PDA

View Full Version : Attenion: PC Users



rg_001100
12th Nov 2008, 01:17
Can your PC run the Tomb Raider: Underworld Demo?

What do you understand about system requirements/the hardware of computers?
What do you understand about your computer in relation to those system requirements/hardware?

I am curious to see just how many PC players we have that can run the demo; and how many people understand about the system requirements/hardware behind the computer in relation to this.

EDIT: I apologise that the list seems daunting. It is both asking about whether demo will run, and whether you understand about that. The first three are if your PC can run the demo, the last three are if your PC cannot run the demo.

(could possibly have been posted in Technical Forum; although that sub-Forum seems more for people with problems)

EDIT: Also,
How well does your PC run the demo?
Is your computer a Laptop? (Does it run the demo?)

EDIT:
Sorry, if you want help, please do not ask for it in this thread, instead, look/search for a thread in TR:U Demo Technical Forum (http://forums.eidosgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=261), and if no one has your problem you could create a new thread. (Might help to look at the Technical FAQ (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=81793) as well). :)

tiger
12th Nov 2008, 01:53
Thank you, rg_001100, the more of these PC polls, the better. :thumbsup:

PC demo players - are you able to play the demo OK? (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/showthread.php?t=137354)

(I truly hope it makes a difference with some TRU decisions by Eidos.) :cool:

rg_001100
12th Nov 2008, 02:03
the more of these PC polls, the better. :thumbsup:

tiger, you were on my mind when I decided to create this. I wanted to see both how many people could run the demo, and how well they understood the system requirements if they did/didn't (and what the spread would be like). The poll is slightly complex as a result. (a 2 dimensional poll, I guess...)

Edited OP and asked another couple of questions :)

Also,
How well does your PC run the demo?
Is your computer a Laptop? (Does it run the demo?)

K^2
12th Nov 2008, 02:28
I built my machine from scratch to make sure it can handle everything I might want to run on it. It has a quad core and an 8800GT, so it handles the demo with no sweat in full 1080p with 4xAA and everything else cranked up to the max.

The_Hylden
12th Nov 2008, 07:23
It runs fine. My PC's a now five+ year old XPS, but that still is a good match. Two Hyper-threaded Pentium 4 processors are equivalent, for the most part (as long as a lot of programs aren't running at once) to dual core processors, and my gigahertz output is higher than most Dual-Core at 3.40 GHz a piece. Memory is the real clincher, though. Mine is maxed out at 4 GBs. Vista takes more than a GB, so it's got to have it in spades. My graphics card isn't the top-end either. 8600 GTS Superclocked, but with everything working together, it blows through this demo on the highest specs (1650 x 1080 rez), except anti-aliasing. I can't run it above 8x AA, as soon as it goes into either 16x AA, or 8x Q AA, chop city occurs. I am pretty happy with that, though.

Smooth as silk, Lara works like a charm. Everything looks fantastic and I've had none of the reported animation glitches, nor camera glitches.

So, there you have it. Looking forward to the real game!

GoranAgar
12th Nov 2008, 10:39
At home the demo runs on 2 PCs and one Notebook.

Veppie
12th Nov 2008, 11:20
It runs on my pc. I bought a new one just to play this game (and for college work:lol: )

I no a little about hardware and got helped pretty well at the store where I let some guy build my pc.

I must say that the test on systemrequierments lab, helped a lot with understanding what this game needs.

Sina_Croft
12th Nov 2008, 11:33
@ home @ "uber"pc xD > great graphs :)
@ laptop, but everything low and off ;)

tombthebomb
12th Nov 2008, 12:28
I have always loved tomb raider and that's why I downloaded the demo. Everything was fine but when I started running it a dialog box appeared relating to display settings. I clicked ok. Then a message came indicating " failed to intialize Direct3D with current settings". My card supports direct3d but i am wondering why it happened . It any never happened with me never. I am dying to get this game. I am sure it is even better than annversary. :confused:

Rexie
12th Nov 2008, 13:35
No, Demo doesn't run and I know lots about the hardware

if I understand the poll right...

Arnar
12th Nov 2008, 14:11
my computer runs the demo slow and is not a laptop

Dr.Willard
12th Nov 2008, 14:34
I voted no, but I know a bit about hardware. At least I know when my computer isn't technically capable of fulfilling a games' requirements. My computer was just over the minimum needed.

I could of voted yes as it did run, but god it was unplayable, literally.The lag just rendered it unplayable. Not surprised though that my PC couldn't run it as smoothly as I wanted it to.

daygo
12th Nov 2008, 16:11
yes i can run it its very good, have no problems with it, and i have a little knowledge of specs and stuff.:rasp:

Ol.a
12th Nov 2008, 16:47
No, Demo doesn't run and I know lots about the hardware

if I understand the poll right...

Same here.. My card has Pixel Shader 2..
My problem (as I said so many times in here) is that I have a laptop and I can't upgrade my video card. If I could, I would happily do it - upgrading never hurt anyone!
I know this is not your problem, but it would be a madness (in my opinion,of course) to buy a new laptop and replace my 1,5 year old one, just for playing TRU.
So, I'm thinking of buying a PS2, which is the cheapest way to play the game, but then I'm thinking the exclusive chapters on Xbox (which costs more), and then I'm thinking that all these will be a waste of money for me, because Tomb Raider is the ONLY game I play.. Anyway..
(But I really wanna play it......... :( )

Wess~Gamer
12th Nov 2008, 16:55
On my pc it works perfectly and it look beautiful!
however the shadows are weird in some of the cutscenes..
but that's nothing I worry about.

anyway, I know some things about hardware and stuff, but really not a lot.
I just voted a little bit :)

rg_001100
12th Nov 2008, 17:54
I have always loved tomb raider and that's why I downloaded the demo. Everything was fine but when I started running it a dialog box appeared relating to display settings. I clicked ok. Then a message came indicating " failed to intialize Direct3D with current settings". My card supports direct3d but i am wondering why it happened . It any never happened with me never. I am dying to get this game. I am sure it is even better than annversary. :confused:
If you want help, please do not ask for it in this thread, instead, look/search for a thread in TR:U Demo Technical Forum (http://forums.eidosgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=261), and if no one has your problem you could create a new thread. (Might help to look at the Technical FAQ (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=81793) as well). :)


I'm thinking of buying a PS2, which is the cheapest way to play the game, but then I'm thinking the exclusive chapters on Xbox (which costs more), and then I'm thinking that all these will be a waste of money for me, because Tomb Raider is the ONLY game I play..
Also to consider is how long the console will last. Look at the chances of the PS2 getting another TR game against the chances of an Xbox360/PS3 getting another TR game, (and perhaps what other types of game you like being on which console).

Bampire
12th Nov 2008, 18:16
It runs, I just lack 3 hardware requirements to make it run even better.

andrew90
12th Nov 2008, 18:34
sadly my PC doesn't run it. I know almost everything about hardware and i will buy a powerful PC very soon, i hope! (i can't wait to) :)

Rachie
12th Nov 2008, 18:51
Laptop....and it runs beautifully. :D

seashell093
12th Nov 2008, 20:14
Laptop....and it runs beautifully. :D

same only if no other windows are open before you play...

Ol.a
12th Nov 2008, 21:56
Also to consider is how long the console will last. Look at the chances of the PS2 getting another TR game against the chances of an Xbox360/PS3 getting another TR game, (and perhaps what other types of game you like being on which console).

You 're so right...
I will definitely buy the PC version of TRU, even if I can't run it..!
My next laptop will run it!
Maybe I'll buy a PS3 and then give it to my niece as a gift.. :rolleyes:

rg_001100
12th Nov 2008, 22:05
You 're so right...
I will definitely buy the PC version of TRU, even if I can't run it..!
My next laptop will run it!
Maybe I'll buy a PS3 and then give it to my niece as a gift.. :rolleyes:

If that's your plan, and you don't want any pre-order goodness (bonus figure, limited edition, etc.) it would make sense to wait until you can play it, just in case the price drops.



It's interesting to look at the results of this poll, thank you for voting.

Valthiel
12th Nov 2008, 22:35
For me the demo runs, and my pc is relatively new so it reches the system requirements.

But I had slight problems with the sound, no matter wich settings I used, everything low to everything the highest, the game runs smooth, but the sound does "rattle" a bit.
Its not extreme, just so much that you notice it, but it ruins the atmosphere of the game.
The rattling only applies to the music and voice, not to the other sounds, as far as I can hear.

Did anyone else experienced such problems? And does anyone know what the reason of that could be?

My soundcard is an onboard soundcard of the MSI P35 Neo2-FR, Intel P35, ATX Mainbord, btw, and it is not bad, I could hardly believe that this is not sufficient.

Any thoughts?

edit: the sound is not hardly interrupted, just very slightly, it sounds more like a little crackling, but still annoying.
And the music even rattles in the main menu, where no computing power is needed (if thats the right word, sounds as if there is a more accurate word, but english is not my strenght ^^), so it doesnt seem to be hardware related (if thats possible)

2nd edit: well, for the completeness, the rest of my system is a single 8800 GTS 512 MB graphic card and 2 x 2 GB RAM (dont know the brands off-hand), and 5.1 infinity speaker set connected via an yamaha receiver connected to the analog output of the onboard soundcard.
(if that helps)

bingojubes
12th Nov 2008, 23:08
i have built 4 computers since i have been interested in, each one better than the last one slightly. i like when stuff runs nicely :)

just tried my PC with Dead Space (max details), Fallout 3 (High details), and Red Alert 3. all 3 (high details) are fantasticos.

<--- voted the first option on poll :)

Shadow125
13th Nov 2008, 18:54
I have to turn my res down a lot and a lot of the effects. The fullscreen effect thing that was in the other games as well has to be off, really lags it up :(

I've got an Intel Dual-Core Processor E2160 (1.86Ghz), and Nvidia 8500 GT (512mb), as well as 4gb RAM.

rg_001100
13th Nov 2008, 18:56
I've got an Intel Dual-Core Processor E2160 (1.86Ghz), and Nvidia 8500 GT (512mb), as well as 4gb RAM.

Laptop or Desktop?

Shadow125
13th Nov 2008, 19:14
Laptop or Desktop?
Desktop.

sprayer
14th Nov 2008, 07:55
it's run fine on vista, but on winxp sp2 won't run (error at start with .exe)

The_Hylden
14th Nov 2008, 19:18
I've got an Intel Dual-Core Processor E2160 (1.86Ghz)

That processor power is a little low for the game. That might be why you're having problems.

Joey91
14th Nov 2008, 19:33
well, I ran a system requirements program on my PC, and it said that I wouldn't be able to play TRU with the best performance, and it's true...but with details like shadows and fullscreen effects, I can managed to play from 35 fps and down, and I have a 8400 GeForce Nvidia graphics card and 1 GB RAM...wich should be nearly Impossible to run, because the minimum RAM is 3 :rasp: :nut: :lmao: :mad2:

And still, I'm good with how programs and suchworks in a computer, but I have no idea how proccesors and RAM works, checked the internet to buy a new Intel proccesor thingy..but it means nothing to me...didn't understand anything. So if someone can and would be kind to help me, it would be really appreciated! :D:D:D

bingojubes
14th Nov 2008, 19:58
faster CPU = processing power (speed)

more memory = good = more "processes" running at once. also good for max detils and performance.

to little of either or both can have decreasing performance, such as system errors and overheating...and/or broken parts in the long run, cause the slower parts will be stressed too hard running games/programs/etc.

so more memory+ faster processor = fun times.

emzee
14th Nov 2008, 20:45
My interent is so slow that it takes 2 days to download the demo! So I just havent bothered Im just waiting with anticipation for the actual game to come out. :D

K^2
14th Nov 2008, 22:12
to little of either or both can have decreasing performance, such as system errors and overheating...and/or broken parts in the long run, cause the slower parts will be stressed too hard running games/programs/etc.
Where do you get that from? System errors come from only two possible sources. Programming mistakes or hardware malfunction. If your system doesn't have enough resources to run something, the software should quit gracefully. Not cause your OS to throw an error.

Furthermore, broken parts? Ridiculous. Computer hardware breaks either due to mechanical stress or manufacturing defects. Days when software errors could kill hardware have gone out with DOS.

Finally, on the CPU or RAM slowing things down, it all depends on where the bottleneck is. Insufficient RAM will generally increase usage of page file, which will mean that OS will interrupt your game and start copying files to/from HDD. That can slow things down. But there are ways to stop this from happening. I was able to run WoW just fine on half the required RAM and minimum on everything else by just making sure that OS doesn't have anything else to take care of. No stray processes - no page file usage.

What really gets you is the transfer speeds to/from system and video RAM. That is a very common bottle neck that has to do with your RAM architecture and your motherboard capabilities. Another one is processing capabilities of CPU and GPU. Again, either one can be your bottle neck. If you are planning to upgrade to make your games run faster, first identify which one is slowing things down. There are various benchmarks that can help you identify the weak link. This can save you hundreds of dollars in unnecessary upgrades that might not even improve anything.

tiger
14th Nov 2008, 23:14
K^2, thanks for that very well detailed information! :thumbsup:

And now, for our "No, Demo doesn't run ..." crowd, above. ;)
So, how is you knowledge about Shader3 necessities versus generic Shader2 abilities? (VS 2.0 for all GPUs)

(I just got this from rg_001100. Thank you very much RG.) :)
High Level Shader Language (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Level_Shader_Language)

And I want to study TRU's textures with their real usage and needs using TombRipper.
(I'd use Texmod, but I cannot even play TRU with its Shader3 requirements.)

So, I am going to need a tru.exe that allows Shader2, just to start work. :cool:

Thanks for listening to my rattling, folks.
(And yes, I know hardware and software, just well enough, to read the side of the box, very carefully.) ;)

rg_001100
15th Nov 2008, 04:14
This may also be of interest:
http://users.erols.com/chare/video.htm

(Saw it in TR:L FAQ)

K^2
15th Nov 2008, 08:02
So, how is you knowledge about Shader3 necessities versus generic Shader2 abilities? (VS 2.0 for all GPUs)
I've never actually worked with Shader 3 personally. I have messed with Shader 1 and 2 a few years ago. From what I remember, Shader 2 did not support loops, branching, jumps, or anything else you would be using on a general purpose processor. The only way to perform "branching" was to multiply things you didn't need by zero, and the logic "tests" were performed by clamping values. On top of that, you couldn't manipulate position of the output pixel on the screen. You could manipulate position of input pixel from texture, though, which allows things like normal map effecting refraction. On a fixed pipe, if you want warped refraction, you have to make the surface curved with polys.

With Shader 3 you can do most of the things you can do on general purpose processor. In fact, one would typically program shaders in Cg, which is a C-based compiler for shaders. By the far the best feature of the new shader is the ability to manipulate position of the output pixel. That allows for the so-called displacement maps. Normal and bump maps let you create shading as if there is some shape to the surface of a polygon, but displacement maps let you actually create bumps and depressions. Really neat stuff. However, I have not seen a single effect in the TRU demo that couldn't be done with vertex shader 2.0. And even with the fixed pipe it wouldn't look all that bad. (Yes, normal maps can be done with fixed pipe if the card supports texture combiners.)

rg_001100
15th Nov 2008, 08:14
I think K^2 understands pretty well. :)

I don't understand the issue as well as K^2 does, but perhaps more features of Shader3 (including the 'revolutionary' feature of being able to "manipulate position of the output pixel"... sorry K^2, but for those who know nothing about Shader technology, that doesn't mean so much :p) are used in other levels, that have cool lighting. (Croft Manor, perhaps, for one reason or another. Or maybe a Ship).
This may show my lack of understanding about the issue (further), but perhaps it's "Shader 3 required" to allow the engine to use Shader 3 features, if not for TR:U then for other games built upon the TR:U engine.
I'm not so concerned about this, however. If CD haven't gone overboard with new graphics features, I'm content that they focus on gameplay (as well).

CAARaeed
15th Nov 2008, 15:10
My interent is so slow that it takes 2 days to download the demo! So I just havent bothered Im just waiting with anticipation for the actual game to come out. :D

in Australia? woohoo! (sorry) i thought we were the only ones left in the world with download speeds measured in tens of kilobytes.

CAARaeed
15th Nov 2008, 15:12
I think K^2 understands pretty well. :)

I don't understand the issue as well as K^2 does, but perhaps more features of Shader3 (including the 'revolutionary' feature of being able to "manipulate position of the output pixel"... sorry K^2, but for those who know nothing about Shader technology, that doesn't mean so much :p) are used in other levels, that have cool lighting. (Croft Manor, perhaps, for one reason or another. Or maybe a Ship).
This may show my lack of understanding about the issue (further), but perhaps it's "Shader 3 required" to allow the engine to use Shader 3 features, if not for TR:U then for other games built upon the TR:U engine.
I'm not so concerned about this, however. If CD haven't gone overboard with new graphics features, I'm content that they focus on gameplay (as well).

hyuck:nut: y'all sound so dang smart!:scratch: hehehe. that's why i clicked 'know a little about'. compared to some people, i do know little, but atleast i know what the parts are called and what they're for. i mean i've only been playing PC games for a decade!

tiger
16th Nov 2008, 01:39
I've never actually worked with Shader 3 personally. I have messed with Shader 1 and 2 a few years ago. From what I remember, Shader 2 did not support loops, branching, jumps, or anything else you would be using on a general purpose processor. The only way to perform "branching" was to multiply things you didn't need by zero, and the logic "tests" were performed by clamping values. On top of that, you couldn't manipulate position of the output pixel on the screen. You could manipulate position of input pixel from texture, though, which allows things like normal map effecting refraction. On a fixed pipe, if you want warped refraction, you have to make the surface curved with polys.

With Shader 3 you can do most of the things you can do on general purpose processor. In fact, one would typically program shaders in Cg, which is a C-based compiler for shaders. By the far the best feature of the new shader is the ability to manipulate position of the output pixel. That allows for the so-called displacement maps. Normal and bump maps let you create shading as if there is some shape to the surface of a polygon, but displacement maps let you actually create bumps and depressions. Really neat stuff. However, I have not seen a single effect in the TRU demo that couldn't be done with vertex shader 2.0. And even with the fixed pipe it wouldn't look all that bad. (Yes, normal maps can be done with fixed pipe if the card supports texture combiners.)

K^2, again some most excellent details! :thumbsup:

I went through the TRU demo and TRL, with TombRipper, and I extracted and examined all of them, just to get a feel for their differences. (And may I say that there are some fine "standard textures" in TRU.)

This is like "comparing apples and oranges", but it looks like they also got into "doubling" TRU texture dimensions, at CD, just like we have done with certain Japanese titles, to simply allow projecting a lot more detail into the same 3d-object. Lara's face is at 1024x1024 from 512x512, which parallels one of my hi-res mods for her, in TRA, btw. :cool:

(It's amazing how a 3d-engine, since the days of Quake, will use the same texture-map to project a much higher level of detail, with a larger scale texture, without any problems like scarring or major loss.)

Anyway, back to my TRU TombRipper stumbling, along with some next-generation TRL guess work.
I kept finding three unique types of textures, in TRU, that seemed to relate to one object or a group?
1. A general texture like in TRL or TRA.
2. A gray-scale texture, which is probably that Normal Map. (TRL uses these, also, it seems?)
Ambient Occlusion and Normal Maps (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/showthread.php?t=138016)
3. A Red-Green-Blue "heat texture", much like infrared-displays used by cinema? (I need some details about this one.)

And again, when I get a Shader2 tru.exe, my overall actions will be to use Texmod to extract types 2 and 3, and then create nulls or transparencies of them. (And perhaps I will radically reduce their size, because they aren't really textures, anymore). ;)

And then create a collection of these nulls in a tpf file, for the front position within Texmod. (That way they will be overriding the Shader3 textures, first, because they simply aren't a needed GPU load for a Shader2 TRU, anymore!) :thumbsup:

K^2
16th Nov 2008, 05:10
Anyway, back to my TRU TombRipper stumbling, along with some next-generation TRL guess work.
I kept finding three unique types of textures, in TRU, that seemed to relate to one object or a group?
1. A general texture like in TRL or TRA.
2. A gray-scale texture, which is probably that Normal Map. (TRL uses these, also, it seems?)
Ambient Occlusion and Normal Maps (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/showthread.php?t=138016)
3. A Red-Green-Blue "heat texture", much like infrared-displays used by cinema? (I need some details about this one.)
1. Yes. Precisely. These are the ones stored with DX1 compression, which is why they can be of higher resolution.

2. No. Gray-scale images can be bump-maps, but the ones I saw in the TRL seem to be just masks. Normal maps are these green and magenta colored ones.

3. These Red-Green-Blue textures aren't used for any special sort of rendering tricks. My guess is that they will be used to imitate the heat-vision binoculars of some sort.


And again, when I get a Shader2 tru.exe, my overall actions will be to use Texmod to extract types 2 and 3, and then create nulls or transparencies of them. (And perhaps I will radically reduce their size, because they aren't really textures, anymore). ;)

And then create a collection of these nulls in a tpf file, for the front position within Texmod. (That way they will be overriding the Shader3 textures, first, because they simply aren't a needed GPU load for a Shader2 TRU, anymore!) :thumbsup:
Why would you want to take out normal maps for Shader 2? Shader 2 is perfectly capable of supporting normal maps. As I said, I have not seen anything in the game, so far, that actually requires Shader 3.

tiger
16th Nov 2008, 22:20
1. Yes. Precisely. These are the ones stored with DX1 compression, which is why they can be of higher resolution.
2. No. Gray-scale images can be bump-maps, but the ones I saw in the TRL seem to be just masks. Normal maps are these green and magenta colored ones.
3. These Red-Green-Blue textures aren't used for any special sort of rendering tricks. My guess is that they will be used to imitate the heat-vision binoculars of some sort.

Why would you want to take out normal maps for Shader 2? Shader 2 is perfectly capable of supporting normal maps. As I said, I have not seen anything in the game, so far, that actually requires Shader 3.

K^2, your very helpful knowledge and insights are definitely appreciated, mate! :thumbsup:
(At least, I got one out of three, sort of right.) :o
Btw, I wasn't planning to remove those green and magenta colored ones.
And I had an "interesting plan of attack" with Texmod, which still might serve us, for needed efficiencies, later? :cool:

But speculation and plans won't mean a thing without a Shader2 TRU.exe, folks. :(
(Then we can start supporting Eidos' "sales efforts" from a source where they really didn't expect it.) :thumbsup:

K^2
16th Nov 2008, 22:59
Hackers might be able to give you Shader2 TRU.exe. There is a special call that loads a shader. It can be traced relatively easily within an executable, since it is a call done via standard libraries. If one can find all of the game's shaders, it should be possible to replace them with Shader2 code and change the calls to make the game run under Shader2 instead of Shader3.

I'm probably going to take a look at DX9c reference to check on that. But off the top of my head, it should be doable. Worst case scenario, might make sense to just disable all of the shader stuff and make the whole thing run through a fixed pipe.

jayel
17th Nov 2008, 21:39
Runs on both of my PCs and my laptop. One PC is new and built for gaming, the other several years old. The laptop is a two year old multimedia Dell. I did get the nVidia glitchiness on entering a new area that was mentioned in the read me file. But, it was short lived and didn't happen every time. I'm sure the next driver version will take care of it.

tiger
18th Nov 2008, 07:00
Hackers might be able to give you Shader2 TRU.exe. There is a special call that loads a shader. It can be traced relatively easily within an executable, since it is a call done via standard libraries. If one can find all of the game's shaders, it should be possible to replace them with Shader2 code and change the calls to make the game run under Shader2 instead of Shader3.

I'm probably going to take a look at DX9c reference to check on that. But off the top of my head, it should be doable. Worst case scenario, might make sense to just disable all of the shader stuff and make the whole thing run through a fixed pipe.

K^2, what would you consider the TRA.exe to be, in terms of Shader2 quality?
TRA might be the very best code that CD has, for Shader2?
(Btw, doing all this "Shader2 surgery" with nice portable c-code and TRU source-code, sounds a lot nicer to me, mate.) :cool:

*** To rg_001100, sorry about high-jacking your message, but we have our Lady Lara and her new TRU game to save. *** :thumbsup:

So, K^2, do you want to start another message here or somewhere else?
A senior TR hacker, SunBeam, can't play TRU with his home PC.
( So he might be very interested with working on this? And I just invited him, to here.)

Sentience
18th Nov 2008, 14:49
Hello, folks. It's been a while. SunBeam here. I managed to get my hands on the demo, played it on my brother's PC (which is bound to run games for 3-4 years from now) and I managed (in the short time I had) to update the flight tool (again, I thank Andrew - CodeReaver from TRForums - without the knowledge of whom I couldn't have made it). I noticed in TRU there's updates involving the dynamics of Lara's movement and constrictions. But that's for another thread, so no more off-topic.

Regarding Shader1.5/2/3, I have to add that I was disappointed to find that I need a new VGA just to run the game. I mean, no need to update my old CPU (1.9 Ghz), but why the hell do I need a VGA update?!?! Same thing happened to BioShock when they tried to shove nVidia VGAs up our throats. Other than that, BioShock community had good results with changing shaders (2 to 1.5), and although crappy, it worked at least. But.. That's Unreal Engine we're talking about..

TRU stores its data in .dat archives and with a bit of luck, we could extract the scripts the game uses. One good point of start would be back-tracing from the default D3D error we get when running the game. That will lead to the main function using such shaders. I'll see what I can dig up on my old PC and post some logs.

Want us to start a new thread?

Cheers,
Sun

rg_001100
18th Nov 2008, 18:03
*** To rg_001100, sorry about high-jacking your message, but we have our Lady Lara and her new TRU game to save. *** :thumbsup:

Although somewhat off-topic to the opening-post, I'm not concerned, so long as the discussion of 'hacking' the file is allowed within the Eidos Community Terms of Use.
(Sentience seems to be "Abandonware", atm).

(Also, you're not allowed your 5-line URL sig as a sig anymore, it's now 2 lines max because people couldn't get the images right. You're allowed to go as wide as you want, but no more than 2 lines).

Raider126
18th Nov 2008, 19:31
I don't know if Underworld wil run. I hope it will.
Recently, just the day before the demo came out my computer's CPU fan exploded like a strange pinata...Sorry lost my train of thought :mad2: . My brother is getting me new fan but it is hard to get. Anyway the system requirements is useful if you're like Zip but it is very differcult for someone like me.

tiger
19th Nov 2008, 00:16
(SunBeam, I cannot send you a PM, so here's my message to you.)

"Sentience" is "Abandonware"? That's an interesting title?
But it has a certain retro-feel, so that's cool with me. :cool:

Anyway, I am VERY GLAD that you have arrived! :thumbsup:

And rg_001100 said that hacking is cool here! (We are just trying to save a large chunk of TRU's market!) :)
(RG, can you fix-up SunBeam's "Sentience" account or maybe make him, SunBeam, here? Thanks!)

rg_001100
19th Nov 2008, 00:31
(SunBeam, I cannot send you a PM, so here's my message to you.)

"Sentience" is "Abandonware"? That's an interesting title?
But it has a certain retro-feel, so that's cool with me. :cool:

Anyway, I am VERY GLAD that you have arrived! :thumbsup:
"Abandonware" user group is banned people.


And rg_001100 said that hacking is cool here! (We are just trying to save a large chunk of TRU's market!) :)
(RG, can you fix-up SunBeam's "Sentience" account or maybe make him, SunBeam, here? Thanks!)
I am not a moderator. I said I see no problem with it.


So, SunBeam, I would say to setup your "TRU Shader2" message or whatever?
And then tell those on this message, where we are at?

(Then a PM to R^2 will let him know, what's what.) ;)
"R^2"? Don't you mean "K^2"?

tiger
19th Nov 2008, 00:40
"Abandonware" user group is banned people.
I am not a moderator. I said I see no problem with it.
"R^2"? Don't you mean "K^2"?
I fixed my mistake, sorry K^2. (Well, at least I got the "^2" part correct) :o

Well, they might as well ban me, also.
Because without this "TRU Shader2 project", I won't have much need for my account here. :(

Sadjuk
19th Nov 2008, 09:29
I fail to see why they keep on banning me, given the fact that first time I was banned they never even bothered to mention the reason. Eidos admins/mods should be more courteous with their users. If we respect one another, I see no point in applying actions to bending of the rules..

Back on track, Tiger, let's move this back to TRF. It's sad to see there's no involvement from the "point of origin". Sadly, the laptop I borrowed from work doesn't support Shader 3 as well :( Back to the test benches on my old rig.

I believe this will be my last message, if I'm not wanted here..

GoranAgar
19th Nov 2008, 09:43
I fail to see why they keep on banning me, given the fact that first time I was banned they never even bothered to mention the reason. Eidos admins/mods should be more courteous with their users. If we respect one another, I see no point in applying actions to bending of the rules..

Nice speech. Too bad you are wrong.

http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=68933

tiger
19th Nov 2008, 23:36
I fail to see why they keep on banning me, given the fact that first time I was banned they never even bothered to mention the reason. Eidos admins/mods should be more courteous with their users. If we respect one another, I see no point in applying actions to bending of the rules..

Back on track, Tiger, let's move this back to TRF. It's sad to see there's no involvement from the "point of origin". Sadly, the laptop I borrowed from work doesn't support Shader 3 as well :( Back to the test benches on my old rig.

I believe this will be my last message, if I'm not wanted here..

I just had to reduce my rather handy five-line signature, down to two.
So pick the place, by starting the message, then PM me the link or do a final reply here for others to follow.
And then we will go and try to save a nice size portion of Eidos' market, somewhere else.

(I'm going to invite my Russian and German hacking buddies to this TRU Shader2 Project, because a lot of them have older machines and they just LOVE Lara! And heck, if I could get some master-modders for Japanese games at HongFire interested, this could become one hell of an ADVENTURE, mates!) :cool:

tiger
21st Nov 2008, 02:31
For our Love of Lara and for TR Adventuring!
TRU - sh.2 by SunBeam! (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/showthread.php?p=3237351) (The beginning of a Shader 2 project.) :thumbsup:

angelus0901
2nd Mar 2009, 09:45
Grrrr, my PC doesn't run the demo or the game!!! :mad2:
I need a better processor, graphic card and RAM memory... :(

tiger
4th Mar 2009, 10:33
Grrrr, my PC doesn't run the demo or the game!!! :mad2:
I need a better processor, graphic card and RAM memory... :(

I can imagine thousands of TRA players, who really enjoyed it, feeling left out. :o
And then Eidos fires 30 from CD, because TRU Sales weren't just good enough. :o
(Btw our project is failing, also, TRU - sh.2 by SunBeam!) :o

pleomax
4th Mar 2009, 16:50
Runs ok on my comp. and i know every bit of my hardware.

I'm afraid that if you have older hardware your going to be left out in the cold more and more and it's not crystal's fault.

I've been playing a korean dancing game called nurien, and it's great but i think it might be harder to run than underworld, so their you go!!!

rg_001100
4th Mar 2009, 17:17
And then Eidos fires 30 from CD, because TRU Sales weren't just good enough. :o
(Btw our project is failing, also, TRU - sh.2 by SunBeam!) :o

Not quite valid statement; they were laid off because Eidos could no longer afford to have them around, more related to the economy than TR:U's performance. Although, speaking of which, TR:U has sold better than TR:L and TR:A (more info here (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=86206), and here (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/showthread.php?t=147558)).