splinter cell 3 pc demo....thoughts...?

Discussion in 'PC Gaming' started by suryad, Feb 21, 2005.

  1. egore

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2005
    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    2
    So basically they are just trying new SM3 effects with there game engine getting ready for Xbox2. Are all the SM3 effects only possible with SM3 couldn't they just leave out the ones that are to difficult to port?I can't believe that all off them are SM3 specific.
     
  2. Reverend

    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Messages:
    3,266
    Likes Received:
    24
    That's correct, SC:CT will not be on the next-gen consoles. The rendering engine for it will, however, be used for the next SC game that will be available on next-gen consoles.

    Note that I'm just a messenger!
     
  3. kyleb

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,165
    Likes Received:
    52
    Well we have to shoot somebody over this..

    :wink:
     
  4. Richard

    Richard Mord's imaginary friend
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,508
    Likes Received:
    40
    Location:
    PT, EU
    Just hoping you're a messenger from both parties to both parties, and that you give whoever at Ubi a piece of our mind.

    But anyway, I'm sure I speak for everyone when I say we appreciate you doing this. Knowing the truth is always better, even if it's not what we would like to hear. :|
     
  5. Demirug

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2002
    Messages:
    1,326
    Likes Received:
    69
    None of the effects can done with SM3 only. It is only the concept that did not fit very well with SM2/SM2.X. Unfortunately each of the SM3 pixelshader contains at least one static branch. If you want to port it back to SM2/SM2.X you have to change the concept. If I have somewhat more time at the moment I would it make myself.
     
  6. suryad

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,479
    Likes Received:
    16
    I agree with Mordenkainen. So sad about no SM 2.0!!! The SM 3.0 shots look a bit more polished in my opinion. I like that look better. Oh well I guess I will have to buy a 6800 Ultra ASAP.
     
  7. Reverend

    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Messages:
    3,266
    Likes Received:
    24
    No, I don't do that. My assumption is that they usually know what they're doing and they know the kind of feedback to expect. Whether they care or not is not what I would comment on. I sympathise with you ATI'ers however (although I have a 6800GT in my machine).
     
  8. Unknown Soldier

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2002
    Messages:
    4,047
    Likes Received:
    1,670
    Since it only comes out later in the year . .you could wait for the R520.

    US
     
  9. pat777

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 19, 2004
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    0
    I thought PS 2.0 or PS 2.0x supported static branching. I guess that was VS 2.0 or VS 2.0x.
     
  10. Demirug

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2002
    Messages:
    1,326
    Likes Received:
    69
    PS 2.X contains static branching as an option. But the only hardware that support this options at the moment is the NV4X.
     
  11. micb

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2003
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bedfordshire, UK
  12. Farid

    Farid Artist formely known as Vysez
    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,844
    Likes Received:
    108
    Location:
    Paris, France
    Did you try "Alt-Enter"?
     
  13. micb

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2003
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bedfordshire, UK
    Yes, it was the first thing I tried, had no effect at all.

    Alos notice how you can see the [x] on the window is grey'd out, odd huh?
     
  14. LeGreg

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2003
    Messages:
    239
    Likes Received:
    3
    There's a new official demo with bug fixes. Tried it ?
     
  15. wireframe

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,347
    Likes Received:
    33
    Any idea what fixes are in the updated demo?
     
  16. wireframe

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,347
    Likes Received:
    33
    Are you people upset because this game doesn't support SM 2.0 or are you upset because it supports SM 3.0? If it was SM 1.1 only would you still not want this game for that particular reason?

    Having tried the first demo (currently downloading the updated demo), I can say that although the SM 3.0 rendering looks better and you have additional options available, the SM 1.1 mode is by no means bad looking. In fact, this game seems to be much improved in terms of rendering when compared to the two previous installments.

    But really, I get the feeling some of you would not complain at all if SM 3.0 was completely removed, leaving everyone with SM 1.1. All I can say is that it probably won't be too long until you can play that mode on ATI hardware as well, should you favor a certain vendor. Furthermore, this game needs a bit more powerful hardware to shine anyways. It is by no means running perfectly on a 6800 Ultra with all options on and settings on max. There is definitely room for another $600 of your cash to make it just right.
     
  17. suryad

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,479
    Likes Received:
    16
    Yeah with the R520 around the corner, I could be a bit more patient. Wireframe, I am just disappointed that Ubi decided to go with SM 1.1 and not SM 2.0. I dont quiet understand what their logic would be. I am quiet happy the game is SM 3.0 capable because then the game will have more replay value in the future with better more powerful cards. It is just the SM 2.0 lack of support that I am complaining about. Would it really be that difficult for Ubi to release a patch that supports 2.0 in the future?! :)
     
  18. Ostsol

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Messages:
    1,765
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    The lack of SM2.0 support is mostly interesting because of the rather large number of people with SM2.0 video cards. It's not a bit-segment like PS1.4 was, after all. Just look at how many people bitched about Valve not defaulting NV3x video cards to the SM2.0 render path.
     
  19. suryad

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,479
    Likes Received:
    16
    I am going to try and see if I can get my hands on the XPS gen 2 model which has a 6800 Go Ultra in it. I guess it is time to Ebay my existing XPS Gen 1....sigh...damn Ubisoft.
     
  20. Altair

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2004
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Montreal
    That's because sm1.1 got larger install base and because Xbox supports sm1.1+.

    Yes it would. It takes significant effort to add full support for sm2.0 and the impact on number of sales of the game is rather questionable. Like Reverend told the major reason for sm3.0 implementation was the research for future console development.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...