| masterbooda |
Posted - May 19 2004 : 03:34:30 AM
Here is my problem... this program I'm writing is in 320x240 resolution and I want to run this in windowed mode but maximized... but the problem is, the screen is awfully fuzzy, you cant even read the text... I have tried everything, and I am simply out of ideas on this one... How do you remove this, I know its not antialiasing or multisampling, all that is off... I can semi fix it by switching resolutions on my desktop to a lower one... but this is something I really shouldn't have to do everytime I run one program... Fullscreen is not an option, because I want to use window menus and all that jazz..
Is this just how windowed mode is, or is there someway to set up the render state to keep this from happening... a little I can handle... but this is too much...
DaBooda Out....
And yes I know 320x240 is an outdated resolution... but Its perfect for this program... and I still like games in this res... |
| VBBR |
Posted - May 28 2004 : 6:15:00 PM
Even better if a 3D game has all these good aspects  but in some way I have to agree with Eric. |
| Sr. Guapo |
Posted - May 24 2004 : 10:35:05 PM
I do like 2D games, usually because alot more effort is put into them. It is hard to woo customers with "amazing" 2D graphics anymore, so effort has to be placed somewhere else - i.e. story, Multiplayer, addicting, etc. |
| Eric Coleman |
Posted - May 24 2004 : 8:06:39 PM
I still prefer Sid Meier's Cilvilization and Starcraft over any 3D game. |
| masterbooda |
Posted - May 24 2004 : 5:03:19 PM
I agree, all 3d is, is one more dimension, collision detection is the same concept. The makings of a game are not necessarly programming, but the Concepts itself. Graphics, are not important, if your player is sucked into that game, and loses time while playing it. And even after completing it they decide to play it again. This is what makes a good game, its just that 3d gives a false sense of hope, when the player plays, it because of the awe of 3d, and the feeling of being more in control.
DaBooda out... |
| VBBR |
Posted - May 24 2004 : 1:34:07 PM
Collision detection - hard depending on the complexity you want. Take it down to a top-down view and you have collisions in 2D.
Visibility determination - the engine I use does that for me 
AI - See "collision detection"
Physics - in 1D: easy / in 2D: hard / in 3D: as hard as 2D + just some more variables in the functions.
See? Not that hard. In the end, it's hard to make a good game, no matter how many dimensions you use.  |
| Sr. Guapo |
Posted - May 24 2004 : 11:12:59 AM
I don't know... It may be easy to make a simple game, but once you start making a larger game-Between the collision detection, visibility determination, AI, physics, etc.-3D can be much harder. |
| VBBR |
Posted - May 23 2004 : 5:06:10 PM
Yeah in some way you are right. A 3D game surely can impress more even if it's a bad game. |
| masterbooda |
Posted - May 23 2004 : 4:05:20 PM
Ignore my post, I forgot, I updated my driver and it worked fine. That is me, always guick to blast hardware... sorry. I just feel like the video gaming world is going nuts with this 3d stuff, when as a programmer, using 3d is like taking a shortcut. Yes setting it up is harder, but after that you can give people the impression that the game is good, when it really isn't, but if you impress with a 2d game the programmer has put some real effort into it.
DaBooda out... |
| VBBR |
Posted - May 23 2004 : 3:36:40 PM
Maybe the manufacturer of your card made something sinister with it? Because I doubt nVidia would do something of this kind with their chips. |
| masterbooda |
Posted - May 23 2004 : 3:18:35 PM
I disagree, I was using an nvide geforce with 64mb on the card, and I was programming quite a few games in dx7, I had alot of stretching involved... That card handled it quite well, as well as the gamma. I also had a game written using 8bit color mode, so I could do palette shifting effects.
I then installed a nvidia xfx 5200 with 128 on board... I then ran the same games, and the stretching slowed down my fps to 5 and the gamma did the same, took forever both together froze it.... and for the 8bit mode, forget about it, the card wouldn't support it.
DaBooda out... |
| Sr. Guapo |
Posted - May 22 2004 : 11:17:50 PM
Even if they are optimized for DX 9(persay), the new cards are so much more powerful than previous cards omtimized for DX 7 (for the sake of argument), so they would still be faster than earlier cards in previous versions of DX. |
| cjb0087 |
Posted - May 22 2004 : 06:29:29 AM
nah, i think cards are being optimized for DX(insert recent number here) or OpenGL(insert random numer between 1.5 and 2.0) |
| Almar |
Posted - May 22 2004 : 04:56:27 AM
quote:
Originally posted by cjb0087
yeah the newer graphics cards (me want an X800 :D) are gonna be optimized for DX9, so they wont go as fast using DX7 as ones optimized for DX7 will (understand?). but it should still work, the same way DX1 should still work (but badly)
I thought cards are "DX# supported" and not optimized.. like if a card supports DX9, then you xcan assume that it allows something like vertex shaders v2, while DX8 and lower do not (or something). I think :)
|
| cjb0087 |
Posted - May 21 2004 : 7:35:02 PM
yeah the newer graphics cards (me want an X800 :D) are gonna be optimized for DX9, so they wont go as fast using DX7 as ones optimized for DX7 will (understand?). but it should still work, the same way DX1 should still work (but badly) |
| masterbooda |
Posted - May 21 2004 : 2:46:34 PM
I will try that... Its a pain.. but its the way things are going to be for us guys, who will not let go of the past and 2D... have you ever noticed that these newer cards are slowly but surely killing 2d... or maybe I am crazy, for I do sit in my basement with nothing but a ton of water and a ham radio waiting for the government to shut me down.... Come get me The Man!! Come get me!!
DaBooda out... |
