/vr/ - Retro Games

Well, it was obviously better at the time to use dedicated rendering hardware. Perhaps software rendering might be better today on these games had the developers accounted for people still wanting to play them on hardware many orders of magnitude more powerful but they didn't so the best software we can render with is software that emulates the hardware.

I usually go with the software renderer because texture filtering looks awful on low resolution textures

accelerated rendering with features like texture filtering set to nearest.

>>4988683
filtered textures look better on lower resolutions. also you can disable texture filtering while still running accelerated renderers

another issue worth pointing out is that when changing renderers you should adjust the brightness levels. for example when you switch from software to OpenGL the graphics might look washed out (kind of visible on OP's image)

>inb4 that autist with his 800x600 screenshots of software Quake 2 claiming it's the definitive experience

>>4988707
>filtered textures look better on lower resolutions
I use low resolutions and it just looks blurry to me regardless.
>you can disable texture filtering while still running accelerated renderers
Sure, I do this when it's an option, but some games like Half-Life seem to have issues with it so it's easier to just run in software.

Soul vs soulless

>>4988695
you must love Project64

It depends on the game. For example, I think Quake 1 looks nicer in software but Quake 2 was definitely made around hardware rendering. Sometimes it's clear the developers intended for the game to be used with one mode over the other, and other times it's personal preferences.

Why do I have a graphics card if I'm just going to use the software renderer? Maybe try thinking for once *rolls eyes*

>>4988738

>>4988660
my first win9X pc didn't have a opengl capable card so mostly what i remember from that era was Unreal Engine 1 absolutely beating the balls off Idtech 2 in software mode.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4oVDS19AWI

Then later on when i got a proper 3D card i realized that UE1 software mode was still better than the best Idtech could do with all its bells and whistles turned on. Shame they never opened up the source.

>>4988749
no, you must love cock

There were ups and downs.

Back then, none of my machines ever got as good a frame rate in software as they did using 3D acceleration.

Of course, that's not really an issue playing on modern machines today.

Unreal Engine's software renderer has this beautiful dithering effect that mimics bilinear filtering but because it's dithering and not blurring it manages to preserve sharp details in the textures that would otherwise become smudges of color.

...But it can't do proper transparency ...And you would've probably been sacrificing anything from 20-30fps by picking software, especially if you were going to try and run at the same resolution as your desktop.

So while I loved the way software looked even back then, there wasn't much incentive to use it if you had a graphics card.

>>4988683
The only reason filtering looked worse is because old hardware renderers are designed to resample non-square textures which were often used in games designed first for software. Modern cards have no such limitation.

>>4988660
It depends heavily on the game. For Quake any modern engine can replicate software looks pretty closely so it's clearly the superior option.

>>4988707
>for example when you switch from software to OpenGL the graphics might look washed out (kind of visible on OP's image)
That's because OP's image is original GLQuake which is missing overbright. Not a problem nowadays.

>>4988683
I think low bit-depth textures are the culprit here.
Try a modern game with texture detail set to ultra low, and you can bet filtering affects it for the better. It might look like a blurry mess, but at least it's a smooth and pleasing blur. Games that use global 8-bit palettes however cannot smoothly blend between shades, and that defeats the benefit that filtering provides.

>>4989664
>Games that use global 8-bit palettes however cannot smoothly blend between shades, and that defeats the benefit that filtering provides.
Wrong. It’s to do with non-square shaped resampling. Filtering is almost always better in a true like-for-like situation (only exception is textures comprised of straight lines). That being said, it’s alright to like unfiltered textures for nostalgia reasons.

Friendly reminder that GL_NEAREST_MIPMAP_LINEAR is still filtering. All it does is make shit pixelated up close, but it's filtered at distance.

>>4988660
Any interesting alternative as a few games sport some cool differences between SW amd HS modes.

>>4989674
>non-square shaped resampling
No, I am aware of this, and I am comparing textures like-for-like.
This picture demonstrates the atrocity that is filtering with 8-bit palettes. Notice how the door's shade alternates between a lighter and a darker brown. These sudden transitions stand out more than they would if everything was just nearest neighbor sampled (which in essense just amplifies the artifacts so that everything looks consistent).

>>4989704
This picture, I mean.

>>4988716
>play old game
>put it to 1920x1080
>HUD and text become unreadable
any way to fix this shit?

>>4989706
It’s a mostly straight line texture, so filtering can make it look worse. Has nothing to do with color count.

>>4989712
Most modern source ports support HUD/UI scaling, don't be a brainlet and check out the options screen.

>>4989713
If the color count were higher, those lines wouldn't manifest as they do in actuality where intermediate shades cannot be represented.

>>4989907
It makes no difference. Even if the texture had 1-bit color (black or white), filtering would make it look better if there were barely any straight lines and worse if it was filled with them.

The shades aren’t the problem, but the shape of the gradations

>>4988716

But it is.

Always like software renderer for these old games. Its not like a console game, where the N64s 3d acceleration made the picture much more legible at the low resolution of a TV than the Playstation. On PC, at 640x480, the pixelation doesn't obscure detail and instead adds the illusion of more detail. With 3d acceleration, you can see that, no, there's actually very little detail.

>>4989968
>instead adds the illusion of more detail
That's just aliasing, anon.

>>4989968
>On PC, at 640x480, the pixelation doesn't obscure detail and instead adds the illusion of more detail.
if anything, linear filtering actually adds more illusionary detail

>With 3d acceleration, you can see that, no, there's actually very little detail.
3d acceleration means you get better framerates and can use a higher resolution. it does not absolutely imply using linear texture filtering; it's usually enabled by default because it just looks better not to have pixelated graphics, but you can turn it off

>>4990048
Linear filtering adding detail is only logical considering with it on, every textured pixel uses 4 texel samples. With filtering off, every textured pixel only uses 1 sample.

I've been playing some N64 with texture filters, and how much you filter depends on the game itself. There are a lot of textures expecially on that system that are designed to be blurry gradients and contrast the sharper character models.

My memories of those late childhood games are a blurry mess which was the idea behind the games at the time (any console game on a crt in your basement would have fucked up sharpness, color, and brightness settings, proper setups were extremely uncommon compared to hobbiests or gamers today). So the graphics were designed with that in mind as is said commonly on this board. My imagination filled in the gaps, you had character and world art to refer to from the cover of the game before you even put it in the console.

With higher resolutions you can actually see what you are doing, for example racing games are much more improved. I imagine ego shooters would be improved too. But I found it a worthwhile expereince to play any game this way. The polygons combined with medium-res textures are a real treat when I'm high or otherwise. It's better for games like Zelda when the faces of characters are sharper. I really feel like I am experiencing the world of the game in more detail which seems like an obvious overall statement but it's true. It really brings out the aesthetic of this time in game design.

Mupen allows you to sharpen the screen but keep most of the graphics pixilated, if you can be patient about audio glitches from emulation. I'm definitely not a fan of smoothing filters.

>>4989927
But if everything were to be converted to black and white, tons of straight lines are ensured.

>>4990076
>ego shooters
hello deutschland!

back when games had soul

>>4988660
Right is better

>>4990221
best

>>4990201
wow much sol

>>4990201
onions*

>>4990256
My god Half-Life Source is disgustingly ugly

>the only correct way to experience Half-Life is software renderer at 640x480 and a 30 fps cap to simulate 90's hardware output

>>4990221
Left is absolutely disgusting. No detail, not even transparency water.

>>4990292
Its simple actually

Just play WON half life and dorget about the atrocious Steam port

>>4990329
>trying to get WON to work on win7

>>4990352
There's 0 reasons to play the WON version. Don't take these memes seriously.

But if you must: Xash3D

>>4990359
>0 resons
i like playing the original unpatched versions of games

>>4990359
>0 reasons to play the WON version.
Its the original game without all the weird downgrades Valve did to the Steam release

Ive read and watched comparisons, the Steam release is fucked up.

And fuck whatever your traing to shill.

>>4990362
>they updated it so now it's normie tier
>I must dig out an obsolete version barely compatible with modern systems to prove that I have superior tastes
This is textbook hipster pretty much.

>>4990372
And the troll reveals themself

>>4990372
>he doesn't have a retro pc ready to go at the click of a button

>>4990379
Ready to pounce at the touch of a button!
My system's locked in by /vr/ gluttons!

>>4990372
>adding bloat to slow down the game
got a copy of 2004 half life 2 just to compare it with the modern version and the modern version runs far worse, ergo, valve sux and CANT be trusted

>>4990431
No shit dude, the updated version of Half-Life 2 has many graphics improvements, no wonder it's more taxing than the one meant for the 2004 hardware.

>>4990458
>many graphics improvements

>>4990463
https://wiki.sourceruns.org/wiki/Differences_between_Half-Life_2_Engines
>Half-Life 2, together with Episode One originally ran on Source Engine (Old Engine). In 2007, the release of Episode Two saw an updated version of that engine, which was called OrangeBox Engine, a.k.a. New Engine. In 2010, Valve updated both HL2 and EP1 to run on the New Engine as well, and that brought all the new glitches.

>Builds 2187-4044 - Old Engine (Source Engine)
>Builds 4295-5135 - New Engine (OrangeBox Engine)
>Builds 5298-latest - Steampipe*

>>4990569
i know the engines because the new ones broke SMOD, but there isnt any improvment to the graphics, its just bugfixes

>>4990576
I'm pretty sure there were improvements in bloom, HDR, better shadows etc. At least after the Orange Box update.

>>4990576
>broke smod
They still haven't updated that goddamn mod to work with modern hl2? That mod was fucking classic. The bananas were the best part.

>>4990717
there was only a few updates right after steampipe that allowed it to work, but there hasnt been an update since 2010, shame i cant find a 2004 version

>>4990308
But it is transparent.

Reminder that software rendering is not dead.

>>4990769
Why doesn't it use dithered texture filtering like in Unreal?

>>4990431
How do you run the 2004 version?

>>4990790
i just got the 2004 retail game from some place, works fine on win7
half life however wont work from the few tutorials i tried, theres an update to make it work on win7 but it takes out all the stuff that makes it unique and plays like the steam release

>>4990802
But doesn't Steam get in the way of installing Half-Life 2? It forces me to update when I install it from the disc.

>>4988660
Smearing low res textures around doesn't improve anything IMO. I much prefer the hard lines of software rendering, its easier on the eyes and all the hard lines makes the world easier to see and pick out objects, and somehow gives a better impression of texture and material to in game objects.

>>4990829
i just got it from here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=gNd5Gdt3xYE
steam doesnt let you go to previous versions and now they actually force updates for all games

>>4990782

It actually does have trilinear filtering and perspective correction, but I like to disable it for that PS1 on steroids look. It's the only real reason to use it, as it takes a top of the line CPU to outperform even a Geforce 6200.

>>4990802
>half life however wont work
installed the game from CD, installed hl1110 patch and it just werks

>>4990918
thats the problem, that patch takes out all the cool shit that makes me want to play the game in the first place

>>4990938
Unpatched works for me on Windows 7.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYfJC2aqZcQ

there was a time when software rendering was better than hardware rendering. early GPUs could only render triangles and that's it, while software rendering was more elastic in what you wanted to achieve (for example, MDK software renderer drew bigger textures than any 3d accelerator could handle at the time)

once shaders became a thing there's literally no difference now

>>4990998
how? i always got an error

>>4988660
>difference between PS1 and N64.jpg

>>4991801
ah yes the n64

Flight Simulator 98 is an interesting case. Up close, it often looks better in software mode because most of the textures are from FS95, which was software-only. So if you're flying low and slow, that's great. But if you're flying up high in a jet, everything becomes pixellated very quickly in software mode, while in hardware mode terrain looks about the same regardless of distance.

Interestingly, subsequent versions of FS (2000, 2002, 2004, FSX) all have a problem with terrain blurring even in hardware mode. If you could get the texture to render at full resolution but all pixellated, it would often look a much better than the blurry terrain they actually generate.

>>4991876
I remember textures not looking as sharp in FS98 in hardware mode with mipmapping off though.

>>4991798
Windows compatibility to the rescue.

>>4991635
>Once shaders became a thing
Try achieving the look of Outcast on a Geforce 3.

>>4991635
ps3 gpu was going to be software only.

>>4991635
>MDK software renderer drew bigger textures than any 3d accelerator could handle at the time
Nope, that was more of a case of software rendering vs really badly integrated hardware rendering. Sure, Voodoo cards had a 256x256 texture limit, but there was nothing stopping developers from using the N64 approach and breaking up larger textures into smaller ones and just tiling them.