PolymerNG will use Vulkan and D3D12
#121 Posted 17 February 2016 - 06:06 AM
#122 Posted 17 February 2016 - 06:15 AM
#123 Posted 17 February 2016 - 06:36 AM
#124 Posted 17 February 2016 - 01:47 PM
#126 Posted 17 February 2016 - 02:32 PM
#127 Posted 18 February 2016 - 11:41 AM
Hope we will see it in action this year.
#128 Posted 18 February 2016 - 11:26 PM
#129 Posted 28 February 2016 - 02:53 AM
Diaz, on 18 February 2016 - 11:26 PM, said:
It's not happening, the guy has gone.
#130 Posted 28 February 2016 - 03:01 AM
#132 Posted 28 February 2016 - 11:12 AM
(I cbf to find the link to the dis gon b gud gif so just imagine it here)
#133 Posted 28 February 2016 - 11:23 AM
#134 Posted 28 February 2016 - 01:44 PM
Hendricks266, on 28 February 2016 - 11:12 AM, said:
(I cbf to find the link to the dis gon b gud gif so just imagine it here)
It seems that by far the biggest barrier stopping large new features from being implemented is the lack of available time. You've done some great things for eduke32, but surely you'll be spreading yourself too thin if you attempt to do anything polymer rated on top of everything else you want to do?
I'm personally still hopeful that icecoldduke may yet come back and continue work, however that becomes exponentially less likely the longer we wait. Has anyone actually heard from him recently?
#135 Posted 01 March 2016 - 06:57 AM
Quote
#136 Posted 01 March 2016 - 03:40 PM
#137 Posted 01 March 2016 - 06:45 PM
Quote
#138 Posted 02 March 2016 - 10:14 AM
HiPolyBash, on 01 March 2016 - 06:45 PM, said:
OK random lurker who has only recently joined. I totally believe he is still working on it and we can expect news any day now.
#140 Posted 02 March 2016 - 11:16 AM
Primarily, it has to work with all of the existing systems we have built and mods that have been made over the years, meaning MD2/MD3 models and PNG textures loaded through defs, etc.
We would also need assurance that ICD owns the copyright to his code, and not his employer.
I haven't actually seen any of ice's code yet, so I can't speak to its quality.
TON, on 02 March 2016 - 11:12 AM, said:
#Respect
Have you actually tried said port?
#141 Posted 02 March 2016 - 11:24 AM
Hendricks266, on 02 March 2016 - 11:16 AM, said:
Have you actually tried said port?
It has a few bugs
#142 Posted 02 March 2016 - 03:46 PM
This post has been edited by Mark.: 02 March 2016 - 03:47 PM
#143 Posted 02 March 2016 - 04:11 PM
Hendricks266, on 02 March 2016 - 11:16 AM, said:
He did seem willing to put the support it, although it always seemed to be an unusually low priority.
What port is this?
#144 Posted 02 March 2016 - 10:58 PM
Just saying.
This post has been edited by Tea Monster: 02 March 2016 - 10:59 PM
#145 Posted 03 March 2016 - 05:21 PM
This post has been edited by MusicallyInspired: 16 March 2016 - 08:01 AM
#146 Posted 29 March 2016 - 04:33 AM
Hendricks266, on 02 March 2016 - 11:16 AM, said:
Please explain why we are insisting that any new system be completely backwardly compatible with a renderer that has caused every creator who used it to despair at it's shortcomings and even abandon projects due to it's problems?
MD2 models with the 'boiling vertice' problem - we really want to support that? Why? It's faulty from design. That has no place in any kind of modern engine at all. MD3's are little better.
We want to have something that EDuke can use in the future, not keep it tied to the past. NG - if, at this rate it ever actually happens, should be a separate renderer.
This post has been edited by Tea Monster: 29 March 2016 - 04:35 AM
#147 Posted 29 March 2016 - 06:29 AM
Tea Monster, on 29 March 2016 - 04:33 AM, said:
You mean Polymost, which also supports all of the same things as Polymer except lighting? Yeah, let's just completely break compatibility with everything done since 2003!
Currently any mod that works in Polymost will work in Polymer and generally vice versa, minus the TROR issue (which will hopefully be fixed as time goes on). Heck people even managed to screw with their gamma settings and play Decay in Polymost which was not made for it at all.
#148 Posted 29 March 2016 - 06:43 AM
Mblackwell, on 29 March 2016 - 06:29 AM, said:
Why not just have it as a separate option for those who want to use it?
#149 Posted 29 March 2016 - 08:15 AM
#150 Posted 29 March 2016 - 08:32 AM
I left the Cryengine because they do not guaranty it, and for other reasons. They focus on big developers and their needs. Unity 3D is similar.
This unwritten rule of EDuke32 to keep it backward compatible is why I am here.