On Thursday 16 June 2005 20:34, Harald JOHNSEN wrote:
> I was thinking of using some pixel shader for one or two effects.
> This would be with the arbvp1 & arbfp1 type shader. Of course I won't
> write them in assembler by would
> use Cg to produce the assembler source.
> The use or arb type program should limit the dependencies on standard
> opengl driver.

The GLSL is part of OpenGL 2.0 and NVidia has allready OpenGL 2.0 compliant 
drivers for Linux and Windows. So OpenGL 2.0 with GLSL is IMHO the way to go.

> But before starting anything like that I first want to know if :
> 1) people have program shader capable cards (ie FX5200+ or ati9500+)
> No need to code lot of things if only 5% of the user can see them.
> Normaly a good percentage should have correct
> cards (or will have in the next 6 month) but I feel that some still use
> olders cards.

I have a Geforce 4 Ti but that's not a problem, i can upgrade later when it 
makes sense. :)
The only thing that is important for me now, is an option to turn it off
and it must stay vendor neutral and crossplatform compatible.
So, please don't use specific OpenGL Extensions that only run on
specific hardware. Instead use only what OpenGL 2.0 offers in a neutral way.

> No need to code lot of things if only 5% of the user can see them.
You can be sure, that i will be able to see it some day (in a couple of months 
-> next videocard is allready planned).
So this shouldn't hinder you.

> 2) you think it's a good idea to enhance a bit some visual aspect of
> Flightgear or you think that only simulation count
> and all the rest is useless eye candy ;)

No, i like eye candy very much and see it as an important factor for 
flightgear beside the physic code and other things.
So when you can improve it, then please, improve it. :)

Best Regards,
 Oliver C.

Flightgear-devel mailing list

Reply via email to