Does anyone know if Micropose will patch GP2 to take advantage of the
superior graphics offered by the 3DFX voodoo and Rendition Verite
chipsets?
Even if it were only a frame rate patch and not a total overhaul of
graphics, I am sure a lot of gamers would appreciate it.
Regards
Daniel Tsui.
> Does anyone know if Micropose will patch GP2 to take advantage of the
> superior graphics offered by the 3DFX voodoo and Rendition Verite
> chipsets?
> Even if it were only a frame rate patch and not a total overhaul of
> graphics, I am sure a lot of gamers would appreciate it.
> Regards
> Daniel Tsui.
The fight for high frame rate is the differnence between success and
failure, and it is certainly not as simple as just writing a 'frame rate
patch'...
So far, many of the games have done this with only a patch. TR, Quake etc.
BB
>> Does anyone know if Micropose will patch GP2 to take advantage of the
>> superior graphics offered by the 3DFX voodoo and Rendition Verite
>> chipsets?
>> Even if it were only a frame rate patch and not a total overhaul of
>> graphics, I am sure a lot of gamers would appreciate it.
>> Regards
>> Daniel Tsui.
>I would think you would need more than a 'patch' to export the games to
>a 3D-card... Remember; the CPU accesses a 3D graphics card totally
>different from a ordinary card. This means ALL the routines in the
>program that use the graphics adapter must be rewritten. In addition,
>you would probably rewrite close to 90 percent of the original program
>(the exe file that is) because a 3D graphics card can process graphics
>as well as just passively draw them, and this would mean that you would
>use the CPU very different (the bigger portion of a program like this
>make the 3D calculations, which should be done on the 3D card...), so
>the entire structure of the program must be altered as well. The
>graphics data files can be used unaltered, though...
>The fight for high frame rate is the differnence between success and
>failure, and it is certainly not as simple as just writing a 'frame rate
>patch'...
> Does anyone know if Micropose will patch GP2 to take advantage of the
> superior graphics offered by the 3DFX voodoo and Rendition Verite
> chipsets?
> Even if it were only a frame rate patch and not a total overhaul of
> graphics, I am sure a lot of gamers would appreciate it.
> Regards
> Daniel Tsui.
GO #2!
Mullins Motorsports Inc.
http://www.***tron.com/~ddmj
: I would think you would need more than a 'patch' to export the games to
: a 3D-card... Remember; the CPU accesses a 3D graphics card totally
: different from a ordinary card. This means ALL the routines in the
: program that use the graphics adapter must be rewritten. In addition,
: you would probably rewrite close to 90 percent of the original program
: (the exe file that is) because a 3D graphics card can process graphics
: as well as just passively draw them, and this would mean that you would
: use the CPU very different (the bigger portion of a program like this
: make the 3D calculations, which should be done on the 3D card...), so
: the entire structure of the program must be altered as well. The
: graphics data files can be used unaltered, though...
: The fight for high frame rate is the differnence between success and
: failure, and it is certainly not as simple as just writing a 'frame rate
: patch'...
Ah, but the way GP2 is written, I don't think we need to worry about
giving extra stuff to the CPU to do when all of the graphics work is
being handled by an accelerated 3d card. That's because when GP2 gets
bogged down, it still does everything CPU and slows down the refreshing
of the frames. Besides if the program was written properly the graphics
routines should be "modular". Having the graphics work done by the
card's engine would just allow the CPU to handle the stuff it's already
being asked to do, but not have to slow down the graphics. It's sorta
the same thing as turning off detail to keep the CPU from having to take
time out of its calculations to draw a tree or building. When we do
that in GP2, the CPU occupancy drops.
Of course all of this is pure speculation since I haven't seen the
actual source for GP2, but it appears that the graphics engine is
modular, if it was deeply embedded in the rest of the code I think it
would have been more effecient. Sometimes just handling calls and
returns from routines create a large overhead in a program. There are
alot of things which need to be stored for retreival after returning
from a called routine along with just handling the addressing issues.
--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> So far, many of the games have done this with only a patch. TR, Quake etc.
> BB
I heard that Microprose has apparently given/sold DirectDraw3 rights
of the game to Microsoft, so there remains a good chance that at least
a faster Win95 version could be in the offing
****************************************************************
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/terrace/abk85/leeker/index.htm
The Voodoo chip can basically only "draw a triangle". A very advanced
triangle with mipmapping, anti-aliasing, z/w-buffering, alpha blending,
fog etc. - but still just a triangle. It cannot do any kind of 3D
manipulation (transforms) and thus does not comprise a 3D system
per se. Hence it should be a relatively simple operation to replace
GP2's "drawTriangle" routine to suit the Voodoo chip. Other problems
may be less trivial to overcome, though. Like the 2MB limit for texmap
storage and the different way the frame buffer is accessed. However, the
lack of a patch or even an announcement of intent still smells more like
politics than technical difficulties.
Cheers,
Kenneth
