/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.2412857]

Turok Tetralogy thread. DOWNGRADE CONFIRMED edition.

[Anonymous No.2412932]

>>2412857
It's like they completely ripped out all the environmental lighting\shading. Weird. Plus the projected character shadows are replaced with blob shadows. Plus the floor textures are drabber.

Weird how people freak out over the music differences when the graphical differences are more drastic.

[Anonymous No.2412967]

>>2412932
Isn't there a settings option for the PC for shadow types?
Probably a different Turok or even another game and I remember it wrong, though.

[Anonymous No.2413184]

>>2412932
Whoever was playing took those screenshots with max brightness.

This is what Turok 2 looks with normal brightness.

[Anonymous No.2413189]

>>2413184
As for the shadows, I can't offer an explanation other than they dun goofed.

Obligatory post where I put the turok mega folder for those who haven't downloaded the PC ports.

https://mega.co.nz/#F!rkx3WbZC!elr6cn_6PQahPNJFzxutow

[Anonymous No.2413195]

N64's GPU had some features that even the Voodoo didn't have...but WAY less raw power.

[Anonymous No.2413208]

>>2413195
quake 2 in had stencil shadows so it wasn't something impossible on pc at the time

[Anonymous No.2413210]

>>2413208
quake 2 had id behind it while turok was a cheap n64 port done by people with less time, support, and probably programming skill.

[Anonymous No.2413237]

>>2413210
still wasn't impossible hardware-wise though

also time to play some t2 and make new webms, because
>reposts

[Anonymous No.2413247]

>>2413237
>still wasn't impossible hardware-wise though
Yeah but it's possible that dynamic lighting was built using the N64's custom T&L hardware which lets you do pseudo pixel/vertex shader stuff. While it's still possible to do it on PC albeit with different techniques, they couldn't "direct port" it because PC graphic cards weren't programmable in that particular way at the time.

[Anonymous No.2413250]

>>2413237
>still wasn't impossible hardware-wise though

notice how i didn't say anything about hardware or it being impossible

[Anonymous No.2413351]

>>2413250
notice how the reply above did

also t2 on pc actually has stencil shadows

[Anonymous No.2413383]

>>2413351
>notice how the reply above did

Wow, you're an idiot and you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.2414694]

>>2413184
>Whoever was playing took those screenshots with max brightness.
It wasn't maximum brightness, but for some reason T2 was running at higher brightness than normal. Lowing the setting fixed the awful lighting. Thank you, based anon.

>>2413351
>also t2 on pc actually has stencil shadows
Does it inconsistently apply them, perhaps?

[Anonymous No.2415651]

>>2413189
anon, I just downloaded turok2 (thanks) but I have one question, I opened the mds file and then opened the cd unit to install the game but my question is, what are the rest of the files/folders in the zip for if everything is already in the mds file? I ask because this my first time doing this and I dont know shit. thanks for the game!

[Anonymous No.2415669]

>>2415651
You dun goofed, installing T2 using the CD image is not going to work.

All the rest of the files and folders ARE the game, simply extract those to a desktop folder of your liking, create a shortcut for "turok2.exe" on your desktop and then mount the image to play with music.

The image is only used for the music, nothing else.

Was there no text file included explaining this?

[Anonymous No.2415708]

>>2415669
I get bad image error when I click the turok.exe, fuck I guess im gonna try project64 for this one

[Anonymous No.2415714]

>>2414694
Turok 3 uses these weird looking auxiliary framebuffer-based shadows that don't work well on slopes and suffer from being low resolution. Plus Oblivion Priests have their upper body cut off on their shadow.

[Anonymous No.2415715]

>>2415708
Last time I heard someone getting a bad image error running executable on Windows 7 was due to malware/spyware.

[Anonymous No.2415724]

>>2415708
>>2415708
Did you uninstall turok 2 and retry by doing what I said on my previous post?

This is what I meant when installing with the CD image, the game will not work.

[Anonymous No.2415732]

One very interesting difference between Turok 2 and Turok 3 is the AI. Turok 2's AI zig-zags constantly when moving. Turok 3's generally walks in a straight line. Turok 2's flesh eaters RUN at you. Turok 3's flesh eaters POWER WALK towards you. Turok 3 unfortunately substitutes really fast enemies that can easily die in one hit if you're lucky with several varieties of bullet sponge. Turok 3 has a weird obsession with enemies that fire fast projectiles, wheras Turok 2 favored enemies that fired slow moving projectiles you could dodge in a sort of dance.

Turok 2's combat is very dancelike. Constantly strafing yoursself as enemies zig-zag and dive and roll around, being infuriatingly difficult to shoot in many cases.

Turok 3's combat is more straightforward. In some ways, it's more enjoyable. But I think that giving enemies projectile weapons and making them super accurate was a massive design mistake that haunts the game. Turok 2's genuinely enjoyable "run backwards really fast while jumping" gameplay simply doesn't work for many Turok 3 enemies because they can shoot at you with razor sharp accurate bullets\acid\magic stuff if you're out of melee range. I also think it's really inexcusable how Turok 2's amazing death animations were more or less ruined by Japan-grade censorship. (I can't help but wonder whether Turok 3 suffered executive meddling. Columbine was in April 1999, right? Turok 2 was late 1998. Turok 3 was late 2000. Some Iguana people mentioned that Acclaim's management got really cold feet about violence in their games after school shootings in the US. I wish someone would track down some key developers to talk with them about what happened.)

[Anonymous No.2415735]

>>2415724
Yes, I unistalled and I did what you said. I was actually able to get into the multiplayer (turok2mp_103.exe) but not the turokmp.exe or turok2.exe

[Anonymous No.2415758]

>>2415735
Give it a try again by running ccleaner's registry cleaner, deleting the folder you put turok 2 in and then redoing everything again.

If that fails then check your pc for any issues it may have, something must be conflicting with the executable.

[Anonymous No.2416219]

>>2414694
>Does it inconsistently apply them, perhaps?
it's a toggleable option
set 3DSHADOWS to true in either the console or the ini file

[Anonymous No.2416245]

>>2416219
Oh thanks for that.

Have a wallpaper.

[Anonymous No.2417093]

[Anonymous No.2417552]

>>2415758
I just did that and Im still getting the bad image error, maybe I just need to check my pc

[Anonymous No.2417904]

>>2416219
>>Does it inconsistently apply them, perhaps?
>it's a toggleable option
>set 3DSHADOWS to true in either the console or the ini file
Very interesting. You learn something new every day. Someone really should create a PC Gaming Wiki page for Turok 2.

[Anonymous No.2418357]

there's also other settings, most useful one being the FOV setting

[Masterchum (pls visit /1cc/) No.2418365]

>>2413237
How the hell are you playing this at 60fps? I thought the PC version was locked

[Anonymous No.2418371]

[Anonymous No.2418374]

>>2418365

[Anonymous No.2418378]

[Anonymous No.2420772]

>>2418374
>the name C:\Users\ in the target box is not valid

How do I fix this?

[Anonymous No.2420835]

>>2420772
"C:\path to turok 2 that contains spaces\is in double quotes\turok2.exe" -MaxFramerate 60

[Anonymous No.2421239]

>>2420835
Domo arigatou Mr roboto-san.

Now if only I could get the music to loop all times, it always happens at random.

Shadowplay is neat as fuck.

[Anonymous No.2421248]

>>2421239
>.webm

Awesom cerbreal boar there m9, i r8 9/9

[Anonymous No.2421257]

>>2421239
Fug, that didn't came out right.

>>2421248
fixed.

[Anonymous No.2422515]

>>2413208
I don't think that's stencil shadows. Looks more like regular polygons put on the ground, their shape and position determined through projection

[Anonymous No.2422553]

>>2422515
maybe, technically
i just call them all 'stencil' for simplicity's sake and to distinguish them from blob shadows

also for the lack of a better term ('3d shadows' sounds like something surreal)

[Anonymous No.2422617]

>>2422553
I'd call them polygonal shadows (which does not imply 3D). Besides stuff based on the stencil buffer, these polygons, and blobs, you also have shadowmap based shadows, that usually have the blocky appearance you see in >>2415714
While I may be overly picky about it, I think the difference matters, since all these shadowing techniques exhibit different advantages and drawbacks. You won't ever have overlapping polygon issues with stencil shadows, yet they're very obvious on the shadows in >>2413208 for example (including some sick z-fighting)

[Anonymous No.2422689]

>>2422617
>polygonal shadows
maybe i'll start calling them that then

[Anonymous No.2422701]

>>2418371
BUSTING A STONE COLD GROOVE