FO DirectX implementation
Program aborts? Network configuration? Graphic errors? Bugs? Post your question here.
posted on January 21st, 2012, 10:40 pm
Hello everyone,
last year I posted on MSFC about a dx-related graphical problem I had with both stock A2 and FO. Dom replied:
I'd just like to hear how far off this is in the Dev plans.![Drop :sweatdrop:](/forum/images/smilies/sweatdrop.gif)
last year I posted on MSFC about a dx-related graphical problem I had with both stock A2 and FO. Dom replied:
Dominus_Noctis wrote:I believe this actually occurs with all chipsets and is due more to the flawed Dx8 implementation - it's just more visible on some maps than others. FO has this too in my experience as the directx implementation is not yet updated to dx9 (only improved). [...] in the future a dx9 render will be implemented to remove these (and other) problems.
I'd just like to hear how far off this is in the Dev plans.
![Drop :sweatdrop:](/forum/images/smilies/sweatdrop.gif)
posted on January 21st, 2012, 11:21 pm
Hi Terra
It's still being worked on - as I understand it, some aspects turned out to be more time consuming than first anticipated, but nonetheless progress is being made.
![Smiley :)](/forum/images/smilies/smile.png)
It's still being worked on - as I understand it, some aspects turned out to be more time consuming than first anticipated, but nonetheless progress is being made.
posted on January 21st, 2012, 11:37 pm
Dominus_Noctis wrote:Hi Terra![]()
It's still being worked on - as I understand it, some aspects turned out to be more time consuming than first anticipated, but nonetheless progress is being made.
That's good to hear. Graphics stuff usually is pretty time-consuming, but good to see that it's being worked on.
![Blush :blush:](/forum/images/smilies/blush.png)
posted on January 22nd, 2012, 12:12 am
Didnt you say that dx9 was part of the orignal code but it was flawed and not fully compleated?
posted on January 22nd, 2012, 12:27 am
Dircome wrote:Didnt you say that dx9 was part of the orignal code but it was flawed and not fully compleated?
yeah it is, that mode was used as a temporary fix for the bugs with the gtx 4/500 cards, but a driver update permanently fixed it. From what Doca said on the forum, the dx9 mode is worse in many ways.
posted on January 22nd, 2012, 2:29 am
armada 2 is based on d3d8. there was no (hidden) directx 9 support in armada 2. directx9 was released one year after armada 2 ![Smiley :)](/forum/images/smilies/smile.png)
our d3d9 renderer is still work in progress and not recommended to use. currently it gives you zero advantage over the standard renderer. there is still debug code in it and has known crash bugs. it is true that it happened to perform better on these nvidia cards when their d3d8 implementation in older drivers were faulty. however currently there is no reason to use the d3d9 implementation to play fleet operations.
![Smiley :)](/forum/images/smilies/smile.png)
our d3d9 renderer is still work in progress and not recommended to use. currently it gives you zero advantage over the standard renderer. there is still debug code in it and has known crash bugs. it is true that it happened to perform better on these nvidia cards when their d3d8 implementation in older drivers were faulty. however currently there is no reason to use the d3d9 implementation to play fleet operations.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests