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.
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..
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.