Supported hardware question

Advanced OpenGL source port fork from ZDoom, picking up where ZDoomGL left off.
[Home] [Download] [Git builds (Win)] [Git builds (Mac)] [Wiki] [Repo] [Bugs&Suggestions]

Moderator: Graf Zahl

User avatar
Enjay
Developer
Developer
Posts: 4751
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 23:19
Location: Scotland

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by Enjay »

Graf Zahl wrote:If the weather is good, for example I rather go cycling than programming.
Can't argue with that. I managed a nice little cycle (about 25 miles) myself today. :)


Thanks for the info.
User avatar
GuntherDW
Posts: 117
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 1:53
Location: Belgium, Antwerp

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by GuntherDW »

Graf Zahl wrote:Texture filtering is a basic feature of any 3D hardware so no need to remove it. The only thing I may dump from the old renderer is the shader code as people having to use the old renderer are most likely those who can't make proper use of shader effects anyway.
If you at least keep compatibility and try to not completely screw up linux support for the new renderer i (and a couple other) wouldn't mind i think.

i got the new renderer to compile (r393, going to try out the new code), if i didn't include the hirestex.cpp, but after spawing a load of warnings & errors about shader code it crashes
User avatar
Rachael
Developer
Developer
Posts: 3651
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 10:30

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by Rachael »

Enjay wrote:
Graf Zahl wrote:If the weather is good, for example I rather go cycling than programming.
Can't argue with that. I managed a nice little cycle (about 25 miles) myself today. :)
I used to enjoy such things... I've moved though and lost my bike. :(

That, and I've become much more nocturnal in nature. My whole life, I have never been able to enjoy the sun.
User avatar
Pluck101
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 14:43
Location: Sheffield Lake, Ohio

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by Pluck101 »

SoulPriestess wrote:
Enjay wrote:
Graf Zahl wrote:If the weather is good, for example I rather go cycling than programming.
Can't argue with that. I managed a nice little cycle (about 25 miles) myself today. :)
I used to enjoy such things... I've moved though and lost my bike. :(

That, and I've become much more nocturnal in nature. My whole life, I have never been able to enjoy the sun.
Tell me about it... daytime is overrated, i like the calm and quiet feeling of the night-time, just the humid yet cool air and the faint swoosh of cars driving past my house are enough to make me feel at peace... whoa, spaced out there for a bit... its 12:41AM rite now so i think i might depart from my bat-cave and take a quick stroll down the block... :)
Your future has become.... FORSAKEN!
dark-slayer-201
Posts: 149
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 14:31

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by dark-slayer-201 »

Pluck101 wrote: Tell me about it... daytime is overrated, i like the calm and quiet feeling of the night-time, just the humid yet cool air and the faint swoosh of cars driving past my house are enough to make me feel at peace... whoa, spaced out there for a bit... its 12:41AM rite now so i think i might depart from my bat-cave and take a quick stroll down the block... :)
oooh, i am not the only nocturnal person.
it is daytime here, but i have my window and closed, blind down, music up and my light off

oh, watch out for people who will try to steal ur stuff
User avatar
Nash
Developer
Developer
Posts: 1226
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:49
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by Nash »

Sorry I'm a little late in this thread. Graf, I've been following GZDoom since its very first release in 2005... I've enjoyed using it release after release.

I'm sure you already know that every now and then, I come in asking about "modern" rendering features... of which most of the responses are "it's difficult because the renderer has to be compatible with old hardware".

Now I'm not going to really expect that just because you start ditching old hardware and start rewriting the renderer, it is assumed that suddenly things like advanced lighting and shadows, or advanced texture effects like materials (specularity, bump, etc) are going to be in... because I know that that isn't your idea of Doom (which is totally fine, I respect that). I know all too well to not expect any of this... besides, you already said many times that you aren't really experienced with all this new-age fancy 3-d stuff.

But what I'd really like to say is - and I believe I've echoed the same when we were talking about branching off to create your own version of DoomScript - go for it.

If it's going to make things easier for you to code and maintain (which ultimately leads to a more fun experience... because I don't think "having to keep compatibility in exchange for improvements" sounds like fun at all). People with low end hardware can always play ZDoom. Or if they want a little "acceleration", then they can live with playing a fallback OpenGL renderer with basic features and maybe filtering but that's it. I mean, they really shouldn't expect to be able to see advanced renderer features on their old hardware.

If you asked me, I'd just tell you to go ahead. For the future of GZDoom. :)
User avatar
Graf Zahl
GZDoom Developer
GZDoom Developer
Posts: 7148
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:48
Location: Germany

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by Graf Zahl »

Nash wrote: Now I'm not going to really expect that just because you start ditching old hardware and start rewriting the renderer, it is assumed that suddenly things like advanced lighting and shadows,
Very unlikely indeed.
or advanced texture effects like materials (specularity, bump, etc) are going to be in... because I know that that isn't your idea of Doom (which is totally fine, I respect that). I know all too well to not expect any of this... besides, you already said many times that you aren't really experienced with all this new-age fancy 3-d stuff.
I am going to implement a material system (albeit a rather simple one) but once it's working - who knows? Having a properly defined system where you can define which textures to combine on a material along with a customizable shader - a lot of things may be possible.

If it's going to make things easier for you to code and maintain (which ultimately leads to a more fun experience... because I don't think "having to keep compatibility in exchange for improvements" sounds like fun at all).
No, definitely not. The old renderer has become close to unmaintainable and that's the main reason so few things have happened on the graphics side of things. And starting from scratch finally gives me an opportunity to work with some of the newfangled features like vertex buffers and such.
People with low end hardware can always play ZDoom. Or if they want a little "acceleration", then they can live with playing a fallback OpenGL renderer with basic features and maybe filtering but that's it. I mean, they really shouldn't expect to be able to see advanced renderer features on their old hardware.
That's the idea. As I already said in the other thread, I am not going to bother much with the shader support in the old renderer anymore - and once the new one is operational I am going to remove shader support from the old one completely. There's little point in keeping it in a fallback implementation aimed at hardware that's to weak too use shaders after all.

Still, sometimes I am baffled how long some people hold on to their outdated hardware. They tend to complain about the evil developers leaving them in the dust when they could resolve the situation by spending a small amount of money.
User avatar
Rachael
Developer
Developer
Posts: 3651
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 10:30

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by Rachael »

Graf Zahl wrote: Still, sometimes I am baffled how long some people hold on to their outdated hardware. They tend to complain about the evil developers leaving them in the dust when they could resolve the situation by spending a small amount of money.
Being one of these people myself, I don't throw money at my computer every month. I know I wish I could, but my computer is nothing more than an entertainment device to me, as much as I wish it could be more.

That being said, it's quite expensive to "keep up with the times." I've got what I got, and I'll be stuck with it for a while.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
GZDoom Developer
GZDoom Developer
Posts: 7148
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:48
Location: Germany

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by Graf Zahl »

Sure. My current computer is 2 years old, too. I am not talking about constant upgrades but running 5-6 year old systems and expecting from modern software to keep support for it. Graphics hardware has changed a lot in the last few years - and I'm not even pushing it with what I'm doing.

All my new renderer demands is proper shader and buffer support (Geforce 8xxx or higher.) That's 3 hardware generations back already. I don't think that's too much to ask these days.
User avatar
Rachael
Developer
Developer
Posts: 3651
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 10:30

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by Rachael »

/nods

I understand. And to be honest, my video card was a cheap piece of crap I bought at Wal-Mart. I don't know if you hear much about them down in Germany, but they're notorious for importing cheap goods. Virtually everything they sell has planned obsolescence of 2 years or less.

The trade-off is, though, that you pay less than retail for a good percentage of things in the store. If you catch it at the right time, you might even get something from the store below reseller value (what the store pays before it makes a profit on the item), and that's when it gets to be really cool.

Hey, you do what you gotta do.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
GZDoom Developer
GZDoom Developer
Posts: 7148
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:48
Location: Germany

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by Graf Zahl »

When it comes to my computer I'm not into that much compromise. I won't buy the most expensive high end machines but I'll also steer clear of the low end garbage these mass retailers offer.
User avatar
Nash
Developer
Developer
Posts: 1226
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:49
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by Nash »

Graf, I'm wondering if there's any chance of seeing shadow lightmaps like in Vavoom in your new renderer... ?

I don't even care if the shadows aren't dynamic... it never looked right in Quake anyway when platforms started to move around, but it still made maps look extremely moody...
dark-slayer-201
Posts: 149
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 14:31

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by dark-slayer-201 »

non dynamic shadows remind me of the ut99 shadow render method.
i'd rather RT lighting and RT Shadows, but that may have to wait, makes darkplaces engine look great.
User avatar
GuntherDW
Posts: 117
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 1:53
Location: Belgium, Antwerp

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by GuntherDW »

ds201 wrote:non dynamic shadows remind me of the ut99 shadow render method.
i'd rather RT lighting and RT Shadows, but that may have to wait, makes darkplaces engine look great.
Dude, graf zahl isn't some kind of wonderboy. Also, RT lighting would be somewhat hard to do in the DooM engine, which is utilising sector lighting and all.
If all you want is pwetty GFX, go check out the newer versions of Doomsday/Risen3D/Vavoom. As long noone stands up with the knowledge on how to create those effects Graf zahl isn't going to implement them.
He's got a private life and work too you know.

Note: not meant as a flame. He's pretty damn demanding over here :p.
User avatar
Rachael
Developer
Developer
Posts: 3651
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 10:30

Re: Supported hardware question

Post by Rachael »

GuntherDW wrote:He's pretty damn demanding over here :p.
I agree, although I did not consider that particular post too demanding, but if he does get out of line I will do something about it.

Return to “GZDoom”