software vs hardware rendering - which is best for early HW accelerated games?

Deusfaux

So thanks to Steam and all the wonderful documentation found on the net, I've been playing older games and learning how to run them optimally.

There is an area of contention though with regards to software vs hardware rendering and which is necessarily better.

Is there consensus on some of these games and which rendering method one should use?

(Quake Engine)
Quake (see, I've heard/seen that OpenGL makes everything blurry due to texture filtering)
Hexen II

(id Tech 2)
Quake II
Heretic II

(Unreal Engine 1)
Unreal
Unreal Tournament
Deus Ex

(GoldSrc)
Half-Life

Zxerol

Hardware unless it gets finicky. For earlier games like Quake, it probably won't make too much of a difference between the software rasterizer and the original hardware implementation (source ports are another story), but once you get to the Unreal-era games, you definitely want hardware mode.

Deusfaux

I'm not convinced on ones like Quake. I've read it adds some things, and takes away several others.

Basically I'm looking for examples of games where HW acceleration doesn't just improve performance (irrelevant on modern hardware), but changes the way the game looks (for better or for worse)

slash000

Well I can tell you Quake 2, when you add hw acceleration, adds colored lighting to the game. It's far more drab without colored lighting when played in SW rendering mode.

Also Unreal adds some effects when run with HW acceleration that are not present in software rendering. I can't remember what all they are, but just as an example, there are certain floors that are a shiny marble surface that are reflective with HW acceleration, but are not with SW acceleration.

Ego

Tribes 1 looks very different with hardware vs software acceleration (considerably better in hardware.)

Deusfaux

slash000 wrote: »

Well I can tell you Quake 2, when you add hw acceleration, adds colored lighting to the game. It's far more drab without colored lighting when played in SW rendering mode.

I got that one running right here. Could you tell me what level or where I could see the difference?

Zxerol

Quake 1 was where the penetration of 3D acceleration really began. It was originally all software, and then glquake was patched in later (then you had hardware vendors scrambling to create MiniGL drivers to accelerate Quake). Games after that, though, started to build hardware acceleration in from the get-go, and they you'll find they all look far better running hardware.

Joshykins

Of all the PC gaming i've done in the mid/late 90's ( tons) I can say that there wasn't a single game that, given the choice, I'd rather play in software mode. In my opinion hardware acceleration looked and played way better than software. I miss my Voodoo 2...

Deusfaux

ok so perhaps the ONLY game of contention is Quake 1? (possibly other Quake 1 based games like Hexen 2)

Deusfaux

furthermore, is there any difference between OpenGL and Direct3D rendering in most of these games? ...or any games?

Zxerol

Generally no, but you might get minor nigglings depending on the renderer used. Quake games runs best on OpenGL (obvious, since it's the only API they support), Unreal 1 was a 3dfx Glide game through-and-through (the Direct3D path later got better through patches, and UT99's implementation was fine), and Half-Life, owing to its Quake lineage, ran a little better on OpenGL, for some examples. You're generally OK with whatever, though.

Monger

I know I've always had issues running Half-Life in D3D. OpenGL is fine, though.

For the Unreal Engine stuff, there's always the DX10 renderer.

subedii

Actually, I distinctly remember when I got a graphics card and played Half-Life 1 with it. I could ramp up the resolution nicely, but the textures actually became a lot more fuzzy because of the compression. It was particularly noticeable on things like vending machines and such.

So software might actually better for HL1, you should still be able to max out everything regardless with today's processor speeds. I don't remember whether you'd be missing out on other visual effects by doing so though.

elliotw2

The only time you want to use a software renderer is if the only other option is to use a Glide card or a Voodoo card. On OpenGL vs D3D, usually OpenGL can work better, but a few will still run well on more modern DirectX

slash000

Deusfaux wrote: »

slash000 wrote: »

Well I can tell you Quake 2, when you add hw acceleration, adds colored lighting to the game. It's far more drab without colored lighting when played in SW rendering mode.

I got that one running right here. Could you tell me what level or where I could see the difference?

I think you can tell on just about any level. It's been many years but even the first level should have some various colors in lighting.

Though I can't recall if the first level is the most dramatic but I'm pretty sure every level has colored lighting.

Deusfaux

aye, i think I see it now. First gun shoots white light, then yellowish light on openGL mode.

I'm noticing all these early openGL games are really dark and that the in game brightness doesn't help... anyone know the cause and solution to this?

Krathoon

Concerning the first Unreal, it is all about the hardware acceleration. It was pretty much a tech demo to show what Epic could do.

Stormwatcher

Quake 2 looks very different in software and hardware mode.

Most accelerated games after Q2 look really much better (Higher game resolution, higher res textures, colored lights, transparencies, better geometry) on hardware accelerated mode.

Glal

Joshykins wrote: »

Of all the PC gaming i've done in the mid/late 90's ( tons) I can say that there wasn't a single game that, given the choice, I'd rather play in software mode.

WhiteMagicRaven

For HeXen II i like to use best source port Hammer of Thyrion http://uhexen2.sourceforge.net/
And i use OpenGL rendering (hardware) its better for me than software mode
I even play heretic and hexen in OpenGL