Login [Register]
Don't have an account? Register now to chat, post, use our tools, and much more.
DShiznit wrote:
I was talking about a computer from like 2002, but I think the latest update for intel chipsets actually added 1.5 support, so that might not even matter. I was just curious. My netbook will support it regardless, no need to add in additional legacy support for me.
Aye, but a computer from 2002 is not likely to be high on the roster of hardware that Elfprince wants to put the effort into creating corner cases to handle, in my humble opinion. Smile
Yeah it looks like 2002 era Intel Chips might be able to squeeze by but wikipedia is saying 1.4 for them. I guess we'll just have to wait and see how many users are still on that old of hardware.
TheStorm wrote:
Yeah it looks like 2002 era Intel Chips might be able to squeeze by but wikipedia is saying 1.4 for them. I guess we'll just have to wait and see how many users are still on that old of hardware.
Hopefully not terribly many; this is aimed at a slightly (though not by much) more sophisticated gaming crowd than casual or flash gaming.
It might be newer, I'm not sure, but it was high-end at the time it was bought. I remember reading in a change log for the intel drivers I downloaded for one of my computers that OpenGL 1.5 support had just been added, but I can't remember if it's the one I'm thinking of. I suppose I'll have to wait and see.
DShiznit wrote:
It might be newer, I'm not sure, but it was high-end at the time it was bought. I remember reading in a change log for the intel drivers I downloaded for one of my computers that OpenGL 1.5 support had just been added, but I can't remember if it's the one I'm thinking of. I suppose I'll have to wait and see.
Do you happen to remember the chipset model so that we could do some preemptive research?
KermMartian wrote:
DShiznit wrote:
It might be newer, I'm not sure, but it was high-end at the time it was bought. I remember reading in a change log for the intel drivers I downloaded for one of my computers that OpenGL 1.5 support had just been added, but I can't remember if it's the one I'm thinking of. I suppose I'll have to wait and see.
Do you happen to remember the chipset model so that we could do some preemptive research?
If my PIII's PSU hadn't died it would have been perfect as its an i810, about as old as a comp running XP can get. If I can find a PSU to throw in it I'll see what glxinfo has to say about it, I'd assume the linux and windows OGL versions would at least be close.
OpenGL 1.5 is horribly old. 3.3, wich has support for older hardware, or 4.0, refined to almost DirectX standards, would be a lot better.
Svenne wrote:
OpenGL 1.5 is horribly old. 3.3, wich has support for older hardware, or 4.0, refined to almost DirectX standards, would be a lot better.
OpenGL 1.5: 2003
OpenGL 2.0: 2004
OpenGL 3.0: 2008
OpenGL 4.0: 2010

I wouldn't call seven years horribly old, especially if it works well and quickly on a wide range of hardware.
I have no idea, but it doesn't really matter. My netbook will still run it, so it's cool.
Svenne wrote:
OpenGL 1.5 is horribly old. 3.3, wich has support for older hardware, or 4.0, refined to almost DirectX standards, would be a lot better.
Your forgetting that many users are using Linux and while the 3D driver stacks under windows are very mature many of the Linux stacks are not so. Heck the FOSS radeon driver only gives me OGL 2.1 on my card that support 3.3 in hardware. I think a target of 1.5 is very reasonable for our target audience.
TheStorm wrote:
Svenne wrote:
OpenGL 1.5 is horribly old. 3.3, wich has support for older hardware, or 4.0, refined to almost DirectX standards, would be a lot better.
Your forgetting that many users are using Linux and while the 3D driver stacks under windows are very mature many of the Linux stacks are not so. Heck the FOSS radeon driver only gives me OGL 2.1 on my card that support 3.3 in hardware. I think a target of 1.5 is very reasonable for our target audience.
Definitely. Blockland/TBM have a history of supporting hardware that's been long since abandoned by most games, so I don't see a reason to abandon that compeltely.
I take it this means there won't be any possibility for an XBLA port...
DShiznit wrote:
I take it this means there won't be any possibility for an XBLA port...


Do you REALLY want to try and map the FB control set onto an XBox controller?
How about allowing the user to choose between different versions? This way we will still retain compatibility with older hardware, while being able to fully use the capabilities of modern cards.
Svenne wrote:
How about allowing the user to choose between different versions? This way we will still retain compatibility with older hardware, while being able to fully use the capabilities of modern cards.
We still get right back to Elfprince13 and the other coders having to maintain a bunch of different versions and optimizations, which is a much less trivial task than it sounds.
yea, that's wayyyyy too much work for something that probably won't make that big of a difference anyway.
elfprince13 wrote:
DShiznit wrote:
I take it this means there won't be any possibility for an XBLA port...


Do you REALLY want to try and map the FB control set onto an XBox controller?


I already have. When building, I use the left stick to shift bricks forward, backward, left, and right, and the right stick to shift them up and down and rotate them. I can then use the triggers as my ctrl and alt for super shifting. However I take it the controller mappings aren't what's holding an XBLA port back...
Err, what about walking and looking and glancing? And brick-coloring? And scaling?
The sticks would only be used for building when a brick is placed. The camera then follows the brick ghost until you cancel it. Menus, like the paint color menu, could also be manipulated using a mouse cursor moved by the left stick when a menu is up.
DShiznit wrote:
The sticks would only be used for building when a brick is placed. The camera then follows the brick ghost until you cancel it. Menus, like the paint color menu, could also be manipulated using a mouse cursor moved by the left stick when a menu is up.
But how would you open all these windows in the first place, and switch to paint mode, and all that? All in all, it sounds super-awkward to me.
  
Register to Join the Conversation
Have your own thoughts to add to this or any other topic? Want to ask a question, offer a suggestion, share your own programs and projects, upload a file to the file archives, get help with calculator and computer programming, or simply chat with like-minded coders and tech and calculator enthusiasts via the site-wide AJAX SAX widget? Registration for a free Cemetech account only takes a minute.

» Go to Registration page
Page 2 of 3
» All times are GMT - 5 Hours
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 

Advertisement