Will a no-T&L-required patch be released?

[Flak]

Does anybody know if the DirectX license has as a requirement that the modified code be released with any modification to the base driver? If that is indeed the case, perhaps Firaxis will release their modified DirectX code with the SDK. Heck, perhaps it's on CD/DVD right now (since I'm blessed to be living in the UK right now, I don't know and really don't have much confidence I'll find out soon). It just may be the case that a patch to get the game to run on non-T&L systems might not require any kind of detailed surgery of the core graphics engine.

T&L
Short for Transform and Lighting, T&L is a type of video technology that takes all the 3D information that used to be handled by the computer processor and gives it to the GPU. This enables for a more complex 3D environment by adding a higher polygon count and improving the lighting at the same time it allows the computer processor to handle other tasks.

Ok, so the major point here is that the game can run faster, and run more detailed graphics because a chunk of the horse power for creating the graphics is put onto the Graphics card Processor Unit, in particular two built-in processing units for transformation of polygons and lighting. So here is what I'm guessing has to be done for any patch, assuming that Firaxis doesn't do it themselves:

1. Somebody has to dummy out any checks for T&L so that this won't stop the game from running any particular features.

2. Somebody has to then modify the Firaxis flavor of DirectX 9.0c to interpret the graphics information it's getting from the game but using non-T&L methods.


Setting up the framework for this is relatively straightforward in C++. Just make the relavent methods virtuals, create new instances of the relative base classes, and overwrite those methods. In fact, this is probably already in place since we know there are so many games running on DirectX 9.0c that aren't dependent on T&L. However Firaxis may have modified things here for their flavor of DirectX.

It won't be easy and will really require somebody who is very competent doing DirectX coding. But technically I think it's completely possible, especially when you consider the quality and quantity of graphics heavy games out there right now that don't rely on T&L.

 

[warpstorm]

If you are having slowdown problems and have a T&L card... turn off the grid, it greatly enhanced my performance... I don't know why something as simple as the grid caused so much slow-down.

I think that the grid isn't as simple as you think it is. It is literally thousands of textured polygons (in Gamebryo everything is textured polygons). Each square looks like dozens of polys to me.

 

[Willem]

It won't be easy and will really require somebody who is very competent doing DirectX coding. But technically I think it's completely possible, especially when you consider the quality and quantity of graphics heavy games out there right now that don't rely on T&L.

I highly doubt this will happen. They could have gone the CPU route from the start but they made the decision to go with the hardware version. It's not very likely that they'll just suddenly change their minds.

 

[Neomega]

I think that the grid isn't as simple as you think it is. It is literally thousands of textured polygons (in Gamebryo everything is textured polygons). Each square looks like dozens of polys to me.

Actually, that is what I was thinking, it is redoing the terrain, (hills, mountains, plains) twice, just to show a grid.

I noticed this from the clouds when you zoom out, they are pixelated, so I assume it is one low poly spherical mesh, displaying a 128x128 texture.

 

[Goombaz]

Does anybody know if the DirectX license has as a requirement that the modified code be released with any modification to the base driver? If that is indeed the case, perhaps Firaxis will release their modified DirectX code with the SDK. Heck, perhaps it's on CD/DVD right now (since I'm blessed to be living in the UK right now, I don't know and really don't have much confidence I'll find out soon). It just may be the case that a patch to get the game to run on non-T&L systems might not require any kind of detailed surgery of the core graphics engine.



Ok, so the major point here is that the game can run faster, and run more detailed graphics because a chunk of the horse power for creating the graphics is put onto the Graphics card Processor Unit, in particular two built-in processing units for transformation of polygons and lighting. So here is what I'm guessing has to be done for any patch, assuming that Firaxis doesn't do it themselves:

1. Somebody has to dummy out any checks for T&L so that this won't stop the game from running any particular features.

2. Somebody has to then modify the Firaxis flavor of DirectX 9.0c to interpret the graphics information it's getting from the game but using non-T&L methods.


Setting up the framework for this is relatively straightforward in C++. Just make the relavent methods virtuals, create new instances of the relative base classes, and overwrite those methods. In fact, this is probably already in place since we know there are so many games running on DirectX 9.0c that aren't dependent on T&L. However Firaxis may have modified things here for their flavor of DirectX.

It won't be easy and will really require somebody who is very competent doing DirectX coding. But technically I think it's completely possible, especially when you consider the quality and quantity of graphics heavy games out there right now that don't rely on T&L.

You seem to know what you are talking about here, but what I know(not saying it is necessarily a lot) about this kind of thing, makes me think that you would have the combined slowdown of wrapping/emulating(or something like it anyhow) combined with the actual speed loss caused by the instructions themselves on the CPU. Wouldn't this make the game so hard to run that virtually any PC that could handle it would have T&L anyhow? Or would it not be that much slower? I am just saying the speed loss of lacking hardware T&L wouldn't just go away, it seems like a "free lunch" type of problem to me. Please do correct me if I am wrong, I would honestly like to know.

Despite some of my comments that may have seemed insensitive to the Intel card owners, I would be very glad for them to be able to run the game if at all possible.

 

[Pyrion]

Why am I reminded of the bashing Dynamix took from the 3dfx holdouts when Tribes 2 was shipped and (surprise surprise) it ran like crap on 3dfx cards?

This is the same thing. "OMG MY FOSSIL CARD DOESN'T DO T&L FIX TEH GAME NOW!%!#!@#". If you can afford a $50 game, you can afford a GeForce2.

 

[Comraddict]

Actually, that is what I was thinking, it is redoing the terrain, (hills, mountains, plains) twice, just to show a grid.

I noticed this from the clouds when you zoom out, they are pixelated, so I assume it is one low poly spherical mesh, displaying a 128x128 texture.

how do you disable grid??

 

[kaine]

If you want to play games and you didn't spend the extra cash to get a laptop that's suitable then you've only got yourself to blame.

Actually this is a really bad way of viewing the problem that in turn leads to games being under-optimized (performance wise), which I believe is the issue with CIV IV. As far as I concern, game developers are selling their products to us, the consumers. And we, as people who have to shell out $$$ to make the purchase should be the ones that are being addressed, not the other way around.

CIV IV was made more interface friendly and has relatively faster gameplay to attract newcomers and casual gamers to the series. Do bare in mind, these people are not those typical fans of the series who will actually go out and spend $1000 on a brand new powerful machine just to play the game. In the other hand, most hardcore gaming geeks with l33t powerful machines would be utilizing their babies up to the max with games like Doom3 and Half Life 2 and I could only imagine that most of these people won't be too keen with the slow pace turn-based games like CIV IV.

In terms of a gameplay, I still think CIV IV is one of the top of the line by introducing fresh concepts, but as far as how the game is delivered and how it currently performs, I believe they won't be able to reach their intended gaming audience. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Neomega]

how do you disable grid??

It's the icon in the lower right, that looks like a blue diamond made of four smaller diamonds.

When you click on it, to disable, or enable the grid, it takes 2-3 minutes for the grid to turn on or off on my computer. This is compared to 15 seconds between turns, and flawless zooming.

When scrollign wiht the grid on, everything is laggy.

 

[Grovor]

Does anyone know if any T&L emulators are working to improve the CIV experience? I've seen references to them if other threads, but the game ain't out in Australia yet so I can't test them.

I have a four month old laptop, which exceeds recommendations, with a 128mb video card but no T&L. I expected it to be more than adequate to play CIV, I'd never even heard of T&L until this became an issue here. I figure I'll be able to play in some way or another though.

To add insult to injury, I have a two year old laptop which meets recommendations, and has a 16mb video card with T&L.

What's a CIV player to do?

 

[Milan's Warrior]

time to upgrade your pre-2000 computer dewd

I don't believe you read my posts in their entirety

 

[Shakes]

2. Somebody has to then modify the Firaxis flavor of DirectX 9.0c to interpret the graphics information it's getting from the game but using non-T&L methods.

And thereby slow the game down to sub-1 FPS frame rates. It'll run, but it wont be playable.

You can do the sort of stuff T&L does in hardware in software, albeit more slowly, if you design your engine to do so. Trying to emulate the actual hardware in software for an engine not designed to do it in software isn't going to work well. It'll be unplayably slow.

It's kind of like how older 3D FPS had a software rendering mode and an OpenGL rendering mode. The software rendering mode was playable, but only because it was especially written. Trying to run the OpenGL mode using a software OpenGL driver resulted in you measuring seconds per frame, not frames per second.

 

[Flak]

I highly doubt this will happen.

I'm about %1000 certain Firaxis won't do it.

And thereby slow the game down to sub-1 FPS frame rates. It'll run, but it wont be playable.

You can do the sort of stuff T&L does in hardware in software, albeit more slowly, if you design your engine to do so. Trying to emulate the actual hardware in software for an engine not designed to do it in software isn't going to work well. It'll be unplayably slow.

Just to set things straight, I'm definitely NOT going to do this patch, nor do I have any real interest in working on such a patch (although it would be an interesting project). BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUT, IF I were going to do something like this, no way I'm going to try and pull down the exact graphics of Civ IV out my non-T&L DirectX patch. The whole point is that there are specialized processors which the normal CPU just doesn't have. So I would probably halve the polygon counts, and probably more than halve the lighting handling, for the output.


Personally, I think it's a mistake to leave so many casual users out of the gaming loop like this. These people tend to travel and spread the word. They also tend to play the game for years. Another thing, these type of players are often middle class or better and have children of various ages that can be influenced by the kind of games that dad is playing. Also, I don't know if anybody has noticed, but these type of players just tend to be the most laid-back go-easy type of players you could hope for with such a type of game. It's a pleasure to have them around when they decide to give their input.

But I'm not the marketing experts of Firaxis. If they think that this market is a dead-end, they're probably going to be more right than I. I personally hope that someone decides to take up the mantle and create such a patch. However realistically, anybody who would have such DirectX programming experience and is into any gaming in any way, probably has a kick-ass machine of their own and really doesn't care if some business traveler with a high-end business machine can run a game like Civilization. That particular niche of player just wasn't vocal enough during development. Such is life I guess.

 

[Grohan]

If you have a computer which doesn't support T&L...

1. ...Your computer is ancient.

OR

2. ...You have bought a computer what is meant for office use/internet surfing BUT not for gaming.

I don't think that Firaxis is going to release a no-T&L-required patch because they have surely have other far more important things to do (like fixing bugs in their games, developing their upcoming game titles etc.)

 

[move_quietly]

I'm about %1000 certain Firaxis won't do it.

[edit]

Personally, I think it's a mistake to leave so many casual users out of the gaming loop like this. These people tend to travel and spread the word. They also tend to play the game for years. Another thing, these type of players are often middle class or better and have children of various ages that can be influenced by the kind of games that dad is playing. Also, I don't know if anybody has noticed, but these type of players just tend to be the most laid-back go-easy type of players you could hope for with such a type of game. It's a pleasure to have them around when they decide to give their input.

[edit]

thank you that's about the nicest things i've heard on the forum about "us" in at least a few days lol. appreciate the kind thoughts. i'll leave the forum thinking good thoughts today. we're really not that bad! and i wish we were playing civ iv. even the passionate outrage of a few of "us" about not being able to play is out of love, if we didn't care then nobody would have been upset about not being able to play. some long time players were just really disappointed is all.

 

[Subtestube]

Hi all, I'm new to these forums, and I don't actually have Civ 4 yet (being in New Zealand I have to wait until Thursday), but there may be a simpler solution to this problem than using virtual functions, depending on how versatile the SDK is, and how much information the game can 'give' regarding where is visible and where isn't.

I've noticed (in reading) that apparently T&L is turned off when rendering the whole map at full-bright (as would make sense - it's a waste of rendering power to selectively light when everything just has the same ambient lighting). So, assuming the SDK gives you access to a 'what's visible' thing, the thing to do would be to just always render the map at fullbright, and then render a black image over everything that isn't visible. This would be a little clumsy, and you might have a few issues at the edges of visibility (because everything is 3D, a black quad 'high' enough to occlude mountains wouldn't necessarily hide surface terrain on the visible 'far edge', but I can't think why it wouldn't work.

Edit: A few corrolaries I just thought of to this:
- This being useful is dependant on how the game culls unseen areas. Obviously if it's not culling efficiently, at the beginning of the game you'd be rendering a LOT more than you need to. Provided it does cull intelligently, you're only rendering a few extra black quads, which are cheap even in software.
- As I say - we'll probably need the SDK before this is do-able.
- This solution *should* be cheaper than virtual functions, provided that the game culls intelligently (see point one).
- This won't work at all, if visibility information is 'hidden'.
Edit 3: Whoops I realised there's an inefficiency in the method I propose above. We should actually render the black quads First. Provided they're 'higher' than the terrain, the terrain should be depth culled when rasterised, and that should skip the texturing step. That should in turn speed things up.

Edit 2: I should also say (just from my perspective) - I am a person with a reasonably powerful desktop PC. I actually do graphics programming, and my 6800 is invaluable to me. THAT SAID, I actually like to play Civ on my notebook, and being an affordable thin and light of about a year and a half ago, it has an Intel Extreme Graphics in it rather than anything better. I'm sure there are at least some users like me, who will play Civ on the desktop, but for whom it is also a hassle. It would be nice for us to be able to also play on laptops whilst on the road.

 

[magritte]

OK...it's absolutely true that any modern video card--hell any high end video card put out in 2000 had T&L onboard. So I would certainly expect to need that sort of video card for any first-person shooter, most RPG's, strategy games with an emphasis on tactical battles (Total War).

But what does 3D actually add to Civilization? It results in this weird-looking landscape where spearmen, trees and mountains are all of comparable size. The units in civilization are clearly intended as symbols of entire regiments, not individuals anyway, so why not stick to a symbolic presentation of the map, rather than this pseudo-representational presentation.

I haven't played Civ4 yet, and I do intend to, but I can't for the life of me figure out the purpose (in terms of gameplay, not marketing) for 3D in a game of this type.

 

[Willem]

I haven't played Civ4 yet, and I do intend to, but I can't for the life of me figure out the purpose (in terms of gameplay, not marketing) for 3D in a game of this type.

You'll be able to zoom in and out very quickly. You can have your entire empire on your screen, locate a hot spot, then get to it quicker than you could before. I found it rather annoying sometimes having to mouse scroll around in order to find a unit/city that I was looking for in Civ 3. That will be a thing of the past.

But yes marketing has something to do with the switch, since it makes the game more visually appealing, and production as well. It's easier and cheaper to produce animations in 3D, which saves the company money in development costs. And before anyone jumps on me and tells me I'm wrong, this came from someone who works for Breakaway Games and was involved in the Civ 3: Conquests expansion.

Incidently, the size of the units is strictly a subjective thing and you will be able to adjust this in the XML files if you don't like it. Besides, even in Civ 3 units were pretty much the same size as the mountains and certainly the trees. That's hardly anything new.

 

[LoneWolf5050]

I ran CIV I on a Tandy
Typed in programs for a TI-99
Played M.U.L.E. on a Commodore 64
Be nice to us old timers

and I'm not that old

Amen. I've still got some punch cards around here somewhere...

(Though they weren't programmed by me.)

--Julian

 

[Mr. Hyperbole]

Originally Posted by Flak
I'm about %1000 certain Firaxis won't do it.

[edit]

Personally, I think it's a mistake to leave so many casual users out of the gaming loop like this. These people tend to travel and spread the word. They also tend to play the game for years. Another thing, these type of players are often middle class or better and have children of various ages that can be influenced by the kind of games that dad is playing. Also, I don't know if anybody has noticed, but these type of players just tend to be the most laid-back go-easy type of players you could hope for with such a type of game. It's a pleasure to have them around when they decide to give their input.

[edit]

thank you that's about the nicest things i've heard on the forum about "us" in at least a few days lol. appreciate the kind thoughts. i'll leave the forum thinking good thoughts today. we're really not that bad! and i wish we were playing civ iv. even the passionate outrage of a few of "us" about not being able to play is out of love, if we didn't care then nobody would have been upset about not being able to play. some long time players were just really disappointed is all.

I concur. Those of us unfortunate enough not to possess HW T&L have been pretty badly flamed here lately. I'm not talking about those who want Sid dead or Firaxis burned to the ground, I'm talking about those who just want answers or have valid concerns. I can't tell you the number of help threads that have been hit with "well, if you were stupid enough to buy a computer two years ago and not upgrade, you deserve what you get, you pathetic bastard," or "you have an Intel chip? You're a total corporate tool! Die in a fire!"
This computer I have now is the first I have ever owned. At the time, I thought it would be good enough to last me at a couple of years of decent gameplay(I do now see the error of my ways ).
I didn't even know that computers HAD graphics card until Civ IV was announced, butI for one will not rag out Firaxis for marching along with technology. I just hope that a fix is possible. If not, I'll just have to take back my copy and wait until I can afford a better computer. Such is life...