6 registered members (AndrewAMD, Ayumi, degenerate_762, 7th_zorro, VoroneTZ, HoopyDerFrood),
1,268
guests, and 6
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
what shader version does your card support?
#182115
02/04/08 23:33
02/04/08 23:33
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,538 WA, Australia
JibbSmart
OP
Expert
|
OP
Expert
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,538
WA, Australia
|
what shader version can your pc handle?
i know i've seen a few people mention their beasts, but i've seen way too many game developers on this forum with graphics cards so old that they do arithmetic by counting their fingers (if a graphics card had fingers).
julz
ps: when choosing what shader model you'd want to support if you released a game right now, choose as if your game can only support one shader model. i want to see what people think the best balance between looking good and wide compatibility is.
Formerly known as JulzMighty. I made KarBOOM!
|
|
|
Re: what shader version does your card support?
[Re: zazang]
#182118
02/06/08 03:07
02/06/08 03:07
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,538 WA, Australia
JibbSmart
OP
Expert
|
OP
Expert
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,538
WA, Australia
|
so far the results are more promising than i had thought -- 79% of voters can handle shader model 3.0 or higher.
and as i thought, the majority would support 2.0 -- 96% of our target audience would be able to play if our target audiences had a similar distribution of shader model support to what you guys do so far (wouldn't it be nice if that many casual gamers really did?).
i guess one thing i didn't consider is the fact that only people with crappy cards complain about shader support, so even though there are only a few absolute rubbish cards among you guys they tend to stick out like dogs' balls (no offense... this isn't meant negatively towards those with such bad cards).
julz
Formerly known as JulzMighty. I made KarBOOM!
|
|
|
Re: what shader version does your card support?
[Re: JibbSmart]
#182119
02/06/08 11:16
02/06/08 11:16
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 290 Latvia
Leonardo
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 290
Latvia
|
Well, I have a Radeon9200 card, which doesn't support many shaders, I believe it supports only PS&VS versions 1.4 or lower, don't know really. But I don't consider my card a crappy one, because I can run NFS:Carbon at the Maximum video settings!! But at the same time, I can't run the Winter Contest DEMO "Demo Scene"! I don't think that is a normal situation and I believe you guys are overrating the use of shaders in-game!
"Things of the mind left untested by the senses are useless."
|
|
|
Re: what shader version does your card support?
[Re: JibbSmart]
#182120
02/06/08 14:33
02/06/08 14:33
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,875
broozar
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,875
|
Quote:
i guess one thing i didn't consider is the fact that only people with crappy cards complain about shader support, so even though there are only a few absolute rubbish cards among you guys they tend to stick out like dogs' balls
i am more concerned about notebook graphics cards. a 8600 in a notebook is damn hot and eats ridiculously much power. so, designing a casual game, i'd take notebook GPUs like Intel x3100 or radeon x1250 as reference. for desktop games, i guess the gf6 series could be the base for the game development today (keeping in mind that the average game takes 12-18 months to hit the stage).
@len: that is because of EA's good fallbacks, and most of the shader effects aren't even displayed by your card (so far to "max detail"). but, the truth is, a radon 9200 can't run quake3arena (early 2000, no hardware shaders) in 1028x1024 and all details above 50 fps. i once had one myself, i switched to geForce 4200 these days.
|
|
|
Re: what shader version does your card support?
[Re: broozar]
#182121
02/06/08 15:03
02/06/08 15:03
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 290 Latvia
Leonardo
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 290
Latvia
|
I'm talking about the fact that I can play NFS:Carbon, but I can't even run this small little Demo Scene! I have a feeling that a lot of the people here are starting to think that their game will rule, because they put shaders in it, but I do not think this is the way to go with 3DGS! Seeing that not so many games are actually fully developed using 3DGS, a developer should focus more on the gameplay of a game and other factors, instead of trying to get the shaders working. And, I think you will agree with me on this one, most of the developers here are indie! Indie games are not so judged by their graphics, but their gameplay. Also the indie market is smaller then the market for core-gamers, so a game needs to appeal to much more people, and if a 3DGS game doesn't work on my system because of shaders, but NFS:Carbon does, which one do you think I will choose to play?
"Things of the mind left untested by the senses are useless."
|
|
|
Re: what shader version does your card support?
[Re: broozar]
#182123
02/06/08 16:04
02/06/08 16:04
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 290 Latvia
Leonardo
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 290
Latvia
|
I am talking about developers who are indie! Hobbyists and beginners are not developers! And I disagree, that if acknex wouldn't support shaders, there would be no more games on the shelf. Most of the games (perhaps even all of them) that are succesful and have been made with 3DGS do not use shaders, because most of those games fall under the category "casual". And when speaking about Crysis, again - if you make a casual game (which, I believe, for now is the best way to go with 3DGS) it will not be compared to Crysis! But you don't seem to have understood my point at all! I'm done explaining my arguments, I already did that. I am just going to ask you a simple direct question - does this situation when my PC can run NFS:Carbon smoothly, but can't run a simple Demo Scene even with the lowest settings, seem normal to you???
PS - this is not intended as a bash to the Demo Scene project, just expressing my views about the use of shaders and their negative side!
Last edited by Leonardo; 02/06/08 16:06.
"Things of the mind left untested by the senses are useless."
|
|
|
|