chamber of inherited assumptions and mental models. Real breakthroughs require an outsider to shatter that frame.
3
48
2,113
Meese Engine on the Wii now released on GitHub, surpassing the render distance of Minecraft legacy console edition on the PS3 and Xbox 360. Also available on GameCube.
14
72
1
1,162
39,633
A Flock of Meese retweeted
Replying to @_ThisSiteSucks
So allocating thousands of times in a single frame is way more costly than meshing and I/O scheduling? I'd rather not pay that opportunity cost. xitter.cf/meesedev/status/205128…
Meanwhile, Meese Engine can stream from disk at hypersonic speeds on an office laptop, at a pure 60 FPS with a render distance of 64 chunks.
1
3
100
4,596
A Flock of Meese retweeted
Replying to @atalocke
If apps were built under tight constraints like a GameCube, then the impossible becomes reality, as shown in this video. The performance gap between the average and best software will only continue to grow because devs underestimate the cost of compounding technical debt.
4
6
186
6,973
Hot take: Stack vs heap is irrelevant. Fine, you pay an initial cost at the beginning. Who cares. Memory access patterns and time complexity dominate costs in most cases.
std::vector always heap allocates. std::array can't change size. For decades, there's been no standard container that gives you a dynamically sized array with a compile-time capacity limit and zero heap allocation C++26 finally adds std::inplace_vector. Guess where they got the idea 🧵👇
6
82
8,978
Meese Engine running on a real GameCube and CRT TV. Wii release is coming soon!
8
34
2
785
11,234
If apps were built under tight constraints like a GameCube, then the impossible becomes reality, as shown in this video. The performance gap between the average and best software will only continue to grow because devs underestimate the cost of compounding technical debt.
I believe one reason for the bloat in modern applications is that we build them on powerful computers, which hide coding inefficiencies. Unfortunately, IDEs and development tools also demand top-tier machines because they consume significant resources. Although the comparison may not be entirely fair, I often think about the simple chat function of ICQ from two decades ago versus Microsoft Teams today. Teams offers far more features and built-in security, but ICQ still outshines it in basic chat performance and responsiveness. I remember running ICQ on an Intel 90 MHz single-core machine with 64 MB of RAM on Windows 95. It launched instantly and the chat functionality worked seamlessly. In contrast, Teams can take several seconds, sometimes even minutes, to start up and often freezes on my 64 GB, Intel 3.0 GHz, 16-core machine. I suspect many people feel the same frustration with modern software. So where did things go off track? ICQ was developed in 1996 under very tight constraints, which forced the developers to build an extremely efficient program. Any memory leak would have been immediately noticeable., the program simply wouldn’t run properly, forcing a fix. High CPU usage would cause the system to freeze, pushing developers to optimize or find creative ways to work within those limits. I often wonder how efficient modern applications could be if they were developed under similar constraints. Such limitations would push us to prioritize coding efficiency. Memory leaks or excessive CPU usage, issues that might otherwise go unnoticed on powerful machines,,would surface during development. I’m not opposed to high-end machines. But I do think developers could benefit from occasionally working in constrained environments. While increasing resource requirements may sometimes be necessary to unlock software’s full potential, I’m not convinced we truly understand where that threshold lies. Not to mention, it becomes difficult to stay productive on a standard computer with modern IDEs.
23
146
5
3,439
154,190
A Flock of Meese retweeted
To be clear, Meese Engine has several extra unused CPU cores in most consumer hardware, free to use. The performance delta doesn't magically go away once you introduce complex world generation. As for lighting and shadows: xitter.cf/meesedev/status/195996…
Upgraded terrain generation with thicker forests in my voxel engine.
4
1
96
3,908
A Flock of Meese retweeted
So you're telling me you need GPU acceleration to solve loading hitches, only to still end up with 20 frame drops in that video (~1 hitch per second), at 125 m/s and a render distance of ~32 chunks. All that for what Meese Engine does in a single worker thread on the CPU (i.e. low utilization), at 2048 m/s and a render distance of 64 chunks. That's not just an apples to orange comparison. If anything, Meese Engine in its handicapped state still crushes the benchmark.
4
2
59
3,083
Garbage collection is still unfit for demanding games: 1. GC requires ~2x the memory footprint to achieve equivalent performance to an game using manual memory management. 2. GC consumes extra threads and memory bandwidth that could've been used for the game. 3. ZGC trades off throughput for latency. In layman's terms, your game will run slower, but at least you won't have lag spikes.
Won't forcing Generational ZGC solve most of the garbage collection stutters? Also Sodium mod completely rewrites rendering and it works incredible. Risks should be taken at this point imo, people should not need an optimization modpack to play the game in proper performance.
5
7
1
155
16,822
Correction: ZGC reduces the chance of hitching. It does not fully eliminate hitching.
26
2,049
Minecraft clone gameplay on a real GameCube. The download for this is on my website, linked in my profile. Unlike Minecraft legacy console edition, the world is truly infinite in size.
16
86
8
995
33,341