Content

Post new topic Reply to topic

Korin's Place

Author Message
Zeth ZEQ2 Programmer View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, March 31, 2007

Newfolder View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Sunday, April 01, 2007

Yeah it's great... it's not the most important place in the dbz anime (it's not even place where they fight :>) but it's looks good.

Iceburner View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Wednesday, April 04, 2007

First post here , nice to be here Laughing

[*] 1/4 Million Triangles.



That sounds hard Smile . Wouldn't the whole thing have a better performance when using textures? I mean 250.000+ Triangles... I think slower CPU's (maybe P4's/AMD's with less than 2 Ghz(don't want to hurt someone now Very Happy)) can't handle this. Or is there a technique which makes it run better.

Sorry if I missed a thread with more informations about this.

Except this, nice! I really like the details but I would like to see a picture with shadows. I'm sure it will look better with shadows. But as it says , it's the first in-development WIP. Keep it up and don't forget to update Smile Wink

Devion Slipping Away View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Wednesday, April 04, 2007

Well take a mainstream card, a low end card and a VERY low end card.

A Geforce 6600 gt can render up to 400 million polygons per second.
A Geforce fx5200 can render up to 175 million polygons per second.
A Geforce 2 MX can render up to 20 million polygons per second.

These figures are theoretical, but for the sake of argument let's say they actually can produce that number.

Now that 250.000 isn't with LOD, which means the TOTAL map is 250.000, not what actually be rendered.
But lets say LOD is disabled what frame rate would you get?

400.000.000 / 250.000 = 1600 frames per second
175.000.000 / 250.000 = 700 frames per second
20.000.000 / 250.000 = 80 frames per second

Now ofcourse I discluded any other effects ingame, the polygons of the characters and the polygons per second are theoretical. But I also discluded LOD and this is just a loose estimate.

But I reckon you shouldn't worry.

Mjam View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Wednesday, April 04, 2007

Either way it looks great probaly better now
Can't wait for the update.

shadowcast View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Wednesday, April 04, 2007

sooo.........my geforce 4 MX has a chance of running this thing....Very Happy hehe......
But lets hope ill get this old bucket updated soon *laughing out loud*

madman121 View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Wednesday, April 04, 2007

looks really good I like it

Zeth ZEQ2 Programmer View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

That sounds hard Smile . Wouldn't the whole thing have a better performance when using textures? I mean 250.000+ Triangles... I think slower CPU's (maybe P4's/AMD's with less than 2 Ghz(don't want to hurt someone now Very Happy)) can't handle this.


Well. The triangles aren't going to be putting a strain on your CPU unless you're rendering them in software (which I hope you don't!). Zios supports both DirectX and OpenGL, so you'll be preferably using your GPU for batch rendering of large triangle scenes Wink

Or is there a technique which makes it run better.


LOD is a significant factor here. More on that very soon.

sooo.........my geforce 4 MX has a chance of running this thing.


With the proper tweaks, it's posssible, yes. We can't guarantee you the highest of quality settings with such a card, but it'll play all the same.

Zajac View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

*laughing out loud* what about radeon 9550? Confused

Zeth ZEQ2 Programmer View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

A 9550 should be roughly equivalent to a a Geforce 4 MX as far as raw capability goes if I recall correctly.

These charts are a bit outdated, I believe, but they should give a general idea of card statistic comparisons.
[ATI]

[NVidia]

spyxter Flutie Flakes View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

So my notebook's nVidia GeForce Go 7600 will also be able to run the game? Having in mind that the only resolution without view distortion which is available to me is 1280*800.

shadowcast View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

Zeth wrote : A 9550 should be roughly equivalent to a a Geforce 4 MX as far as raw capability goes if I recall correctly.



Hmm your maybe wrong, cause if I recall good 9550 does support pixel shaders and MX doesnt.......
Another question....IS the cellshading going to be using
pixel shaders.....cause im a bit worried...
If it does then im stuck with normal opengl shading, If the game supports it *laughing out loud*

Iceburner View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

Thanks for the lists Zeth,

My Radeon X1650 Pro should do it,huh Razz And as shadowcast asked, is the cel-shading going to use pixel-shaders?

I think this thread cleared some questions about "performance".

Iceburner

MDave ZEQ2 Ninja View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

spyxter wrote : So my notebook's nVidia GeForce Go 7600 will also be able to run the game? Having in mind that the only resolution without view distortion which is available to me is 1280*800.



Thats more then enough, I have that same card too Wink 512mb ram version Razz

Think of it this way if you need a game to compare it too. Half Life 2 looks fine and plays fine on a Geforce 4 mx, but looks great and everything on a higher end card that has all the fancy shader abilites Wink

shadowcast wrote :
Hmm your maybe wrong, cause if I recall good 9550 does support pixel shaders and MX doesnt.......
Another question....IS the cellshading going to be using
pixel shaders.....cause im a bit worried...
If it does then im stuck with normal opengl shading, If the game supports it *laughing out loud*



We will make sure you get at LEAST that effect on a gf4 mx (think q3 zeq2).

LionHeart View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

Will it work on a GeForce FX 5200?

MDave ZEQ2 Ninja View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

LionHeart wrote : Will it work on a GeForce FX 5200?



This is turning into a "Specs Requirements?" thread, which we already have HERE

If we told you it will work on a GeForce 4 MX, you'd think the other cards more powerful then it would work too, Lionheart? Razz

LionHeart View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

Oups I thought GeForce MX was more powerful than GeForce 5200, my bad, sorry:P .

Zeth ZEQ2 Programmer View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

Hmm your maybe wrong, cause if I recall good 9550 does support pixel shaders and MX doesnt.......



A 9550 should be roughly equivalent to a a Geforce 4 MX as far as raw capability goes



I was speaking in terms of card statistics, not shader model compatability.

Another question....IS the cellshading going to be using pixel shaders.....cause im a bit worried...


Yes, we are using pixel shaders for some aspects of the game. We do have several fallback methods for older systems (especially those without proper shader support) that give fair performance in regards to quality.

Here. Have some shader model support charts.

[ATI]

[NVidia]

shadowcast View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

well I have been thinking of upgrading this old bucket anyways........And since zeq2 will be released in a long time....(I suppose) ill probably upgrade it till then...


Could you tell me more of those fallback methods.....or will you cover it with the new update....

Devion Slipping Away View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

In theory everything above Geforce 2 MX and Radeon 8500 should be able te run zeq2.(Counting on the amount of triangles and an aggressive LoD technique)

I don't know how it will affect the graphics in terms of pixel shaders as the Geforce 2 MX doesnt support it. But I guess the ZEQ2 will optimize it.(Well if I see Zeth enthusiasm for keeping ZEQ2 compatible and running on ancient hardware, you shouldnt worry basically)

Shako Formerly a Dot View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

I would suggest to chill down because this game won't come out tomorrow or next year *laughing out loud*, so chill down,
I'm sure the one or the other guy will be able to get a new graphic card or even buy a new computer.

The Zeq2 team are the only ones who interest with what specs they can test their engine/game.

Devion Slipping Away View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Saturday, April 07, 2007

Shako wrote : I would suggest to chill down because this game won't come out tomorrow or next year *laughing out loud*, so chill down,
I'm sure the one or the other guy will be able to get a new graphic card or even buy a new computer.

The Zeq2 team are the only ones who interest with what specs they can test their engine/game.


And to whom are you replying?

AGoku View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Sunday, April 29, 2007

holy f'ing poo that looks great

Dan the Rebirth View user's profile Send private message

Reply with quote Wednesday, May 02, 2007

wow I just realised that you guys are back online, and I have to say: cool
well the map of the carin tower looks kinda static at the moment but I can't really say why it does so, my its because there are no shadowas at the moment...
gues we have to wait until we see something ingame like again

I really ask me how kamis place will look like, because in the buu saga you saw many unfamiliar places up there(where piccolo was guiding buu to gotenks)

Post new topic Reply to topic

Online
0 / 2472