TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 56 of 98 FirstFirst ... 61116212631364146515253545556575859606166717681869196 ... LastLast
Results 1,376 to 1,400 of 2446

Thread: Thief 1/2 & SShock 2: DDFix and Enhanced Resolution Patch - discussion

  1. #1376
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2003
    Location: Norman, OK
    Quote Originally Posted by Child Of Karras View Post
    Intel GMA 945.
    I'm not at all certain your chipset will even *do* antialiasing... If you can't force it on a graphics driver screen, I'm fairly sure it's not an option for you.

  2. #1377
    Member
    Registered: May 2005
    I'm pretty sure that any antialiasing the gma945 does is in software. You don't want to enable it.

  3. #1378
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2005
    Location: Hiding in Garrett's wardrobe.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikerdude View Post
    should young SiO2 take up the challenge, that is....
    OK, I'll look at the Fog issue. I'm fed up of not having fog myself. No promises though!

    There may also be added benefits from using Direct3D9 (such as improved performance due to better internal batching) but we'll have to see - one issue at a time.

    Theoretically, we could use DX10 or even DX11 instead of DX9 though at the moment I can't think of any real, tangible benefits (except ultra-coolness).

    Bloom/HDR rendering (using DX9) is something I'd though about, though this may be tricky to pull off with only device state to examine at runtime. You don't want to bloom the GUI, for example, but perhaps we can assume that all primitives T2 sends to render whilst fog is enabled are world geometry and the rest of the primitives are non-world (such as gui).

  4. #1379
    ZylonBane
    Registered: Sep 2000
    Location: ZylonBane
    Quote Originally Posted by SiO2 View Post
    Bloom/HDR rendering (using DX9) is something I'd though about, though this may be tricky to pull off with only device state to examine at runtime.
    Indeed. I know some people like it, but I've always thought the fake-HDR filters applied to old games look like complete ass, precisely for the reason you noted. The renderer has no way of knowing if 255,255,255 is a sheet of paper, or the heart of a sun.

  5. #1380
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by SiO2 View Post
    Theoretically, we could use DX10 or even DX11 instead of DX9 though at the moment I can't think of any real, tangible benefits (except ultra-coolness).
    I can think of a very real, tangible reason not to use DX10 or DX11 - they need Windows Vista or Windows 7. Limiting yourself to those for a hack designed to make Thief work as well as possible for the most number of people would be rather foolhardy.

    Also, it's been a while so I can't quite recall the specifics, but you'll want to hunt through this thread to see why Timeslip originally abandoned the D3D9 version if you haven't already.

    Quote Originally Posted by SiO2 View Post
    Bloom/HDR rendering (using DX9) is something I'd though about, though this may be tricky to pull off with only device state to examine at runtime.
    Bloom, sweet Builder nooo.

  6. #1381
    Quote Originally Posted by SiO2 View Post
    OK, I'll look at the Fog issue. I'm fed up of not having fog myself. No promises though!

    There may also be added benefits from using Direct3D9 (such as improved performance due to better internal batching) but we'll have to see - one issue at a time.

    Theoretically, we could use DX10 or even DX11 instead of DX9 though at the moment I can't think of any real, tangible benefits (except ultra-coolness).

    Bloom/HDR rendering (using DX9) is something I'd though about, though this may be tricky to pull off with only device state to examine at runtime. You don't want to bloom the GUI, for example, but perhaps we can assume that all primitives T2 sends to render whilst fog is enabled are world geometry and the rest of the primitives are non-world (such as gui).
    Because thief / thief 2 are dx 6/7 games, Timeslip switched ddfix's engine or whatever it is (i'm not a programmer so excuse me) from dx 9 to dx 6, back in version 1.1.1. So, unless you have better success than timeslip with dx 9, it may not be a good idea. Just thought i'd mention it, but I probably don't understand it very well. Also, are you familiar with the bloom trick from enbseries? There was a thread from last year about enbseries. I also found this one while searching for the link.

  7. #1382
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2005
    Location: Hiding in Garrett's wardrobe.
    I didn't realise that Timeslip had a DX9 version. I'll obviously use it as a starting point. Thanks for the heads-up on that one!

    Fixing fog is the primary goal and currently the only goal. I can't remember the last time I myself saw fog, so that is my motivation.

    HDR/Bloom is merely an idea. DX10/DX11 is merely an idea. If you have a DX11 card then using D3D11 may by the only way to get at the newer higher quality AA. Anyway, for my part, DX10/DX11 functionality would be as a *secondary* addition to DX9 support. If we want to be really wacky we could replace Timeslip's DX9 code with OpenGL.

    If I do have some luck with fog then I'll be looking for beta testers. And before any public release I will need to contact Timeslip, if I can, to make sure I'm not "treading on anyone's toes".

  8. #1383
    And before any public release I will need to contact Timeslip, if I can, to make sure I'm not "treading on anyone's toes".
    Nah, if you want to make your own version, feel free. Doubly so if it improves on mine.

    Problems you'll bump into are thief's habit of locking the front/backbuffers and trying to copy 16 bit data into them, (the bits where it locks the front buffer are the ones that cause most problems in dx9, since you don't have direct access to it,) issues with vsync, (turning it on breaks menus, turning it off causes in game problems,) and a few render states that seem to do something slightly different in dx9 as they did in dx6. I can't remember the reason I switched back to dx6. Probably a compination of all the little problems.
    Last edited by Timeslip; 13th Oct 2009 at 17:01.

  9. #1384
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Ireland
    The D3D9 version is very old now, though. As far as I can recall, it was made before any of the high-res texture replacement options, amongst other things.

  10. #1385
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2001
    What would be great, SiO2, is if you could create a single all-purpose tool for running the Dark Engine games on a modern PC. If that's possible, of course. I'm talking about improving DDFix to get fog working, and maybe other improvements, but also incorporating the excellent and essential Enhanced Resolution patch (aka the Widescreen patch). Having everything in a single package would be simply sweet.

  11. #1386
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2002
    Location: LTSI
    Yeah, since one person stepped forward to do something for the common good, why not put the whole load on him and see how far he can go.

  12. #1387
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2003
    Quote Originally Posted by SiO2 View Post
    Fixing fog is the primary goal and currently the only goal. I can't remember the last time I myself saw fog, so that is my motivation.

    DX10/DX11 is merely an idea. If we want to be really wacky we could replace Timeslip's DX9 code with OpenGL.

    If I do have some luck with fog then I'll be looking for beta testers. And before any public release I will need to contact Timeslip, if I can, to make sure I'm not "treading on anyone's toes".
    To be honest if you can get fog working and possibly internal AA support that would be all that.s needed. But converting to openGL would be VERY VERY good, as this would open up thief to other possibilities.

    Regarding testing, may I suggest using the shalebridge testing forum and can I also suggest getting some testers as savvy as you with regarding to this type of programming, eg Timeslip, NewHorizon, Potterr, Ascottk, JohnP and a few others who I would group into the same level of tech ability.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kolya View Post
    Yeah, since one person stepped forward to do something for the common good, why not put the whole load on him and see how far he can go.
    Are being serious or extracting the michael..?
    Last edited by bikerdude; 13th Oct 2009 at 17:40.

  13. #1388
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Ireland
    Why waste his time on internal AA support? What's wrong with setting it in the graphic card's control panel?

  14. #1389
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2003
    Quote Originally Posted by Nameless Voice View Post
    Why on earth should he waste his time on internal AA support when it can just be turned on it the graphics card control panel?
    Er, it wasnt a frivolous suggestion... the only way to force AA under nvidia cards with DDfix patched T2 is to Force it globally, which is a problem for a lot of people. I dont know about ATi I havent tested this yet.

  15. #1390
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Ireland
    Works just fine for me. Is it a Vista-specific problem, or something that got broken in the most recent drivers (mine are a few versions out-of-date, 185.85 I think.)

  16. #1391
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2003
    Quote Originally Posted by Nameless Voice View Post
    Works just fine for me. Is it a Vista-specific problem, or something that got broken in the most recent drivers (mine are a few versions out-of-date, 185.85 I think.)
    Ah, yes of course. I keep forgetting, vista combined with 180.00 or newer drivers requires AA to be forced globally. I have another PC with a HD3850, but that only runs Xp so i cant test under vista for the AA issue mentioned above.

  17. #1392
    Just to make sure I understand, you guys are saying fog stopped working with newer hardware?
    Last edited by sNeaksieGarrett; 13th Oct 2009 at 20:20. Reason: oops, typo

  18. #1393
    Member
    Registered: May 2005
    Well yes. It does technically work on ATI HD3***/4***'s, but still buggy (disappears after looking at a readable)

  19. #1394
    Member
    Registered: Jan 2009
    Location: Germany
    And only in vista, in XP it works very well.

  20. #1395
    ZylonBane
    Registered: Sep 2000
    Location: ZylonBane
    Quote Originally Posted by Kolya View Post
    Yeah, since one person stepped forward to do something for the common good, why not put the whole load on him and see how far he can go.
    From my understanding, the widescreen patch is actually a pretty simple piece of work. The hard part for the original author was figuring out where to patch the executable.

  21. #1396
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Ireland
    The problem, if I recall correctly from looking into this a year or so back, is that you need to patch your .exe for the specific non-standard resolution you want to use, whereas a DDFix-patched .exe is generic to any setup.

  22. #1397
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2005
    Location: Hiding in Garrett's wardrobe.
    Quote Originally Posted by Timeslip View Post
    Nah, if you want to make your own version, feel free. Doubly so if it improves on mine.
    Thanks. It never hurts to ask permission first.

    Quote Originally Posted by Timeslip View Post
    Problems you'll bump into are thief's habit of locking the front/backbuffers and trying to copy 16 bit data into them, (the bits where it locks the front buffer are the ones that cause most problems in dx9, since you don't have direct access to it,) issues with vsync, (turning it on breaks menus, turning it off causes in game problems,) and a few render states that seem to do something slightly different in dx9 as they did in dx6. I can't remember the reason I switched back to dx6. Probably a compination of all the little problems.
    Thanks very much for the info. Locking the frontbuffer is just pure evil - definitely not allowed in later DirectX versions.

  23. #1398
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2005
    Location: Hiding in Garrett's wardrobe.
    OK people, very first step is for me to run Timeslip's DX9 version and verify that it works for me.

    Then I'll write the shaders to do fog. I'll touch nothing else, even if there's noticeable bugs (unless they're pathological). If I can't get fog to work then all else is moot. If I can get fog to work then we can see what else may be needed (though just fixing fog is probably good enough for now).

  24. #1399
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2005
    Location: Hiding in Garrett's wardrobe.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikerdude View Post
    But converting to openGL would be VERY VERY good, as this would open up thief to other possibilities.
    I used to write OpenGL drivers. I may be able to do this. Do we really want it?

    Would it be able to be used in a way that would violate the T2 EULA? Just wondering...

  25. #1400
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2003
    Quote Originally Posted by SiO2 View Post
    I used to write OpenGL drivers. I may be able to do this. Do we really want it?

    Would it be able to be used in a way that would violate the T2 EULA? Just wondering...
    useing OpenGL would free thief from the shortcomings of DirectX and having to deal with the constant hardware/driver issues that have been the proverbial thorn in our collective sides.

    I seriously doubt it, but one of our resident legal eagles will know for sure.

Page 56 of 98 FirstFirst ... 61116212631364146515253545556575859606166717681869196 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •