Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

60% Positive

Analyzed from 2002 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#git#perforce#game#company#while#version#used#don#little#svn

Discussion (77 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

ChrisMarshallNYabout 10 hours ago
If you are using Perforce as an enterprise system, $500 is peanuts. Perforce can get pricey.

We used to be a Perforce shop, in my last job.

However, I continue to be amazed that Perforce survived Git. I assume its ability to handle large binaries has been what saved it.

I seem to remember an HN posting, some time ago, about a new system, aimed at creatives, and that handles big binaries. It looked fairly good, but not sure how it’s doing.

a-dubabout 9 hours ago
> If you are using Perforce as an enterprise system, $500 is peanuts. Perforce can get pricey.

i think it was $600/seat back when i paid attention (20+ years ago). don't remember if it was perpetual or annual.

> However, I continue to be amazed that Perforce survived Git. I assume its ability to handle large binaries has been what saved it.

yeah i think it lives on in games probably mostly through inertia. last i looked the company itself had shifted away from p4 classic to some git wrapper stuff.

i've never actually seen it but my understanding is that google's custom internal system (piper) basically is a reimplemented scalable p4+g4 wrapper.

i always thought the workspace mapping and workspace template model in p4 was pretty elegant, especially for things like embedded platforms where you could opt in and out various subtrees which made very large device trees/bsps more manageable.

also they were the first widely deployed vcs system that attempted to be efficient (server side indices for local tree state and communication with the server in deltas rather than forcing complete rescans for every operation that often involved talking to the server as each file was scanned)

khursabout 9 hours ago
>I seem to remember an HN posting, some time ago...

Was 31 days ago... and it's Epic backed rather than a sole indie dev so likely to mature.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48571081

nylonstrungabout 10 hours ago
You're probably thinking of Lore by Epic Games which was announced recently and seems to be well-received so far and natively supported by Unreal Engine
ChrisMarshallNYabout 10 hours ago
Yup. That’s it.

I remember when one of the engines (either Unreal or Unity), shipped with Perforce included.

flohofwoeabout 9 hours ago
There was also PlasticSCM, which was acquired by Unity a while back. I'm hearing differing opinions about whether it's good or bad though.

https://www.plasticscm.com/

https://unity.com/features/version-control

jordandabout 9 hours ago
Yeah there's no good alternative Version Control right now that can handle large binaries. And for Lore from Epic Games, while it's still 2-3 years away from being suitable for Game productions to replace Perforce, there's genuine interest and excitement about using/testing it (in some cases, studios are spending tens of thousands on P4 licenses they don't really want). Lore is already used at scale in UEFN across a huge user base so the core tech behind it is solid and trusted.
sam_lowry_about 7 hours ago
git lfs?
ChrisMarshallNYabout 7 hours ago
From what I understand (I don't use it, myself, so this is hearsay), Git LFS is unsuitable for the kinds of assets used by creative studios.
blagieabout 7 hours ago
> However, I continue to be amazed that Perforce survived Git. I assume its ability to handle large binaries has been what saved it.

Curiously enough, the git data model is ideal for handling large binaries. The place it crashes-and-burns is the user space.

aitchnyuabout 8 hours ago
Feels like a captive audience. My tiny company paid a buggy Github competitor even in 2019 and they hiked prices like crazy. They did have a brand new project that deployed multiple projects to our own VPS with zero downtime.
forrestthewoodsabout 10 hours ago
> However, I continue to be amazed that Perforce survived Git.

Virtually 100% of non-indie devs use Perforce.

Is Perforce good? Ehhh not really. It’s been stagnant for 15 years.

Is Git capable of meeting game dev needs? It’s not enough close. No Git LFS does not count.

Personally I think even Git is mediocre at best. But it’s all modern devs know. So there’s been very little progress towards version control that doesn’t suck. Very sad.

Hopefully Epic’s Lore is good. Low odds. But not zero! And hey at least they’re trying.

lazypenguinabout 10 hours ago
Agreed, in my experience VCS still an unsolved problem for gaming. Git/SVN/Perforce are picked not because they’re the best but because there’s really nothing else. My team uses git for code and SVN for assets and it sort of sucks. I’m keeping an eye on lore and while it has great potential it’s still immature and under resourced (seems like side project at Epic from what insights I can gather)
invaderabout 7 hours ago
> Virtually 100% of non-indie devs use Perforce.

Not really. There are better products out there.

When I worked at Triple-A studio, we used Alienbrain, which is specifically tailored for huge binary versioning with previews and stuff. We had terabytes of assets, and Alienbrain handled it well, including seamless integration into pipelines - something a stock git or Perforce would never achieve.

StilesCrisisabout 3 hours ago
Blizzard? I've never heard of Alienbrain used elsewhere.
dijitabout 9 hours ago
not sure why this is flagged, the accidental omission of “game” devs can’t be it. it’s extremely true that game devs either use perforce, or they’re trying to use SVN because their company is cheap… perforce is strictly superior to SVN and miles better than GitLFS- and they’ve been sitting on that fact for over a decade.

I think they must have some kind of patent protection because their software is buggy too.. i have no idea how this company can survive with what is, honestly, an unfinished product and a directionless, soulless and bloated organisation attached to it…

… but it is the industry standard in game dev and automotive …

what a lucky position to be in.

traceroute66about 9 hours ago
> i have no idea how this company can survive with what is, honestly, an unfinished product and a directionless, soulless and bloated organisation attached to it…

Some might say you could say that about Microsoft too. :)

LtWorfabout 10 hours ago
No no. I know SVN and mercurial as well. Git is better. And normally when someone pushes a huge file it means they compiled something on their machine and are placing it on git, which is something that raises all the alarm bells for me.
flohofwoeabout 9 hours ago
You want to have your original art files (before they enter the asset pipeline) in the VCS (photoshop images, 3d models, maybe even videos), basically *all* files associated with the game project. Those source asset files are usually in the 5..20 MByte range, and up to 100 MByte isn't all that unusual either. Git (even with the LFS crutch) completely breaks down in such a scenario because it was designed for handling mainly text (while in game dev projects at most 1..5% of all source data is text (by number of files, several orders of magnitude less by size). Even good ole SVN is much better in that scenario than git (assuming you run SVN on a big, dedicated inhouse server).
rcxdudeabout 10 hours ago
Except in game dev where you want to version control your art assets as well.
ChrisMarshallNYabout 10 hours ago
> Virtually 100% of non-indie GAME devs use Perforce.

FTFY. Git is likely the system used by almost every non game pro shop out there. Paranoid ones self-host.

Linus changed the world twice, and Git may have more impact, overall, than Linux (arguably).

Not bad, for a 10-day yak-shave project.

pjmlpabout 10 hours ago
Which would have failed had it been developed by someone else, without being a requirement for Linux kernel development.
momocowcowabout 9 hours ago
Im amazed git survived at all. Such a mess of complexity and exotic jargon to abstract away something that should be inherently simple. After 20 years I can use it with ease thanks to llms.
superb_devabout 9 hours ago
I genuinely think you have to be trying to not pick up git after 20 years. Have a little more faith in yourself, it's not super complicated
ndriscollabout 7 hours ago
It is inherently simple? It's a couple tools to manipulate a graph of snapshots. You can make commits, checkout commits, make/move references to commits, diff commits, and apply diffs to commits. If you wrap your head around that you've pretty much mastered it.
pxmpxmabout 7 hours ago
I love that comments like these incept million tech bro look-at-my-clout responses for having learned some subset of the magic incantations to make git barely usable... As if you get an award for mental heuristics to put up with a poorly architected product with leaky abstraction all over.

If you mentions reflogs, i'm yelling bingo.

Bonus points: You have 3 new commits and in one there is a change in file.stupid, how many git bs things does it take to revert file.stupid to previous version while keeping the rest of the change set.

Hendriktoabout 9 hours ago
That just means you did not really try for 20 years.
mrigheleabout 7 hours ago
UI wise git sucks. The its commands are barely related to what they do, and that little makes sense only if you have in mind the underlying storage model (which is by itself a sign of bad UI).

Almost any other version control tool I have used in my life make more sense that git.

There are many reason for why git won, being able to use it without having to look up commands is not one of them.

dijitabout 8 hours ago
Come now, lets be real.

How many esoteric tools are needed for proper development?

“save my file” should not need a phd level awareness of the save model, yet it seems to because its so easy to fall off the happy path.

uf00lmeabout 10 hours ago
This tends to be the kind of thing you can get thrown in for free when negotiating. It's highly unlikely to be a deal breaker for anyone buying Perforce, if anything they may have done this to stop annoying cheap customers buying from them.
toshabout 7 hours ago
here is a free version of the first 4 chapters

https://training.perforce.com/learn/courses/536/p4-helix-cor...

TZubiriabout 11 hours ago
I was like 10 minutes deep into the free version when I noticed that a couple of weird things could be attributed to the 'narrator' being a ChatGPT like speech synth.

1- The voice is not consistent across different videos. 2- Once in a while it does that thing where it sounds like a demon and changes the voice profile to a completely different person for a little while. 3- There's weird... pauses... that in some cases make sense, but in some cases it's just completely non-sensical "this is a very useful... feature" or "looking at your issue that you are... raising to them", it sounds like someone reading a Charles Bukowski poem. This happens the most often, once you see it it's like those optical illusion things where you can't unsee it.

One cannot spend too much time evaluating products, and I feel that I have seen all that I needed to see, how good can a product of a company that does this be? And to charge 500$ for the complete course?

I don't quite get it. Like is it really easier to generate a video with fake AI narration than just narrating it yourself? I think it would even be harder, only to make your reputation and brand 1000% worse? And the act of showcasing a free version of the course to 'get a taste of it', when in reality I'm guessing most would see the red flags and back away, thanks I guess.

I just don't get it.

Hnrobert42about 8 hours ago
Having made training videos, doing a voice recording is a huge pain in the ass. So easy to flub and have to edit or re-record. Hard to maintain even pace. I haven't tried AI generated voices, but doing it manually is difficult.
exe34about 10 hours ago
If it's all ai generated, it's only fair if I use STT to convert it and have an LLM summarise it back to what might have been the original bullet points used to make the training video. Or just send me the prompt.
fluoridationabout 8 hours ago
It's TTS. That doesn't mean the text wasn't written by a human.
exe3440 minutes ago
Oh suddenly AI isn't fair.
nubgabout 11 hours ago
The problem being? If the content is good enough and the narration fine (it took you a while to even notice), why does it matter?

> Like is it really easier to generate a video with fake AI narration than just narrating it yourself?

Yes?

Also, they can iterate quicker (don't have to rerecord if content changes).

MiroslavPokornyabout 10 hours ago
Maybe its me, but having a human narrate the text is one part of a guarantee that shows an actual team of a few experts took the time to prepare the text and review the finished product.
B-Conabout 10 hours ago
A human reader for a popular product is generally a paid actor who reads the script nearly verbatim, not a domain expert, so it has no bearing on the technical quality of the script.
dannersyabout 10 hours ago
You may be correct, but from a user experience and product standpoint, you'll never get around the fact that if something doesn't feel real then it will also feel less quality and thus less valuable. Whether you like this about the human experience or not is irrelevant, since they are selling something they expect humans to use and buy, and one would hope they'd want their customers to come away from it feeling like they got their money's worth.
thranceabout 10 hours ago
A human voice is just a marker that some effort and care went into the making of this video. With AI voices, it's lazy slop more often than not.
jstanleyabout 10 hours ago
I too judge books by their covers.
HPsquaredabout 10 hours ago
It's all information that feeds into the Bayesian.
mattmaroonabout 10 hours ago
Everyone does. That’s why publishers put care into cover art.
iamsaitamabout 10 hours ago
Commitment. The chances it's sloppy content are much higher when the presentation costs very little.
dspillettabout 10 hours ago
> If the content is good enough and the narration fine (it took you a while to even notice), why does it matter?

I tend to assume that the production has been cheaper but they aren't passing any of the saving on to me. They are pushing the human out of the loop for the bottom line, and there is no benefit to anyone but the company.

ML/AI is a bonus for society in many things like medical scanning, helping the blind interact with the world, etc, but nobody is using AI voiceovers like this example for anything other than helping the company's bottom line by avoiding paying people.

The great displacement isn't just coming, it is here and happening all around us. I for one am doing what (very little) I can to avoid helping it along and that includes refusing AI generated content wherever practical. I'll accept it from a small local business that possibly has little other choice ATM, because of they pay for someone to do the job they'll probably use generative AI anyway, but not from a larger company.

dolebirchwoodabout 10 hours ago
I've subscribed to paid courses in the past, and sometimes the speaker's voice would be so off-putting that it would really drag down the quality of the experience (looking at you, Steve Kinney). I'd have paid extra to have an option to replace with an AI voice.
tjpnzabout 9 hours ago
It's a strong signal that the person or organization "creating" said video views the person consuming it with open contempt.
paganelabout 10 hours ago
The problem is that I personally have a visceral hate against AI-voices.
wkjagtabout 10 hours ago
Same for me. And it's not even rational. Even if I know the information is good, I'm just so put off by it that I am unable to follow.
vascoabout 10 hours ago
And a coffee place near me charges €10 for a strawberry matcha drink, but we don't have to purchase either.
lifestyleguruabout 10 hours ago
You keep hearing and saying that you don't have to go there, then suddenly there is nowhere else to go because all places are like this.