future 3d graphics replacement, started some work

Alltaken · Post by **Alltaken** » 04 Jan 2005 06:06

Kumagoro wrote:Wouldn't it be better to use 3D trains and vehicles on a 2D environment? A small 3d model wil take less space than 40 sprites... i think

And how about day/night cycle? Will it be implemented? (i wonder how will the train lights look, hope few stunning GL efects )

day/night should be possible. but no time soon.

and i personally don't think 3d trans are the way to go. i would much prefer 3d ground with 2d trains... but hey whatever works.

Alltaken

DaleStan · Post by **DaleStan** » 04 Jan 2005 07:20

The problem with 3D anything is that then we suddendly require a 3D renderer. For one, this would proably be a little bit of work for the devs, and for another, I expect I'm not the only person around here whose machine can barely handle GTA3[0]; I really don't want to see what would happen if I asked this thing attempt to render hundreds of complex 3D objects. As I've said before, a proper train network in TTDPatch can take over 80% of my 1.8GHz processor, leaving almost nothing for 3D rendering. (What, you think my graphics card would do the rendering? It would. That is, it would <rant>if I had an AGP slot.</rant>)

[0] Framerates around 15, if I'm lucky.[1] Occasionally it drops down to 3 or so--that is, 3 per minute (the 15 is per second, thankfully)
[1] And that's only if I shut down ALL background apps. Including the firewall.

Observer · Post by **Observer** » 04 Jan 2005 11:37

I actually agree with DaleStan on this. My pc is quite a bit faster, but I like to do some network gaming with older pc's. And I also like to play this at school (during class hehehe) on my crappy old laptop without any good graphics card.

Torrasque · Post by **Torrasque** » 04 Jan 2005 13:19

Yeah, I don't want 3d too, but what's the problem? It don't gonna be 3d. the 3d model are only created for making sprites. (Yeah drawing 40 faces for one vehicule is a pain)

P.S How uglish it could be in 3d : http://www.clubic.com/t/jeux/shot/1685.html

Sorry for my english

Jeffrey · Post by **Jeffrey** » 04 Jan 2005 14:24

Torrasque wrote:P.S How uglish it could be in 3d : http://www.clubic.com/t/jeux/shot/1685.html

haha that are some extreme low-poly models

MeusH · Post by **MeusH** » 06 Jan 2005 19:39

Oh men you completly don't get it!

The camera will be on same height as current Tycoon height! And I wonder why you compare GTA3 with another game! GTA3 has the worst 3D engine ever made! UT works fine on 500MHz comp, quake3 works fine, too... And those games think a few millions polygons and enities more than tycoon would...

ConductorBob · Post by **ConductorBob** » 09 Jan 2005 06:03

As a person who lives on the overclocking forums of the world, UT GOTYE may work on an 800mhz computer, and UT2003 + 2004 both take a minimum of around 1100mhz, just to boot a map. Otherwise....

Any progress, or more so, any pics I can gaze at?

Aegir · Post by **Aegir** » 09 Jan 2005 06:13

MeusH wrote:Oh men you completly don't get it!

The camera will be on same height as current Tycoon height! And I wonder why you compare GTA3 with another game! GTA3 has the worst 3D engine ever made! UT works fine on 500MHz comp, quake3 works fine, too... And those games think a few millions polygons and enities more than tycoon would...

And one of the beauties of OTTD/TTDPatch is that it will run on an old computer that does not support OpenGL acceleration. And beleive me, there are lots stuck in. this situation

And what about somone on Linux? Not everyone can get working 3d Acceration. Hell, ATI's current drivers spit the dummy where Xorg6.8 is concerned, and the workaround for that quite often leaves people with 3d acceleration barely good enough to run any of the GL screensavers.

As much as I dont particularly like OTTD in its current stage of development, I am looking forward to the graphics system Alltaken has been pushing for. True 3d, in my oppinion doesn't really work for this genre.

(And GTA3 has a rather good engine, considering its a port from somthing that does rather good graphics considering the limitations of the Playstation 2 platform.)

Torrasque · Post by **Torrasque** » 09 Jan 2005 12:59

MeusH wrote:[...] UT works fine on 500MHz comp, quake3 works fine, too... And those games think a few millions polygons and enities more than tycoon would...

Please someone can help me???
Show me one pics of a game that looks good and is like TT. I can't believe it can not be ugly...but I wish I have false.
I'll really appreciate if you show me a proof.

sorry for my english

Joker · Post by **Joker** » 09 Jan 2005 21:17

ConductorBob wrote:As a person who lives on the overclocking forums of the world, UT GOTYE may work on an 800mhz computer, and UT2003 + 2004 both take a minimum of around 1100mhz, just to boot a map. Otherwise....

This is not true. 466MHz Celeron with GeForce2 MX 32MB card was able to run UT without problems and also was able to run UT 2003 with low detail settings, but it was playable. 300MHz processor with Riva card also was able to run UT.

MeusH · Post by **MeusH** » 11 Jan 2005 12:43

I agree with Joker, he's right!
And now tell me how many computers doesn't have 3d accelelator. 1%? 2%?
Oh, and remember there are 3d games that don't require accelelator

Cadde · Post by **Cadde** » 19 Feb 2005 04:58

What happened to all the good looking graphics?

It all went dead or what?

ThorRune · Post by **ThorRune** » 19 Feb 2005 15:44

The vecation ended

Alltaken · Post by **Alltaken** » 22 Feb 2005 15:16

ThorRune wrote:The vecation ended

yeah, but progress is certainly been made. a huge amount. (if you look around you will find a huge amount of stuff to define what needs to be contributed)

Alltaken

Transport Tycoon Forums

future 3d graphics replacement, started some work

Who is online