Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Engoo - engwin or engqsb

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Dooomer
    replied
    you may check out qbismS8, another software winquake improvement, which imho is better than engoo.

    Leave a comment:


  • TempesT
    replied
    Originally posted by Mindf!3ldzX View Post
    It's like saying "I want a Flintstones mobile , but I demand it have an engine in it because I'm a tender foot"
    Asking for a modern Winquake client that offers modest enhancements isn't too much to ask. I don't agree with that analogy either. I'm not asking for the Flintstones mobile (Winquake) to have an engine (enhancements) in it, there's already clients out there that have a lot under the hood. I'm just asking for a Winquake client that stays true and is faithful to vanilla Quake. Kind of like, how Ritzquake and QuakeSpasm are for single-player. Technically, I'm asking for a Flintstones mobile WITHOUT an engine, but everyone is making all these enhancements to the engine so I can't find a client with no engine.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mindf!3ldzX
    replied
    It's like saying "I want a Flintstones mobile , but I demand it have an engine in it because I'm a tender foot"

    Your best bet, IMO , is to make a decision

    100% Classic Quake

    or

    100% Modernize Quake

    You're gonna be hard pressed to find an engine that does deliver modernized enhancements (like higher resolutions,or 16:9 ratio's,etc) and doesn't deliver other snazzy updates to the engine.

    It's going to be infinitely easier to pick an modern engine, and start disabling features left and right until your left with a watered down modern engine.

    Leave a comment:


  • TempesT
    replied
    Wow, I had no idea that much changed between the two clients. I'll stick with non-QuakeWorld based software render ports for single-player then.

    Leave a comment:


  • Spike
    replied
    quakeworld player physics are just buggy tbh. It was meant to be identical...
    instead there's walljumping differences, bunnyhopping differences, jump height differences, etc.
    The fact that it uses prediction is technically just a placebo, but placebos are just as important when we're talking about the feel of things.

    Leave a comment:


  • TempesT
    replied
    Modern as in, currently being developed or has more modern features, like HD resolution support above 1280x1024.

    How does QuakeWorld change the physics? You mean add model interpolation? This is good to know because I was using the ezQuake software render recently, which would be a QuakeWorld client.
    Last edited by TempesT; 01-02-2013, 09:06 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Spirit
    replied
    What do you mean by "more modern"?

    QuakeWorld has different physics, so don't use it to play singleplayer Quake if you want it faithful in gameplay.

    Leave a comment:


  • damage_inc
    replied
    That's cool man, I love it when you can actually get the answers you seek! Drives me crazy otherwise.

    Leave a comment:


  • TempesT
    replied
    I personally asked leileilol (the developer of Engoo) what the differences where in the engwin and engqsb executables, and he said that the QSB executable is experimental. It has higher map limits and stuff like that. It also has risks of crashing. So I'm going to stick with the engwin executable.

    Leave a comment:


  • TempesT
    replied
    Winquake was the first software render I tried. I used it as a basis to compare other source ports. I'm just looking for a more modern software port. So far, Engoo is the best I've come by. If ezQuake adds a explosion type that is the original explosion effect, then it might be superior.

    Leave a comment:


  • damage_inc
    replied
    Couldn't you just play REAL vanilla Quake? Use VirtualBox or VMware and play dos quake, original code and pixels? Or maybe even DosBox would work.

    Then source port changes, which most want to do when they recode the engine, don't come into play. Just asking

    Leave a comment:


  • TempesT
    replied
    Originally posted by Mindf!3ldzX View Post
    Axes was designed to chop down tree's, reckon you'd wanna try out your best Paul Bunyan pose before you realize a chainsaw was eaiser
    Both the axe and chainsaw were designed to cut wood, so I would have to go with the chainsaw lol.

    Well, I just got back from playing around with the ezQuake render, and have to say its a really nice software port. One thing I don't like though is, the explosion effects have been changed in ezQuake. I can't seem to get the explosion effect to look like how it does in vanilla Quake with ezQuake. It does offer the choice of changing the explosion type. Too bad I couldn't find an setting that uses the vanilla Quake explosion effect. I will ask on the ezQuake forums about it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mindf!3ldzX
    replied
    Axes was designed to chop down tree's, reckon you'd wanna try out your best Paul Bunyan pose before you realize a chainsaw was eaiser

    Leave a comment:


  • damage_inc
    replied
    Yeah, no piccie... the mouse and the VM and ezQuake were just not getting along, grrr... Anyway's, cool. Let me know how it goes for ya.

    Leave a comment:


  • TempesT
    replied
    Its okay, I believe you. Well that's awesome, next time I play some MegaTF, i'll have to use the software render lol. You must be right because ezQuake comes with two executables. One of them is labeled "gl" at the end, so the other one must be the software render.
    Last edited by TempesT; 01-01-2013, 01:06 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X