EVE Search - New Dev Blog: I can totally run that on my Amiga

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

New Dev Blog: I can totally run that on my Amiga

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 13 post(s)
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.13 21:42:00 - [1] Originally by: Morgan La'Chance DO NOT DISCONTINUE SUPPORT OF SM 2.0 LATER Just when we get acceptable large fleet battles due to less server lag, you're gonna make them into slideshows? While I can agree on not discontinue SM2 so soon. I must say that your logic is failed. Pixel shaders are procedures executed per pixel on the screen. Its completely irrelevant how many ships are on the screen the shaders will be processed for each pixel having 400 ships in grid only only you looking at your ship pretty close. I tend to think SM2 should be kept to at least MID 2010
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.15 00:39:00 - [2] Originally by: Bibi People talk about oh just run shadermodel etc and see if your gf support 2.0 or 3.0 eve will work sure if you got any of those no problem, but what about multiple accounts running at the sametime ? I dont know anyone in eve that only use /have one account not one player, I Imagine that alot of people thats been using more then one account at the same time will have problems after this change even if their GF support 2.0 and 3. and obviously it will be more expensive upgrading for those players to be able to run multiple accounts as they done so far with classic eve client. As a multi account user I dont really see myself playing eve if I can't play as I now can do with the classic version, at leats 3 accounts on one computer with a good fps as well atm. I dont know in price how much I would have to spend to get 3 accounts running perfect on one computer with premium lite version only thing I know is that it will be more money then if I only had one account running and ofc I want them to run as good as they did before the change. But I'm not willing to spend large amount of money just to be able play multiple accounts in a new and less reliable client that makes the game slower then the old version even with a new computer thats it... well I can answer that myself even. Shader model upgrade would have ZERO effect on how many clients you can run. Since you have only 1 at your screen at any time. Shaders are procedures ran to each and every pixel on the screen. That is independent of a lot of stuff that people usually associate with software load. It does not matter how many ships are in the battle using SM 2 or 3 won't change anything the GPU load is exactly the same. So when people say to us to use classic client in fleet battles.. just LOL at their ignorance. Does not matter if you have 27 clients running at once. SM 2 or 3 won't change anything on load because shaders are run only to pixels that are on the screen.. The only thing that limits how many clients you can run is main system memory and CPU itself. In 9 of 10 cases will be memory bottlenecked (system, not video card) If you get a 6600 card you can run premium. If you load more clients ,and loose performance video card has ZERO relation to it. You are just short of memory or raw cpu power. Well in fact I just lied a tiny bit. memmory usage and CPU usage are LESS demanded on SM3 shaders than SM2 shaders. SM3 allows the implementation of branches and loops within the shader. To achieve reasonable programmability, SM2 must use data tables encoded in extra textures. That uses more memmory and CPU power. SM3 unloads this into runtime processing in the VGA. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.15 20:37:00 - [3] Originally by: Mara Rinn Edited by: Mara Rinn on 15/01/2009 02:17:36 Edited by: Mara Rinn on 15/01/2009 02:16:22 Originally by: Kagura Nikon The only thing that limits how many clients you can run is main system memory and CPU itself. In 9 of 10 cases will be memory bottlenecked (system, not video card) I have problems running two clients in Premium, but can run just fine in Classic, only because Premium uses far more texture memory than Classic. The bottleneck in my case is that the graphics card only has 128MB for texture memory. Multiple instances of the EVE client do not share textures, so I'll end up with the same textures loaded twice, effectively cutting the graphics card down to 64MB of texture memory for each client. In my case, I'd be able to run multiple independent clients on my laptop without any trouble if it was possible to turn textures off. One optimisation that CCP could make is for the one client to allow multiple simultaneous sessions, thereby keeping all the graphics assets in memory for only 1 client. Each flight window would be part of one application - this would allow other efficiencies such as only sending object details down the pipe once instead of once for each client as it jumps into system or loads the grid at the end of warping in. but that is completely unrelated to the SM used. My observations are upon people being worried on the SM2 to SM3 move. That move will have zero NEGATIVE impact result as long as your card has SM3 capabilities. Also if CCP wanted to do it right they could easily make both accounts running share the same textures resources. They just need to wake up and make the game client multi-account capable. The card drivers would solve the rest by themselves. That would completely remove the memmory factor from the multi account issue. The complain is a valid one but unrelated to shader models. But does not make less true that CCP should wake up and do something that is SIMPLE as sharing render contexts. And don't dare CCP to tell me this is difficult, I just implemented not long ago at work a shared rendering context between 10 tomographic 3d reconstruction viewers sharing the same resources in a single rendering process. Took me a few hours. Any well designed system with a well decoupled graphic system can do it as well. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.15 20:43:00 - [4] Originally by: Koyama Ise Originally by: WheatGrass I don't mind the change but please do give us another client that will run on >= ten year old junk. That way we can change skills, work the market, and do other in-station stuff -other than walking in stations. Thank you. I no longer have a T/S 1000 or T/S 2068. So, would a web / Java based client be feasible or just a web page? Also, how about making the new client selectable between DirectX and OpenGL? Perhaps that would make things a bit easier for the linux Wine crowd and Cenega. Thank you for all the new toys. I know you mean good but making both an Open GL and DirectX client I believe would defeat the purpose of phasing out SM 1. Because in the end you'd have 2 different rendering engines which may or may not need new textures/models. completely unrelated in fact. Making an OpenGl renderer would bring a lot of initial work true, since its a lot of new code. But that would impact in nothing on the art department. OpenGL and DX are equivalent APIs (GL still keeps a lot of outdated stuff that makes a pain in arse for driver developers, but aside of that nothing huge). ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.16 22:04:00 - [5] Originally by: Una D Wouldn't it be easier to move over EVE to OpenGL and dump directx? Would make for much easier porting. Would change absolutely NOTHIGN on this issue. Both DirectX and OpenGL use the same hardware underneath. OpenGL also have same feature capabilities like SM1 age SM 2 age etc... just OpenGL does not fixate them on a single brand name, but in a set of extensions names. The difficulty of supporting older hardware would change in nothing. Only advantage would be a easy and painless port to MAC and linux.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.16 22:49:00 - [6] Originally by: Bacabachaui **I have a question for CCP** After researching the card on my 2 year old basic laptop, it says it supports shader model 2 but "does not support hardware T&L (Transform & Lightning) calculations (which is required for some games)." I have no idea what that means, but will this be a problem running the Lite version in March? Its really hard to believe that are true results. You might need to recheck. Because since the advent of programable GPUs the TnL concept basically means Vertex shaders. And if your card doe snot support vertex shaders then it doe snot support even SM 1.0 If the T&L is made in software then the card is not processign the shader (At least the vertex part) therefore they cannot claim the card itself support any shader model at all!
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.16 23:26:00 - [7] Originally by: Bacabachaui Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: Bacabachaui **I have a question for CCP** After researching the card on my 2 year old basic laptop, it says it supports shader model 2 but "does not support hardware T&L (Transform & Lightning) calculations (which is required for some games)." I have no idea what that means, but will this be a problem running the Lite version in March? Its really hard to believe that are true results. You might need to recheck. Because since the advent of programable GPUs the TnL concept basically means Vertex shaders. And if your card doe snot support vertex shaders then it doe snot support even SM 1.0 If the T&L is made in software then the card is not processign the shader (At least the vertex part) therefore they cannot claim the card itself support any shader model at all! This is where I read it. It does say "It supports DirectX 9.0 with Shader Model 2.0 (Vertex Shader are calculated in Software - by the CPU) and OpenGL 1.4." But I have no idea what that means either :) basically means Intel deceived you. By a true definition then they do not support SM2 at all on their CARD because SM 2 includes both pixel and vertex shader. Giving you a software implementation is useless since M$ already gives you one for free on windows. I wish someone big enough would sue a company for doing FAKE advertisement. That is why basically Never ever take a SIS or Intel card over an NVIDIA or AMD one. Never. They are on worse cases. 10 to 15 times superior hardware :( And the worse part is Intel makes propaganda that their mighty hardware will soon make standalone card outdated.. pff :(
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.17 00:04:00 - [8] Originally by: xXxSatsujinxXx Heya, just wondering if i'l get any performance hit on this. I'm on an inspiron 9100 (i know... it was a quick replacement after my previous machine went pop, but i've become stuck with it :() Running a Pentium 4 @ 3.4ghz, 1GB RAM, ATI radeon 9800 (which apparently supports SM2)... I currently get between 20-25fps for the most part on classic, just wondering if i'm likely to lose any FPS, cos quite frankly i can't afford to drop any... :( Either way i'l be upgrading soon(tm), i just need to know if i need to do it before march or december... It should be running already a little bit faster than this, .. if you are not using a too high resolution. The 9800 card has a very good implementation of SM2. Don' t worry. The only thing I can think might be extressing too much your card is if you play in a resulution much higher than the ones that were common when this card was designed. That is a card from the 1280x1024 age. If you go higher than that, drop Anti aliasing or anisotropic filtering to safe on fill rate,
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.17 00:06:00 - [9] Originally by: Viggen This was the push I needed... thanks CCP! Have been considering buying a new system for a while now. Atm I have:- Pentium 4, 2.66GHz 1GB 333Mhz RAM 128MB ATi Radeon 9200 (SM1.1 max) No soundcard 120GB Hard Drive (slow) Windows XP Running classic at a poor frame rate but got used to it. But after playing Eve for over 5 years now, I'm not prepared to stop playing at any cost. So I've gone a bit crazy and ordered the following system:- Intel« CoreÖ i7 Quad Core Processor 12GB 1333MHz Triple Channel DDR3 SDRAM 2GB ATi Radeon HD4870 X2 Graphics, DirectX 10.1 (SM4.1) Creative Labs Sound Blaster X-Fi Xtreme 1TB (1000GB) Hard Drive Vista 64 bit Hoping this system will keep me playing Eve for a further 5 years Looking forward to having the game running fast and smooth, and a first look at the Premium client \o/ Not sure what to expect really lol Thanks again CCP sorry to inform you that this won 't cut. ITs (sorry again to use this word) STUPID to spend taht much on s system today to hope to be ok in 5 years. If you spend 1/3 of that today you can run eve on max quality today and in 2 years you spend another 3rd of that and can upgrade for the next 2-3 years .. etc.... But that computer that look uber today wil be a CRAP PC in 5-6 years. And when that day happen by the cost of 1/4 of what you spend now you can buy a much better PC.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.17 09:27:00 - [10] Originally by: Viggen Originally by: Kagura Nikon Edited by: Kagura Nikon on 17/01/2009 00:08:24 sorry to inform you that this won 't cut. ITs (sorry again to use this word) STUPID to spend taht much on s system today to hope to be ok in 5 years. If you spend 1/3 of that today you can run eve on max quality today and in 2 years you spend another 3rd of that and can upgrade for the next 2-3 years .. etc.... But that computer that look uber today wil be a CRAP PC in 5-6 years. And when that day happen by the cost of 1/4 of what you spend now you can buy a much better PC. If you want to play eve as a goal for your machine. Get a Dual core 2.4 GHz or more CPU. 2-4 GB DDR2 and a GeForce 9600. You can play with 4 accounts in premium with max graphics even on big battles (The server will slow down far before your machine). And that will cost 1/3 of what you propose. Yes its a lot of cash, but I wouldnt go as far as saying I'm stupid... why shouldnt I get a top spec machine for a game that I love so much.. I'll be able to enjoy it in its full glory for a long time at least which is all i want. I can afford it so why not, besides, I might get the bug of using high spec machines to enjoy my favorite hobby and upgrade again in a couple of years. Stupid, I dont think so... fortunate to be able to do this, yes I am. I didn't intended to say YOU are stupid. But to say its stupid to think that by wasting a ton of money today you can hope to still play in 5 years. This PC will be crap in 5 years. But if you spend half of that now you can have a very good pc now. and in 3 years spend the other half and have a PC much better then this one you planing. Got it? The ONLY way to keep yourself able to always play good games is to change computer often. Not to go for high end. If you get a MID end computer every 2 years you will be spending less than a high end and will have a better machine. A 3 years ago TOP computer is QUITE inferior to a today's mid end computer.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.17 09:31:00 - [11] Originally by: mattbucci I purchased a new toshibia laptop last year. just a cheap budget pc. As i run both my clients on it will i still continue to be able to dual client? i only get about 20fps as it is. Here are my specs ProcessorAMD Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 / 1.8 GHz Multi-Core TechnologyDual-Core Data Bus Speed800 MHz Graphics Processor / VendorATI Radeon X1200 Video MemoryShared video memory (UMA) Max Allocated RAM Size319 MB Installed Size4 GB / 4 GB (max) TechnologyDDR2 SDRAM - 667 MHz with 4GB ram you will have no problem. GPU power is not related at the number of clients you can use because the pixels of only 1 are showing at any moment. Premium uses more memory of the computer and this is the main cause of some people being unable to play with so many programs running.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.17 09:35:00 - [12] Originally by: Syriana So what do I do? I read that I'll be able to run premium-lite, but right now I only get 3-10 FPS running classic and Eve is the only program in the foreground with fewer background processes than average. My travel compy: Inspiron 1318, Core 2 Duo T3800 @ 2.4GHz, Vista 32b, 4GB RAM, Mobile Intel 965 Express. I'm away from home for a long next while. No solo combat for me atm... would be nice if I could. Even mission support is generally questionable for me. the important part is.. what is running in background? I have a friend with a similar computer and in classic he gets 60+ fps . So there is something going wrong there...
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.17 11:22:00 - [13] Originally by: Gorgosti Also, if you're writing new shader techniques anyway, I agree with what someone in the beginning posted: write a plain one, just output the pixels with their texture, no lighting etc. That'll look horrible, but it would be quick (to the gfx-card haters: it would be faster then in classic, assuming that classic doesn't use the gfx-card or uses a fixed-pipeline) There is a huge problem on that. That would cause CCP to loose A LOT of potential new subscribers. Because new players see the game in footages in youtube or at their friends machines. When they see a crappy graphic they will most of time decide to not spend their money on eve. Simple as that. The very simple PRESENCE of low quality graphics is detrimental to the game expansion market wise. So I can understand very well CCP wanting to raise the bar. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.18 10:50:00 - [14] Originally by: Spc One Edited by: Spc One on 18/01/2009 00:20:53 It is ok to go to PS 3.0 but not to 4.0. I think there are alot of people who will use Windows XP for very very long and since XP has a support of max 3.0 i wouldn't suggest to go for PS 4.0. I will not be switching to vista or windows 7 at any cost - not even for eve in the future if support goes for 4.0/4.1. I think that for notebooks PS2.0 is the standard and it will stay that way for very long but for desktops PS3.0 is ok as long as it is not PS4.0. All of my desktops support PS 3.0 (DX 9.0c) except the notebook which supports PS 2.0 max. Maybe not very relevant to this topic but this is untrue. Windows XP , in fact even windows 2000 have access to PS 4.0. Just not in directX. In OpenGL you can have SM 4 shaders, doe snto matter the operating system. The limitation of DirectX10 cannot be installed in XP is purely artificial from Microsoft.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.18 10:53:00 - [15] Originally by: AnyOldIron I agree with Toshiro Greyhawk who writes his points very well,this is not a single ,off the shelf standalone game. It`s something we pay for again and again, there are supposed to be 285,000 subscribers. 285k x $15 x 12months (and that`s the minimum subscription with my payment method i pay TWICE that). Your CLASSIC dev team must have an incredible wage. SHAME a lot of your customers don`t (but then THAT`s not your problem is it) Seen this in other MMO`s , the rich will keep playing the poor won`t and there will be more like this round the corner. in fact wages on iceland (At lest prior to crisis ) were basically the highest in the world. The DO have huge costs. And not only that, most high profile game companies have some sort of sponsoring from NVIDIA, AMD or intel for new projects. And those want games that demand more and more hardware.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.18 10:55:00 - [16] Originally by: Ulviirala Vauryndar Is it too much effort to have it support to work with 1/1.1 Shaders? I read the blog and understand the problems. As of yet I can't afford new hardware until May and even then I have to wait for the annual bills. I'd like it to look awesome but its just not possible atm and its perfectly fine with me, I like it the way it looks on my machine, true love ;) Coming back from a break and using the 5-days free activation offer today but I'm not extending gametime by 60d, I guess. Since the Premium Lite client wouldn't run without being able to support Shaders 2.0 or above (radeon 9100 chipset on AGP card). due to fact that ccp decided to use Direct X, yes it is. Direct X doe snot support anymore SM 1.X. You can only make 1.X class shaders with openGL currently, or downgrade the DirectX SDK (Then you loose the SM3 support)
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.19 00:00:00 - [17] Originally by: AnyOldIron You make excellent points Kaguro, but i`ve been in this business 26 yrs, 12 of that in systems development. The hardware companies sponsor software development to push Hardware sales faster and faster, leading to the situation we have today. Where any hardware you buy (pc or mobile phone,etc) is virtually OBSOLETE the day you buy it, other industries may be able to withstand that sort of pressure (Fashion comes to mind). In this industry that Breakneck speed is not sustainable for long, most of you don`t need twice the cpu ,Ram etc for your needs , you need it to run your operating system`s latest insanity. I set up a vista machine the other day for a customer, just sitting at the desktop it used 70% of 1 core and 60% of RAM is that sane ?? considering that at it`s purest an operating system is only there so YOU can run YOUR software. By the way the customer told me to put it back to XP. I worked for 3 years in Game development industry (now changed to medical image 3d stuff). And was not only once that we faced pressures to raise the minimum requirements or support a feature that NEEDs a newest tech card. That is specially true out of the MMO industry. Why? because the normal games face heavy problems with piracy. But if they can strike a deal with a hardware manufacturer, that makes the hardware manufacture pay for large part of the game development, in exchange of making the game a "you are force to buy the new cards of the moment", they will do it. That because hardware cannot be pirated, so you just push your sales from software to hardware in fact and get a more guaranteed return for both parts. I really don't know how long this vertiginous push into new and newer techs can go, but i bet its will beat quite a few more years at least. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.01.19 00:02:00 - [18] Originally by: Zarthax Mandatori Now, im one of those odd people, running EvE on a Laptop. System: OS: Win XP Pro (5.1, Build 2699) Processor: Intel Pentium M 1.70 GHz Mem: 2048 RAM Direct-X 9.0c (4.09.0000.0904) GFX Card: ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 DAC-Type: Internal DAC(400MHz) Mem: 128 Mb Direct Draw: Active Direct 3D: Active ACC: Active Will this system be able to run the next patch as smooth as it runs the current standart client ? if your resolution is not extremely high, then yes. That I am speaking in a supposition that CCP wil do a good SM2 implementation on the new client. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.