🚀 go-pugleaf

Cant tell ya (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

well it looked really good to me and I have a 486DX2/66 with 16 megs of RAM. 
Frame rate was very good.  It's probably due to my ATI mach32 video card
though.

Greg

Greg Taylor wrote:
> 
> Cant tell ya (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
> 
> well it looked really good to me and I have a 486DX2/66 with 16 megs of RAM.
> Frame rate was very good.  It's probably due to my ATI mach32 video card
> though.
> 
> Greg


A quick question for you,

	I was trying to get the demo working on a friends computer who 
has a Mach32 2Meg VRAM video card and I couldn't get the VESA function 
to perform correctly. I even downloaded the newest VVESA.COM utility 
from ATI. What Vesa driver are you using and where can I get it.

Kevin E. Griffin

In article <4cd5qb$2...@drencrom.insync.net>,
   Cant tell ya <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??

I got a 486DX/2 with 8 megs RAM, BUT I got 256k cache and 2 megs on the video 
card.  Wouldm't believe what a difference those two make to a 128k with 1 meg. 
BIG difference.  I think the ITS demo looks fabulous, though I wouldn't try to 
play the game on my machine, honestly.  I was getting maybe 10-12 fps and still 
thought it was terrific.




    =<Bren Lynne>========================= _ \=== _ \=== ___/=  |== /==
   =<br...@interlog.com>================== /= /== /= /== /====   |= /==
  =<br...@erendezvous.com>=============== __ <== __ <== __/== /= | /==
 =<http://www.interlog.com/~bren/>===== /== /= /== /= /==== /==  /==
=<the wandering.net.wonderer>=========_____/=_/==_/=____/=_/===_/==

>> 
>> Cant tell ya (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??

All I can say is that if ITS ever actually oes come out, and it looks anywhere 
NEAR as incredible as this demo does, I'm gonna be the first in line to buy 
it!!

The characters look so real I would swear that it was really actual digitize 
footage dummied up to look like polygons!  I have a P-100 only 8 megs ram and 
a generic S3 2 mb PCI video card.  If this demo wasn't running at at least 
30 fps, I certainly couldn't tell.  So, to whoever was bellyaching about how 
horrible the demo is, all I can say is...  Why don't you just keep playing 
Wolfenstein 3D and let us play with games like this, your IBM PC XT turbo just 
can't hack it.



>> : kraemer
>> 
>> : http://www.insync.net/~kraemer
>> 
>> well it looked really good to me and I have a 486DX2/66 with 16 megs of 
RAM.
>> Frame rate was very good.  It's probably due to my ATI mach32 video card
>> though.
>> 
>> Greg
>
>
>A quick question for you,
>
>	I was trying to get the demo working on a friends computer who 
>has a Mach32 2Meg VRAM video card and I couldn't get the VESA function 
>to perform correctly. I even downloaded the newest VVESA.COM utility 
>from ATI. What Vesa driver are you using and where can I get it.
>
>Kevin E. Griffin

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
>

In article <4cf45h$8...@steel.interlog.com>,
Bren Lynne <Sb...@interlog.com> wrote:

>In article <4cd5qb$2...@drencrom.insync.net>,
>   Cant tell ya <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??
>
>I got a 486DX/2 with 8 megs RAM, BUT I got 256k cache and 2 megs on the video 
>card.  Wouldm't believe what a difference those two make to a 128k with 1 meg. 
>BIG difference.  I think the ITS demo looks fabulous, though I wouldn't try to 
>play the game on my machine, honestly.  I was getting maybe 10-12 fps and still 
>thought it was terrific.

I got a i486DX4/100 with 32 Megs and a Matrox Millennium PCI 4MB and IMO this
demo runs very good.. hmm hard to count FPS but i'd guess its about 20 to
25. It looks awesome :)

See ya,
Lutz.

-------------------------------------------------------------
Lutz Heinrichs        E-Mail..: hans...@fireball.tng.oche.de
Aachen, Germany       voice...: +49 2408 5769
                      fax.....: +49 2408 5544