[NMF Experimentation] Largest Map Evar?
Moderator: Moderators
ATI drivers suck, no matter how hard they sponsor Valve to let HL2 run good on them.
- Working on map renderer, I wanted subtract operations, not implemented because none of the ATI cards have GL_ARB_imaging, nvidia had it with their first cards.
EDIT: NM they support something else.
- Implemented some new water stuff. I figured rectangular textures are common these days, well ATI has no support for them at all. Not even the newest cards.
Water renderer, well that's not their fault, the renderer could have used another (standard) language and then it should have worked I think.
- Working on map renderer, I wanted subtract operations, not implemented because none of the ATI cards have GL_ARB_imaging, nvidia had it with their first cards.
EDIT: NM they support something else.
- Implemented some new water stuff. I figured rectangular textures are common these days, well ATI has no support for them at all. Not even the newest cards.
Water renderer, well that's not their fault, the renderer could have used another (standard) language and then it should have worked I think.
Last edited by jcnossen on 06 Aug 2006, 11:50, edited 1 time in total.
-
Forboding Angel
- Evolution RTS Developer
- Posts: 14673
- Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43
Dude, you obviously aren't aware of this, but for some people with Ati, maps larger than 32x32 will appear black.Dragon45 wrote:And fordboding - let me quote your response.
Forboding Angel wrote:ati cards can only support textures up to 2048x2048. Therefore, any person that has an ati graphics card cannot play on a map that is bigger than 32x32.
Your wording means you are incorrect. You argued nothing about shadows or anything else.
Also, I would like to point out that most mappers automatically know that it is the shadow map that causes problems for ati. Sorry for not being super specific. Actually btw, JC said that maps larger than 32x32 will simply not work for users with Ati cards some time ago. Maybe you should go jump all over him too.
The reason that smoth and I in particular are argumentetive is simply because little twits like you go around and shit all over every thread that we post in. You are simply oblivious to the fact htat the both of us have spent tons of out FREE time helping the community, and half the time we have to deal with 16 year old highschool kids who have decided they don't like use because we made oyu look stupid publicly, and now you want to attempt to cause all kinds of problems in every damn thread.
If you would simply spend more time reading and comprehending instead of thinking about only what you want to say then people might be nicer too you.
Now, go fuck off. I was never even an asshole to anyone at the beginning, only when I was provoked, all I said was that either the large maps would not work outright or they would have all kinds of issues, lordo replied with:
I was not an asshole to anyone until later in the topic.Thats pure bullshit. I don't know where your getting that from but I can play Epic seamlessly on my ATI Radeon 9600 128mb. Thats 40x40 btw.
THen Lordo decides to post his ON ATI montage, he forgot in his little quotes to mention WITH ISSUES. He made those quotes ot be an ass, that is the only way to take that post tone.
I reply as asshole back, then we start going back and forth. Then Dragon45 decides to come in here and act like the high school brat that he is.
THen gnome makes a post that is entirely off base which clearly indicates that he read until somehting that he didn't like, ignored all the posts after that. BTW when did I ever say spring was god? I rarely even play spring.
SO to recap:
Appearently some ati cards do not have issues whereas some do. THe point is, that there ARE issues, so until those arre resolved it's basically folly to make superhuge maps. They would most likely run pretty slow for most people anyway. That would be dependant on the number of blendmaps used in said map, and to have a good looking map you need at the minimum 2 - 3. That gets to be pretty memory intensive.
I said it right at the beginng in, and you all still argeud over it, and I have read and posted in more threads than all of you put together, I've spent more time than all of you put togther in these forums and I have thus accumulated a huge mass of knowledge from simply reading what has been said.
I even predate you all by at least several months and some of you at least a year.
So when i say FA si right in what he posted above, be ashamed be very ashamed! ffs even a core dev posted here and you still tried going on, do you really know more than the core devs workign on spring?
I even predate you all by at least several months and some of you at least a year.
So when i say FA si right in what he posted above, be ashamed be very ashamed! ffs even a core dev posted here and you still tried going on, do you really know more than the core devs workign on spring?
For the sake of clarity the 64x64 map I did. Nice and simple one texture, no blending, height range is about 8000!
Issues, some are obvious, some I'll explain.
The stepping is caused because the engine will not load a 16bit raw heightmap at this size (4097x4097 ~32MB) and does not only uses 8bits of if a 16bit tiff.
The shadows seem too deep, maybe they don't mix properly with the shading?
The map take a long time to load, were talking minutes here.
Yes, that is an FPS counter weee!
[edit]
Screens taken using spring-sm3-r1667.exe, spring-sm3-v2.exe does not render the shadows but does render the shading.
[/edit]
Issues, some are obvious, some I'll explain.
The stepping is caused because the engine will not load a 16bit raw heightmap at this size (4097x4097 ~32MB) and does not only uses 8bits of if a 16bit tiff.
The shadows seem too deep, maybe they don't mix properly with the shading?
The map take a long time to load, were talking minutes here.
Yes, that is an FPS counter weee!
[edit]
Screens taken using spring-sm3-r1667.exe, spring-sm3-v2.exe does not render the shadows but does render the shading.
[/edit]
-
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
No, they just use DX. Spring is the odd game out because we use a universally compatible graphics platform that ATI has, in all honestly, quite shitty support for. We don't really have the option of converting to DX at this point, neither is it really appealing since we have a quite active lunix segment to our community.Gnome wrote:Yeah, clearly. OMG WTF ATI U NOOBS AN OPEN SOURCE GMAE DOESNT RUN RITE ON UR CARDZ LOL.Forboding Angel wrote:Dumbass....With issues...
Until ati decides to get it's act together, maps larger than 32x32 will have all kinds of issues with ati users.
It's also clearly ATI's fault that the 9200 doesn't display text in Spring either. I mean, hell, while we're at it, it's their fault that it can't run Spring's reflective water either. I mean, hell, HL2 is just the odd game out, right? The one in a million? I think they sold their souls to the devil (ATI, LOL GET IT???) so their game would run properly on ATI cards!! It's a conspiracy! They're oppressing Spring, and by extension AA! Shits, guess we'll be burning down ATI's R&D lab next week then, because Multiplayer Water.. I mean spring is infallible!
That being said, steps will continue to be made to improve things, but likely spring will always run better in Geforce cards then ATI simply because in order to make spring run will with ATI cards we need to work around arbitrary limitations that ATI has built into their cards that don't exist when working with nvidia development. It also doesn't help that all our coders have Geforce cards so they can't test compatibility with ATI's easily.
Why would they want to help a totally uncooperative teams of nvidea-fanboys building a game played by a total of maybe 1000 people?bamb wrote:Maybe the developers could drop a query mail to Ati. After all, they get bad pr when there's lots of bug reports. Spring is a pretty good-looking open-source project and probably more so visible in the linux community.
I mean, spring just dives into any kind of propritary nvidia arb extensions its no wonder that it wont work as well on ati cards.
And none of the developers having a ati card is more than a bit retarted.
And reading swiftspears post above it seems the whole graphics related development process is more than a bit brain damaged ("arbitrary limitations" my ass...)
-
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
There are arbitrary limitations. The 2000x2000 (or something around that) texture size limitation is a hard coded ATI limitation, nvidea's is more then double that. We're not saying it's impossible to work around, forb is a bit overstating that, it's possible to work around for sure, but it's going to take time to develop those solutions and spring has a lot of other things to deal with at the same time.
IMSabbel, if you want to hire developers for us that have infinite resources to evaluate and equalize the graphical performance differences between ATI cards and nvidea cards on spring we're more then willing. It's not "retarded" that none of the spring developers have an ATI card, it's just the way it worked out, they aren't paid for spring there is no good reason they would buy a video card they don't want simply for testing purposes in spring. Equalizing performance between the two card manufacturers is a long and tedious development process, Valve spent almost 2 years on it for HL2, you can't just treat it like it's some simple common sense development practice that should have already been done right now. This engine is still in beta and there's about a billion features still not implemented, the graphics work, that's good enough.
IMSabbel, if you want to hire developers for us that have infinite resources to evaluate and equalize the graphical performance differences between ATI cards and nvidea cards on spring we're more then willing. It's not "retarded" that none of the spring developers have an ATI card, it's just the way it worked out, they aren't paid for spring there is no good reason they would buy a video card they don't want simply for testing purposes in spring. Equalizing performance between the two card manufacturers is a long and tedious development process, Valve spent almost 2 years on it for HL2, you can't just treat it like it's some simple common sense development practice that should have already been done right now. This engine is still in beta and there's about a billion features still not implemented, the graphics work, that's good enough.
Maybe you should read above posts before spouting your opinion blindly in future IMSabbel.
Spring is an OpenGL game. It's a universal standard derived from SGI's IrixGL (IrisGL? (Nobody remembers anyway...)) that is effectively cross-platform and fairly efficent in comparison to DirectX which is the Windows wonder that ATI supports excessively while neglecting OpenGL. It would be suicide for a developer to use an ATI card because they're developing cross-platform which means OpenGL.
That is the reason that ATI and Spring don't mix. Not that the development was targetted away voluntarily from ATI cards, ATI cards simply don't support the cross-platform elements and the core graphical issues in Spring effectively.
There ARE limitations on both ends. Spring is coded for OpenGL, which should work everywhere except Microsoft would rather get us all on DirectX. ATI is focused on Windows machines which make up the majority of computers but probably not a supermajority of those who play Spring, and they neglect OpenGL.
Spring is an OpenGL game. It's a universal standard derived from SGI's IrixGL (IrisGL? (Nobody remembers anyway...)) that is effectively cross-platform and fairly efficent in comparison to DirectX which is the Windows wonder that ATI supports excessively while neglecting OpenGL. It would be suicide for a developer to use an ATI card because they're developing cross-platform which means OpenGL.
That is the reason that ATI and Spring don't mix. Not that the development was targetted away voluntarily from ATI cards, ATI cards simply don't support the cross-platform elements and the core graphical issues in Spring effectively.
There ARE limitations on both ends. Spring is coded for OpenGL, which should work everywhere except Microsoft would rather get us all on DirectX. ATI is focused on Windows machines which make up the majority of computers but probably not a supermajority of those who play Spring, and they neglect OpenGL.
