From: Andrew Leonard To: ml@qoole.com In-Reply-To: <199709220729.AA00118@interlock2.lexmark.com> Reply-To: ml@qoole.com Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 12:36:03 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: GLQoole question On Mon, 22 Sep 1997 dawsonr@LEXMARK.COM wrote: > > On the subject of GLquake, It runs real crap on SOA's later levels, it > seems that the furter the view the slower the frame rate. > But my pentium ain't that good, only a 120, I also find that when I run my > maps in GL they slow down to a crawl, but on the normal ver, it's all ok! > > Eh? Why? GLQuake does some things differently than regular. For one thing, it's not a good friend of rotating entities, nor is it very good at having a very large viewing area [Mexx1, which is like Mt. Erebus, slowed GLQuake to a crawl, but E1M7, which is open but not terribly large, runs perfectly]. Also, a lot of sky tends to slow GLQuake to a crawl, as shown in Quake Rally and some Rocket Arena levels [specifically, Rocket Garden]. On the other hand, it may do some levels great that regular Quake can't do very well, such as E1M7. It's mostly a hack, and Hexen 2 is the intermediary step in finalizing GL in the Quake engine - it's not an unsupported beta like GLQuake was, but it's in a seperate EXE. Quake 2 will make it all in one EXE and offer full support, but until then, just get used to GLQuake's quirks. The Pentium 120 isn't helping much either, but I think the Voodoo chip tops out at P166 - i.e. GLQuake running on a P200 won't be all that much faster than GLQuake running on a P166.