DNF Graphics

Nessus · 10-09-2005, 01:11 PM

Will there be any thoughts about making the game scalable into the future? For example including graphics options that would bring current gen cards to their knees but will be achievable a year or two after launch.

I know Valve stated that with HL2 they had game models that were really high detail that they would release at a later date when technology caught up. Looks like that will never happen but I thought it was a great idea. Did you guys do anything like that?

Cerberus_e · 10-10-2005, 09:19 AM

doom 3 did that with ultra quality: you need 512 mb memory in your GPU to play on that or it won't work properly

now, a year later, there are still not a whole lot of people being able to run ultra quality (almost none, in fact)
it's a cool feature yes.

but it's like that with most new games, 3DR says no graphics card is able to run DNF at 1600*1200 on maxed out settings.

Geo-King · 10-10-2005, 09:20 AM

I would like to see that too but I am going to have this comp (2.4MHz Intel, 9800Pro - 4x AGP, 1GB 333MHz RAM) for a very long long time so I hope it's scalable indeed.

I remember reading a long time ago someone from ID saying that DooM3 would show its true potential when new cards come out. Are we at that point now???

It’s amazing what modders can do. Just look at all the stuff they have done to older games. Have you played with the tenebrae source port for Quake1.

Emultra · 10-10-2005, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Cerberus_e said:
but it's like that with most new games, 3DR says no graphics card is able to run DNF at 1600*1200 on maxed out settings.

Even SLi'd 7800GTX's?

Cerberus_e · 10-10-2005, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Geo-King said:
I remember reading a long time ago someone from ID saying that DooM3 would show its true potential when new cards come out. Are we at that point now???

how unfortunate, if you waited 1 minute longer to watch this thread, you'd have seen my post

Spyd · 10-10-2005, 09:42 AM

The Doom3 engine will show its real power with Quake4 and next games.
Half Life 2 will have these high-res models with the "Lost coast" map, to be released shortly.
I hope that we'll get some stuff from 3DR when DNF is done, such as new content or high res models.

Geo-King · 10-10-2005, 10:00 AM

In my opinion, Hardware manufacturers are purposely developing product at slower speeds to make as much profit as possible. Some guy in Japan over-clocked his CPU to 7 or 8 (I don’t remember) GHz. WTF! Sure, he needed a crazy cooling system but that’s still proof that we should be at 10GHz by now. Some guy did this in his basement, don’t you think a multi-billion dollar company can do just a little bit better?

Why am I ranting off topic you might ask well because I wanna see Photo Realistic DNF! GRRRR! BARK! BARK!

Found the story.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/web/display/20050811231553.html

hell-angel · 10-11-2005, 12:28 AM

Quote:

Emultra said:

Quote:

Cerberus_e said:
but it's like that with most new games, 3DR says no graphics card is able to run DNF at 1600*1200 on maxed out settings.

Even SLi'd 7800GTX's?

Even if they did, that are 2 graphics cards, not 1 and that is what they where refering to.

Kalki · 10-11-2005, 04:45 AM

I hope so. I want to see how this game stacks up against what we saw in Unreal Engine 3, not that I have any expectations from it.

Little Conqueror · 10-11-2005, 05:37 AM

Quote:

Cerberus_e said:
doom 3 did that with ultra quality: you need 512 mb memory in your GPU to play on that or it won't work properly

now, a year later, there are still not a whole lot of people being able to run ultra quality (almost none, in fact)
it's a cool feature yes.

but it's like that with most new games, 3DR says no graphics card is able to run DNF at 1600*1200 on maxed out settings.

512 MB?!? Really?!? I know I'm not exactly getting the best out of my Ultra on my Radeon 9600, but I can still run it in 800x600 (which I don't like doing of course) at a very acceptable framerate.

I'm waiting until Duke Nukem Forever is a bit closer to release before I upgrade/buy a new computer. Things are just so damned expensive now - I have rent and bills to pay, so I don't have money (though I have plenty of time) to burn on computer hardware.

But I definitely think developers should keep a broad spectrum of hardware in mind, from low-end to extreme. Scalability is awesome. Even if I'll never be able to do it on my slow computer, I want all sorts of nice, advanced options - I just don't want them to be pushed on my aging computer and called "features." (An option to disable works.)

FireFly · 10-11-2005, 05:49 AM

Quote:

Cerberus_e said:
doom 3 did that with ultra quality: you need 512 mb memory in your GPU to play on that or it won't work properly

now, a year later, there are still not a whole lot of people being able to run ultra quality (almost none, in fact)
it's a cool feature yes.

but it's like that with most new games, 3DR says no graphics card is able to run DNF at 1600*1200 on maxed out settings.

It works just fine with 256 MB cards, you just occasionally get some slight hitching (as new textures are loaded into the video memory).

As for George's quote, that was said in early 2004, before the new generation of cards hit.

Cerberus_e · 10-11-2005, 09:37 AM

Quote:

FireFly said:

Quote:

Cerberus_e said:
doom 3 did that with ultra quality: you need 512 mb memory in your GPU to play on that or it won't work properly

now, a year later, there are still not a whole lot of people being able to run ultra quality (almost none, in fact)
it's a cool feature yes.

but it's like that with most new games, 3DR says no graphics card is able to run DNF at 1600*1200 on maxed out settings.

It works just fine with 256 MB cards, you just occasionally get some slight hitching (as new textures are loaded into the video memory).

yes, when you open a door

I have that problem on low quality too

Little Conqueror · 10-11-2005, 09:49 AM

I think that's actually an issue with the game itself that can be resolved. It's been a while since I've played Doom 3 though.

10-12-2005, 09:44 AM

I just hope the game supports AA and Full AF!!! I want Duke in all it's picture Perfect perfection. My Graphics card is just drooling for this game.

hasenbein · 10-12-2005, 11:48 AM

I can play D3 it with Ultra Details but I cant see a difference. In what way should it look different?

Cerberus_e · 10-12-2005, 11:54 AM

no compression in the textures.

FireFly · 10-12-2005, 01:47 PM

That's already the case for the 'High' quality setting. The only difference between the 'Ultra' and 'High' settings is that the former does not compress the specular or diffuse maps, meaning the lighting on objects is slightly more refined.

NutWrench · 10-12-2005, 02:10 PM

Quote:

hasenbein said:
I can play D3 it with Ultra Details but I cant see a difference. In what way should it look different?

The Doom 3 engine sorts textures according to frequency of use. So a commonly-used texture gets the least compression and an infrequently-used texture gets the most. At the Ultra setting, ALL the textures are at the best quality, with no compression.

If you look carefully through a Doom 3 level, you can find several one-shot textures that look really crappy, even at the medium texture quality setting. (Like the bio-scanner texture at the beginning of the game)

Jeff · 10-12-2005, 02:22 PM

I probably won't get much quality with an X800 series card, but maybe for the next round. Bring on those 1 GB to 2 GB of graphics memory.

Nessus · 10-12-2005, 02:35 PM

I found Ultra barely worth doing, unless youre really looking hard at still shots you dont really see a diffrence.

Does Doom3 use 3DTC? I thought that looked really good, did it take off or did Nvidia not adopt it thus killing it?

10-12-2005, 05:20 PM

Plus when you put it on ultra, it forces anti aliasing (by default unless you reset it back to 0)

But you don't need an 512 MB Card to experience Ultra...

I do it all the time and it works fine and is so smooth.

hell-angel · 10-13-2005, 12:30 AM

Quote:

Jeff said:
I probably won't get much quality with an X800 series card, but maybe for the next round. Bring on those 1 GB to 2 GB of graphics memory.

Yeah, and those processor speeds (for the GPU) can be increased as well IMO.

b.t.w. Jeff:
Congratulations.

Zaarin · 10-13-2005, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Jeff said:
I probably won't get much quality with an X800 series card, but maybe for the next round. Bring on those 1 GB to 2 GB of graphics memory.

Aww, crap, I still have a GF4 Ti4200 with 128Mb + Voodoo 1 with 6Mb

Also, Happy b-day to you Jeff! Hope you get what you wanted for present.

Sayantan · 10-13-2005, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Nessus said:
Does Doom3 use 3DTC? I thought that looked really good, did it take off or did Nvidia not adopt it thus killing it?

Nope. It doesn't have it yet. But who knows ......... *fingers crossed*

hell-angel · 10-14-2005, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Sayantan said:

Quote:

Nessus said:
Does Doom3 use 3DTC? I thought that looked really good, did it take off or did Nvidia not adopt it thus killing it?

Nope. It doesn't have it yet. But who knows ......... *fingers crossed*

what is 3DTC?

SyntaxN · 10-14-2005, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Nessus said:
Does Doom3 use 3DTC? I thought that looked really good, did it take off or did Nvidia not adopt it thus killing it?

Do you mean 3dc from ATI

Nessus · 10-15-2005, 05:16 PM

Yeah I meant 3dc, I always thought it really looked really good.

vincentdante · 01-15-2009, 12:19 AM

Do you think this game will support it and incorporate some of the features? Or perhapes they will just stick with what they have going. What do you think?

LadiesAndGentlemen · 01-15-2009, 12:28 AM

I've heard that DX11 will have some interesting "features", but as far as I know, DX10 is just a failed marketing experiment.

KaiserSoze · 01-15-2009, 01:45 AM

I see little difference in dx9 vs dx10 when I play Crysis
Warhead. The last comment George made re: dx certification
was that DNF was a dx9 game.

Most likely it'll end up being dx9 and run on XP/Vista.

Wouldn't be surprised to see DNF's system recommendations
mirror those of Crysis: WH btw.

vincentdante · 01-15-2009, 02:04 AM

I suppose your right, DX9 would be the sensible choice.

Either way though DX9 or DX10 this game will still be awesome

Nihilanth · 01-15-2009, 02:39 AM

I'm not an expert about that, but if Carmack said that dx9 suffices and id Tech 5 lives without it, I'm all for sticking with dx9. Besides, I like my XP and won't be switching to Vista for possible few dx10 effects, thank you.

SpinX · 01-15-2009, 05:41 AM

Direct x 10 is a very usefull tool for creating certain effects like water that was a complex proces in direct x 9... for developpers direct x 10 is a huge leap forward in terms of game developpment...

KO Gilligan · 01-15-2009, 05:54 AM

A lot of people believe that games are not fully using DX10 to it's potential and won't until they retire the DX9 compatibility in games. Fog effects in games like Bioshock are a night and day difference. But I don't see a huge difference in most gameplay.... In fact Tomb Raider Underworld looks amazing in DX9. It certainly doesn't cripple the textures.

I don't know the technical aspects, but looking at the back of new video card boxes the differences are crisp and bold, and completely breathtaking. Basic bull

slapnutz · 01-15-2009, 05:58 AM

I agree DX10 is actually better than Dx9 in every way, it just got a bad wrap due to Vista and some early "look our game does dx10" crappy code.

Far Cry 2 is a decent example of Dx10 done right. With the right h/w, the game runs faster and looks better in dx10 than in Dx9.

Btw, what are these "interesting features" dx11 could have? (apart from RayTracing)

KO Gilligan · 01-15-2009, 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaiserSoze

I see little difference in dx9 vs dx10 when I play Crysis
Warhead. The last comment George made re: dx certification
was that DNF was a dx9 game.

Most likely it'll end up being dx9 and run on XP/Vista.

Wouldn't be surprised to see DNF's system recommendations
mirror those of Crysis: WH btw.

Agreed... any graphics rich game nowadays will be. But actually Cry 2 Engine was actually said to be more scalable and "run on a wider variety of machines" than the original.

I'm gonna say a notch higher on the reality side..
My guess for recommendations:
Dual Core and 8800 or better or you get a slide show.
I remember George even said they were running it on 8800 cards

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Broussard

It's a multicore engine. Graphic detail is a large part of why.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hark

I wonder what kind of computers the folks at 3D Realms are using...

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Broussard

Most people are on intel core duo machines, a couple gigs of ram and a 7950 or 8800 level video card.

Jiminator · 01-15-2009, 09:30 AM

most developers are not interested in spending a lot of effort for a small number of people that can use it. The tech needs to cook for another couple of years. Updating XP with it would certainly help justify the cost.

Tea Monster · 01-15-2009, 10:38 AM

Any chance of finding out what the poly count of models is? Say the new liz trooper and the Cycloid...?

peoplessi · 01-15-2009, 11:48 AM

Jiminator, 15-25% isn't a small number, at it's increasing. Of course, DX9 SM3 is much bigger crowd but still.

Also, just adding some DX10 features, it doesn't need a whole rewrite to achieve that, but of course other things are the priority. Obviously at this point I expect the game to work on XP/Vista/7

fast-1 · 01-15-2009, 12:44 PM

Please keep the Windows XP in the system requirements.

10-12-2005, 09:44 AM	#14
Piano Man Guest	Re: Graphics, looking towards the future. I just hope the game supports AA and Full AF!!! I want Duke in all it's picture Perfect perfection. My Graphics card is just drooling for this game.

10-12-2005, 05:20 PM	#21
Piano Man Guest	Re: Graphics, looking towards the future. Plus when you put it on ultra, it forces anti aliasing (by default unless you reset it back to 0) But you don't need an 512 MB Card to experience Ultra... I do it all the time and it works fine and is so smooth.

10-09-2005, 01:11 PM	#1
Nessus	DNF Graphics Will there be any thoughts about making the game scalable into the future? For example including graphics options that would bring current gen cards to their knees but will be achievable a year or two after launch. I know Valve stated that with HL2 they had game models that were really high detail that they would release at a later date when technology caught up. Looks like that will never happen but I thought it was a great idea. Did you guys do anything like that? __________________ "Times are bad. Children no longer obey their parents, and everyone is writing a book." Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC)

10-10-2005, 09:19 AM	#2
Cerberus_e	Re: Graphics, looking towards the future. doom 3 did that with ultra quality: you need 512 mb memory in your GPU to play on that or it won't work properly now, a year later, there are still not a whole lot of people being able to run ultra quality (almost none, in fact) it's a cool feature yes. but it's like that with most new games, 3DR says no graphics card is able to run DNF at 1600*1200 on maxed out settings.

10-10-2005, 09:20 AM	#3
Geo-King	Re: Graphics, looking towards the future. I would like to see that too but I am going to have this comp (2.4MHz Intel, 9800Pro - 4x AGP, 1GB 333MHz RAM) for a very long long time so I hope it's scalable indeed. I remember reading a long time ago someone from ID saying that DooM3 would show its true potential when new cards come out. Are we at that point now??? It’s amazing what modders can do. Just look at all the stuff they have done to older games. Have you played with the tenebrae source port for Quake1. __________________ Tales From The Afternow

10-10-2005, 09:42 AM	#6
Spyd	Re: Graphics, looking towards the future. The Doom3 engine will show its real power with Quake4 and next games. Half Life 2 will have these high-res models with the "Lost coast" map, to be released shortly. I hope that we'll get some stuff from 3DR when DNF is done, such as new content or high res models.

10-10-2005, 10:00 AM	#7
Geo-King	Re: Graphics, looking towards the future. In my opinion, Hardware manufacturers are purposely developing product at slower speeds to make as much profit as possible. Some guy in Japan over-clocked his CPU to 7 or 8 (I don’t remember) GHz. WTF! Sure, he needed a crazy cooling system but that’s still proof that we should be at 10GHz by now. Some guy did this in his basement, don’t you think a multi-billion dollar company can do just a little bit better? Why am I ranting off topic you might ask well because I wanna see Photo Realistic DNF! GRRRR! BARK! BARK! Found the story. http://www.xbitlabs.com/web/display/20050811231553.html __________________ Tales From The Afternow

10-11-2005, 04:45 AM	#9
Kalki	Re: Graphics, looking towards the future. I hope so. I want to see how this game stacks up against what we saw in Unreal Engine 3, not that I have any expectations from it. __________________ "Gentlemen, generations to follow will see us as the first pioneers of the internet. They will look upon our days as those of brave spirits and free ideals - where men were men, women were men and children were the FBI." Free Speech

10-11-2005, 09:49 AM	#13
Little Conqueror	Re: Graphics, looking towards the future. I think that's actually an issue with the game itself that can be resolved. It's been a while since I've played Doom 3 though. __________________ If wishes were fishes, we'd smell like ladies' underwear. "If you join the good fight, you get 72 domain names when you die." -- Wamplet

10-12-2005, 11:48 AM	#15
hasenbein	Re: Graphics, looking towards the future. I can play D3 it with Ultra Details but I cant see a difference. In what way should it look different?

10-12-2005, 11:54 AM	#16
Cerberus_e	Re: Graphics, looking towards the future. no compression in the textures.

10-12-2005, 01:47 PM	#17
FireFly	Re: Graphics, looking towards the future. That's already the case for the 'High' quality setting. The only difference between the 'Ultra' and 'High' settings is that the former does not compress the specular or diffuse maps, meaning the lighting on objects is slightly more refined. __________________ "I think the push for people to innovate in gameplay - i'm not sure that I particularly agree with it" John Carmack

10-12-2005, 02:22 PM	#19
Jeff	Re: Graphics, looking towards the future. I probably won't get much quality with an X800 series card, but maybe for the next round. Bring on those 1 GB to 2 GB of graphics memory.

10-12-2005, 02:35 PM	#20
Nessus	Re: Graphics, looking towards the future. I found Ultra barely worth doing, unless youre really looking hard at still shots you dont really see a diffrence. Does Doom3 use 3DTC? I thought that looked really good, did it take off or did Nvidia not adopt it thus killing it? __________________ "Times are bad. Children no longer obey their parents, and everyone is writing a book." Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC)

10-15-2005, 05:16 PM	#27
Nessus	Re: Graphics, looking towards the future. Yeah I meant 3dc, I always thought it really looked really good. __________________ "Times are bad. Children no longer obey their parents, and everyone is writing a book." Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC)

01-15-2009, 12:19 AM	#28
vincentdante	DX10 features / Graphics Do you think this game will support it and incorporate some of the features? Or perhapes they will just stick with what they have going. What do you think?

01-15-2009, 12:28 AM	#29
LadiesAndGentlemen	Re: DX10 features I've heard that DX11 will have some interesting "features", but as far as I know, DX10 is just a failed marketing experiment.

01-15-2009, 01:45 AM	#30
KaiserSoze	Re: DX10 features I see little difference in dx9 vs dx10 when I play Crysis Warhead. The last comment George made re: dx certification was that DNF was a dx9 game. Most likely it'll end up being dx9 and run on XP/Vista. Wouldn't be surprised to see DNF's system recommendations mirror those of Crysis: WH btw. __________________ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JjimMO2SdE

01-15-2009, 02:04 AM	#31
vincentdante	Re: DX10 features I suppose your right, DX9 would be the sensible choice. Either way though DX9 or DX10 this game will still be awesome

01-15-2009, 02:39 AM	#32
Nihilanth	Re: DX10 features I'm not an expert about that, but if Carmack said that dx9 suffices and id Tech 5 lives without it, I'm all for sticking with dx9. Besides, I like my XP and won't be switching to Vista for possible few dx10 effects, thank you. __________________ We were standing on the edge of discovery 2014: The Vanishing of Ethan Carter 2015: SOMA

01-15-2009, 05:41 AM	#33
SpinX	Re: DX10 features Direct x 10 is a very usefull tool for creating certain effects like water that was a complex proces in direct x 9... for developpers direct x 10 is a huge leap forward in terms of game developpment... __________________ waiting for: Elite sequel, Half life 3, Diablo3, DNF Enough is enough! I've had it with these motherxxxxxx delays on this motherxxxxxx game :) http://www.youtube.com/user/ftbfelix

01-15-2009, 05:54 AM	#34
KO Gilligan	Re: DX10 features A lot of people believe that games are not fully using DX10 to it's potential and won't until they retire the DX9 compatibility in games. Fog effects in games like Bioshock are a night and day difference. But I don't see a huge difference in most gameplay.... In fact Tomb Raider Underworld looks amazing in DX9. It certainly doesn't cripple the textures. I don't know the technical aspects, but looking at the back of new video card boxes the differences are crisp and bold, and completely breathtaking. Basic bull Last edited by KO Gilligan; 01-15-2009 at 05:57 AM.

01-15-2009, 05:58 AM	#35
slapnutz	Re: DX10 features I agree DX10 is actually better than Dx9 in every way, it just got a bad wrap due to Vista and some early "look our game does dx10" crappy code. Far Cry 2 is a decent example of Dx10 done right. With the right h/w, the game runs faster and looks better in dx10 than in Dx9. Btw, what are these "interesting features" dx11 could have? (apart from RayTracing) __________________ I agree with Psyrgery's sig: Dear George: You've failed misserably and made your Company to be remembered FOREVER for its Epic Fail. You've made your game the most EPIC joke in game history. Congratulations!! :)

01-15-2009, 09:30 AM	#37
Jiminator	Re: DX10 features / Graphics most developers are not interested in spending a lot of effort for a small number of people that can use it. The tech needs to cook for another couple of years. Updating XP with it would certainly help justify the cost. __________________ big badass nasty weapons here....

01-15-2009, 10:38 AM	#38
Tea Monster	Re: DX10 features / Graphics Any chance of finding out what the poly count of models is? Say the new liz trooper and the Cycloid...? __________________ Tea Monster's web portfolio

01-15-2009, 11:48 AM	#39
peoplessi	Re: DX10 features / Graphics Jiminator, 15-25% isn't a small number, at it's increasing. Of course, DX9 SM3 is much bigger crowd but still. Also, just adding some DX10 features, it doesn't need a whole rewrite to achieve that, but of course other things are the priority. Obviously at this point I expect the game to work on XP/Vista/7 __________________ Duke Nukem Forever Who am I to judge?

01-15-2009, 12:44 PM	#40
fast-1	Re: DX10 features / Graphics Please keep the Windows XP in the system requirements.