DRD Team

I uploaded a new test version (same file name). Could you please test it again?

Graf Zahl wrote:I uploaded a new test version (same file name). Could you please test it again?

Sure:

One more test.

Could you download this altered version of LTSD's E4M3,

http://grafzahl.drdteam.org/gzdoom/e4m3.zip

warp to

-1888,1504 and 3200,1728 and make some screenshots looking northwest, north and northeast from both positions?

HOLY SHIT!!!! They screenshots make me drool like crazy. Oh if only I could slap a better graphics card into the computer I am using for now.

That buggy screenshots? `

I have not seen much in the way of good screenshots showing off GZDooM in OpenGL. Most of the current shots are so damn dark that I can not see what is in them.

Graf Zahl wrote:One more test.

Could you download this altered version of LTSD's E4M3,

http://grafzahl.drdteam.org/gzdoom/e4m3.zip

warp to

-1888,1504 and 3200,1728 and make some screenshots looking northwest, north and northeast from both positions?

OK:

Are you sure you got the first spot right? It sure doesn't look like the one I had in mind and the signs of the coordinates don't seem to match.

Anyway, seeing the last shot really makes my head hurt. How the hell does ATI manage to screw up that miserably?

I think I'll try a fragment shader to apply fog. Maybe that will help...

Y'know, I could've sworn that the fog was much more, well, opaque in plain ZDoom (.96x) when I was playing that very wad a couple of days ago. Am I right, or do I just need to wake up?

Fog in hardware works completely differently so differences are to be expected. But much of the effect comes from the incorrect fog in those pictures.

Graf Zahl wrote:Are you sure you got the first spot right? It sure doesn't look like the one I had in mind and the signs of the coordinates don't seem to match.

If you want me to do some more, I can; but perhaps it is best if you provide copies of the screenshots you want -- without the bug of course -- as well as coordinates, just so I can't get the wrong places In any case, I'd like to know what it looks like when not sabotaged by ATI

Graf Zahl wrote:Anyway, seeing the last shot really makes my head hurt. How the hell does ATI manage to screw up that miserably?

Well, ATI have a long and ignoble history of buggy drivers and whatnot, so no surprise there!

These Kapok/Clevo desktop-replacement notebooks come with options for both ATI and NVida; when I start working again and have some money, the first luxury item I buy will be the current -- at the time -- model of the computer I have now... but you can guess which option I won't buy it with...!

Yea I am thinking of going Nvidia since ATI can't learn shit worth saving their asses. I had to go to Dell just so I could update my 9100's drivers so I could *gasp* play Call of Duty (Demo) and DooM 3 (Demo). Still I don't care if these shots are showing off the buggy nature of ATI. All I care is that they show me what OpenGL can truly do for GZDooM.

[quote="MartinHowe"]If you want me to do some more, I can; but perhaps it is best if you provide copies of the screenshots you want -- without the bug of course -- as well as coordinates, just so I can't get the wrong places In any case, I'd like to know what it looks like when not sabotaged by ATI


The street-screenshots all look ok. It's only the water that gets screwed up. These are quite large sectors that get cut off at the screen's edge and that's where I suspect the error. The second one with the water (looking straight north) is how it is supposed to look no matter what direction.

I uploaded another version which uses a fragment shader to do the fogging. (same link again)

Could you test that, too?

For this one I need some more information though:

1. You switch to the shader-based fog by typing 'gl_useshaders 1' in the console.
2. I need a few FPS comparisons between the normal mode and the new one. On my Geforce it produces a noticable speed hit but it looks much better

And of course the most important thing: Does it work? The new code completely circumvents the built in fog capabilities of the hardware.

(Please don't be surprised if I don't respond in the next few days. I won't be at home next week and I have no idea whether I have internet access during that time.)

Well, I noticed absolutely no difference, FPS wise or display wise, between gl_useshaders 1 and gl_useshaders 0. Besides that, the fog still looks wonky over the water, and I don't think there's any point to posting pics of it, as they'd be exactly the same as the ones already up.