🚀 go-pugleaf

Hmm,

I have a 486 DX2 66, 32 megs of Ram and an ATI Mach 32 with 2 
megs of VRAM. I thought the demo looked ok but I think if feels 
completely different that Doom or Hexen. I thought it looked a 
little blurry. I think that it could be a good foundation for 
future games but it doesn't seem to be a configurable as Quake 
will be when it comes out. I wish Quake would allow you to 
create your own character and with rules like D&D for strength, 
etc. I don't see what the big deal is about not worshiping 
ITS.I thought the graphics were ok. But, maybe my standard is 
just a little higher. We'll just have to see how the game 
plays. That will be the real deciding factor.

<no...@unknown.org> wrote:
>I keep hearing people say the Into the shadows demo thing looks like
>shit.  How much ram do you guys have and what kind of CPU do you got??
>The Into the shadows has better texture mapping and lighting than
>descent or any other game I have seen, the anti-aliasing is also
>excellent. Maybe you need a lot of ram for the texture maps? 
>Did it look really good to anyone else with a p-100 and lots of RAM??
>
>
>kraemer
>
>http://www.insync.net/~kraemer
>