Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Mars3D


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
5 replies to this topic

#1 RGB   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 03 July 2000 - 01:27 PM

Just finished a screensaver, it needs a PIII or K7 to run properly and at least 128Mb of RAM. If you wanna see one of the most hardware demanding screensavers written go here. http://www.dialspace.dial.pipex.com/voodoopeople/mars3d.html

Sponsor:

#2 Serpent Warrior   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 04 July 2000 - 06:35 AM

why go with high poly instead of bumpmaping? I havn''t played with the settings yet so maybe I''ll be back later =). 3million polys is a lot.. my computer almost had a hartattack..

--Serpent Warrior
The Irish Bunny Project
Looking for coders, modelers, skinners,levelers
--------------------



""Based on refreshingly twisted folklore
and parodies, IBP will be one hell of an
action game --when you''re not laughing too
hard that is! BYOB."
-- Charles Mallory III (Shiny Entertainment)




#3 RGB   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 04 July 2000 - 07:32 AM

I would be surprised if bump mapping would give the same quality, particularly when close to the surface. I know bump mapping gives depth through lighting but it cant take occlusion into account and the illusion of depth falls apart when your close to an object which is meant to have a significant height. Im not knocking bump mapping, it is a great technique but IMO it is best suited to games where frame rate is a priority and to objects/walls with subtle variations in depth.

I set out to make something that would push the fastest P.C.'s to the limits to see what was possible with brute force. This is not something commercial software companies can afford to do since it excludes a large proportion of their market.

Maybe I did it out of frustration that the games I buy rarely make full use of my hardware.

Anyway thanks for trying it out, all feedback is appreciated.

Edited by - RGB on July 4, 2000 2:37:34 PM

Edited by - RGB on July 4, 2000 2:38:14 PM

#4 Serpent Warrior   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 04 July 2000 - 04:10 PM

well, it was pushin my PIII500 to the limits . I was only getin maybe. 2.5 fps. I still havn''t gotten the chance to mess with it, just gettin back from J-4th holiday. I have a TNT2 Ultra also.. not sure if that helps. Well, me off to play..

-Sw

#5 RGB   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 04 July 2000 - 08:36 PM

I would expect A PIII500 with TNT2U to get about 3.5 fps zoomed out and about 6.5 fps zoomed in. I noticed that the optimisations were switched off in my project doh, not sure how much difference that makes, but it might account for the difference. If you can be bothered download it again for that extra 1fps

BTW, was very impressed with your graphics & website serpent.

#6 RGB   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Posted 05 July 2000 - 07:27 AM

Ignore the bit about the new version being faster, just tested it and its not




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS