Half-Life problem

[AuthorityAction]

From what I've heard Half-Life plays better in OpenGL mode, but it won't let me play in that mode. When I try to it says "This video mode is not supported by your video card" or something like that. The thing is, I have a AIW 9700 Pro. I should be able to play in OpenGL shouldn't I? :hrm:

Any ideas? TIA

Pic of video drivers:

[Enverex]

Make sure that on the left hand side when you select the OpenGL screenmode that the "3DFX Mini-GL" thingy isn't selected, that it's actually set to default.

[AuthorityAction]

Make sure that on the left hand side when you select the OpenGL screenmode that the "3DFX Mini-GL" thingy isn't selected, that it's actually set to default.

Same error... :bawling:

[ginipig]

Did you just start playing halflife recently, or have you been using Software-mode all this time?!!

[Enverex]

I have a better idea, use Direct3D mode (D3D).

[AuthorityAction]

Did you just start playing halflife recently, or have you been using Software-mode all this time?!!

I've been playing half-life/cs for a long time. I've been using Direct3D, but I was told that openGL runs better and I couldn't figure out why my AIW 9700 Pro wouldn't be able to play it.

[Enverex]

Define better? On an "ATi Rage Pro" maybe, but for gods sake, the game is capped at 99fps anyway, and your card is capable or about 800fps, so I really don't think it is going to run better in anyway. Plus OpenGL has a tendency to Halo vertex lighting.

[ginipig]

I switched over to OpenGL from software mode the moment I start playing ~3 yrs ago. Typically, Radeon's perform better on OpenGL on the old halflife engine. Don't ask me why, or else I'll have to redirect you to sooo many benches; I'm too busy prepping for NyE to do so.

Have you tried searching on www.steampowered.com? Most FPS-related issues end up there. You'll probably have to refine your search to 9700 wonder opengl (as steampowered doesn't accept 3 character searches.)

[Thrax]

On my system in my sig, HL's implementation of DirectX runs at an abysmal 55 frames per second... It hits the engine's hard cap on OpenGL.

[Enverex]

On my system in my sig, HL's implementation of DirectX runs at an abysmal 55 frames per second... It hits the engine's hard cap on OpenGL.

You can force it to run at 99fps by entering a command at the console, but I really don't see the point, why do you need higher than 55fps?

[Templar]

You could try rolling back drivers, or trying new ones. You might be better off cleaning the drivers out and doing a fresh reinstall of them.

[AuthorityAction]

You could try rolling back drivers, or trying new ones. You might be better off cleaning the drivers out and doing a fresh reinstall of them.

I was thinking about that, but since Direct3D is working I'm going to use that.

[Thrax]

I think, NS, that you entirely missed my point.

In your fashion. :rolleyes:

[ginipig]

Are you sure that the limitations on your fps aren't caused by your monitor's refresh rates? Refresh force fixes the bug that caps in-game refreshes to 60Hz (monitor) regardless of how fast your monitor may refresh at certain res.

I believe that this is a Windows Xp bug, and not any particular renderer's fault.

[Thrax]

I'm quite sure.

Vertical synch is disabled, and refresh rates are maxed for the resolution.

I will repeat what I said:

In my signature, that system hits 99 FPS, which is the HL engine's FPS hard-cap at all times. However, when using its implementation of DirectX, it never goes over 60 and (adding something new here) that's the highest it gets.. It likes to wallow around 40 and 30 fps..

[ginipig]

Btw, regarding going from 55 fps to 100 fps: I know, yaddayadda the human eye can only see so and so frames per second, but in real-world applications, you will see the difference. Lets say you saw 55 fps of your opponent's strafe. Compare this to the fact that he sees 99fps of your movements, then you'll realize that you're at quite a disadvantage.

Make sure anti-aliasing, vertical-sync, anisotropic filtering are all turned off.

Penguin: I haven't been able to find anything remotely similar to your problem.

[edit] faster refresh rates = less time crosshair takes to revert back to grounded position

[ginipig]

btw, my previous post refers to Opengl. I'm not a fan of Directx, yet.

[Thrax]

Human eye can see 600 FPS or more; military testing has proven that.

People just have trouble distinguishing between 30 FPS on <i>film</i> and 30 FPS on <i>computers</i>.

30 FPS on film is find because all the objects blur together slightly at the edges. Each frame isn't the next, frozen, 100% static image in motion. Frames overlap slightly, cameras and eyes blur things together to get fluid movement. It's why pausing a DVD of someone in motion shows their figure blurred, but why you can track it and make sense of it.

If each frame of that person's movement had been crystal and blur-free, it'd look like crap.

[ginipig]

So, in essence Enverex, 100fps kicks yo 55fps butt any day :)

[kanezfan]

the real question is why are you still playing HL today? i mean it was a great game when it came out, but now it looks like dog poo

[Thrax]

Why is the Wizard of Oz still one of the most beloved movies of all time?

Why do people still play with classic cars?

Why do you do a radio show?

Just because it's old, and/or an outmoded style does not mean it's not worth doing, watching, or playing.

[ginipig]

Coz I RoXoR's JoO BoXeRs

But seriously:

I've stuck with CS since beta versions, when the awm was called the awp, and ALL models were left handed. Condition Zero was a major disappointment, despite the modelling.

Honestly, I've never taken a liking to any other multiplayer game. That, and I've been made quite a bit of money off of Lan Tourneys. My friends and I would usually go to a track (different Cities, different States,) and auto-x or drag for the fastest 1/4 mile on nat.asp'd or Turbo'd. Then we'd head to the local lan for some major slaughter.

[kanezfan]

i was being an @ss thrax lol. HL is one of the greatest video games.

[Enverex]

So, in essence Enverex, 100fps kicks yo 55fps butt any day :)

And is still completely pointless. 55 looks fast and as I said, you can SEE faster, yeah, but who cares, 55fps is not slow and is not necessary. Take GTA (+ Vice City) and Halo, all of those games were capped at 30fps (though I do believe they do per frame bluring).

Just because you can SEE a difference, it doesn't warrant the point of actually doing it, you dont see me trying to get 600fps in other games, just because I can. The point is, as long as it is above 50fps, you shouldn't care.

How exactly can you "not be a fan of DirectX" I mean it's an API ffs, and I highly doubt you are a game creator which would be the only valid reason to not like an API in that manner.

[Thrax]

I'm not a fan of DirectX either, and your analyzation of people needing to be game devs to dislike a certain API is patently false at its very best.

DirectX as an API supports the same features as the OpenGL library, however its development cycle is considerably longer. In addition to this, effects rendered with OpenGL are considerably quicker to code, AND render than the same effect on the DX platform.

DX is a late-comer to the API field. Whilst it has received hearty support from the industry, and is doing quite well.. OpenGL's aforementioned superiorities makes it a priority to me.

If one API can render a game more fluidly than another, is it not now my concern also? As an end-user, I am concerned about performance...And that performance is in OpenGL.

So.. I ask you: Why does one need to be a game creator to dislike an API?

[Enverex]

So.. I ask you: Why does one need to be a game creator to dislike an API?

You just answered my question.

DirectX as an API supports the same features as the OpenGL library, however its development cycle is considerably longer. In addition to this, effects rendered with OpenGL are considerably quicker to code, AND render than the same effect on the DX platform.

Basically you just said that OpenGL is easier to code for and renders quicker, which would be a reason to dislike D3D in favor of OpenGL.

[Thrax]

You just accepted a reason that by your previous logic, would be invalid. I'm not a game dev, but OpenGL vs. DirectX concerns me. OpenGL as an API is superior, therefore I am not a fan of DirectX.

:skeptic:

and I highly doubt you are a game creator which would be the only valid reason to not like an API in that manner.

[Enverex]

You just accepted a reason that by your previous logic, would be invalid. I'm not a game dev, but OpenGL vs. DirectX concerns me. OpenGL as an API is superior, therefore I am not a fan of DirectX.

:skeptic:

You aren't making any sence. I pointed out the fact that OpenGL is easier to code for, which would be the job of a Coder, not and end user, and please write your posts out properly the first time round, not posting them as fast as possible, then editing them as it makes them a pain in the ass to reply to.

I was I fan of OpenGL over DirectX because it always seemed to run better, but lately it seems to be buggy in any game that I try, mainly from things like lighting having squares around them (GTA3/VC, Deus Ex). Which you will probably say contradicts what I said, but what I said was purely in context, which was:

That someone was trying to run something in OpenGL with no actual gain (in graphics or anything else) and simply not wanting to use Direct3D for those reasons was quite stupid and not a valid reason to hate Direct3D (simply due to it being an old game capped at 55fps for D3D which wasn't D3Ds fault in any way).

[keto]

If I have to pull this car over, you're both going to be VERY sorry.

Enjoy the holiday season, y'all ;)