Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Pyro on May 12, 2009, 12:52:35 PM

Title: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Pyro on May 12, 2009, 12:52:35 PM
This thread is for discussions about the test.  Please post your test results in the RESULTS thread and keep the discussion in this thread.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on May 12, 2009, 01:07:11 PM
The RGB values look a whole lot richer compared to the picture which was posted a while ago? Which is great!

I like the different tree shapes and sizes.

The textures looks very nice and detailed form above, but could use a little more detail in the field areas, very monotone in places.

The sun sets through the mountain?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: moot on May 12, 2009, 01:37:48 PM
I must be doing something wrong.  I get 0 fps in windowed and full screen modes.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: detch01 on May 12, 2009, 03:21:26 PM
moot I had that problem too. I got a frame rate result by switching the time. The fr I got out of it though seems a tad high to me <g>.
Am running Vista home premium which could be the problem.



Cheers,
asw
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on May 12, 2009, 03:42:24 PM
Beautiful! Only thing that bugs me is that some of the terrain textures seem to have shadows in them. I like the bump idea too.

Not to be greedy here, but will the beaches be refined or can we expect some kind of tide thing? It seems like something that wouldn't be easily seen from the air, but everything else just looks so nice that the beaches kind of stick out.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Pyro on May 12, 2009, 03:59:11 PM
UPDATE - There is a new version now that fixes the clipping issue on the edges and also fixes an issue that caused frame rates on some machines to be wildly inaccurate.

Here's the latest version:  http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/gtester1.zip
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on May 12, 2009, 04:23:25 PM
I didn’t expect an update that quick.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: StokesAk on May 12, 2009, 04:39:04 PM
If you have a low end comuter with no video card will the gray graphics in the test show up like they did in game or is HTC going to do something?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: humble on May 12, 2009, 04:45:37 PM
not much difference for me...


(http://www.az-dsl.com/snaphook/ahtest.JPG)
1st

(http://www.az-dsl.com/snaphook/ahtest1.JPG)
update
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on May 12, 2009, 05:31:23 PM
The 'at' value in display view info is altitude in feet, correct?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: ImADot on May 12, 2009, 05:49:55 PM
Nice dusk, sunset, night (with accurate constellations), dawn and sunrise.   :rock

Can't wait for the production version!
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on May 12, 2009, 06:52:49 PM
(with accurate constellations),
I noticed Orion (only one I can easily pick out :lol ) which begs the question... will the north star show true north?
:noid
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on May 12, 2009, 07:31:47 PM
.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: TequilaChaser on May 12, 2009, 07:36:14 PM
.

I thought April Fools Jokes were only for April 1st of each year? :D

seriously though.....how are people flying planes in this thing? or where is the water that Motherland posted a screenshot of in the Results thread?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Easyscor on May 12, 2009, 07:41:04 PM
Quote from: TequilaChaser
...seriously though.....how are people flying planes in this thing? or where is the water that Motherland posted a screenshot of in the Results thread?
Shift+drag and Ctrl+drag using right mouse button, try it, you'll like it.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: thndregg on May 12, 2009, 07:48:37 PM
Guess I'm screwed when this is implimented. My 5 year old ATI 9800 runs at a 12 framerate on that test program. My comp won't accept a new video card as AGP slots are outmoded. I simply won't have $$$$ to shell out on building a new machine until next year. :(
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: texastc316 on May 12, 2009, 07:56:32 PM
get you one for $300 on ebay. they are there, just got to get creative when searching.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Easyscor on May 12, 2009, 08:02:23 PM
White water. Might be my driver?

This was taken from where A1 would be in-game.

(http://members.dslextreme.com/users/easyscor/previews/gtest4.jpg)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on May 12, 2009, 08:45:08 PM
Anyone notice the absence of the 15K haze/mist/cloud layer?

I think it’s a good idea to leave it out, just  like in scenarios. It creates a sort of visible barrier that many people don’t like to cross. I’m sure we will see a lot more medium to high altitude fights with it removed.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Greebo on May 12, 2009, 09:02:29 PM
I like that the rock looks like rock now, the old terrain was green everywhere. The water reflections look very nice too.

Perhaps a future version of the tester could have some way of forcing it to use the low detail terrain for those who have lousy framerate or other problems with the good looking stuff. Just for reassurance they will still be able to play the game when the new version comes out.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Hajo on May 12, 2009, 09:30:28 PM
Terrain was gorgeous!

Unfortunately I have a PC that is only 4 months old with dual 4850s running Crossfire and my FR was 17.15

in my monitors native resolution of 1920X1200 32 bit.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Hajo on May 12, 2009, 09:33:04 PM
oopps
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on May 12, 2009, 09:48:40 PM
Terrain was gorgeous!

Unfortunately I have a PC that is only 4 months old with dual 4850s running Crossfire and my FR was 17.15

in my monitors native resolution of 1920X1200 32 bit.

The FPS takes about 10-30 seconds to load the correct numbers.

You should be getting crazy FPS, not 17.15!
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: StokesAk on May 12, 2009, 10:04:42 PM
It was gray before, this is much better.

Have you guys taken a look at the airfileds are they different?

(http://i423.photobucket.com/albums/pp313/Strokeys/AHtraiian.jpg)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Hajo on May 12, 2009, 10:05:55 PM
Kazaa:

I had ATI control center started at Boot.

Used msconfig and omitted it from Boot list.

FR went from 17.15 to 163.8  1900X1200 native resolution and game resolution I use.

<phew>

tip!  Don''t have ATI Control center running!  Make sure it is not started on Boot!
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Banshee7 on May 12, 2009, 10:55:23 PM
Guess I'm screwed when this is implimented. My 5 year old ATI 9800 runs at a 12 framerate on that test program. My comp won't accept a new video card as AGP slots are outmoded. I simply won't have $$$$ to shell out on building a new machine until next year. :(


Don't worry.  I'm in the process of even finding out if I can upgrade....7 yr old computer, 5 FR :)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on May 12, 2009, 11:54:56 PM
If HTC have new clouds next on the list then I'm going to be really, really happy. :pray :O
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: eh on May 13, 2009, 12:50:25 AM
FR 65.60
Res 1024x768

Win XP 64 bit
AMD 64 4000+ 2GB RAM
NVIDIA GeForce 6800, 256 Mb

Used original test file. Everything looks as it should. Not bad for an old machine.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: JimmyC on May 13, 2009, 05:00:24 AM
for Stokes

(http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff274/lowerbrook/airfield.jpg)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Ruah on May 13, 2009, 06:24:53 AM
so my 512 mb graphics card will be able to take this?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Larry on May 13, 2009, 06:35:18 AM
For those that are able to download this I have a question. Are hills now round and smooth or are they still sharp 'block' forms?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Greebo on May 13, 2009, 07:36:25 AM
At first glance the terrain elevations seem similar to the current system. Using the the test program's wire frame effect and the airfield for scale it appears terrain elevations are still altered in half mile blocks, i.e. at nine points per terrain tile. However each one mile square is now a block of 64 triangles. I imagine we may be able to alter the height of these either individually or with a filter in the new TE and either this feature is not ready yet or it wasn't worth doing for a test terrain.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: hitech on May 13, 2009, 09:26:50 AM
The elevation resolution is not changing.

HiTech
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: maddafinga on May 13, 2009, 03:33:18 PM

Don't worry.  I'm in the process of even finding out if I can upgrade....7 yr old computer, 5 FR :)

 Would this apply to that nvidia control center also I wonder?  I always leave it up and running assuming that it's somehow important to the settings being enabled in the game right, but now that I see this I wonder.....
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: StokesAk on May 13, 2009, 03:34:09 PM
Do you have to have a video card to play aces high well, i play on a Gateway laptop.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Pyro on May 13, 2009, 04:18:43 PM
Removed update link due to water not working in that version.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Pyro on May 13, 2009, 04:26:42 PM
Do you have to have a video card to play aces high well, i play on a Gateway laptop.

If by "well", you mean in the normal mode instead of the low detail mode, then yes.  A typical onboard video chip isn't capable of running it in normal mode.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: 1Boner on May 13, 2009, 04:29:46 PM
How do I take and put up a shot of my test??


thanks.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Easyscor on May 13, 2009, 04:37:16 PM
Very fast download.

When I tried to run it, I received the following error:

d3dx9_40.dll was not found.

Looks like I'm behind in my updates?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Pyro on May 13, 2009, 05:02:52 PM
You need to unzip the patch into your existing gtester folder from your previous installation.  If there was not a previous installation or you unzip it somewhere else, it will not work.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Pyro on May 13, 2009, 05:06:16 PM
How do I take and put up a shot of my test??

You have to use the Windows print screen function.  Just hold down the control key while pressing the PrtScn key.  Then open up Paint and paste the image there.  You can then save it to a file.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: humble on May 13, 2009, 05:20:25 PM
still cant find any water, I can rotate the view via right mouse click but thats it, am i missing something?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Easyscor on May 13, 2009, 05:44:52 PM
Yes humble, right click and drag with the Ctrl key down. Also Shift+right click and drag.

Pyro, it's better, and I installed SP3 just in case.

Card: ATI Radeon 9800 Pro (128MB DDR AGP 8x/4x on an ABIT P4 system)
Anomalies: All water was white, I'll post a SS in the other thread
Full Screen Frame Rate: 14.20 at default view location (slightly less then 14.40 last time)
Resolution: 1280x1024

DirectX Version: DirectX 9.0c (4.09.0000.0904)

Main Driver: ati2dvag.dll
Version: 6.14.0010.6601
Date: 2/21/2006
Mini VDD: ati2mtag.sys




(http://members.dslextreme.com/users/easyscor/previews/gtest%205.jpg)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on May 13, 2009, 06:36:18 PM
so my 512 mb graphics card will be able to take this?
Download the program & see.

I downloaded the new version and now the water is white a la Easyscores screenshot. Worked flawlessly before.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: 68falcon on May 13, 2009, 07:08:52 PM
Pyro after downloading Gtester2 the water is now white. With Gtester1 the water was blue with sun reflections, awesome looking. Frame rate stayed the same with both tests

ATI Radeon 4870
Windows XP Pro with SP3
Frame 60

GTESTER1
(http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/2706/gtester1.jpg)

GTESTER2
(http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/5017/gtester2.jpg)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: StokesAk on May 13, 2009, 09:19:56 PM
Ok so if i get an error report when i run the getester that means my video card is to bad and therefore wont be able to play?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Slate on May 13, 2009, 10:52:48 PM
The sun sets through the mountain?

 I also see the sun rising from inside the mountain.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: USRanger on May 13, 2009, 10:54:17 PM
Same here.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: TequilaChaser on May 13, 2009, 11:51:28 PM
although, I myself, was curious as to how people were seeing water.etc........I did follow my testing to EXACTLY what Pyro asked for, and nothing more...because nothing else matters at this time with this test......( or does it? HTC &/or Pyro? )

the following link:  &  the listed Instructions to follow:  is exactly what was asked for and nothing more, so they could easily PARSE the results......
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,264673.msg3296557.html#msg3296557



INSTRUCTIONS

1-  Download and upzip this file:  http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/gtester2.zip It will unzip to a folder called gtester.  You can put this wherever you want it on your computer. 
2-  Shut down any apps that you have open and go into the gtester folder and run the file gtester.exe. 
3-  Note whether it looks like either of the examples below or if it crashes or has any graphic anomalies.  It might be all white for example.
4-  Do not move the view or change sliders or other default settings.
5-  Press escape to go to full screen mode.
6-  Wait 10 seconds and record your frame rate and resolution.

Please report your results in this thread in the following format:

Your video card model. 
Did it run normal, low detail, crash, or have any graphic anomalies.
Recorded frame rate from test.  Make sure you are in full screen mode and not windowed mode when you record this.
Recorded resolution from frame rate test in full screen mode.


& this was very important:
Please limit replies in this thread to test results.  There is a separate discussion thread for everything else  All replies other than test results in this thread will be deleted so that we can easily parse through it.  Thanks for your help!


I would like to know if HTC is interested in more information, since they put out another patch and told people to check it between the Shader on & off etc........ I myself 1st tested and changed my views etc.but re-read the instructions and went and posted what the Test asked for......

Also, turning on vsync locked my Frame rate in ay 70to 72 constant........ turning off ATI Tray Tools let the Frame Rate go up, turning AtI Tray Tools back on made it come back down..... I could set and tinker with it and get frames with anti alias, buffering, all kinds of junk and my FR ranged 129 to 184...... with vsync off.  with vsync on it was always locked to my monitors refresh of 70 hz ( 70 to 72 hz )

turn my ESET Smart Security Firewall/anti virus/malware etc ( NOD32 etc ) offf had no effects.... leaving my windows Media player opened thru the fire wallwhile testing lost me 3 to 4 FPS...shutting it down and it gained it back.......so all your VOIP, Skype, Messenger chat programs, itunes, etc.....is going to cause you problems....as well a nividia riva tuner might cause you lower fps, and Ati Cataylist control center ( CCC ) will cost you to have lower fps.......

I hope this helps someone realise that their low 14 or 26 framerate is being caused by a different program and is not necessarily your computer being older........[/
color]

Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Pyro on May 14, 2009, 09:16:26 AM
The specific instructions were specifically for the frame rate test.  If people move around or change things, we can't get an apples to apples comparison.  I didn't mean that use of the tester should be restricted for the frame rate test.  My apologies for the confusion.

It does appear that the water is no longer working correctly.  I'm going to change the main download link to the previous version.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: FireDrgn on May 14, 2009, 11:25:50 AM
ARe we suppose to test with  Vsync enabled... ?

<S>
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: caldera on May 14, 2009, 04:07:57 PM
I'd like to take this oppurtunity to request that the size of the sun be scaled down about 75%.  :pray
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Delirium on May 14, 2009, 04:46:05 PM
I posted a pic in the results thread of the sun appearring right through the mountain face. Will this be resolved before the update is released?

I don't know much about coding (coading), but it seems a waste to do all this work on the terrain and ignore a bug like that.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on May 14, 2009, 05:09:38 PM
I posted a pic in the results thread of the sun appearring right through the mountain face. Will this be resolved before the update is released?

I don't know much about coding (coading), but it seems a waste to do all this work on the terrain and ignore a bug like that.
Especially considering that the Moon works correctly.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: texastc316 on May 14, 2009, 05:20:42 PM
I'm sure they would fix such a glaring bug with this terrain  update being so big. hey I made a pun. sigh
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: FireDrgn on May 14, 2009, 08:03:58 PM
Can anyone tell me how to fix this.....and ya i know you cant fix stupid.......

(http://members.cox.net/dstruse/gtest.JPG)

the blue square is were the gtester first pops up before i hit esc to go into full view mode
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Swatch on May 14, 2009, 09:40:45 PM
I've found no glaring issues...  some odd things happening where the water meets the land in VERY FEW PLACES (flickering shoreline) but I figure that's still in debugging.   I found a couple interesting shots I'll share with you...

The good:  I honestly expected some living creature to crawl out of this or something... it looked very realistic!
(http://swatch.homeip.net/AHMap/turtlehome.JPG)


The not-so-good:  I'm ready to ramp my PTBoat off this thing....

(http://swatch.homeip.net/AHMap/waterflowsuphill.JPG)

But I jest... it looks absolutely great, and that last one might be more a function of terrain than program.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: moot on May 15, 2009, 04:41:59 AM
Swatch you might want to say which version of the tester those results are from.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on May 15, 2009, 07:49:37 AM
I found one problem with the water effect and that is the water ripple is so small that it looks good only on sea level.

If the waves would have small and large waves like in real sea, the sea would look great even from 10k altitude where you can only discern the larger alterations. Now it just disappears into flatness.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: kotrenin on May 15, 2009, 10:26:08 AM
I love the reflection of the mountain on the water.
It would be nice if you could see a reflection of your airplane on the water when this is released.
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2458/3533066977_120f0b3c74_b.jpg)

I did notice these stretch marks though.
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2036/3533901888_4f1644788a_b.jpg)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Easyscor on May 15, 2009, 10:35:01 AM
I found one problem with the water effect and that is the water ripple is so small that it looks good only on sea level.

If the waves would have small and large waves like in real sea, the sea would look great even from 10k altitude where you can only discern the larger alterations. Now it just disappears into flatness.

The old manual bomb sight calibration needs a fixed point to calibrate, so moving waves from 10k doesn't make sense. Besides, how often do you watch an individual wave track across the surface of the ocean. I think this should be handled with the water texture, and above a certain distance you shouldn't see movement IMO, and frame rates should benefit with that setup as well. We'll just have to wait and see what htc does.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Megalodon on May 15, 2009, 10:38:39 AM
Guess I'm screwed when this is implimented. My 5 year old ATI 9800 runs at a 12 framerate on that test program. My comp won't accept a new video card as AGP slots are outmoded. I simply won't have $$$$ to shell out on building a new machine until next year. :(

 still quit a few agp cards better than yours. I dont think its the card though :)

Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Noir on May 15, 2009, 11:38:43 AM
I do have that bug too

ATI RADEON HD2600XT http://mapage.noos.fr/rsm/DxDiag.txt (http://mapage.noos.fr/rsm/DxDiag.txt)

(http://mapage.noos.fr/rsm/ahtest2.jpg)

Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: AKDogg on May 15, 2009, 02:24:04 PM
I do have that bug too


Don't move the reflectivity slider.  leave it at default.  Infact, leave all sliders at default when u first start the program.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Hajo on May 15, 2009, 02:26:56 PM
Noir........ directions state don't play with the sliders!

Also...test full screen!  You have a windowed picture posted.

Hit ESC to go to full screen, and wait at least 10 seconds for an accurate FR display.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Ack-Ack on May 15, 2009, 02:29:01 PM
Guess I'm screwed when this is implimented. My 5 year old ATI 9800 runs at a 12 framerate on that test program. My comp won't accept a new video card as AGP slots are outmoded. I simply won't have $$$$ to shell out on building a new machine until next year. :(

Might want to check out the ATI HD3850 AGP card.  Works pretty good.


ack-ack
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on May 15, 2009, 02:37:16 PM
Noir........ directions state don't play with the sliders!

Also...test full screen!  You have a windowed picture posted.

Hit ESC to go to full screen, and wait at least 10 seconds for an accurate FR display.
I get the same bug without playing with the sliders & on fullscreen view. It worked perfectly on previous versions.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Gianlupo on May 15, 2009, 03:24:16 PM
Removed update link due to water not working in that version.

Pyro, I tried the gtester1 again, water is not showing with it on my pc.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: moot on May 15, 2009, 04:08:03 PM
Kotrenin - Looks like planes will show up in the water reflections.  There'll also be self-shadowing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UR9MvyoBig
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: thndregg on May 15, 2009, 06:32:55 PM
Might want to check out the ATI HD3850 AGP card.  Works pretty good.


ack-ack

Thanks, sir. Will keep that under consideration. :)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: FireDrgn on May 15, 2009, 07:18:35 PM
I downloaded the newest drivers for my 98oogts    ........problem solved...
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: danny37 on May 16, 2009, 03:11:39 AM
(http://i729.photobucket.com/albums/ww293/danny37/gtester.jpg)
(http://i729.photobucket.com/albums/ww293/danny37/gtester1.jpg)
i guess this is another slap in the face from vista :uhoh
i miss xp
nvidia geforce8300 gs driver is up to date.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on May 16, 2009, 03:24:58 AM
The old manual bomb sight calibration needs a fixed point to calibrate, so moving waves from 10k doesn't make sense. Besides, how often do you watch an individual wave track across the surface of the ocean. I think this should be handled with the water texture, and above a certain distance you shouldn't see movement IMO, and frame rates should benefit with that setup as well. We'll just have to wait and see what htc does.

Have you ever tried IL2? It's a great example how the sea looks realistic even at high altitude. The sea shouldn't move in small looped pattern like it does now, it should have waves. Waves that AFAIK can be created simply by moving a couple texture layers in relation to eachothers -> low performance hit. The current implementation looks like a busy ants nest from higher above instead of a sea. If you look at the sea from high altitude you notice that the sea appears almost motionless - but it does have texture. Large waves that almost can't be seen on sea level.

(http://www.hobbyandgames.com/shop/h/hobbyandgames/img-lib/spd_20060728111653_b.jpg)

Notice how smaller ripples are combined with large waves. The large ones can be seen at very high altitude and stop making the sea level look a flat mat of pixels.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on May 16, 2009, 03:50:44 AM
(http://i729.photobucket.com/albums/ww293/danny37/gtester.jpg)
(http://i729.photobucket.com/albums/ww293/danny37/gtester1.jpg)
i guess this is another slap in the face from vista :uhoh
i miss xp
nvidia geforce8300 gs driver is up to date.

If you have vsync on, do you have triple buffering enabled? For some reason it can really boost your FPS even though Skuzzy said AH2 enables it by default. It appears that in some system configurations it has to be enabled manually from the control panel.

If you should have this particular problem, your FPS will dip real low whenever your system can't fully peg the native refresh speed.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: WWhiskey on May 16, 2009, 10:01:44 AM
ordered new card yesterday.
about $ 140 delivered from newegg.
 (http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg229/WWhiskey/newcard.jpg)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: danny37 on May 16, 2009, 12:31:22 PM
If you have vsync on, do you have triple buffering enabled? For some reason it can really boost your FPS even though Skuzzy said AH2 enables it by default. It appears that in some system configurations it has to be enabled manually from the control panel.

If you should have this particular problem, your FPS will dip real low whenever your system can't fully peg the native refresh speed.
vsync and triple buffering didnt help any,fps still less than 18.the bright spot in picture2 follows me no matter where i go,unless i go to ground level then it disappears and the water and all looks normal(waves and reflections) but the fps stay low fullscreen,in half screen fps is at 32 to 35.
what im wondering is,is the low fps in the gtester mean that when the update comes out im, i can expect the same or worse fps in the game?especially when theres alot of players in one area,or like in TT where theres alot of objects also,if so then the game would be unplayable for me :cry
as of now in game i get a solid 59-60 unless around a bunch of smoke(like being around a refinery strat thats been hit recently) then it drops into the low 50s,
or in the tower for some reason i get fps in the upper 30s to low 40s.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Cajunn on May 16, 2009, 02:39:40 PM
Went through the whole thing, changed time hour by hour, everything is very crisp, my frame rates or anywhere from 130 with the lowest being around 60 when moving fairly fast across the land scape. Great job, beautiful layout, love the sunsets (the orange might be a little bright probably just me) very realistic. :aok
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on May 16, 2009, 02:42:28 PM
vsync and triple buffering didnt help any,fps still less than 18.the bright spot in picture2 follows me no matter where i go,unless i go to ground level then it disappears and the water and all looks normal(waves and reflections) but the fps stay low fullscreen,in half screen fps is at 32 to 35.
That bright spot is the reflection of the sun off of the water. It's not going to move ;)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: danny37 on May 16, 2009, 02:55:01 PM
no,it does move,as i said it follows me anywhere i move on the water and land just not as visible on land,and ive not seen that in anyone elses pics that have been posted.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on May 16, 2009, 03:04:14 PM
no,it does move,as i said it follows me anywhere i move on the water and land just not as visible on land,and ive not seen that in anyone elses pics that have been posted.
That's what I meant, should have worded it differently. The reflection of the sun will follow you every where it goes, not moving from your screen... just like the real sun.
Both your screenshots look completely normal.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: danny37 on May 16, 2009, 04:07:34 PM
looks more like a bug to me,thats gonna be an aggravation to fly over the water and look down and see that. :eek:
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: wsveum on May 16, 2009, 04:21:02 PM
When I did the test I got a Frame Rate of 76.69 Res 1920 x 1200 at full screen.
On my Gateway FX 7020 AMD Phenom 9600 Quad-Core Processor 2.30 GHz
3.00 GB Memory
32 - Bit OS
Windows Vista Home Premium SP1
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT
I've not been playing long but I do like what I have seen with the new update. Can not wait to see it in action. Thanks to HTC for all there hard work.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: DamnedRen on May 16, 2009, 11:49:15 PM
ordered new card yesterday.
about $ 140 delivered from newegg.


I know this might sound silly but "over clocked right out of the box"?

Ren :noid
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: moot on May 17, 2009, 05:07:12 AM
It's a standard (nvidia) model with the reseller's (bfg) mods added (oc)?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: DamnedRen on May 17, 2009, 05:22:10 AM
Thanks. It's the first time I ever heard of over clocking right out of the box. Sounds like a sales pitch.

Ren
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: moot on May 17, 2009, 07:17:26 AM
It's been around for a while.. I suppose it's one more case of economies of scale, where the mfg profits on being able to supply a demand for cheaper than the customer could manage, thanks to mass production.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kermit de frog on May 17, 2009, 03:53:34 PM
Thanks. It's the first time I ever heard of over clocking right out of the box. Sounds like a sales pitch.

Ren

You get a lifetime warranty on that overclocked model.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: DamnedRen on May 17, 2009, 04:17:52 PM
Lifetime? Very nice!  :)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: WWhiskey on May 17, 2009, 06:37:40 PM
Lifetime? Very nice!  :)

yep and from what ive seen in here and heard other places bfg is good to go, when it comes to helping you out with there cards
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: ebfd11 on May 20, 2009, 11:30:43 AM
OK dumb question here...


I get the static look, in other words I cant find where to go to find the water so I can test this out. can some one please help me??
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: moot on May 20, 2009, 01:11:15 PM
click drag through the terrain while holding alt/shift/ctrl.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: WWhiskey on May 21, 2009, 04:57:16 PM
ok old card setup on vista
  vista
1600x1200
 ati hd 3650
21.17 frame rate first pic
no problems other than low frame rate!

 new setup bfg gt 9800 oc (over clocked from the factory)
1600x1200
109.05 frames per second
 worth the money i think! :aok

Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: FireDrgn on May 22, 2009, 02:47:10 PM
Looks like they took out the hedges.. or am i miising someting?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on May 25, 2009, 01:27:41 PM
am i miising someting?

well the hedges obviously..
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on May 25, 2009, 01:40:07 PM
Looks like they took out the hedges.. or am i miising someting?
The NDIsles terrain is using the Pacific style terrain, thus the lack of Hedgerows.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Noir on May 26, 2009, 12:02:26 PM
Noir........ directions state don't play with the sliders!

Also...test full screen!  You have a windowed picture posted.

Hit ESC to go to full screen, and wait at least 10 seconds for an accurate FR display.

Same bug with sliders by default and in full screen.

Now I have a second HD2600XT in crossfire, and my FR got divided by 3  :huh
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Noir on May 26, 2009, 12:05:08 PM
(http://i729.photobucket.com/albums/ww293/danny37/gtester.jpg)
(http://i729.photobucket.com/albums/ww293/danny37/gtester1.jpg)
i guess this is another slap in the face from vista :uhoh
i miss xp
nvidia geforce8300 gs driver is up to date.

the geforce 8300 is a pretty low end card for recent games, vista or not. You won't be able to play in such a high resolution IMO.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on May 27, 2009, 01:58:31 AM
It seems like the 8800GTX series gfx cards are owning the new textures.  :rock
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Hajo on May 27, 2009, 04:04:59 PM
Noir if running Crossfire make sure in settings you are in Standard Mode!

Also make sure ATI/Catalyst Control Center is not running or in task bar.

If it is booting up uncheck it using MSconfig in the start-up tab.

Restart with control center disabled or off.  Frame rates should be higher appreciably
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Noir on May 28, 2009, 04:00:05 AM
I don't know about no standard mode, and running CCC does not explain why the FR got divided by 3, and even so its deactivated.

I'm running windows vista SP2

(http://mapage.noos.fr/rsm/process.jpg)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Hajo on May 30, 2009, 12:56:59 PM
Noir I am running XPSP3.  That may be a difference.

If you do have catalyst/ATI control center I suggest you do this.

Go to Settings/Control Panel/Display/Settings/Advanced.  this should activate Control Center.

A drop down menu appears ....I'm using crossfired ATI 4850s.

the screen on the right should show a graphic of an auto driving on a road.

Underneath that graphic might be a slider or something that says Standard...(could be a slider or a chk box)

If you scroll down the menu on the left you will see the settings that you can adjust.

The last one in the Menu should be Crossfire.  When you select Crossfire you will see text that explains

that MAKE SURE when running Crosssfire you are in standard mode.

If you didn't find it at the first screen I described above click on the selections in the drop down menu

to the left.  You will find it.

Hope this helps
Hajo
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Noir on May 31, 2009, 04:50:30 AM
I don't have the standard option on the vista 8.11 catalyst panel. I do have a "balanced" option which is on. I still find odd that the crossfire is working in any game including AH2 and not that tester.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on June 01, 2009, 01:16:27 PM
I hope HTC fix the sun so it doesn't set through the hills.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: -sudz- on June 02, 2009, 09:16:05 AM
I hope HTC fix the sun so it doesn't set through the hills.
You want us to fix a test app?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: soda72 on June 02, 2009, 09:30:51 AM
You want us to fix a test app?

 :rofl
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on June 02, 2009, 01:18:25 PM
You want us to fix a test app?

Sudz,

I would rather have the bug fixed before the release of the long awaited patch. The phenomenon also occurs in our current client.

Now if your asking me what I want... :t

Keep up the great work HTC. :aok

(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/Luke_831/Image2-2.png)

:rofl

 :P
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on June 02, 2009, 02:03:46 PM
The pheromone also occurs in our current client.
lolwut
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on June 02, 2009, 02:12:50 PM
lolwut

O'rly?

Spell check ftl.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on June 02, 2009, 02:16:01 PM
:D
That was funny though :lol
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Pyro on June 03, 2009, 04:02:12 PM
Ok, there is a new gtester available.  You can download it here.

http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/gtester3.zip

This should fix the water.  If you were running gtester before and seeing the normal (not low detail) terrain but not seeing the water, we'd like to make sure that you can now see the water.  Please report any other anomalies that you see in this version.  Thanks.

<EDIT>  It appears that full screen mode is not working in this version, so we'll just need you to do your testing in a window.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on June 03, 2009, 04:14:38 PM
Pyro, are you sure you have enough sub folders in the latest download?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Pyro on June 03, 2009, 04:18:28 PM
Kazaa, there should only be one subfolder.  There are some other subfolders that get created after you run it.

Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on June 03, 2009, 04:21:50 PM
cc. :huh
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on June 03, 2009, 04:37:47 PM
Woah, those are some major changes.

Pyro,

Any reason why the textures look so different?

I feel HTC was going in the right direction with gtester1, it looked nicely detailed, maybe just a bit to much farm land. The colours were also much richer, gtester3 seems to be the complete opposite.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on June 03, 2009, 06:48:40 PM
Pyro,
The Gtester3 folder is under Documents and Settings\Pyro\Desktop in the new .zip.

Woah, those are some major changes.

Pyro,

Any reason why the textures look so different?

I feel HTC was going in the right direction with gtester1, it looked nicely detailed, maybe just a bit to much farm land. The colours were also much richer, gtester3 seems to be the complete opposite.
I like them, especially the new 'bump' pattern. It's a bit darker all around but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Easyscor on June 03, 2009, 07:12:28 PM


First, my DxDiag.txt is here (http://members.dslextreme.com/users/easyscor/gtester3/DxDiag.txt)



(http://members.dslextreme.com/users/easyscor/gtester3/ss1.jpg)
(http://members.dslextreme.com/users/easyscor/gtester3/ss2.jpg)
(http://members.dslextreme.com/users/easyscor/gtester3/ss3.jpg)
(http://members.dslextreme.com/users/easyscor/gtester3/ss4.jpg)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Baumer on June 03, 2009, 07:15:39 PM
gtester3 (running in windowed mode)

Frame Rate- 31.4
Res- 1379x1009

I noticed the same reflection stretching as in the earlier version, see below.

(http://332nd.org/dogs/baumer/Stuff/gtester3.jpg)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on June 03, 2009, 08:05:29 PM
Only thing about the updated version is that the oceans look like dirty toilet water.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on June 04, 2009, 03:59:21 AM
Only thing about the updated version is that the oceans look like dirty toilet water.

+1.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Noir on June 04, 2009, 06:15:12 AM
Crossfire HD2600XT.

despite the full screen crash, the water is showing in gtester3 and looks very good.

the evening lightning is nice, but the sun is showing thru the hills.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Pyro on June 09, 2009, 04:27:27 PM
A new version of gtester is now available here:

http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/gtester4.zip

Full screen works again in this version.  If you are seeing some anomalies in windowed mode, please check it again in full screen mode to see if it goes away.  We are aware of one anomaly that occurs with some cards in windowed mode.

The default location has changed to where some water is visible.  We'd like to see some frame rate checks from the default position with water reflections on and off to note the difference.  Thanks again for your help.

P.S.  Water color is variable and can be set differently from one terrain to the next.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on June 09, 2009, 05:14:15 PM
P.S.  Water color is variable and can be set differently from one terrain to the next.
Figured.
I'm not sure if you changed it, or it's just because I'm seeing it in fullscreen for the first time, but the water looks much better now. I like how you can see the reflection of the clouds, too.
No anomalies that I can see, I see that you fixed the stretching issue... haven't been able to test FR yet, I've got a lot of programs open I don't want to close right now...
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Vulcan on June 09, 2009, 05:19:39 PM
Woot stereo 3D works! Thankyou HTC  :rock
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Easyscor on June 09, 2009, 05:38:32 PM
Sure is nice to finally see the water you guys have been talking about lol.

Anyone else notice, I had to click on the scene in the window to enable keyboard input. It wouldn't respond to the Esc key on my machine until I did that, after first clicking the Reflections off check box.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on June 10, 2009, 08:38:22 AM
So does anyone else want to discuss the changes with the terrain textures, between gtester1 and gtester4?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: bravoa8 on June 10, 2009, 02:22:47 PM
gtester4 fixed the water (i posted in the results)but... frame rate was five and it was real slow didn't get to look around any
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: moot on June 11, 2009, 06:19:27 PM
Not a result.. but the moon doesn't show up in the water reflections.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Swatch on June 11, 2009, 06:33:28 PM
not going to lie.... a moon reflecting off the water would be awesome...  and make me want nighttime even more!
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: moot on June 11, 2009, 11:36:45 PM
Neither do the stars, it seems.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: CDR1 on June 14, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
well i had a nice computer 4 years ago but i think i'm in trouble now
1.8 athalon 64
1 gig ram
ati 9600 256

frame rates 10-15
question? What frame rates do you guys think will be needed to remove your computer from the list of "reasons i get killed so much".
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: RATTFINK on June 14, 2009, 11:03:38 PM
Neither do the stars, it seems.


I see star reflections in mine. No moon though...


(http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u7/rattfink31/GraphicTest4RATT.jpg)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on June 15, 2009, 07:22:44 AM
well i had a nice computer 4 years ago but i think i'm in trouble now
1.8 athalon 64
1 gig ram
ati 9600 256

frame rates 10-15
question? What frame rates do you guys think will be needed to remove your computer from the list of "reasons i get killed so much".

So called scientists say that the human eye is adjusted to about 29FPS but that’s a total lie.

A solid FPS of 60 is the golden bar for gaming, however, the more the better.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Skuzzy on June 15, 2009, 07:49:37 AM
So called scientists say that the human eye is adjusted to about 29FPS but that’s a total lie.

A solid FPS of 60 is the golden bar for gaming, however, the more the better.


There is nothing to be gained, graphically, from exceeding the horizontal refresh rate of the monitor.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Greebo on June 15, 2009, 12:44:30 PM
I wonder how much reliance can be placed on the tester WRT framerates in the next version of AH. Presumably the tester does not have all the CPU intensive stuff from the game like flight, ballistics and damage model calculations as it is designed just to test the graphics cards. So in the next version anyone with a CPU limited PC will suffer a framerate hit compared to what they got with the tester, while someone with a graphics card limited PC won't. Unless that is, the next version of AH is so graphics card dependent that CPU strength isn't an issue for anyone.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Vulcan on June 15, 2009, 08:24:34 PM
So called scientists say that the human eye is adjusted to about 29FPS but that’s a total lie.

A solid FPS of 60 is the golden bar for gaming, however, the more the better.


Incorrect, the human BRAIN perceives motion at ~17fps, it can perceive frames up to about 110fps.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Noir on June 16, 2009, 06:02:37 AM
I still don't get why the tester is running SO bad on my computer while AH2 and other modern games work as expected. I am worried.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Pyro on June 17, 2009, 12:42:43 PM
Noir, can you retest with Crossfire disabled?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Noir on June 17, 2009, 01:58:24 PM
GTester 4 results, default view and full screen.

Operating System: Windows Vista Business SP2
Video card: ATI HD2600XT without crossfire
Res: 1600*1200
FPS with reflections on: 36FPS
FPS with reflections off: 44FPS

for reference, I made a mistake in my previous report as I'm running in 1600 and not 1280. I reran the test with crossfire back on.

GTester 4 results, default view and full screen.

Operating System: Windows Vista Business SP2
Video card: ATI HD2600XT*2 in hardware crossfire.
Res: 1600*1200
FPS with reflections on: 10FPS
FPS with reflections off: 17FPS

 :noid
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Noir on June 17, 2009, 02:16:40 PM
as a side note (crossfire mode)

(http://mapage.noos.fr/rsm/gtester_1.jpg)

I hit esc then, and get 270fps in windowed mode
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: RATTFINK on June 17, 2009, 02:44:14 PM
Pardon me, what is "crossfire", besides the song by the great Stevie Ray Vaughan?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgKVvypJc5s
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Noir on June 17, 2009, 04:18:04 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CrossFire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CrossFire)
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Skuzzy on June 17, 2009, 04:48:39 PM
Vertical sync enabled or disabled?  Anti-aliasing?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Noir on June 17, 2009, 06:26:24 PM
anti aliasing is "application controlled"
vsync is "default off"
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: GuyNoir on June 17, 2009, 11:02:30 PM
Alright, I definitely can't wait for the new terrain update and I'm even more excited to see a Pacific terrain...  I think my all-time favorite tile set was that old map in the CT in Aces High 1 where the American carriers had to invade the Japanese-held Pacific island (can't remember which... Saipan?) with that pretty custom-skinned city.

When Aces High 2 came out, we lost a lot of variety in our tile-sets (like the sweet desert terrain from Pizza or the winter Finnish map) but we ended up with better fights from the new object density.  Since then, though, we've been stuck in Europe with hedge-rows, dark seas, and wooly barnyard animals and I've missed the bright sun and blue waters of the Pacific...

Now, we're finally heading west, and, after trying out the gtester, I really hope that we don't just end up with the atmosphere of the European terrain again but with more palm trees.

So....  hopefully I can give you guys a tour of how the theater should look (the old brown and white war photos don't quite capture the vibe).

One of my granddads was a merchant marine in the Pacific and the other was a marine in the island-hopping campaign, so I'll post the route that he fought through:

Tarawa:

(http://i39.tinypic.com/29m9935.jpg)

(http://i42.tinypic.com/2a0yuq.jpg)

Saipan:

(http://i42.tinypic.com/20hn9c5.jpg)

(http://i42.tinypic.com/nyh5zd.jpg)

(http://i40.tinypic.com/2zzt5oy.jpg)

(http://i41.tinypic.com/30hsjmx.jpg)

Tinian:

(http://i39.tinypic.com/28w2wkx.jpg)

(http://i41.tinypic.com/2044f9.jpg)

Okinawa:

(http://i41.tinypic.com/r0dqmr.jpg)

(http://i44.tinypic.com/35d50m1.jpg)

(http://i44.tinypic.com/2r3hysk.jpg)


Now, here's a screenshot I just took from the gtester:

(http://i39.tinypic.com/2ykke2u.jpg)

It's a great terrain, but I'm afraid that it's just not capturing the feel of the Pacific...

So, just playing around with the colors of the sky and water in the screenshot (and not touching the land), I've come up with this:

(http://i42.tinypic.com/2nalf8h.jpg)

It's not perfect, but I think it gets a lot closer to the real thing (and even seems to give more color to the jungle/grass)... it'd really be great if the brilliant blue of the shallow water got incorporated  into the beach tiles, too.  I dunno... anyone else agree?

Sorry for the gigantic post, but the terrain's almost live and I'd really like to see the it get knocked out of the park the first go-round... I know how long it sometimes takes for a second go-round  ;) :D
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Noir on June 18, 2009, 03:55:37 AM
yeah your blue is way more pacific-ish
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on June 18, 2009, 12:29:38 PM
I've always had the feeling that the Pacific was more 'blue' than the Atlantic. The color of the water seems to match what I've seen on the east coast of the US, and pictures I've seen of the Atlantic etc, but definitely doesn't look Pacific.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Kazaa on June 18, 2009, 12:34:22 PM
Alright, I definitely can't wait for the new terrain update and I'm even more excited to see a Pacific terrain...  I think my all-time favorite tile set was that old map in the CT in Aces High 1 where the American carriers had to invade the Japanese-held Pacific island (can't remember which... Saipan?) with that pretty custom-skinned city.

When Aces High 2 came out, we lost a lot of variety in our tile-sets (like the sweet desert terrain from Pizza or the winter Finnish map) but we ended up with better fights from the new object density.  Since then, though, we've been stuck in Europe with hedge-rows, dark seas, and wooly barnyard animals and I've missed the bright sun and blue waters of the Pacific...

Now, we're finally heading west, and, after trying out the gtester, I really hope that we don't just end up with the atmosphere of the European terrain again but with more palm trees.

So....  hopefully I can give you guys a tour of how the theater should look (the old brown and white war photos don't quite capture the vibe).

One of my granddads was a merchant marine in the Pacific and the other was a marine in the island-hopping campaign, so I'll post the route that he fought through:

Tarawa:

(http://i39.tinypic.com/29m9935.jpg)

(http://i42.tinypic.com/2a0yuq.jpg)

Saipan:

(http://i42.tinypic.com/20hn9c5.jpg)

(http://i42.tinypic.com/nyh5zd.jpg)

(http://i40.tinypic.com/2zzt5oy.jpg)

(http://i41.tinypic.com/30hsjmx.jpg)

Tinian:

(http://i39.tinypic.com/28w2wkx.jpg)

(http://i41.tinypic.com/2044f9.jpg)

Okinawa:

(http://i41.tinypic.com/r0dqmr.jpg)

(http://i44.tinypic.com/35d50m1.jpg)

(http://i44.tinypic.com/2r3hysk.jpg)


Now, here's a screenshot I just took from the gtester:

(http://i39.tinypic.com/2ykke2u.jpg)

It's a great terrain, but I'm afraid that it's just not capturing the feel of the Pacific...

So, just playing around with the colors of the sky and water in the screenshot (and not touching the land), I've come up with this:

(http://i42.tinypic.com/2nalf8h.jpg)

It's not perfect, but I think it gets a lot closer to the real thing (and even seems to give more color to the jungle/grass)... it'd really be great if the brilliant blue of the shallow water got incorporated  into the beach tiles, too.  I dunno... anyone else agree?

Sorry for the gigantic post, but the terrain's almost live and I'd really like to see the it get knocked out of the park the first go-round... I know how long it sometimes takes for a second go-round  ;) :D

I agree 100% with you sir, well said.
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: mike254 on June 18, 2009, 10:52:05 PM
So does this mean we will have night in the main arenas?  :x 
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Noir on June 19, 2009, 05:50:07 AM
So does this mean we will have night in the main arenas?  :x 

where did you see this ?
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: mike254 on June 19, 2009, 09:10:03 AM
Well there is night in the Gtester... just hoping we will see it in the MA.  :pray
Title: Re: Graphics compatibility test - DISCUSSION THREAD
Post by: Motherland on June 19, 2009, 09:11:35 AM
Well there is night in the Gtester... just hoping we will see it in the MA.  :pray
You can set night in the current version of the game ;)