Marine Aquarium 3 Rumors and Speculation - Page 31

Jim Sachs · 05-13-2007, 08:49 AM

I'll need to find out what the current best-selling card is, and get that. As for quad-core, maybe.

feldon34 · 05-13-2007, 01:16 PM

NewEgg Top Sellers for Video Cards

Excluding anything over $130 and ranked by performance (which seems to closely follow price):

ATI Radeon X1950GT 256MB $130
ATI Radeon X1900GT 256MB $120

nVidia GeForce 7600GT 256MB $120
nVidia GeForce 7600GS 512MB $110
nVidia GeForce 7600GS 256MB $85
nVidia GeForce 6600GT 128MB $73

First, know that video card model numbers can be bewildering. It can be impossible to tell from a model number how fast the GPU runs. Tom's Hardware has great video card reviews and has a continually updated video card comparison tool, but they often leave out the most popular cards, generally leave out 512MB which is very useful for EverQuest II, or mention GPU speeds that don't sync up with anything written on the boxes.

Tom's Hardware The Best Video Cards for the Money May 2007 edition

Note that video cards vary from DDR2 to DDR3 memory. GS is a slower CPU than GT so a 7300GT might outrun a 7600GS.

drfish · 05-13-2007, 06:43 PM

Or he could get one of these which seems to be popular enough and isn't based on 2 year old technology (and that's being generous)...

Seriously, why not buy a card that has so many features you'll never utilize all of them? Oh wait... I gotta stop giving advice to people other than myself...

feldon34 · 05-13-2007, 07:24 PM

Jim is writing Marine Aquarium 3 in DirectX 8 to run on millions of computers, not on a $400 DirectX 10 card. But maybe if Jim wants to play EQ2. I'd rather he play EQ2 after MA3 comes out.

patscarr · 05-13-2007, 07:53 PM

Originally posted by Jim Sachs:

There will be a new program this year. At least a Beta version.

Originally posted by Jim Sachs:

things have actually been progressing nicely for the past couple of weeks!

Originally posted by Jim Sachs:

I'm making a lot of progress lately.

I just had to bring these quotes over from the "Love and / or marriage; how did you meet your Significant Other?" thread. They belong over here, and are very informative. The "new program this year" remark by Jim, is so unorthodox, unJimlike, highly irregular, ect... I was just blown away by it.

drfish · 05-13-2007, 07:56 PM

A year from now that $400 card will be $100 and two years from now it will be integrated into $50 motherboards (you're usually the first person to point that kind of thing out)... Since that's probably time line for MA3 anyway I don't see the problem... Sorry, that was a little low, mostly joking, I'm just thinking about scalability, it wouldn't hurt to play with the features that card has to offer, they'll be standard soon enough and they're the beginning of a new era.

If MA3 doesn't blow people's minds I worry it won't find it's way onto millions of computers (at least not at full price)...

Few are still impressed by DX8, and IMO going old school will only get you so far...

I'm not being disrespectful, I hope you guys know that, but I have serious doubts about the wow factor of this upcoming release, and it worries me because of how badly I want it to be great.

Jim's talent plus the power of today's tech is a guaranteed success, coupled with yesterday's tech I'm not 100% sure...

Jim Sachs · 05-13-2007, 10:47 PM

Exactly what effect in DX10 are you so interested in? My only concern is making something which appears absolutely real, and so far I haven't seen any DX10 feature which would do me much good and isn't available in DX8.

Yellow Tang · 05-14-2007, 03:07 AM

Hey Doc, you shouldn't compare your upgrade cycle with the average computer user, who is happy when the system runs fine and can connect to the internet to read some e-mails and surf a bit. These persons do an upgrade (or buy a complete new system) when the old one crashes down, but not earlier. I know a lot of people who use 5-10 year old computers with Win98 and AMD K6 processors and maybe GeForce2 cards in it, believe it or not!

drfish · 05-14-2007, 05:25 AM

Originally posted by Jim Sachs:

Exactly what effect in DX10 are you so interested in? My only concern is making something which appears absolutely real, and so far I haven't seen any DX10 feature which would do me much good and isn't available in DX8.

At the moment I'm still obsessing over the idea of GPU physics accelerated swarms of bubbles...

Other than that I haven't really seen enough DX10 demos to say. I know DX8 is in a completely different league than anything before it, I just keep thinking about the DX8 version of the aquarium that's already out there and I'm having a hard time pushing the thought out of my mind that DX8 this time around is going to mean little more than an engine upgrade with nearly identical visuals...

If you're really going to be taking full advantage of all the neat tricks DX8 brings to the table I'll stop worrying...

feldon34 · 05-14-2007, 08:36 AM

What DirectX 8 version of the Aquarium?

The current version is written in DirectX 6.

People make assumptions that bigger is better or higher numbers or recent technology is always better. Don't fall into that trap. Make up your mind yourself rather than reading the hype.

Jav400 · 05-14-2007, 08:46 AM

The only DX8 version there ever was to date is the Demo for MS.

drfish · 05-14-2007, 09:03 AM

The one made for the plus pack or whatever it was called... That was upgraded to DX8 for various reasons as I recall.

I'm not a hyped minded person, but I do get excited about potential. I simply think there's more potential for MA3 to be spectacular if it's aimed at looking it's best on a DX10 card (and all that implies) than on something from the Geforce3/Radeon 8500 timeline (early 2001)... I'm not saying it shouldn't run on PS1.0 hardware (though I'd honestly prefer PS2.0/DX9 be where that bar is set (even that hardware has been around since late 2002)) but lets face it, a generational iteration of has been missed, in technology terms we should be talking about MA4 now.

I'd like to see MA3 look like what MA4 would look like. That's all. Call me greedy if you want.

Tiny Turtle · 05-14-2007, 03:15 PM

Required reading for people who want to discuss DirectX versions (with pics):
http://developer.valvesoftware.com/w...rectX_Versions
http://gear.ign.com/articles/567/567437p1.html

Unfortunately for Doc, I've found no DX10 reviews, but still interesting.

The feature I wish would be included is reflective scales on the fish. If I've understood correctly (being somewhat noobish here) this would require Shader Model 2.0 - i.e. DX9. Alan's Dream Aquarium was nice before, but it was when he got the scales to shimmer that DA surpassed MA2 (sorry, but it did).

Given the somewhat sparing frequency of MA iterations, I dare say it would be a good thing to consider scalability to make sure it still looks as good as it possibly can upon release. Knowing the ambition level of Mr. Sachs I know it will

drfish · 05-14-2007, 03:59 PM

Great links!

Yeah, there's not much in the way of DX10 yet but everybody who's anybody is gearing up for it.

The are some Crysis comparison shots floating around though, and some Alan Wake ones as well I think...

Tiny Turtle · 05-14-2007, 04:17 PM

..and some of 'em are faked...

Sergiales · 05-14-2007, 05:01 PM

Don't forget that the acclaimed realism lies in an important thing: the Art.
I'm tired of seeing software that implements the latest technologies and the final result is not as great as expected. I think that apart from hi-tech, there are other factors that easily contribute to a higher quality product.
And Jim is an artist. I'm sure that without the latest technology, Jim is going to amaze us again!.

feldon34 · 05-14-2007, 05:49 PM

Originally posted by Tiny Turtle:

The feature I wish would be included is reflective scales on the fish. If I've understood correctly (being somewhat noobish here) this would require Shader Model 2.0 - i.e. DX9. Alan's Dream Aquarium was nice before, but it was when he got the scales to shimmer that DA surpassed MA2 (sorry, but it did).

Nope.

Reflective scales can be done in any version of DirectX you want. You just have to create multiple textures. Shader Model 2.0 means that the video card can do certain tricks on the card. That does not mean that this cannot be emulated in software. Reflections have been possible in software for years.

Also doesn't DA run in DirectX 8?

feldon34 · 05-14-2007, 05:53 PM

Gears of War takes full advantage of the effects and everything looks very realistic, but everything is so unreal and desolate and torn apart, it doesn't get an opportunity to shine. I guess I would have liked to see pockets of beauty in between the grunge and despair.

Tiny Turtle · 05-14-2007, 06:27 PM

Originally posted by feldon31:

Nope.

Reflective scales can be done in any version of DirectX you want. You just have to create multiple textures. Shader Model 2.0 means that the video card can do certain tricks on the card. That does not mean that this cannot be emulated in software. Reflections have been possible in software for years.

Also doesn't DA run in DirectX 8?

Ok, but how come the screenshots in the links I posted have extremely boring appearances in the DX6 & DX7 versions?
I dunno about Alan's.

drfish · 05-14-2007, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by Sergiales:

Don't forget that the acclaimed realism lies in an important thing: the Art.
I'm tired of seeing software that implements the latest technologies and the final result is not as great as expected. I think that apart from hi-tech, there are other factors that easily contribute to a higher quality product.
And Jim is an artist. I'm sure that without the latest technology, Jim is going to amaze us again!.

That's part of the reason I said this awhile back, "I know that imperfections look worse the more realistically things are rendered but that's where the artist part of the job comes in." I HATE seeing bloom effects, HDR, and shots from upcoming games using motion-blur and dept-of-field effects poorly... Don't just throw some fancy trick in because you can, do it because it unanimously improves the look of the program. I want nothing more than to see all the high tech trickery used so well you don't even notice it; simply because it looks so gosh darn real. Nobody's done that yet.

05-13-2007, 08:49 AM	#601
Jim Sachs Developer Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Southern Oregon Posts: 9,771	I'll need to find out what the current best-selling card is, and get that. As for quad-core, maybe. Jim Sachs Creator of SereneScreen Aquarium

05-13-2007, 01:16 PM	#602
feldon34 Forum Administrator Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Rock Hill, SC Posts: 10,938	NewEgg Top Sellers for Video Cards Excluding anything over $130 and ranked by performance (which seems to closely follow price): ATI Radeon X1950GT 256MB $130 ATI Radeon X1900GT 256MB $120 nVidia GeForce 7600GT 256MB $120 nVidia GeForce 7600GS 512MB $110 nVidia GeForce 7600GS 256MB $85 nVidia GeForce 6600GT 128MB $73 First, know that video card model numbers can be bewildering. It can be impossible to tell from a model number how fast the GPU runs. Tom's Hardware has great video card reviews and has a continually updated video card comparison tool, but they often leave out the most popular cards, generally leave out 512MB which is very useful for EverQuest II, or mention GPU speeds that don't sync up with anything written on the boxes. Tom's Hardware The Best Video Cards for the Money May 2007 edition Note that video cards vary from DDR2 to DDR3 memory. GS is a slower CPU than GT so a 7300GT might outrun a 7600GS. "Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal." - Emma Goldman

05-13-2007, 06:43 PM	#603
drfish the Doc Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Zeeland, MI Posts: 5,352	Or he could get one of these which seems to be popular enough and isn't based on 2 year old technology (and that's being generous)... Seriously, why not buy a card that has so many features you'll never utilize all of them? Oh wait... I gotta stop giving advice to people other than myself... I don't watch commercials.

05-13-2007, 07:24 PM	#604
feldon34 Forum Administrator Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Rock Hill, SC Posts: 10,938	Jim is writing Marine Aquarium 3 in DirectX 8 to run on millions of computers, not on a $400 DirectX 10 card. But maybe if Jim wants to play EQ2. I'd rather he play EQ2 after MA3 comes out. "Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal." - Emma Goldman

05-13-2007, 07:53 PM	#605
patscarr Pet Shark Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Back in Buffalo Posts: 5,454	Originally posted by Jim Sachs: There will be a new program this year. At least a Beta version. Originally posted by Jim Sachs: things have actually been progressing nicely for the past couple of weeks! Originally posted by Jim Sachs: I'm making a lot of progress lately. I just had to bring these quotes over from the "Love and / or marriage; how did you meet your Significant Other?" thread. They belong over here, and are very informative. The "new program this year" remark by Jim, is so unorthodox, unJimlike, highly irregular, ect... I was just blown away by it. Patrick

05-13-2007, 07:56 PM	#606
drfish the Doc Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Zeeland, MI Posts: 5,352	A year from now that $400 card will be $100 and two years from now it will be integrated into $50 motherboards (you're usually the first person to point that kind of thing out)... Since that's probably time line for MA3 anyway I don't see the problem... Sorry, that was a little low, mostly joking, I'm just thinking about scalability, it wouldn't hurt to play with the features that card has to offer, they'll be standard soon enough and they're the beginning of a new era. If MA3 doesn't blow people's minds I worry it won't find it's way onto millions of computers (at least not at full price)... Few are still impressed by DX8, and IMO going old school will only get you so far... I'm not being disrespectful, I hope you guys know that, but I have serious doubts about the wow factor of this upcoming release, and it worries me because of how badly I want it to be great. Jim's talent plus the power of today's tech is a guaranteed success, coupled with yesterday's tech I'm not 100% sure... I don't watch commercials.

05-13-2007, 10:47 PM	#607
Jim Sachs Developer Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Southern Oregon Posts: 9,771	Exactly what effect in DX10 are you so interested in? My only concern is making something which appears absolutely real, and so far I haven't seen any DX10 feature which would do me much good and isn't available in DX8. Jim Sachs Creator of SereneScreen Aquarium

05-14-2007, 03:07 AM	#608
Yellow Tang YT Join Date: Jan 2002 Tournaments Won: 1 Location: Germany Posts: 729	Hey Doc, you shouldn't compare your upgrade cycle with the average computer user, who is happy when the system runs fine and can connect to the internet to read some e-mails and surf a bit. These persons do an upgrade (or buy a complete new system) when the old one crashes down, but not earlier. I know a lot of people who use 5-10 year old computers with Win98 and AMD K6 processors and maybe GeForce2 cards in it, believe it or not!

05-14-2007, 05:25 AM	#609
drfish the Doc Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Zeeland, MI Posts: 5,352	Originally posted by Jim Sachs: Exactly what effect in DX10 are you so interested in? My only concern is making something which appears absolutely real, and so far I haven't seen any DX10 feature which would do me much good and isn't available in DX8. At the moment I'm still obsessing over the idea of GPU physics accelerated swarms of bubbles... Other than that I haven't really seen enough DX10 demos to say. I know DX8 is in a completely different league than anything before it, I just keep thinking about the DX8 version of the aquarium that's already out there and I'm having a hard time pushing the thought out of my mind that DX8 this time around is going to mean little more than an engine upgrade with nearly identical visuals... If you're really going to be taking full advantage of all the neat tricks DX8 brings to the table I'll stop worrying... I don't watch commercials.

05-14-2007, 08:36 AM	#610
feldon34 Forum Administrator Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Rock Hill, SC Posts: 10,938	What DirectX 8 version of the Aquarium? The current version is written in DirectX 6. People make assumptions that bigger is better or higher numbers or recent technology is always better. Don't fall into that trap. Make up your mind yourself rather than reading the hype. "Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal." - Emma Goldman

05-14-2007, 08:46 AM	#611
Jav400 Administrator Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Tennessee Posts: 9,725	The only DX8 version there ever was to date is the Demo for MS. Michael Administrator of Inside:SereneScreen Aquarium Forum, Chatroom, Fan Site & *Gallery* DVD Collection

05-14-2007, 09:03 AM	#612
drfish the Doc Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Zeeland, MI Posts: 5,352	The one made for the plus pack or whatever it was called... That was upgraded to DX8 for various reasons as I recall. I'm not a hyped minded person, but I do get excited about potential. I simply think there's more potential for MA3 to be spectacular if it's aimed at looking it's best on a DX10 card (and all that implies) than on something from the Geforce3/Radeon 8500 timeline (early 2001)... I'm not saying it shouldn't run on PS1.0 hardware (though I'd honestly prefer PS2.0/DX9 be where that bar is set (even that hardware has been around since late 2002)) but lets face it, a generational iteration of has been missed, in technology terms we should be talking about MA4 now. I'd like to see MA3 look like what MA4 would look like. That's all. Call me greedy if you want. I don't watch commercials.

05-14-2007, 03:15 PM	#613
Tiny Turtle is pleased Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 7,365	Required reading for people who want to discuss DirectX versions (with pics): http://developer.valvesoftware.com/w...rectX_Versions http://gear.ign.com/articles/567/567437p1.html Unfortunately for Doc, I've found no DX10 reviews, but still interesting. The feature I wish would be included is reflective scales on the fish. If I've understood correctly (being somewhat noobish here) this would require Shader Model 2.0 - i.e. DX9. Alan's Dream Aquarium was nice before, but it was when he got the scales to shimmer that DA surpassed MA2 (sorry, but it did). Given the somewhat sparing frequency of MA iterations, I dare say it would be a good thing to consider scalability to make sure it still looks as good as it possibly can upon release. Knowing the ambition level of Mr. Sachs I know it will Thanks to Morgan, Tiny Snapshots is up and running again with "Tiny Järvafält" as the latest addition – Go have a look and tell me what you think. "We knew the world would not be the same. A few people laughed, a few people cried, most people were silent. I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita. Vishnu is trying to persuade the Prince that he should do his duty and to impress him takes on his multi-armed form and says, 'Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.' I suppose we all thought that, one way or another." /Robert Oppenheimer on witnessing the first thermonuclear detonation in history.

05-14-2007, 03:59 PM	#614
drfish the Doc Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Zeeland, MI Posts: 5,352	Great links! Yeah, there's not much in the way of DX10 yet but everybody who's anybody is gearing up for it. The are some Crysis comparison shots floating around though, and some Alan Wake ones as well I think... I don't watch commercials.

05-14-2007, 04:17 PM	#615
Tiny Turtle is pleased Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 7,365	..and some of 'em are faked... Thanks to Morgan, Tiny Snapshots is up and running again with "Tiny Järvafält" as the latest addition – Go have a look and tell me what you think. "We knew the world would not be the same. A few people laughed, a few people cried, most people were silent. I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita. Vishnu is trying to persuade the Prince that he should do his duty and to impress him takes on his multi-armed form and says, 'Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.' I suppose we all thought that, one way or another." /Robert Oppenheimer on witnessing the first thermonuclear detonation in history.

05-14-2007, 05:01 PM	#616
Sergiales Software Engineer Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Spain Posts: 266	Don't forget that the acclaimed realism lies in an important thing: the Art. I'm tired of seeing software that implements the latest technologies and the final result is not as great as expected. I think that apart from hi-tech, there are other factors that easily contribute to a higher quality product. And Jim is an artist. I'm sure that without the latest technology, Jim is going to amaze us again!. Sincerely, Sergio.

05-14-2007, 05:49 PM	#617
feldon34 Forum Administrator Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Rock Hill, SC Posts: 10,938	Originally posted by Tiny Turtle: The feature I wish would be included is reflective scales on the fish. If I've understood correctly (being somewhat noobish here) this would require Shader Model 2.0 - i.e. DX9. Alan's Dream Aquarium was nice before, but it was when he got the scales to shimmer that DA surpassed MA2 (sorry, but it did). Nope. Reflective scales can be done in any version of DirectX you want. You just have to create multiple textures. Shader Model 2.0 means that the video card can do certain tricks on the card. That does not mean that this cannot be emulated in software. Reflections have been possible in software for years. Also doesn't DA run in DirectX 8? "Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal." - Emma Goldman

05-14-2007, 05:53 PM	#618
feldon34 Forum Administrator Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Rock Hill, SC Posts: 10,938	Gears of War takes full advantage of the effects and everything looks very realistic, but everything is so unreal and desolate and torn apart, it doesn't get an opportunity to shine. I guess I would have liked to see pockets of beauty in between the grunge and despair. "Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal." - Emma Goldman

05-14-2007, 06:27 PM	#619
Tiny Turtle is pleased Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 7,365	Originally posted by feldon31: Nope. Reflective scales can be done in any version of DirectX you want. You just have to create multiple textures. Shader Model 2.0 means that the video card can do certain tricks on the card. That does not mean that this cannot be emulated in software. Reflections have been possible in software for years. Also doesn't DA run in DirectX 8? Ok, but how come the screenshots in the links I posted have extremely boring appearances in the DX6 & DX7 versions? I dunno about Alan's. Thanks to Morgan, Tiny Snapshots is up and running again with "Tiny Järvafält" as the latest addition – Go have a look and tell me what you think. "We knew the world would not be the same. A few people laughed, a few people cried, most people were silent. I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita. Vishnu is trying to persuade the Prince that he should do his duty and to impress him takes on his multi-armed form and says, 'Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.' I suppose we all thought that, one way or another." /Robert Oppenheimer on witnessing the first thermonuclear detonation in history.

05-14-2007, 07:04 PM	#620
drfish the Doc Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Zeeland, MI Posts: 5,352	Originally posted by Sergiales: Don't forget that the acclaimed realism lies in an important thing: the Art. I'm tired of seeing software that implements the latest technologies and the final result is not as great as expected. I think that apart from hi-tech, there are other factors that easily contribute to a higher quality product. And Jim is an artist. I'm sure that without the latest technology, Jim is going to amaze us again!. That's part of the reason I said this awhile back, "I know that imperfections look worse the more realistically things are rendered but that's where the artist part of the job comes in." I HATE seeing bloom effects, HDR, and shots from upcoming games using motion-blur and dept-of-field effects poorly... Don't just throw some fancy trick in because you can, do it because it unanimously improves the look of the program. I want nothing more than to see all the high tech trickery used so well you don't even notice it; simply because it looks so gosh darn real. Nobody's done that yet. I don't watch commercials.