[Jblade]

It looks even better in Survival

[Danukem]

Looks fantastic. The circle crosshair for the shotgun is kind of strange, though.

[Jokke_r]

hmm those round pillars could use some gouraud shading

[Spiker]

That looks like some modern game

[Jblade]

DeeperThought, on May 25 2009, 06:46 PM, said:

Looks fantastic. The circle crosshair for the shotgun is kind of strange, though.

it's old - when I get round to updating the code and stuff it'll be a dynamic crosshair for accuracy.

glad you guys like it

[HellFire]

Really cool screeshots, james

[zchri9]

@James, Survival looks great!

[Jimmy]

Oh man, I thought Survival had died. D=

[Daedolon]

Captain Awesome, on May 26 2009, 01:53 AM, said:

Oh man, I thought Survival had died. D=

I bet he's just teasing us... very badly.

[Sobek]

James... Words fail me. That is beautiful.

I keep wanting to ask for a build but I want to wait until it's 'final' so I can just get stuck in and have a play. With everything I'm seeing I am seriously considering making my mod take advantage of it. So bloody tempting.

[KillerBudgie]

James, on May 25 2009, 06:42 PM, said:

It looks even better in Survival

They do. IMO it looks even better than the Doom 3 Engine (ID Tech 4)!

[Yatta]

Fantastic shots.

Polymer makes John Carmack's blood boil, his ass whistle, and it gives iD Tech 4 a run for its money.

[The Commander]

Captain Awesome, on May 26 2009, 10:53 AM, said:

Oh man, I thought Survival had died. D=

I was to say the same thing.

[asdasd]

great job guys!

minimum requirements?

Can I run it with this? P4-2.66 1.2G.RAM ATI radeon 9200

[The Commander]

asdasd, on May 26 2009, 08:38 PM, said:

great job guys!

minimum requirements?

Can I run it with this? P4-2.66 1.2G.RAM ATI radeon 9200

With that card I wouldn't think so. Even if it does it will be shockingly slow.

[Fantinaikos]

2 MB RAM and ATI radeon x1650. Your opinion?

[supergoofy]

Fantinaikos, on May 26 2009, 04:34 AM, said:

2 MB RAM and ATI radeon x1650. Your opinion?

The Radeon 1650 is a little better than GeForce 8600GT, I think.

2GB RAM is the recommended for Windows XP (32 or 64 bit)
4GB RAM is the recommended for Vista (32 or 64 bit)

If you have a P4 3.0 GHz or above, then you can run Polymer, but not with HRP. Polymer + HRP needs a really fast cpu and gpu. But in the future there might be major optimizations to polymer renderer and then we can all run it.

As I said in an earlier post, anyone to convert polymer to assembly? This is extremely hard to do and it needs a lot of work.

[SwissCm]

supergoofy, on May 26 2009, 09:40 PM, said:

The Radeon 1650 is a little better than GeForce 8600GT, I think.

Uhhhhhhhhh no. The 8600GT pretty much thrashes it.

Quote

2GB RAM is the recommended for Windows XP (32 or 64 bit)
4GB RAM is the recommended for Vista (32 or 64 bit)

4GB RAM on Vista x86 would be a gigantic waste of time, considering you wouldn't be able to use about a gig of it. Don't hold me on this, but I beleive video RAM may be more important.

Quote

If you have a P4 3.0 GHz or above, then you can run Polymer, but not with HRP. Polymer + HRP needs a really fast cpu and gpu. But in the future there might be major optimizations to polymer renderer and then we can all run it.

At the moment I beleive that point lights are rather CPU intensive due to being unoptimised. Considering they give my Phenom 9660 a hard time, I seriously doubt you would get playable framerates with a P4 with polymers current state. This of course may change with further optimisation, but I'm pretty sure that if you want to use Polymer's best features, you'll need a pretty beefy PC. In other words, not a P4 with a Radeon x1650.

Quote

As I said in an earlier post, anyone to convert polymer to assembly? This is extremely hard to do and it needs a lot of work.

Not only would that be a pointless waste of time due to the little benefit in performance that would bring, it would also be incompatible with non-x86 platforms. The problem isn't with the programming language the code is written in, but with inefficient algorithms.

[MusicallyInspired]

I've got an X1650 AGP card on a P42.5Ghz with 768MB of RAM and it works. But when I play Hollywood Holocaust with the Polymer HRP and the maphacks it's almost unplayable in some areas. Txtures just turn completely black altogether and I get down to 1 or less FPS. Plus with my sprite issue it's completely unplayable. I had to alter the source so that it would display only models and not sprites when using polymer to even be able to run it.

[TerminX]

asdasd, on May 26 2009, 01:38 AM, said:

great job guys!

minimum requirements?

Can I run it with this? P4-2.66 1.2G.RAM ATI radeon 9200

Hahahahahah no.

[Jokke_r]

i'd say if your computer can run Stalker in DX9 mode you can probably run this. Or say COD4

[Fantinaikos]

But it would easier insert an ON/OFF polymer button in the video section of eduke32 options?

about the RAM and the power of my graphic card, i play Gothic 3 (whit and whitout community patch) almost perfectly so i cannot understand why a game relatively whit minor detail, although polymer, can't run.

[MusicallyInspired]

Fantinaikos, on May 26 2009, 12:53 PM, said:

But it would easier insert an ON/OFF polymer button in the video section of eduke32 options?

There's already a Polymer checkbox on the setup screen on startup.

[d3drocks]

Yatta, on May 11 2009, 01:18 AM, said:

God I love Polymer. It's our new DNF.

Here's a super high quality shot I just took:

http://img93.imagesh...433/polymer.jpg

was that done in real time, or was it rendered as an image slowly?

[Yatta]

d3drocks, on May 26 2009, 12:29 PM, said:

was that done in real time, or was it rendered as an image slowly?

Real time.

Also, to put a little perspective to this, I should mention that I'm on a 2006 rig with an AMD 4200+ X2, 7800 GT 256 MB, and 2 GB ram. Mid-range machine by today's standards!

[Jokke_r]

Fantinaikos, on May 26 2009, 08:53 PM, said:

But it would easier insert an ON/OFF polymer button in the video section of eduke32 options?

about the RAM and the power of my graphic card, i play Gothic 3 (whit and whitout community patch) almost perfectly so i cannot understand why a game relatively whit minor detail, although polymer, can't run.

Polymer uses graphical effects which require shader model 3.0 support from your card. Gothic uses shader model 2.0 so it will work on older cards.
Although i'm pretty sure most of the effects in polymer could be done with shader model 2.0 i'm sure plagman has reasons of his own to use 3.0.

About the HRP though, imo a lot of the textures would probably look fine with half the current resolution, i mean a lot of them aren't THAT complicated or detailed. Especially combined with detail textures i'm sure most textures in the game would look fine with like a max 256x256 res saving a lot of texture memory.

[Ramen4ever]

I'm not even sure what "survival" is but damn that looked sexy. XD

[Danukem]

Jokke_r, on May 26 2009, 12:31 PM, said:

About the HRP though, imo a lot of the textures would probably look fine with half the current resolution, i mean a lot of them aren't THAT complicated or detailed. Especially combined with detail textures i'm sure most textures in the game would look fine with like a max 256x256 res saving a lot of texture memory.

but we wants moar pixels, cuz moar is always betta, if duke had 10000 x 10000 graphix then it would look like crysis

[Moggimus]

I totally agree with scaling down the textures a bit.

[MusicallyInspired]

Yatta, on May 26 2009, 02:31 PM, said:

Real time.

Also, to put a little perspective to this, I should mention that I'm on a 2006 rig with an AMD 4200+ X2, 7800 GT 256 MB, and 2 GB ram. Mid-range machine by today's standards!

And yet, as great as that looks, it looks even better with normal/spec mapping! My jaw dropped when I saw how the rock face textures looked with the (yet unfinished) Polymer HRP pack that was linked to earlier. It's one thing to have awesome lighting and shading and then another thing to have bump maps. And then ANOTHER thing to have parallax mapping!