[Request for deletion]
Yeah, I know. But in the previous forums she was asking why we weren't using DirectX.
Quote from: Yonkey on October 27, 2003, 11:37:54 AM
Yeah, I know. But in the previous forums she was asking why we weren't using DirectX.
I thought Jeysie was against using DirectX ???
But then, she wasn't too much in favor of the OpenGL either. IIRC, It's the whole 3D acceleration she had a problem with.
No, she said that her card only supports up to DirectX 8. And that OpenGL ran really slow on her computer. But yeah, it's the 3D accelerated thing that's the problem, it doesn't matter if it's OpenGL or DirectX, if the video card doesn't support it, it will be slow & choppy regardless. :-\
That's just it. OpenGL is supported on more platforms and versions than DirectX. This means, in theory more people will be able to use it. :)
So you're using the better one. End of discussion 8)
I think the problem is that my video card is fast with software acceleration, but not hardware acceleration. Dunno what that means for the various formats.
Quote from: Storm on October 27, 2003, 11:36:36 AMActually, I think she meant the compatibility argument thread.
Not one of my finest, I must say ::)
Yes, I did. And I thought you handled yourself fairly well, considering. I mean, I'm all for OS choice, and making sure a program is coded to be easily portable to different OSes. But if doing each port is still going to take a long time, you need to port to the OS that the most people use first, namely Windows. It's a choice between getting *something* out there now, and making everyone wait.
Not to mention, there are several programs designed for using Windows programs on other OSes, especially Linux. You'd think they'd be used to using such software by now, if they can't stand the wait.
And... open-sourcing an adventure game? How? You can't effectively open-source something unless it's either something that won't be ruined by seeing all the code in development, or something modular that can be released in separate parts. An adventure game is neither. Geez, what a nut. Oh, well, it's irrelevant, now. :)
(I could open up another can of worms by commenting on an adventure game that uses 3D accelerated images, but AFAIK doesn't really seem to take advantage of 3D positioning possibilities, but I won't. ;) Unless it does, in which case I'll keep the worms well contained.)
Peace & Luv, Liz
Yeah, but that whole argument was rather pointless to begin with, especially after Cesar said how things are going to go. I really should learn to just ignore guys like that :P
"Just 64MB"? Mine is only 4MB, according to my DirectX diagnostics. :'( (sigh) Someday, someday.
Edit: And I got it flipped... software is slower, hardware is faster for me. Maybe the SC2 port uses software rendering OpenGL drivers, and that's why it's so slow for me...
Peace & Luv, Liz
Quote from: Jeysie on October 27, 2003, 02:40:09 PM
"Just 64MB"? Mine is only 4MB, according to my DirectX diagnostics. :'( (sigh) Someday, someday.
4MB :o Wow, now I can visualize how choppy the game'll be for you. I'm not going to say it won't work at all, because I told you how I was still able to run it. Still, I suggest waiting for the beta testing. The code and graphics will be optimized then for slower computers.
Quote from: Jeysie on October 27, 2003, 02:40:09 PM
Edit: And I got it flipped... software is slower, hardware is faster for me. Maybe the SC2 port uses software rendering OpenGL drivers, and that's why it's so slow for me...
Yeah, I wasn't going to say anything, but if you take any Computer Engineering courses you learn that hardware performs way faster than software, or rather software trying to emulate hardware. I guess mainly because most, if not all the calculatons are done with the video card's GPU (designed specifically to process them), and not the computer's main CPU and memory.
Quote from: Yonkey on October 27, 2003, 02:58:45 PM4MB :o Wow, now I can visualize how choppy the game'll be for you. I'm not going to say it won't work at all, because I told you how I was still able to run it. Still, I suggest waiting for the beta testing. The code and graphics will be optimized then for slower computers.
Heh, joy. ;) If you want me to beta-test for you guys when the time comes, I'd be willing to give it a shot and apply. Aside from my dismal specs, I'm really good at bending games by thinking up weird and bizarre things to try out. ;)
Quote from: Yonkey on October 27, 2003, 02:58:45 PMYeah, I wasn't going to say anything, but if you take any Computer Engineering courses you learn that hardware performs way faster than software, or rather software trying to emulate hardware. I guess mainly because most, if not all the calculatons are done with the video card's GPU (designed specifically to process them), and not the computer's main CPU and memory.
Yeah, I do know that much about video stuff. :) (I'm good with software, usually, but hardware has always given me some pause.) I thought my memory seemed a little odd, so I pulled out my DXDiag program to check to make sure. (Plus I wanted to find out my memory specs... the ones for my video card, that is. I already know my cerebral memory could use an upgrade. ;D)
Peace & Luv, Liz
You're not making me feel very reassured here, Yonkey. ;) Out of curiousity, are you guys going to make use of the 3D element, or is this just a "2D adventure with 3D graphics"?
At any rate, I have an AMD-K6-3D 350MHz with MMX. I believe it's the rough equivalent of a P2. And I have 128MB of RAM. Yay.
Peace & Luv, Liz
Again, aren't y'all being a bit premature? ::)
It's hard to know how well the game's going to run on each and every system, especially if the game isn't even completed.
Quote from: Jeysie on October 27, 2003, 04:42:09 PM
You're not making me feel very reassured here, Yonkey. ;) Out of curiousity, are you guys going to make use of the 3D element, or is this just a "2D adventure with 3D graphics"?
It's hard to say. In the demo I could move the camera around, zoom in and out, but I know the camera will be fixed in the actual game so it's more like a "2D adventure with 3D graphics". There may be camera movements in conversations and cutscenes, maybe even a zoom when you pick up or examine objects.
This is really a question Cesar or Rich should answer because I don't really know what's going in the game and what's not. I do know a lot of the 3D will be faked since the camera will be fixed. For example, instead of designing a whole 3D world of a location, we would just have a 2D plane as a background as large as the camera view. So it would look like there's a whole landscape, but really it's just a piece of one. If you were able to move the camera or walk through the plane, you'd see the other side is empty.
So, since this isn't like a first person shooter, where the camera is moving a lot and everything has to have an external surface because of all the ways you can view it, it may not be as graphic intensive. This is why the game may run on slower computers.
Wasn't it already said the game is going to be full 3D, only with a fixed camera? ???
The "2D adventure with 3D graphics" is more like regular 2D with pre-rendered 3D sprites, not something using a 3D engine.
Hmm. I guess what I meant more is... it seems like all the adventure games nowadays are moving to 3D... but the "pure" ones are only using it for eye candy.
Personally I've always thought 2D graphics were far prettier than 3D (although I'll be quite happy to have the KQ9 team surprise me and blow my socks off...), so if adventure game makers are going to move to 3D, I wish they'd *use* the 3D. Make being able to peek around corners, go over or under things, look under or around things, and stuff like that important to exploring and solving puzzles. There's gotta be a way to do it without turning things into an action-adventure.
If game developers aren't going to fully utilize the 3D aspects, I kinda wish they'd stick to 2D... better graphics, less interface wackiness, less system requirements, and it's gotta be easier to program. Well... maybe full 3D for your next adventure game. ;D
Peace & Luv, Liz
I never played MoE, but was it something like that? I mean able to freely explore in three dimensions? It wouldn't work in this game because there are far too many lands, details and objects to explore. ;D
Also, it was decided years ago that this game would be screen-to-screen (like traditional adventure games), in 3D and have a 3rd person view. 8)
I'm playing this one weird action adventure called Darkened Skye. It certainly has some interesting approaches to its puzzles, though sadly it makes you have to beat monsters. On the other hand, different spells work on different creatures, so that is still a bit of a puzzle. And it is humorous (kinda sarcastic sometimes) and at least has a few breaks between killing monsters, so it isn't all bad.
All the same, I prefer good old fashioned adventure games so I don't have to worry about shooting Pterodactyls with a "sniper" staff.
I have to admit I love the free exploration aspect of many action games (particularly the 3D ones), it's all the rest of stuff that requires coordination that I hate. :P
Peace & Luv, Liz
Quote from: Storm on October 27, 2003, 05:04:31 PM
Wasn't it already said the game is going to be full 3D, only with a fixed camera? ???
Yes Storm, thats the idea as far as I know.
[shadow=gray,right,bottom]A 4MB Video Card? :suffer:
Sorry ;) Why don't you just get a better card? You can upgrade substantially for next to nothing[/shadow]
Unfortunately I can't. My current video card is built into the motherboard, and there's no separate AGP slot available for me to install a different card to override the built-in one. :P
Peace & Luv, Liz
Dang, that's not good...
*hands Jeysie a $40 motherboard with AGP slots*
Hee. I appreciate the gesture, Bushie, but pretty much *everything* is built into my motherboard, so the only way for me to upgrade anything besides my RAM, CD drive, Zip drive, or hard drive, is to get a new 'puter. :P (Well, I probably could upgrade my modem or sound card with some headache-worthy tweaking, but there's not much need.)
Actually, what I could use is a new floppy drive... mine seems to have died out. So much for easy access to testing webpages on my roomie's IE6 installation. :P :P
Peace & Luv, Liz
I've got 32Mb on my video card. I hope I'm safe :-\
This is close enough to the topic. Will there be 3Dnow!, MMX, or (that new/old set of instructions that I know nothing about, SSE?) support? Will it take advantage of dual CPUs or 64bit CPUs(I'm guessing no to both)?
Also, will there be Pixel and Vertex Shader support(I think I know the answer, but I wanted to hear it from Phoenix)?
I don't care about the speed too much, I've played games that REQUIRED a 3Dcard without one(I squeezed by with MMX). My computer can play all the games made at the moment(until Doom3 is finished), so I assume I'll be able to play the game at a decent speed.
Lol, I'm pretty sure it will run faster than that. ;-D I don't even tweak my computer that much and it can run games like Ryzom in Win98SE at 30 fps. It helps to have very few unneccessary programs running at a time. ;)
Quote from: Louisiana Night on May 31, 2004, 10:07:25 PM
Will it take advantage of dual CPUs or 64bit CPUs(I'm guessing no to both)?
As far as I know, the O/S is what controls dual CPU's and not specific programs. Since the game will work on Windows XP Pro and higher, I would guess the answer is yes to both questions. 8)
I have:
256MB ATI radeon 9800
dual 4.2 GHz P4
180GB Serial HD
1GB DDRAM
is that good enough or do I need a liquid nitrogen cooling system?
Quote from: grundy on June 03, 2004, 06:22:08 AMYou can disable any 'on-board' devices in your BIOS settings.
As dumb as this sounds... believe it or not there is just no way to get into my computer's BIOS. I own a Compaq. :P
It may not matter... *if* I can stay employed (and actually get some decent hours :P ) I might actually have enough money to buy a new computer by the end of the year anyway. I hope. (I need a new computer for more reasons than just games, anyway.)
Peace & Luv, Liz
Quote from: GunHoMac on June 03, 2004, 11:42:41 AM
I have:
256MB ATI radeon 9800
dual 4.2 GHz P4
180GB Serial HD
1GB DDRAM
is that good enough or do I need a liquid nitrogen cooling system?
You know, I've being in the 3D Industry for many years, so believe it or not, my System is still better than yours! ;P XB
Oh and Jeysie, you can get around the annoying Compaq boot screen and get into the BIOS, I used to own a Compaq many Years AGO! It was a 200Mhz Pentium, WOO! But yes, there are ways to edit the bios.
Step one. Grab the Compaq
Step two. Open your window
Step three. Take Aim
Step Four. Throw your Compaq over the back fence
Step five. Buy a new System
Step six. Build a system yourself, or get someone who knows how to help, because buying namebrand computers costs you twice as much as they're worth.
Step seven, Like six, never buy a Compaq again!
;B
lol!! you know, that is what I would do too!! ...that is if I had the money to buy parts ; )
Hee! Grundy, two thoughts:
1. I did own this Compaq YEARS ago, so to speak... I bought it back in 1997. Took me three years to pay off the damn thing because my luck with jobs has been horrible... and I've been dying to get a new one since then, but haven't been able to because, well, my luck with jobs (and thus paychecks) is still horrible. Which brings me to...
2. Wire me ~$2000 USD, and the pleasure of throwing my current computer out the window is all yours. ;)
Actually, I'll probably keep this "old" computer around. I have this idea of using it for learning website stuff by clogging it up with browsers and trying to figure out how to install a web server on it for testing purposes, so I can keep my "real" system clean. ;) (As it is, I'm going to have to re-install IE6 on my current system so I can do some testing... BOO HISS!)
I'm definitely going to build my own computer next time. I have no idea *how* I'm going to do it since my hardware knack/knowledge is virtually nil and I don't personally know any offline hardware gurus, but I'll manage somehow. (For instance, I know precisely jack about motherboards! :P )
Actually, there is a PC boutique nearby that looks interesting and offers to build systems... the main problem is that I want to build a Win98 box because there's no way I'm touching WinXP, so I'd have to wrangle that out with somebody. Grah.
Peace & Luv, Liz
If you're trying to find something cheap, and want to limit the amount of flustration(building PC from scratch), I recommend a bare bone system. Tiger Direct wiuld be a good place to look(if you don't mind S&H), they have good sales. Pricewatch has cheaper prices(it's an advertising company), but you'd have to look at the companys(not Pricewatch's) policies.
Pricewatch (http://www.pricewatch.com)
Tiger Direct (http://www.tigerdirect.com/)
Quote from: grundy on June 03, 2004, 06:22:08 AM
Lets GUESS some Recommended system requirements then...
700Mhz CPU, 64MB Video Card, 128MB RAM...
Now lets GUESS some Ideal system requirements then...
1.3Ghz CPU, 128MB Video Card, 512MB RAM...
Now you've just made me hope KQ9 won't be released for another 2 years or so... 'cause there's no way in hell I'll have a computer like this earlier than that :(
What are your system specs?
400Mhz CPU, 32MB Video Card, 192MB RAM :(
I know that's lower than the engine's requirements... don't know excatly what it means for the game, but it can't be good :-\
Storm's computer kicks my computer's butt, unfortunately. :P
Peace & Luv, Liz
my laptop have trouble with running the newer games (ie. i have opengl problems) so if i can't use my laptop i have the same system specs as storm (bit less actually ; \ )
Anyone that is planning on upgrading(and buying parts seperately).
These are my opinions, and I know there are MANY people that disagree.
Buy AMD, not Intel (AMD=cheaper,faster,better)-CPU
Nvidia(Geforce) is better at OpenGL-GPU
ATI(Radion) is better for DirectX-GPU
Buy DDR(fast,cheap), not RD(wont work with AMD, expensive), or SD(old,cheap)
Extras(audio,video,lan,modem,etc) are better off the motherboard
Extras(audio,video,lan,modem,etc) are cheaper on the motherboard
Lite-On and Samsung make good, cheap CD-drives/burners.
LCDs are bad for action games, and expensive
Don't buy IBM hardrives(I think that's the right company)
Refurbished products are far cheaper(but I don't trust them)
There were a few more things, but I forgot what they were. Everyone that cares to, add to/edit the info.
I had a long conversation with a few people on the team last week, including Cesar, and, as I guessed, the game is aimed at higher-end systems...
I recommended 700Mhz CPU 512MB RAM 128 Video Card...
It will most likely be recommended that you have atleast a
1Ghz CPU
256MB RAM
64-128MB Video Card...
But don't fret!
A new system, especially to meet these specs, is easily affordable these days. For example...
I can setup a complete system that is WELL OVER the recommended specs for the game, everything accept a monitor ( because they last longer and you don't always need a new one. ).
This system only cost $840 Australian!
-AMD Athlon XP2500+ 1.83GHz
-ASUS A7V8X-MX Mobo ( With onboard Audio. )
-Apacer 256MB 333MHz PC2700 RAM
-S-Media Radeon 9200 128MB Video Card
-Maxtor-Quantum 40GB 7200rpm Hard Drive
-AOpen KF-45 Miditower ATX with 250W PSU
-AOpen 56x Internal CD Drive
-Microsoft BLACK Multimedia keyboard +
-Black Intellimouse Bundle PS/2
ALL THIS! For only $840!
and in US Dollars, thats only about $550-600!
"OMGWTF" you say?
You could even save more money if you keep the cd drives, mouse and keyboard and case from your old computer.... you could get a system for as little as $600 Australian ( $400 US )...
Now everyone, don't start whining about system requirements! :P
Believe it or not, but even I can't afford to spend even $400 on hardware. I'm having a hard time paying the rent atm as it is :(
Also, even if I COULD find all those components here, I doubt they'll cost the same :-\
Guess I'll just have to use someone else's computer ::)
I'm in a similar boat as Storm... I'm likely better off, but still not enough so to have $400 for a computer. Otherwise I would have bought one already. ;P
Plus, I need a computer with a DVD-R drive at minimum, and possibly a DVD drive, too. I really would like to get my VHS collection in some kind of shape, and I do a lot of "tape" trading. So a bare bones computer won't cut it. :P
And I don't know anyone with a better computer (Harrison's has pretty much the same specs as mine)... at least, no one whose I could use for the length of time required to play an adventure game.
Peace & Luv, Liz
Are we talking about the same thing? I'm talking about a case,motherboard,power supply, and maybe a few extras. You'd add the rest yourself. I don't like hooking up motherboards, it bothers me.
Grundy was talking about building a whole system. I guess "bare bones" was a bad term in my own post... "basic" might have been better. I need more than a basic computer, so it's going to cost a fair bit more.
I'm not sure that building the thing is as much of an issue for me, since I do know of a boutique nearby. It's just a matter of having enough moolah for the parts.
Peace & Luv, Liz
When you get enough money to buy the parts, just tell me. If you tell me what parts you're looking for, I might be able to find them cheaper than most(including S&H, but if you lived near a frys that would be better). I also look at their policies(in case something goes wrong)
, so I normally don't just buy the cheapest thing I can find. I recommend you don't either.
P.S. I'm not sure that's how you spell Frys.
No Frys stores anywhere in my area, I'm afraid.
I'll keep in mind your offer, thank you. :) I don't anticipate doing any computer shopping until the end of the year, though. Even if I technically have the money before then, my job and home situation are nebulous enough that I want to get a good "stockpile" in the bank before considering anything major "disposable income". :P
Peace & Luv, Liz