Im making a 3d game, and have 2 ideas of how to render it:
1. Using clones
2. Pen extension
However, for a full screen, which would be faster, drawing everything (so i get a better 3d effect), or clones, where it would be 2d when shown.
Issues with both:
Pen: Having to draw the whole stage.
Clones: Running a script multiple times.
The goal is for it to run well on Scratch alone, so Turbowarp isn’t to be accounted for.
So, which would allow it to run faster, as its gonna render as much as a whole city.

GIitchInTheMatrix wrote:

Im making a 3d game, and have 2 ideas of how to render it:
1. Using clones
2. Pen extension
However, for a full screen, which would be faster, drawing everything (so i get a better 3d effect), or clones, where it would be 2d when shown.
Issues with both:
Pen: Having to draw the whole stage.
Clones: Running a script multiple times.
The goal is for it to run well on Scratch alone, so Turbowarp isn’t to be accounted for.
So, which would allow it to run faster, as its gonna render as much as a whole city.

Well, while in Turbo mode, the pen extension would be faster. But, generally, clones are faster. Really does depend on what the values are set to and how fast you set them to go.

Well, for low poly texture-less maps, pen is faster
https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/511165698/ is an example, it runs great.
For textured scenes with many different parts and lots of things in the scene, clones are better
https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/757339407/ this project for example uses clones and can support many objects at beautiful speeds.

The bad things about pen is that it has limited capability for realism and other things like that without turbowarp
The bad thing about clones is that they have perspective issues.