DRD Team

I've seen the code behind the hardware shaders and while I admit it's impressive, I can't help but get the thought that it's quite a lot harder to understand. I've looked at the resource 'book' on the zdoom wiki and I've been searching around for better examples of how to make shaders and what their overall limits are.

I know for a fact I'm a complete and total noob at this kind of stuff, so my question is, does anyone know of any directions I should take before focusing on shaders? If I am ready to attempt handling shaders, what all is there that I should know for things like this example: http://zdoom.org/wiki/GLDEFS#Hardware_shaders ?

Well, at least for some nice shadows graf could implent the real lights/shadows from vavoom to gzdoom, if you don't like it or can't run you just select some option like "Light/Shadow render" from Advanced to Simple =D

Graf, I'm going to a university and i'll learn about computer cience, with this, i'll nearn something that i could help gzdoom in something (like render, some new things...)?

Good luck ibm5155... I really think the renderer needs some modern effects. Nothing too fancy. Just basic stuff; vertex model lighting, specular maps, smooth model alpha, better triangle culling... I mean, this stuff has been around in game engines that date as far back as 1999 (Half-Life, Quake 3)...

Hopefully you'll be able to contribute...

Nash wrote: I mean, this stuff has been around in game engines that date as far back as 1999 (Half-Life, Quake 3)...

Hopefully you'll be able to contribute...

But these engines were tailored around such things. Doom wasn't and it's hard enough to render the completely inadequate data in 3D.

I understand that. If it's easy, it would've already been in, right? That's fine... I just hope that people like ibm5155 or Geometer would come along and make contributions to the renderer.

Wait a little Nash, I'll only start in Computer Cience next year, so nothing for now (only modding).
The only one that could "copy" some render things from vavoom should be Graf Zahl or Geometer could do this (i don't remember the name of the vavoom creator, but i remember he allowed to use somethings like the new effects (real time lights...) and put in gzdoom.

Hey, I'm getting into computer science as well! Though I think I'll be starting off with Java.

Anyway, I'm still trying to find a good way to work on this but I haven't had any luck so far...

I wonder why many of these courses are called "computer science". From what I can tell, very few of them are scientific courses (ie they have little, if anything, to do with research, the scientific method and so on). I think it would be more accurate to call most of them computer technology rather than computer science. That's not to try and devalue the course, just be accurate. If a course is called "science" then it should be a scientific course. No?

Enjay wrote:I wonder why many of these courses are called "computer science". From what I can tell, very few of them are scientific courses (ie they have little, if anything, to do with research, the scientific method and so on). I think it would be more accurate to call most of them computer technology rather than computer science.

The "science" of computers, of course, lies in the way electrical current is routed through switches (both hardware and software). But there are other aspects of science involved, such as process theory, heat dissipation, and voltage regulation. A friend of mine got a Ph. D in VLSI (Very Large Scale Integrated) Circuitry, which required him to delve into logic, advanced circuit theory, thermodynamics, and electronics, all of which are sciences. [I took some of the same courses, though not at an advanced level, when I was working towards my engineering degree.]

But, yes, what you say about "computer science" nowadays mostly being about "computer technology" is true.

Staying on topic here, I agree that any help Graf gets can only improve GZDooM.

Enjay wrote:I wonder why many of these courses are called "computer science".

I suppose they think "computer scientist" makes them sound smarter than "informatician".

Hey Graf, I´ve found the Retribution Engine, it´s a free GPL engine and have nice features like shaders and lights, I test the performance of the engine in two hardares
1)Pentium III 1GHz, 384mb ram, ati radeon 7200 (works in high, but can´t show shaders and some lights effects)
2)Pentium III 1GHz, 1GB ram, nvidia FX5500 (works with all the effects in maximun with nice fps)
So, could you implement some of lights/shaders into gzdoom?

Retribution engine gameplay


Download Retribution engine source code

And a off question:Gzdoom is Graf Zahl Doom? (i think it was open Gl zdoom)

ibm5155 wrote:Hey Graf, I´ve found the Retribution Engine, it´s a free GPL engine

it is an incompatible license, sadly

now i read better the first question.

Graf, what does glsl in gzdoom, i didn´t saw noone using that.

I saw many places what it can do, so if he can do all that things(shader, metalic texture...) why i didn´t saw some project using that?

Edward-san wrote:

ibm5155 wrote:Hey Graf, I´ve found the Retribution Engine, it´s a free GPL engine

it is an incompatible license, sadly

As far as I know, the piece of code that is incompatible with GPL is the software renderer (which is based on the Build engine) and the FMODEX library.

Why do we still need the software renderer? When I create mods I frequently make use of 3d platforms in my construction of buildings with real roof. Therefore, I think the software renderer is not needed anymore.

The FMODEX library isn't needed either. It's nice with reverb but if all GPL-incompatible code is scraped it is possible to use fftw3 to use convolution reverbs.

Graf Zahl wrote:But these engines were tailored around such things. Doom wasn't and it's hard enough to render the completely inadequate data in 3D.

How much work would it require be able to load a ((G)Z)Doom map in ioquake3? Would a specialized nodebuilder do the work? After all, a such a map actually describes a 3d world.