.kkrieger - 3D shooter in 96kb

  • Thread starter Thread starter Alexander
  • Start date Start date
Sorry, went through six pages and didn't see a website that I
recognized. Something like Nonags or Freewarehome.com would be nice to
see as having it listed.
Click to expand...


I saw tomshardware.com review. Downloaded the file, and it seems as if
it gets your PC to work overtime to produce graphics etc.

Very very slow, on an athlon 2.5 with a fairly decent graphics card.

very clever programming, but not very playable
 
system requirements
----------------------
- A 1.5GHz Pentium3/Athlon or faster.
- 512MB of RAM (or more)
- A Geforce4Ti (or higher) or ATI Radeon8500 (or higher) graphics card

supporting pixel shaders 1.3, preferably with 128MB or more of VRAM.
- Some kind of sound hardware
- DirectX 9.0b

* Posted via http://www.sixfiles.com/forum
 
Alastair said:
I saw tomshardware.com review. Downloaded the file, and it seems as if
it gets your PC to work overtime to produce graphics etc.
Very very slow, on an athlon 2.5 with a fairly decent graphics card.
very clever programming, but not very playable
Click to expand...

I thought that 96 kb was kind of small for an OpenGL game. Probably
would lock my system up. Still might give it a try though.

Thanks for the review, Alastair.
 
John said:
I thought that 96 kb was kind of small for an OpenGL game.
Click to expand...

That's the point...it's a demonstration and exercise in anti-bloat etc etc.
Probably would lock my system up.
Click to expand...

Probably...unless you have a high-end graphics card as the program
calculates everything in the game on the fly, using (lots of) maths ;)
 
five said:
That's the point...it's a demonstration and exercise in anti-bloat etc etc.


Probably...unless you have a high-end graphics card as the program
calculates everything in the game on the fly, using (lots of) maths ;)
Click to expand...

Well, I just got done giving it a try and here's the results.

First, I recommend that you read the readme.txt file. There's no help
that I could find. Second, one the game started (which took a
LOOOOONNNNNGGGGG time!) I couldn't exit the game. Ctrl-Alt-Del didn't
work even. Had to hold in the button on the tower for four seconds to
shut my entire system down, then on reboot scandisk did a check of
both hard drives.
Thirdly, movement was too slow and there were far too many dropped
frames. My system is a Pentium 4 1.9 ghz with a GeForce4 running 128
mb on the video card. I have 256 mb of memory and a Sound Blaster
Audigy Gamer. The sound in the game was good and the graphics were
impressive but as I said, the gameplay was affected by seriously jerky
movement from dropped frames. IMO the basic recommendations for system
requirements is unrealistic.
 
John said:
I thought that 96 kb was kind of small for an OpenGL game. Probably
would lock my system up. Still might give it a try though.
Click to expand...
It uses DirectX, not OpenGL (from what I have heard). You need fast
system and a fast video card to get it to run at a decent rate.

brian
 
Brian said:
It uses DirectX, not OpenGL (from what I have heard). You need fast
system and a fast video card to get it to run at a decent rate.
Click to expand...

I could find no information at the site, so I'll take your word for
it. Also, if my Nvidea GeForce4 card with 128 mb of ram on it (one and
a half years old at this point) is too slow, then the system
requirements of the game are unrealistic. Basically, what they're
saying is that if you want to play this game, you'd better have a
brand new high end computer. Okay, I guess, but they're cutting their
possible user base down to a very small number. That's their business,
but it makes no sense to me.

Incidentally, that timer bar graphic at the top of their page is
something you'll be seeing a lot of when you start the program.
 
I should hope.
Heh. Okay, if you say so.
Click to expand...

I subscribe to "Computer Shopper" and keep an eye on the average
configurations available. Right now, the median ram size is 512, not 1
gig like you have. 1 gig is found usually on higher end machines.
Although your processor is now considered low end for an Intel,
(other end of the scale being 3.4 ghz: expect to see 4 ghz by years
end, and only in the new Prescott [E] series) it's still available
from some vendors.
My contention that the program authors are asking too much in the
way of system capabilities from their end users, stands.
 
John said:
I subscribe to "Computer Shopper" and keep an eye on the average
configurations available. Right now, the median ram size is 512, not 1
gig like you have. 1 gig is found usually on higher end machines.
Although your processor is now considered low end for an Intel, (other
end of the scale being 3.4 ghz: expect to see 4 ghz by years end, and
only in the new Prescott [E] series) it's still available from some
vendors.
My contention that the program authors are asking too much in the way
of system capabilities from their end users, stands.
Click to expand...


Ran like a charm on my system.

P4 3.2 Ghz
2 Gb 3200 DDR (Dual channel)
GeForce 5950 Ultra
;)
 
I should hope.
Heh. Okay, if you say so.
Click to expand...

I subscribe to "Computer Shopper" and keep an eye on the average
configurations available. Right now, the median ram size is 512, not 1
gig like you have. 1 gig is found usually on higher end machines.
Although your processor is now considered low end for an Intel,
(other end of the scale being 3.4 ghz: expect to see 4 ghz by years
end, and only in the new Prescott [E] series) it's still available
from some vendors.
My contention that the program authors are asking too much in the
way of system capabilities from their end users, stands.
Click to expand...

I think you are right, but my guess is that this project is to see
what is possible, rather than what will make a splash on the market
 
Back
Top