hows the 4x fsaa on a ti500? It didnt seem to make a difference in any res and in low res I could see the blurred edges, kinda annoying actually
hows the 4x fsaa on a ti500? It didnt seem to make a difference in any res and in low res I could see the blurred edges, kinda annoying actually
Trying AA or AF on any card lower than a Radeon 9500 pro is kinda pointless IMO - you get huge drops in FPS, even a Ti4600 will be way too slow for any game requiring any sort of immediate reaction to an event.
Actually, you can leave aniso on full blast for all radeon series cards. I've never turned it off since I got my 32DDR.
I remember reading that doom was going to support OGL 2.0, but I ALSO remember reading (more recently) that Id was bought my M$.Quote:
Originally posted by BL1NK
Doom3 Will be an OpenGL game :) Will it use openGL 2.0 thunderbird? hehe
We all remember what happened to HALO when Bungie was bought by the Evil Empire don't we?
I think it's a pretty safe bet that Doom will support DX8, and 9, and that it MIGHT still go OGL 2.0.
just thought i would say that HL was the Quake 1 engine, with Quake 2 optimizations and sections of code.Quote:
Originally posted by Alientank
7) Speculation is that HL2's engine is a heavily reworked Quake 3 engine. It makes sense, after all the immense success they had with the modified Quake 2 engine for Half life. I doubt it will have higher requirements then Doom 3 will.
i also like high resolutions as Thunderbird does - Aniso has never been off on any Radeon card i have used and FSAA has been fairly good on most cards since the 9xxx series and GF4 series of video cards. (performance losses aside)
i would usually take higher resolutions over FSAA unless either my monitor or the game does not support it. 2048x1536 on Q3 does look nice - unplayable (both in the framerate sense and the 'this is weird' sense) but nice nevertheless.
i always thought that Doom 3 would be OpenGL 2.0+ <-- ie "2.1"
as for Playability in Doom 3 - you actually think that iD are going to give up a huge percentage of their userbase if they do not make the Spec sheet fairly 'low grade'?
That's why ID has a wide variety of detail settings...so that settings and resolution can make it run on a variety of hardware...The highest settings are typically for VC's that don't exist yet when id comes out with a new engine showcase game.
Well, remembering *wayyyyyyyyy* back to when Quake 3 came out, IIRC it was definitely playable at lower resolutions, but it took another generation or two of cards before everyone started celebrating that it was playable at 1600x1200x32. So maybe Doom 3 will be that way, playable on GF3s but not able to show its full potential til a generation or two more down the road?
Like a Radeon 9800 for exampleQuote:
Originally posted by masteraleph
playable on GF3s but not able to show its full potential til a generation or two more down the road?
runs very, very well. I was playing through it earlier (Fatal1ty gave it to me) and I was getting 60+ fps in the corridors, and then the inevitable slow down as I came up on zombies/monsters.
This was at 4x aa and 8x ansio, but I don't know what res, I didn't change that.
I played all 3 maps too :D
:cue sound of big can of worms being opened:Quote:
Originally posted by Vizer
as for Playability in Doom 3 - you actually think that iD are going to give up a huge percentage of their userbase if they do not make the Spec sheet fairly 'low grade'?
A few thoughts: The longer it takes Id to release Doom3, the faster the average cpu/video card becomes, the less outlandish the requirements will seem.
You may have heard people in the media say that the general reluctance of people to upgrade their machines is the lack of a demanding killer app. Doom 3 could be that app. Id is in the unique position of being able to push the envelope a little.
When Quake3 was released it was ahead of the hardware, and I expect D3 to be the same. I happily played Q3 on a Celeron 400 with a Voodoo3. This was when 640x480 16bit color gaming was good stuff. I think anyone who believes their 2GHz machines are going to be running Doom3 at the highest rez/settings hasn't actually tried the alpha version. This is far more complex than anything released so far. My prediciton is what's considered a decent rig these days (2GHz, GF3) will be limited to 640x480 at the lowest settings for everything in order to achieve 30fps - this is more or less what Carmack said he's aiming for. As it is my system (1.4GHz, GF4) can get about 17fps until a bad guy appears and I slow to 2fps. If think people are expecting them to speed up the game far more than what's possible given how advanced the engine is.
Booom...shake...boom...shake...boom...shake...boom...shake (here comes alientank)Quote:
Originally posted by wavephorm
When Quake3 was released it was ahead of the hardware, and I expect D3 to be the same. I happily played Q3 on a Celeron 400 with a Voodoo3. This was when 640x480 16bit color gaming was good stuff. I think anyone who believes their 2GHz machines are going to be running Doom3 at the highest rez/settings hasn't actually tried the alpha version. This is far more complex than anything released so far. My prediciton is what's considered a decent rig these days (2GHz, GF3) will be limited to 640x480 at the lowest settings for everything in order to achieve 30fps - this is more or less what Carmack said he's aiming for. As it is my system (1.4GHz, GF4) can get about 17fps until a bad guy appears and I slow to 2fps. If think people are expecting them to speed up the game far more than what's possible given how advanced the engine is.
The rig at last years E3 was a 2.5 GHZ machine with a 9700. Don't forget about back in the day when it was first shown at that mac convention on a GF3.
um.........I had a rig, 366@550 celeron that ran quake3 at 1024x768 at 35fps and it wasnt high end, I think high end was 800eb pentium3 with a geforce ddr getting like 50fps in 1600x1200, high color or 75fps 32 bit color in 1024x768...........thats what radeon9700s will get in doom3, ill be running 1600x1200 but in 16 bit color :(
High End gaming machine when Quake3 FIRST came out was a PIII 600 (slot 1, not the coppermine) and either a TNT2 Ultra or a Voodoo3. People were arguing over which was better.;)
This was the hardware we had when it first came out and we were ALL struggling at 1024x768.
AND later, even when the Geforce DDR did come out. It didn't come close to 1600x1200x32 at 50fps.
Not until the Geforce 2 ULTRA did we see 50-60 fps at 1600x1200x32.
The GeforceDDR gave about 70fps at 1024x768x32 with a PIII coppermine at 840mhz.
A step up to a Radeon 32DDR back then gave 45fps at 1280x1024x32.
Tbird....please post FACTS only. Not assumptions.
can I have a PWND Pat?
thankies thankies :D