Hi,
So i just joined and thought to myself this is the best thing since CT because Ubisoft are ruining their company... I wanted to ask and request that you please please please have an system requirements that allow older computers to run the game too... Because alot of people hated DA because of the high requirements it had... I hope this can be done because my computer isnt that flash so I cant run all those new games that are getting released atm :-\ I would love to play this game and I don't care if the graphics are so bad you cant tell the different between the spy and the mercs just as long as I can play it :)
hope that this goes well and that you guys keep up to the excellent work :D
Spark92
Yeah, i'd like to see an option to choose between SM2 and SM3 - although my PC can run SM3, it drains lots of resources :/
--frvge edit: that doesnt make sense. More constructive posting please
it does if you read my other posts on system requirements. frvge, do something against the n00b spamming and not about me showing my annoyance about the ones who have no idea how ct works or didn't read the other threads.
ps will reach beta phase in about 2 years, and i don't give a flying shit about the whining kiddies with their crappy computer that can't run the latest games in mid settings now. remember, when ps hits the shelves, games like crysis will be an old hat.
Well, don't expect it to run on a GeForce 440mx. xD
Well, i managed to run DA, so i think i'll get like 40-70 FPS here :P
Yeah, and my PC owns:
P IV 3.0Ghz
GF 6800 XT
512 Megs of crappy ram
Onboard sound (EAX is a cheat)
if SM3 is in the game, i will get like 20 FPS looking a wall :/
Quote from: Kok4f4n on June 30, 2007, 02:58:56 PM
Yeah, i'd like to see an option to choose between SM2 and SM3 - although my PC can run SM3, it drains lots of resources :/
i lol'd
Not only is making an option for shader models boarding impossible, think of the balancing issues!
lol you can make it so like if someone has bad FPS it automatically switches down the options like if someone has <40 FPS it goes SM2 and stuff.
just as long as the system requirements are the same as CT then ill be happy :)
Im putting my money on slightly higher requirements. It's gonna look slightly better and play better after all...
Quote from: Tidenburg on June 30, 2007, 05:05:44 PM
Im putting my money on slightly higher requirements. It's gonna look slightly better and play better after all...
I'll take your money. I don't think "slightly higher" will cut it. You need least a PS 2.0 graphics card and whatever CPU that maintains balance with it.
:'( well that means that I need to start saving for better graphics card...
what a miracle ::)
omfguzuck
i wouldn't worry too much, by the time this game is out, sm3 will be in the majority. And Kok4f4n, to what you said abot sm2 runs faster than sm3..sm3 is in fact more efficient (so i'm told)
If you can play unreal tournament 3...you will be able to play our game. So use that games minimum standard.
Quote
Preliminary UT3 System Requirements
Minimum Requirements
CPU: 2.8Ghz
RAM: 512MB
Graphics: Geforce 6 series
Recommended System
CPU: 3-4Ghz
RAM: 1024MB
Graphics: NVIDIA 6800GT/Ultra or 7800GT/GTX SLI
UT3 Technical features and requirements
* Dual-core CPU: Multi-threading is supported and should provide much better performance
* 64-bit version to be available with better textures
* Renderers: SM3.0, 2.0, possible DX8 renderer
* HDR supported
* Physics: Novodex Physics Engine
* AGEIA PhysX PPU supported.
I want it to be on DX8 for uber-performance.
Quote from: Tidenburg on July 01, 2007, 12:09:04 AM
Quote
Preliminary UT3 System Requirements
Minimum Requirements
CPU: 2.8Ghz
RAM: 512MB
Graphics: Geforce 6 series
Recommended System
CPU: 3-4Ghz
RAM: 1024MB
Graphics: NVIDIA 6800GT/Ultra or 7800GT/GTX SLI
UT3 Technical features and requirements
* Dual-core CPU: Multi-threading is supported and should provide much better performance
* 64-bit version to be available with better textures
* Renderers: SM3.0, 2.0, possible DX8 renderer
* HDR supported
* Physics: Novodex Physics Engine
* AGEIA PhysX PPU supported.
Look's like DA System Requirements X( ahh.... i think not soo many people can play that...
Then start saving money ;D. You have till Christmas and probably even longer (mid 2008?). By then we'll have 7000+ processors. (although named differently).
wouldnt it be easier to use an engine that is less technical to support those who dont have the high tech computers? wouldnt that save a whole lot of time and make it easier to find programmers? I would upgrade my computer just for this game if it does have high requirements but alot of people would like to have the option for low specs...
No, this is like whining a XB360 game isn't out on the Xbox. Time change and technology advances, deal with it. You have probably a year - few years to upgrade your PC.
Don't use dell! They scam. You want to buy your upgrades directly from a manufacturer. To find the original prices of a pc part you half the retail (store) price, this will give you the "middle mans" price. Then you half it again to get how much it cost directly from the manufacturer.
crucial.com
make their own stuff and so sell it cheap. There are many more sites like this on the net.
dude I know where to buy stuff from and im not whining just thinking to myself that alot of people didnt go to DA because of the high specs on dat so itll get a whole lot more people in the game if it has an option for lower specs. Just because you are willing to pay 1k a year on upgrading your computer doesn't mean everyone else is.
1k a year? where the hell did you get that from.
Spark 1K is enough to get you a new pc. You could easily stay in the required spec's for just about Ã,£200 a year. DA specs weren't incredibly high, just the programming in the game itself was very sloppy.
I buy a new medium-to-high-end PC every 3-4 years (=1500 euros). After 2 years I usually have an upgrade of something (=200 euros).
Total cost 1700 for 4 years. is 425 euros a year. That's close to 200 pounds.
I might get a new one for Crysis and UT3. Now on a 3400+, 1GB, 6800LE... Not too good, but it's got SM3.
thats 575USD a year frvge. And you dont buy any programs with that? how about the games themselves? or the costs to fix parts and such if you made the computer yourself... Itll add up to abit less then 1k a year wont it?
Fix parts? How do you break them, parts are not as breakable as the companies make out they are. Making a PC is cheaper. You say you know where to buy the parts from yet you insist that it would cost 1K? Also, even though the Ã,£ is worth 2 $'s prices are usually the same (somthing will cost $100 where you are will cost like Ã,£85 here) in pc stuff because its all imported :P
fix parts = parts break. I had my graphics card break for no reason last year. I had my monitor nearly on fire for no reason again 2 years ago... thats what I mean.
I dont insist it costs 1k. I thought it would get pretty close to that to have computers as good as they come to these days but apparently from what your saying its not. Ok then if its as cheap as you say ill say the same thing as i said from the start: Ill upgrade for the game.
Quote from: Tidenburg on July 01, 2007, 01:54:34 PM
Time change and technology advances, deal with it.
That is such BS. The first game I couldn't run was Battlefield 2. Someone explain to be why a computer that runs Doom3, Quake4 and every game before that, can't run Battlefield 2 and BF 2142.
What's the second game I couldn't run? Get ready for this, it's vietcong2 (http://images.google.ca/images?q=Vietcong%202&svnum=10&um=1&hl=en&safe=off&imgsz=xxlarge&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi)! That's right, it's a conspiracy by game developers to sell video cards that you didn't really need.
And let's not forgot the Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion. Surely, I can't play this and I couldn't :(...until Oldblivion (http://www.oldblivion.com/index.php?page=screenshots) ported the shaders over. I can understand if some developers want to use the latest and coolest shaders for their game, but give us an option to lower the graphics so we (the losers) can enjoy the game too! Look at this (http://www.oldblivion.com/screenshots/lqvsoldb.jpg). The top picture is oblivion on "Ultra Low" settings, it requires 2.0 shaders. Bottom picture is Oldblivion and requires 1.1 shaders. I'd rather be playing with 20fps than not at all.
Same here - my PC runs CT on highest settings (res 1024x768 - my monitor suxx)
But it gets like 5-10 FPS on lowest settings in DA... conspiracy???
Yeah, but then you're not spending money to upgrade your computer. Why do you think all games which have microsoft involved either have high specs required or DX10? It's because it makes you upgrade your PC to play it, that way they get money from hardware aswell, or windows Vista for the new drivers. The new flight sim is an example of this.
BTW the people on the sc forums who say "oo I can run RS Vegas & oblivion but not SC DA" need to know that just because a game looks better or nearly the same it doesn't mean the way its programmed and designed. People need to take into account their drivers may be out of date or there are conflicts goin on in their system, there a whole lot more to how good you pc is than its specs.
Quote from: Kok4f4n on July 01, 2007, 03:56:49 PM
Same here - my PC runs CT on highest settings (res 1024x768 - my monitor suxx)
But it gets like 5-10 FPS on lowest settings in DA... conspiracy???
That's just bad porting/programming.
Quote from: Tidenburg on July 01, 2007, 03:59:15 PM
Yeah, but then you're not spending money to upgrade your computer. Why do you think all games which have microsoft involved either have high specs required or DX10? It's because it makes you upgrade your PC to play it, that way they get money from hardware aswell, or windows Vista for the new drivers. The new flight sim is an example of this.
Yeah, that was my point. But making system requirements more than you actually need is fraud that they profit from it. It's a shame too, I really liked Vietcong1...
do you have a geforce 4 ti or something?
Yes
im totally with overstatement. Look at the awesome graphics of Chaos Theory. All it needs is Pixel Shader 1.0 to run the game... I mean when DA was released I talked the game over with many people and nearly all of them thought "why didnt they have an option for people who have lower graphics 2 play". I dont mind the graphics as long as the gameplay is good and I too would rather be playing at 20fps then not at all!
It's all about priorities, period.
I agree that some game specs are quite high to what they offer. But cmon, a guy with a Geforce 4/Pentium 3 800mhz/256mb of ram has to realize that he desperately needs an upgrade if he wants to keep playing games. As Zed would say "it's not rocket science".
Right, but I with my FX 5200 (own3r graphics) played a bunch of games - i played:
CT
Doom 3
HL2
Quake 4
FarCry,
and i didnt manage to run DA... what a crap - i ran Q4, (wich has better graphics btw) and i cant run DA...
What a crap.
this whole discussion is absolutely mindless and unproductive. we all know that hardware is expensive, and that ubi fucked up sc4 ::)
Aggreed. Topic for deletion.
FFS, where do you people buy your hardware from? Scams'r'us?
2GB Ram - Ã,£50
Duo Core Processor - Ã,£100
^ Those thing are what you need to dramatically speed up a pc. Ã,£150 is not much in the grand scale of things.
And yes, UBI fucked up DA ;)
and no topic doesn't have to be deleted, just because it goes off on a whim it's still relevant to the subject
The graphics don't match the requirements. BF2142 looks like it could run on my PC if it were given the chance. I can play Half Life 2 but not S.T.A.L.K.E.R? WTF?!
This is one of the reasons I still support using an open-source engine. You have to freedom to make the game as beautiful as you'd like but have fallback options for when you can't.
So long as the normal "quality" is looking nice then I'm not gonna protest against a radio button for Low quality, just so long as it doesn't come with any balance issues.
Quote from: Overstatement on July 01, 2007, 05:46:56 PM
The graphics don't match the requirements. BF2142 looks like it could run on my PC if it were given the chance. I can play Half Life 2 but not S.T.A.L.K.E.R? WTF?!
This is one of the reasons I still support using an open-source engine. You have to freedom to make the game as beautiful as you'd like but have fallback options for when you can't.
Yeah just look at Warrock or AssaultCube - both games own, and they have a p2p netcode (it owns server-centric netcode)
To play PS, you better have at least a good SM 3.0 card. To be efficient, get a dual core processor and a DX10 compatible card.
One of the many reasons I think UE3 is a good choice is for it's lighting engine. One of the major gameplay aspects of CT game play is if you in bright or dark areas. We can take this a step further with fully dynamic lighting environments.
Quote from: iservealot on July 01, 2007, 08:00:04 PM
To play PS, you better have at least a good SM 3.0 card. To be efficient, get a dual core processor and a DX10 compatible card.
One of the many reasons I think UE3 is a good choice is for it's lighting engine. One of the major gameplay aspects of CT game play is if you in bright or dark areas. We can take this a step further with fully dynamic lighting environments.
affirmative
Unreal3 is great and all but it wasn't designed with light based gameplay in mind. My worst case scenario is Unreal doesn't understand pitch black (or some other lighting design) and we really can't do anything because the engine is not accessible to us. With the new age of modding, gameplay can be modded to almost whatever you want but when it comes to lower level stuff, not as much.
Lets not forget that opened source is more reliable than commerial engines (because they've been tested by more people and have existed longer) and that shaders aren't these big complex programs you guys think it is but a series of small programs(most of them so small that you can read without scrolling) that work together to form the final image.
Quote from: Overstatement on July 01, 2007, 08:41:05 PM
Unreal3 is great and all but it wasn't designed with light based gameplay in mind. My worst case scenario is Unreal doesn't understand pitch black (or some other lighting design) and we really can't do anything because the engine is not accessible to us. With the new age of modding, gameplay can be modded to almost whatever you want but when it comes to lower level stuff, not as much.
neither does CT or any other engine. No engine is really designed for light and shadow gameplay, or "understand the meaning of true black".
In Chaos Theory, they achieve this with the use of Glow functions. Things pass a certain color level will have a glow (emissive) to them. And things that lower than a certain color are down toned to be darker.
I said if it doesn't understand true black, we can't change how it's rendered unlike open source engines. Are you only reading half my post?
This is only 1 of many examples of problems we can run into. Spinter Cell have a lot of unique requirements that any FPSs don't.
I thought SCDA was made on the unreal engine? It says that on the credits...
If they can do it then we can
wats CT run on?
Quote from: Spark92 on July 02, 2007, 12:51:05 PM
wats CT run on?
Unreal2.
Quote from: Tidenburg on July 02, 2007, 12:34:44 PM
I thought SCDA was made on the unreal engine? It says that on the credits...
If they can do it then we can
They didn't make a mod, they had a licence. My point is that we can't reach into the engine and change whatever we want. DA had the engine source so therefore they could. Could the number of rendering bugs be an indication of how many times they did?
Quote from: Overstatement on July 02, 2007, 01:29:30 PM
Could the number of rendering bugs be an indication of how many times they did?
good point ^^
One must also take into account aspects beyond just the engine.
Right now our team is severely limited in the programming department. Overstatement is the only one on here capable of doing this opensource, making him the bottleneck that this project would depend upon. If we went open source, this project could easily be killed if he left the project. Games Programmers are a rare commodity, work hard, and deserve a high price.
I work with several programmers, and I asked their opinions on doing a mod using open source. These guys code 60hrs a week as a profession. They are quite fast and amazing at what they can do. I take them seriously when they say it would take 2 years (full time) to make a game if we went open source (they are quite experienced with open source engines). Its a lot of work that I just could not trust to only one person for such a long time. Going opensource is essentially making your own game, our studio uses open source software for our games.
We have to also understand the experience of the rest of the team. We have 4 guys with a great deal of experience with the Unreal Editor. (Iservalot, Innocent, Mr. Mic, Zedblade). If any one of them leaves the project, we can still continue, and as a group they can create entire levels from scratch to finish without actually using 3d software or any kind of exporters. They are also capable of learning a small amount of scripting. Going open source and we lose all of those skills because all levels have to be created in 3d software, and the team has to learn a new editor and engine.
Zedblade has user access to Epic, and is working on AAA titles using the Unreal Editor....this gives him connection to information we need prior to UT 3 release.
We currently use Roboblitz for early access to UR Engine so we are not dead in the water.
And the most obvious is the reputation of UT 3. It certainly does not harm us to use a high profile engine. As a result, when UT is release there will be plethora of mods in production and people looking to participate in a robust community. We hope to inspire people with our project by being as professional as possible with it.
Personally, i do not have a preferance for what engine we use. I am thinking only in practical terms which I have just mentioned. Going open source would force us to rely on 1 person to code the entire thing, in a minimum of 2 years while also a alienating entire skill sets of a lot of others on the team. We are not committed to the engine...no reason we couldnt use HL 2 for example, but this decision is not entirely based on my opinions. It is a team decision.
Quote from: goodkebab on July 02, 2007, 02:38:07 PM
Right now our team is severely limited in the programming department. Overstatement is the only one on here capable of doing this opensource, making him the bottleneck that this project would depend upon. If we went open source, this project could easily be killed if he left the project. Games Programmers are a rare commodity, work hard, and deserve a high price.
You have a warped view of the situation. If we use UT3, you'll have 1 very confused programming advisor(me, because I can't script without debugging which I can't without being able to run the game) and NO programmers. With ORGE we'll go back to C++ and you'll have 2 confident programmers (me and frvge).
Quote from: goodkebab on July 02, 2007, 02:38:07 PM
I work with several programmers, and I asked their opinions on doing a mod using open source. These guys code 60hrs a week as a profession. They are quite fast and amazing at what they can do. I take them seriously when they say it would take 2 years (full time) to make a game if we went open source (they are quite experienced with open source engines). Its a lot of work that I just could not trust to only one person for such a long time. Going opensource is essentially making your own game, our studio uses open source software for our games.
So you keep saying. It's great that you have people you trust and all but without having a more detailed explanation other than "it takes a long time", for me to trust them would be blind trust and also, I want to know why they think this way, there could be many reasons. There are lots of projects for ORGE already so it can't take TOO long.
Quote from: goodkebab on July 02, 2007, 02:38:07 PM
We have to also understand the experience of the rest of the team. We have 4 guys with a great deal of experience with the Unreal Editor. (Iservalot, Innocent, Mr. Mic, Zedblade). If any one of them leaves the project, we can still continue, and as a group they can create entire levels from scratch to finish without actually using 3d software or any kind of exporters. They are also capable of learning a small amount of scripting. Going open source and we lose all of those skills because all levels have to be created in 3d software, and the team has to learn a new editor and engine.
I can say the exact thing about making C++ programmers learn script. Mappers learning a new editor means learning where the new buttons are that do the old things. Programmers learning a new program means sorting through hundreds of files of code in a different language without documentation. Nevermind the fact that I'm the only one willing to learn a new language. Add to that, some of our people must have some experince with one of these (http://www.ogre3d.org/wiki/index.php/DCC_Tools) editors which are importable to ORGE.
Quote from: goodkebab on July 02, 2007, 02:38:07 PM
Zedblade has user access to Epic, and is working on AAA titles using the Unreal Editor....this gives him connection to information we need prior to UT 3 release.
Zedblade may have an account but I don't think he'll be copy and pasting any of the pages for me. Will he have enough technical knowledge to paraphrase? I'll ask. Even if he did give me his account name and password, that would only be making it on par to what ORGE already offers in documentation.
Quote from: goodkebab on July 02, 2007, 02:38:07 PM
We currently use Roboblitz for early access to UR Engine so we are not dead in the water.
That's not really a plus...
Quote from: goodkebab on July 02, 2007, 02:38:07 PM
And the most obvious is the reputation of UT 3. It certainly does not harm us to use a high profile engine. As a result, when UT is release there will be plethora of mods in production and people looking to participate in a robust community. We hope to inspire people with our project by being as professional as possible with it.
Yeah, a community and skilled programmers. ORGE has none of that...I'll bet that (weighted by skill) ORGE has more programmers than UT3 because ORGE is not "cool". UT3 will have a lot of 12 year olds who talk more than they script, ORGE only has people who are genuinely interested in programming. And sure there's harm in using a high profile engine, wasn't I talking about that before your post?
Quote from: goodkebab on July 02, 2007, 02:38:07 PM
It is a team decision.
I'm glad that you don't get annoyed by my constant arguments. It's my way of casting a vote.
what's ORGE?
Err...I meant OGRE (http://www.ogre3d.org/).
;)
Quote from: Overstatement on July 01, 2007, 08:41:05 PM
My worst case scenario is Unreal doesn't understand pitch black (or some other lighting design) and we really can't do anything because the engine is not accessible to us.
Every engine i've ever worked with can display pitch black perfectly well.
And with my experience in U3, it can certainly do the same.
The lights in that game bake to static light maps using simple raycasting techniques that have been used since the original quake. No direct line of sight to a light = pitch black. There is no light bouncing.
The formula goes something like this (disgarding bumps and other pixel transform crap, but the result is still the same):
pixelcolor = (diffuse * staticlight) + (diffuse * dynamiclight) + (specularmask * specularlight) + (environmentmap * environmentmask)
Given that the light value comes from tracing the light back to its source with no bounces, the only time a pixel would emerge with a non-zero value in a zero-value light condition is when there's an environment map at play, and you can even multiply the environment map with the total light falling on the surface with U3's material editor.
so why cant we use OGRE instead? will it also solve the problem with the system requirements?
Main advantage of a UT mod is that it'll give us a bigger player base more than likely.
Quote from: Spark92 on July 03, 2007, 03:11:29 AM
so why cant we use OGRE instead? will it also solve the problem with the system requirements?
there is no problem damnit, stop being a cheapskate and go buy a 7100 or something.
Quote from: Bionic-Blob on July 03, 2007, 09:55:43 AM
Quote from: Spark92 on July 03, 2007, 03:11:29 AM
so why cant we use OGRE instead? will it also solve the problem with the system requirements?
there is no problem damnit, stop being a cheapskate and go buy a 7100 or something.
Thank You! Took the words right outta my mouth.
Quote from: Tidenburg on July 03, 2007, 10:13:50 AM
Quote from: Bionic-Blob on July 03, 2007, 09:55:43 AM
Quote from: Spark92 on July 03, 2007, 03:11:29 AM
so why cant we use OGRE instead? will it also solve the problem with the system requirements?
there is no problem damnit, stop being a cheapskate and go buy a 7100 or something.
Thank You! Took the words right outta my mouth.
Mine too. :E
I'll take you guys don't have the money to spend on a new pc, so I'll make this only to meet the Recommended specs. EDIT: actually is better than the recommended specs.
I've checked ONLY newegg.com
Corsair 1gb (2x512mb)ddr2 800mhz USD67,00
eVGA GeForce 7600gt 256mb USD99,00
AMD Athlon 64 x2 4000+ AM2 USD99,00
ASUS M2N-X Socket AM2 USD64,99
PSU Enermax 535w - USD79,99
---------------------------
Total ------------------------>USD409,98
Oh noes what about a case/cd/dvd/flopper/HD/SoundCard/Monitor!??!?!?!?
Pick the ones from your current PC!
pwned.
Quote from: Bionic-Blob on July 03, 2007, 09:55:43 AM
there is no problem damnit
Where have you been the last couple of posts? Seriously, OGRE = 2 programmers. UT3 = NO programmers. And I am quickly approching the view that scripting is as hard as C++.
Quote from: MR.Mic on July 03, 2007, 03:07:08 AM
The lights in that game bake to static light maps using simple raycasting techniques that have been used since the original quake.
Back in the day, programmers had to preprocess lights (lightmapping) because doing it in realtime is crazy talk. These days when programmers use lightmaps (if ever), they use it to calculate more complicated lighting models (like radiosity) and you can bet those will include lightbouncing. You may be able to set the light settings but reducing it would really make the game very ugly.
Quote from: MR.Mic on July 03, 2007, 03:07:08 AM
pixelcolor = (diffuse * staticlight) + (diffuse * dynamiclight) + (specularmask * specularlight) + (environmentmap * environmentmask)
Dynamic lights can't be calculated with lightmapping. And this would be a simplistic model of any lighting model but I get the point.
Quote from: Overstatement on July 03, 2007, 11:13:49 PM
Quote from: Bionic-Blob on July 03, 2007, 09:55:43 AM
there is no problem damnit
Where have you been the last couple of posts? Seriously, OGRE = 2 programmers. UT3 = NO programmers. And I am quickly approching the view that scripting is as hard as C++.
[/quote]
wtf? i never said anything about that. i was responding to the guy's statement that the system requirements are a 'problem'
Quote from: Overstatement on July 01, 2007, 03:50:48 PM
Quote from: Tidenburg on July 01, 2007, 01:54:34 PM
Time change and technology advances, deal with it.
That is such BS. The first game I couldn't run was Battlefield 2. Someone explain to be why a computer that runs Doom3, Quake4 and every game before that, can't run Battlefield 2 and BF 2142.
What's the second game I couldn't run? Get ready for this, it's vietcong2 (http://images.google.ca/images?q=Vietcong%202&svnum=10&um=1&hl=en&safe=off&imgsz=xxlarge&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi)! That's right, it's a conspiracy by game developers to sell video cards that you didn't really need.
And let's not forgot the Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion. Surely, I can't play this and I couldn't :(...until Oldblivion (http://www.oldblivion.com/index.php?page=screenshots) ported the shaders over. I can understand if some developers want to use the latest and coolest shaders for their game, but give us an option to lower the graphics so we (the losers) can enjoy the game too! Look at this (http://www.oldblivion.com/screenshots/lqvsoldb.jpg). The top picture is oblivion on "Ultra Low" settings, it requires 2.0 shaders. Bottom picture is Oldblivion and requires 1.1 shaders. I'd rather be playing with 20fps than not at all.
Read this. Maybe you should read before you type because this is what overstatement has said about 3 pages ago. Read the rest of the topic and youll actually understand what overstatement is saying... Just because it isnt a problem for you doesnt mean the group of people that it is a problem for should be forgotten. I live in NZ and parts here are fricking expensive. Parts that are 100US dollars in the US are 300US here. Seriously guys you cant just think about yourself here whats the problem with having an option for people with lower computers?
Quote from: Bionic-Blob on July 03, 2007, 09:55:43 AM
Quote from: Spark92 on July 03, 2007, 03:11:29 AM
so why cant we use OGRE instead? will it also solve the problem with the system requirements?
there is no problem damnit, stop being a cheapskate and go buy a 7100 or something.
Thats what I said from the start! I said that I will upgrade if I have to but then a group of people came in and said stop whining about this! I wasnt whining... All I asked for is an option for us people with older computers.
Quote from: Gui Brazil on July 03, 2007, 06:21:11 PM
I'll take you guys don't have the money to spend on a new pc, so I'll make this only to meet the Recommended specs. EDIT: actually is better than the recommended specs.
I've checked ONLY newegg.com
Corsair 1gb (2x512mb)ddr2 800mhz USD67,00
eVGA GeForce 7600gt 256mb USD99,00
AMD Athlon 64 x2 4000+ AM2 USD99,00
ASUS M2N-X Socket AM2 USD64,99
PSU Enermax 535w - USD79,99
---------------------------
Total ------------------------>USD409,98
Oh noes what about a case/cd/dvd/flopper/HD/SoundCard/Monitor!??!?!?!?
Pick the ones from your current PC!
Read what I said above... Prices here from part shops online and other places are about 3 times that.
Quote from: Gawain on July 03, 2007, 07:50:18 PM
pwned.
Your posts are just stupid gawain. Learn to post on a forum.
Quote from: Spark92 on July 04, 2007, 03:05:17 AM
Quote from: Gawain on July 03, 2007, 07:50:18 PM
pwned.
Your posts are just stupid gawain. Learn to post on a forum.
the whole system requirement discussion is bs, especially since we had this question some times ago.
AND it is bs to discuss about the engine now, i always thought this decision has been made months ago. but maybe they were expecting to get programmers for ur script more easily. is the ogre as powerful as the unreal engine?
Quote from: Gawain on July 04, 2007, 01:44:35 PM
is the ogre as powerful as the unreal engine?
Is it going to look as good as Unreal3 games? No. But using the OGRE engine will negate all these problems I've mentioned. It also has new pluses like acutal ownership of our game and the ability to continually develop better graphics after the release through patches.
Quote from: Overstatement on July 04, 2007, 02:29:52 PM
Quote from: Gawain on July 04, 2007, 01:44:35 PM
is the ogre as powerful as the unreal engine?
Is it going to look as good as Unreal3 games? No. But using the OGRE engine will negate all these problems I've mentioned. It also has new pluses like acutal ownership of our game and the ability to continually develop better graphics after the release through patches.
So you say you're using Unreal only to get better graphics??
Even I don't know the answer to that question. But you've seen goodkebab's reasons for choosing it so you'll have to come to your own conclusions.
Quote from: Kok4f4n on July 04, 2007, 02:32:36 PM
So you say you're using Unreal only to get better graphics??
the most important thing for ps are good dynamic lighting possibilities while maintaining a good performance, isn't it?
Yeah, thats why unreal is a good choice.
Why not use Pain Engine, then? It has good lighting....
Quote from: Spark92 on July 04, 2007, 03:05:17 AM
Seriously guys you cant just think about yourself here whats the problem with having an option for people with lower computers?
I have an Athlon 64 3000+, 1gb of RAM (2x512mb) pc3200 and a 6600gt, I'll probably have to upgrade too. Don't think that I have this awesome pwning PC and I don't give a fuck for the ones that don't. But guess what! I'm not whinning about it, simply because I know that this PC is 2 year old and its "WE'RE THE BRAND NEW PWNING SHIT" days are gone.
You should know too that you have to upgrade your pc once in a while...I simply doubt that PC parts are more expensive in New Zealand than in Brazil.
Quote from: Gawain on July 04, 2007, 02:43:49 PM
Quote from: Kok4f4n on July 04, 2007, 02:32:36 PM
So you say you're using Unreal only to get better graphics??
the most important thing for ps are good dynamic lighting possibilities while maintaining a good performance, isn't it?
We chose to use Unreal Engine 3 for several different reasons. One of them being that it is a next gen engine (which means to effectivly play it, you need next gen hardware)
Some other reasons why we chose this engine was for all of the different feature set it includes. Thigs like a good animation system, complex shaders, real time lighting, common compatiblilty, efficent network code and fan base are just a few of the reasons.
When looking at engines like OGRE, you have to realize that everthing we do needs to be handeled from scratch. I do not believe that OGRE allows for VSM (or even PCF) lighting in real time, nor do I think it offers any extrodinary animation system.
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
We chose to use Unreal Engine 3 for several different reasons. One of them being that it is a next gen engine (which means to effectivly play it, you need next gen hardware)
So you have some contract with nVidia so they sell more of the GF 8800??? That's what i understand.
Quote from: Kok4f4n on July 04, 2007, 07:24:43 PM
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
We chose to use Unreal Engine 3 for several different reasons. One of them being that it is a next gen engine (which means to effectivly play it, you need next gen hardware)
So you have some contract with nVidia so they sell more of the GF 8800??? That's what i understand.
where the hell are you getting this crap from
Quote from: Bionic-Blob on July 04, 2007, 07:36:20 PM
Quote from: Kok4f4n on July 04, 2007, 07:24:43 PM
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
We chose to use Unreal Engine 3 for several different reasons. One of them being that it is a next gen engine (which means to effectivly play it, you need next gen hardware)
So you have some contract with nVidia so they sell more of the GF 8800??? That's what i understand.
where the hell are you getting this crap from
My mind??
Yea dude, we have a contract with nVidia.
How do you think we're going to the Bahamas drink beer every month?
Why we chose UE3 is in the Stickies I believe, and if not, iservealot said most important parts.
Wait and see till UT3 is released...
The minimum specs of Roboblitz:
Minimum System Requirements:
* OS: MicrosoftÃ,® WindowsÃ,® XP SP2
CPU: IntelÃ,® PentiumÃ,® 4 2.0GHz or AMD Athlonâ„¢ XP 2000+
RAM: 512 MB
Hard Disk Space: 400MB
Video Card: nVidiaÃ,® GeForceÃ,® 6600 or ATI RadeonÃ,® X800
Video Card RAM: 256 MB
DirectX Version: 9.0c
That's not too bad is it?
Of course not. I can't really understand all this whinage about omg my Voodoo won't run it!
woa woa what?
Do i have to upgrade my Geforce MX400? What kind of bullshit is this. Next thing your gonna tell me is I need a DVD drive to install the game.
lolz ur gonna d/l it.
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
a good animation system
Animations have been done roughly the same since their invention. OGRE offers hardware animation which is all I need to know.
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
complex shaders
Complex and inflexible. Always fun in a game where graphics affect gameplay. Between my computer knowledge and frvge's math skills, we can invent complex shaders too. If not, there is a whole internet out there we can mix and match from.
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
real time lighting
We've been doing realtime lighting since forever.
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
common compatiblilty
Huh?
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
efficent network code and fan base are just a few of the reasons.
It's almost too efficent...it was designed for 64 players at a time. Wouldn't it suck if it cuts corners in places that doesn't matter in FPS but will in PS? When using camnet or spy cams, you might see choppy spies(or no spies at all) because they aren't technically suppose to be in your model's view of vision according to the game. If we make it our own or download one, we won't have to fear of these issues.
The fan base argument still makes no sense to me. 1) By using UT3 instead of OGRE, you are limiting the group from EVERYONE to EVERYONE WHO OWNS UT3. 2) I never thought limiting a stealth-action game to people whose main method of combat is circle strafing was a good idea.
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
When looking at engines like OGRE, you have to realize that everthing we do needs to be handeled from scratch.
What's better? 2 programmers creating something "from scratch" or NO programmers changing an undocumented and confusing game code?
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
I do not believe that OGRE allows for VSM (or even PCF) lighting in real time, nor do I think it offers any extrodinary animation system.
I don't know what those mean. More words less abbreviations.
Ok guys, how about arguing the points I've layed down? I'm telling you the house you're buying is on fire, you're telling me how nice the kitchen is...
I say open-source.
A mod can be open source too =/ Only not the underlaying engine for obvious reasons.
Quote from: Kok4f4n on July 05, 2007, 01:09:31 AM
I say open-source.
You say that only because of your FX5200.
So nothing, I'm just stating that your opinion is purely based on the fact that you don't want/can't upgrade your computer.
I have no preference and I don't really care which one will be used, as far as it keeps going.
Quote from: Gui Brazil on July 05, 2007, 02:25:26 AM
I have no preference and I don't really care which one will be used, as far as it keeps going.
Same, as long as it runs on mu PC :P
Personally, I just want what is best for the project. Lots of very interesting points have been made for both sides of the argument, and people will really have to sit down and decide which one is better. I do have to agree with Overstatement's .....statement about limiting the game to only people who own UT3 (and I definitely do not want some damned circle-strafers playing PS with me. However, working with an engine like the UT3 engine, which looks extremely impressive, could really get the ball rolling first. Open-source would take even longer to code, but has a lot of benefits that come with going that direction.
gah i dont have the patience to red through the whole topic...but my comp could run BF2142 perfectly idk about Quake 4 and those games and it cant run DA i already tried it...am i off the subject?
Quote from: Overstatement on July 04, 2007, 11:25:15 PM
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
a good animation system
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
Animations have been done roughly the same since their invention. OGRE offers hardware animation which is all I need to know.
How the hell do you do hardware animations? Is there some kind of special hardware that caluclates animations? *insert sarcasim here*
Furthermore, UE3 lets us intregrate physics with animations, to allow for the most accurate simulations. Not to mention it has a great animation blending system, which you would need to code from scratch in OGRE to be anywhere near as efficent as it is in UE3
complex shaders
Complex and inflexible. Always fun in a game where graphics affect gameplay. Between my computer knowledge and frvge's math skills, we can invent complex shaders too. If not, there is a whole internet out there we can mix and match from.
-Good, so since you guys are gonna spend so much time inventing new ways to do things and trying new methods from the internet, go try new methods to learn Unreal Script. There is a whole internet full that explains Unreal Script to you. ;)
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
efficent network code and fan base are just a few of the reasons.
It's almost too efficent...it was designed for 64 players at a time. Wouldn't it suck if it cuts corners in places that doesn't matter in FPS but will in PS? When using camnet or spy cams, you might see choppy spies(or no spies at all) because they aren't technically suppose to be in your model's view of vision according to the game. If we make it our own or download one, we won't have to fear of these issues.
- it sounds like you are talking out of your ass on this one. Oh wait... I know you are. If you knew anything about how camnet or spy cams work, you'd know that the engine takes the ownership of the camera from the spy pawn (in the player controller), and creates one for the cam net/spy cam. Since UE3 uses recent hardware technology to render on screen content, it doesnt make certain dissapear etc, as the engine redners what ever is in your FOV - period. No zoning, no optimizations (unless your forcefully make things dissapear from differeneces)
Also, the whole "lag" thing becuase of too optimized code makes NO sense. You can declare what kind of replications you want for what actors in Uscript. A lot of the code in PAWN actors and PlayerControllers (player actors) is delegated to network replication, and what exactly is replicated (like if animations)
The fan base argument still makes no sense to me. 1) By using UT3 instead of OGRE, you are limiting the group from EVERYONE to EVERYONE WHO OWNS UT3. 2) I never thought limiting a stealth-action game to people whose main method of combat is circle strafing was a good idea.
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
When looking at engines like OGRE, you have to realize that everthing we do needs to be handeled from scratch.
What's better? 2 programmers creating something "from scratch" or NO programmers changing an undocumented and confusing game code?
-Option C, letting Frvge (one of the two current programmers) learn Uscript, instead of taking the time to learn OGRE scripts, or what ever other engine you'd want to use.
Of course, we could always see who else shows up for scripting.
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
I do not believe that OGRE allows for VSM (or even PCF) lighting in real time, nor do I think it offers any extrodinary animation system.
I don't know what those mean. More words less abbreviations.
-VSM and PCF are different shadowing methods that are commonly used in current generations games for lighting algorythems. Example - SCDA Versus uses a technique called BPCF to calculate shadows, which was probably chosen becuase of use with the X360
iservealot you seem to know a whole lot about this stuff but from what I read your not programming this so how can you argu with someone who is? (overstatement)
Quote from: Spark92 on July 05, 2007, 09:10:57 AM
iservealot you seem to know a whole lot about this stuff but from what I read your not programming this so how can you argu with someone who is? (overstatement)
I know the engine, overstatement does not. If I efficently understood how to script a particular language, I would gladly take the position of scriptor.
well you dont know how to script and if you do you obviously dont know as much as overstatement because you arent the scriptor. If overstatement is the one coding this then shouldnt he get a choice on the way he wants to do it?
You don't need to know the way a script works to know what it does. I code simple stuff in AS, C++ and visual basic, it doesn't mean because i'm a "coder" I know how everything works in that area. Overstatement could know every script language in the world yet not know how Unreal engine works.
and yeah that camera thing you said was just bs. The players are not updated according to where the player is and normally all players are kept track of no matter where they are, if something like that for some reason was implemented then it would be based on the camera's position which is moved when you use the cam, and not the actor position. Then I may be completely incorrect, i'm talking about stuff which i've picked up from other engines and it may not necessarily apply to UR
but he is the scriptor isnt he? shouldnt he get the choice? if he doesnt know how to unreal engine works as you said shouldnt he have a choice to choose between a language that he does know?
Yeah but thats changing the subject. I think our point was he was making stuff up that made it look like UR was a bad choice. Plus we will need more than one or two programmers if we want to get this done within a cerain time timeframe..................
and if you read what he said youll see that he talked about the fact that if you made something from scratch in open source you would have 2 programmers and if you made it in UR then youll have no programmers... read the last post he posted plz...
It's irrelevant, im not talking about any other post but the one which he made stuff up in, you know. The one quoted, I think it was quite obvious that we weren't talking about any other parts or different posts so stop trying to change the topic more than its already been changed :D
Quote from: Overstatement on July 04, 2007, 11:25:15 PM
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
a good animation system
Animations have been done roughly the same since their invention. OGRE offers hardware animation which is all I need to know.
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
complex shaders
Complex and inflexible. Always fun in a game where graphics affect gameplay. Between my computer knowledge and frvge's math skills, we can invent complex shaders too. If not, there is a whole internet out there we can mix and match from.
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
real time lighting
We've been doing realtime lighting since forever.
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
common compatiblilty
Huh?
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
efficent network code and fan base are just a few of the reasons.
It's almost too efficent...it was designed for 64 players at a time. Wouldn't it suck if it cuts corners in places that doesn't matter in FPS but will in PS? When using camnet or spy cams, you might see choppy spies(or no spies at all) because they aren't technically suppose to be in your model's view of vision according to the game. If we make it our own or download one, we won't have to fear of these issues.
The fan base argument still makes no sense to me. 1) By using UT3 instead of OGRE, you are limiting the group from EVERYONE to EVERYONE WHO OWNS UT3. 2) I never thought limiting a stealth-action game to people whose main method of combat is circle strafing was a good idea.
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
When looking at engines like OGRE, you have to realize that everthing we do needs to be handeled from scratch.
What's better? 2 programmers creating something "from scratch" or NO programmers changing an undocumented and confusing game code?
Quote from: iservealot on July 04, 2007, 07:10:11 PM
I do not believe that OGRE allows for VSM (or even PCF) lighting in real time, nor do I think it offers any extrodinary animation system.
I don't know what those mean. More words less abbreviations.
Ok guys, how about arguing the points I've layed down? I'm telling you the house you're buying is on fire, you're telling me how nice the kitchen is...
Ill make it simple for you.
This is the post that was quoted.
Read the
bold part.
Your previous post said that we will need more than one or two programmers but isnt it better having 2 then having none at all?
You seem to be under the illusion that we will never find any more programmers....
and was it really necessary to quote the whole post just to put one bit in bold?
you didnt seem to understand it when i said read his last post so I thought ill make it simple for you ;)
Maybe we will find more programmers but who knows how long thatll take... seems like this project has been going on since last year and its still looking for programmers but only one (overstatement) was found... :(
maybe because theres nothing for the programmers to do till UT3 comes out?
It doesnt matter that overstatement is the only programmer we have at the moment. It makes no sense why we would script entire new partsof the engine to what we want in an open source engine,
when that learning time can be better used learning Uscript, as UE3 already has plenty of things that PS can take advantage of.
Quote from: iservealot on July 05, 2007, 09:00:06 AM
Furthermore, UE3 lets us intregrate physics with animations, to allow for the most accurate simulations. Not to mention it has a great animation blending system, which you would need to code from scratch in OGRE to be anywhere near as efficent as it is in UE3
OGRE with ODE does both. And here comes the old "Companies > Open projects"...piracy, who's winning? The company solely created to everything possible to prevent piracy that it will screw up some people's CDdrives(you know who I'm talking about) or a group of programmers who've hacked it in weeks. OGRE was created with contributions of many experts all over the world, Unreal3 was made by experinced but limited (relatively) group of people.
Quote from: iservealot on July 05, 2007, 09:00:06 AM
There is a whole internet full that explains Unreal Script to you
No, it doesn't. How many times have I referred to scripting as "undocumented"? This is my number 1 reason that learning UnrealScript is hard (the second reason being that UnrealScript supports so many of the same features as C++ that you might as well learn C++).
Quote from: iservealot on July 05, 2007, 09:00:06 AM
Also, the whole "lag" thing becuase of too optimized code makes NO sense.
This is what optimization means...finding the potentially visible set and only updating those. See?
Quote
A significant bandwidth optimization in Unreal's network code is that the server only tells clients about actors in that client's relevant set.
...
If the actor is visible according to a line-of-sight check between the actor's Location and the player's Location, then it is relevant.
http://unreal.epicgames.com/Network.htm
This page is from 1999 and refers to Unreal1 but the scripting information is still relevant so should the networking because the demands of FPS for networking haven't changed much either (damn you all). Finding the potentially visible set is a major component of any realtime process wether it be graphics, sound, networking or physics so this
will exist in some way. It is possible that it looks at the camera position and not the model's position but can it be both? I sure wouldn't want to give up my ability to hear cams while in camnet...(Tidenburg owes me an apology)
Quote from: iservealot on July 05, 2007, 09:00:06 AM
Option C, letting Frvge (one of the two current programmers) learn Uscript, instead of taking the time to learn OGRE scripts, or what ever other engine you'd want to use.
Of course, we could always see who else shows up for scripting.
frvge doesn't want to learn scripting, do you frvge? (keep in mind that if you say no, I will xfire you "So, how's the scripting going?" everyday just like on that other project we did). If we go with OGRE, the beauty of C++ is that only 1 person needs to learn OGRE, the other people can just go around making up stuff without learning anything.
Quote from: iservealot on July 05, 2007, 09:00:06 AM
VSM and PCF are different shadowing methods that are commonly used in current generations games for lighting algorythems. Example - SCDA Versus uses a technique called BPCF to calculate shadows, which was probably chosen becuase of use with the X360
I think Mr.Mic was trying carefully to avoid saying this. Advanced shadowing stuff may screw up the effects we want (to not be able to see a spy in shadow). Anyway, this guy (http://www.ogre3d.org/wiki/index.php/Custom_Shadow_Mapping) apparently did it. Does that seems like a lot of work?
Quote from: iservealot on July 05, 2007, 08:44:14 PM
It makes no sense why we would script entire new partsof the engine to what we want in an open source engine
If you ignored all the points I've made and replaced them with that one point, then yes, it wouldn't make a lot of sense. Your house is on fire and no amount of good points will negate it.
Oh, I just thought of one thing. Everyone is talking about the lobby but I don't think UT3 has a lobby (the one in CT where you wait for new players) and I have never seen a mod add a lobby to a game that has none already.
man... thats enough reasons to choose OGRE... it sounds much more professional...
Hey Over, how many people from the Ogre forums you think you can get to jump into our project?
I still stand that having a lot of people with UT editor experience reduces required work for the programmers.
-and changing to ogre could quite possibly lose them.
Choosing UT was heavily based on this reason.
Overstatement, I dont feel like arguing your points again, cuz you becme very repetitive, but I can tell you that UT3 does in fact allow for lobby change. It's gonna happen trus me.
Quote from: iservealot on July 06, 2007, 08:36:16 AM
Overstatement, I dont feel like arguing your points again, cuz you becme very repetitive, but I can tell you that UT3 does in fact allow for lobby change. It's gonna happen trus me.
I'm arguing point by point so if I've become repetitive, its because you said something I've already addressed and I've had to repeat myself. Yes, you know that you can create a UI and replace any game UI screen with that. But create a new UI screen between connecting and playing on a server? From my experinces from engines, they force the map to load on connect. Anyway, you can't tell me for sure that it doesn't and I've never seen it done on any mod.
Quote from: goodkebab on July 06, 2007, 08:19:26 AM
Hey Over, how many people from the Ogre forums you think you can get to jump into our project?
I still stand that having a lot of people with UT editor experience reduces required work for the programmers.
-and changing to ogre could quite possibly lose them.
Choosing UT was heavily based on this reason.
There's only 1 way to find out (I could make a model viewer app with OGRE if you can do some animations of him switching poses for added PR. Make it look exactly like your renders but with movement). And just incase you missed it, mappers can use either use some user made editor OR one of the commercial mappers that OGRE supports.
Quote from: Overstatement on July 06, 2007, 02:50:02 PM
Quote from: iservealot on July 06, 2007, 08:36:16 AM
Overstatement, I dont feel like arguing your points again, cuz you becme very repetitive, but I can tell you that UT3 does in fact allow for lobby change. It's gonna happen trus me.
I'm arguing point by point so if I've become repetitive, its because you said something I've already addressed and I've had to repeat myself. Yes, you know that you can create a UI and replace any game UI screen with that. But create a new UI screen between connecting and playing on a server? From my experinces from engines, they force the map to load on connect. Anyway, you can't tell me for sure that it doesn't and I've never seen it done on any mod.
there might be a workaround to that. not sure how it all works, but maybe it's possible for the lobby to actually be a map in itself, which you sets the parameters through a UI screen, and then when you press launch it changes the map the one you chose?
That would mean you can't see the map of the server you're joining. Also, you'd have to load the lobby for every game you join.
Overstatement, you havent seen it done in any mod, becuase there are no Unreal 3 MODS!! (except for base work JaReal)
You make an interesting point abou it loading lobby on connect. I am assuming that it will switch over if you script the mod to look at our "menu.ut3".
IF for any reason you cannot, the simple slution is to create a sub directory that copies the UT3 game executable, and add "-ProjectStealtMenuMapName". Then, they will boot right into the Project Stealth menu and game mode, and not be allowed to return to the UT3 game, unless they close the game, and open the original UT3.exe.
(further more, I am sure you could even run some kind of .bat file that executes parameters on start)
Quote from: iservealot on July 07, 2007, 06:45:42 AM
Overstatement, you havent seen it done in any mod, becuase there are no Unreal 3 MODS!! (except for base work JaReal)
You make an interesting point abou it loading lobby on connect. I am assuming that it will switch over if you script the mod to look at our "menu.ut3".
IF for any reason you cannot, the simple slution is to create a sub directory that copies the UT3 game executable, and add "-ProjectStealtMenuMapName". Then, they will boot right into the Project Stealth menu and game mode, and not be allowed to return to the UT3 game, unless they close the game, and open the original UT3.exe.
(further more, I am sure you could even run some kind of .bat file that executes parameters on start)
Yeah, so I get my judgement from the next best thing, other mods. They aren't too much different, most of them share common stuff with interfacing with the engine.
I don't understand. I am talking about the lobby where you wait for other players. Sounds like you're talking about the lobby where you see games to join. Using a shortcut with a "-mod ProjectStealth" in the target line is the standard way of starting up a mod anyway. But it doesn't help with the waiting lobby because after you connect, the engine expects a whole bunch of stuff you aren't ready to give yet (and you'll have to Bionic-Blob it).
I think i was the one that suggested this to Over to have an external app for the Lobby system...kinda like what CT had between SP and MP.
I dont know if it is technically possible, but if you could do it with UT 2004 resources i dont see why not.
As far as loading time, the UI system should be pretty fast....it shouldnt be more then 2mb of memory. CT gets the loading times between every map anyways.
Quote from: goodkebab on July 07, 2007, 07:33:31 PM
I think i was the one that suggested this to Over to have an external app for the Lobby system...kinda like what CT had between SP and MP.
I dont know if it is technically possible, but if you could do it with UT 2004 resources i dont see why not.
As far as loading time, the UI system should be pretty fast....it shouldnt be more then 2mb of memory. CT gets the loading times between every map anyways.
No, it's not possible. It would require a way to connect to servers and for security reasons, they don't release such information. And the load time would include more than just the UI, it also probably load all the scripts (even though you don't use them, they are still loaded) and the framework that's in all maps.
Quote from: Overstatement on July 07, 2007, 07:51:47 PM
Quote from: goodkebab on July 07, 2007, 07:33:31 PM
I think i was the one that suggested this to Over to have an external app for the Lobby system...kinda like what CT had between SP and MP.
I dont know if it is technically possible, but if you could do it with UT 2004 resources i dont see why not.
As far as loading time, the UI system should be pretty fast....it shouldnt be more then 2mb of memory. CT gets the loading times between every map anyways.
No, it's not possible. It would require a way to connect to servers and for security reasons, they don't release such information. And the load time would include more than just the UI, it also probably load all the scripts (even though you don't use them, they are still loaded) and the framework that's in all maps.
once again, you are wrong. The third party app can load external command lines to the game. SO, to join a server it would be the mod name, then some more paramters to join an IP etc. You can have it boot right into the "joining session" and have a pre defined timeout set.
The only thing I am not too sure about is how you would return back to the third part app. I am sure you could probably write an external program that figures out when UT3 closes, and then it launches itself back up or something.
Kinda like how PT did.
You misunderstood me but now that I've reread kebab's post, I misunderstood him which would mean he misunderstood my eariler post and blob's post. Learn to read everyone!
I was talking about a lobby like where you wait and chat with other players. You're thinking of the lobby before that, which doesn't require connecting to a server. At least that's what I think you're thinking, I'm not sure anymore... If not, maybe you could explain how I can or where I can find info to 1) connect to the master server and get a list of game servers 2) connect to the game server 3) process all the text messages and other info in C++.
Also, your method didn't work too well with CT. At least, I've never gotten a connection by pressing "Join Game" on xfire. They always failed to connect and they're probably done the way you said.
thats because ct fails.
the join game button works fine with ut2k4
The system requirements will be somewhat near this!
Project Stealth System Requirements
Minimum Requirements
CPU: 2.8Ghz
RAM: 512MB
Graphics: Geforce 6 series
Recommended System
CPU: 3-4Ghz
RAM: 1024MB
Graphics: NVIDIA 6800GT/Ultra or 7800GT/GTX SLI
Project Stealth Technical features and requirements
* Dual-core CPU: Multi-threading is supported and should provide much better performance
* 64-bit version to be available with better textures
* Renderers: SM3.0, 2.0, possible DX8 renderer
* HDR supported
* Physics: Novodex Physics Engine
* AGEIA PhysX PPU supported.
Quote from: MulleDK13 on July 14, 2007, 05:19:46 PM
* 64-bit version to be available with better textures
wahh??
Gives better textures!
Quote from: MulleDK13 on July 14, 2007, 05:19:46 PM
The system requirements will be somewhat near this!
Project Stealth System Requirements
Minimum Requirements
CPU: 2.8Ghz
RAM: 512MB
Graphics: Geforce 6 series
Recommended System
CPU: 3-4Ghz
RAM: 1024MB
Graphics: NVIDIA 6800GT/Ultra or 7800GT/GTX SLI
Project Stealth Technical features and requirements
* Dual-core CPU: Multi-threading is supported and should provide much better performance
* 64-bit version to be available with better textures
* Renderers: SM3.0, 2.0, possible DX8 renderer
* HDR supported
* Physics: Novodex Physics Engine
* AGEIA PhysX PPU supported.
This guy has no idea what he talking about. He is just throwing out requirments that he wants.
Quote from: MulleDK13 on July 14, 2007, 05:19:46 PM
Recommended System
Graphics: NVIDIA 6800GT/Ultra or 7800GT/GTX SLI
That owned me xDD
Quote from: iservealot on July 14, 2007, 09:23:27 PM
This guy has no idea what he talking about. He is just throwing out requirments that he wants.
Uhm..... No...... These are the official UT2007 system requirements!! So it's probably going to be somewhat near this!
why dont we use UT2? :o
Cause UT3 will be the next uber-game.
And i just read the official syspecs - UT3 needs a GF FX card to run.
no SM3 is required. YAY!!! :P
IF Project Stealth gets to be playable with such card, don't come screaming later on that your Geforce Fx5200 and 486 processor run like crap on low and you get a ridiculous FPS.
Quote from: Gui Brazil on July 18, 2007, 02:12:24 AM
IF Project Stealth gets to be playable with such card, don't come screaming later on that your Geforce Fx5200 and 486 processor run like crap on low and you get a ridiculous FPS.
If is correct. I can already tell you that this will not run decent on a SM 2.0 graphics card. Bare in mind that when this gets released, the G90 will already be out.
Also, our game will depend heavily on lighting, something that can't even be efficiently done on the FX series.
Quote from: iservealot on July 18, 2007, 07:37:56 AM
Also, our game will depend heavily on lighting, something that can't even be efficiently done on the FX series.
lol, i play CT with good fps, so i think that except for the high-poly models, there shouldn't be any REALLY BIG choke point for my system... except if you make all the lighting real-time, then i will have to buy a super-computer to run it...
I havent read most new stuff, but I am reading books on DirectX, OpenGL, shaders AND OGRE... I am willing to learn anything thats necessary, but I need to be in the mood and need to have the time.
Finish your shader book!
And my Apple pie.