Hi Ken, When I was talking about 3D I wasn't just meaning audio. I was meaning an entire 3D world. However, I've decided against something of that complexity. \The audio alone is problematic, and I generally don't recommend 3D buffers. The main reason is you can have less effects loading in 3D buffers. They are located in hardware buffers, and every computers soundcard is different. I might have one that can process say 64 hardware buffers, and the next guys might only be able to do 32. The guy doing 32 obviously wont get the same effect as the guy with 64, and will be writing in wondering why the game doesn't work right. Answer upgrade your computer and add a better name brand soundcard and don't use the l-cheapo one that came in your computer. When you use plane old secondary buffers with stereo panning you can lode the buffers in to software and then it is only a matter of CPU output and available memory to access. Even though panning isn't quite the effect you can duplicate 3d buffers somewhat by using panning properly when calculated and use the volume control on the buffer for rolloff. I remember a year or so ago when James north put out his 3D audio mouse demo, and several wrote in complaining that their soundcard wasn't up to the specs. That is not good for us devs who would like to put out games with the "works" but find out the customer base doesn't have the hardware to do it. So for now panning is a good alternative.
Ken the Crazy wrote: > I say go with the 3d. That way people can learn on their level--maybe have > some panning effects and whatnot in the intro if people want to learn how to > pan sound--but 3d just rocks. > Ken Downey > President > DreamTechInteractive! > _______________________________________________ Gamers mailing list .. Gamers@audyssey.org To unsubscribe send E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can visit http://audyssey.org/mailman/listinfo/gamers_audyssey.org to make any subscription changes via the web.
