Not logged in, Join Here! or Log In Below:  
News Articles Search    

Submitted by Martin Stich, posted on November 27, 2000

Image Description, by Martin Stich

These are a few shots of the game we are currently developing, called tank2. It's (self-written) engine features outdoor terrain rendering, Quake2 models, x-models, decals, smooth day/night cycling, 3d and 2d particles, dynamic lighting, a console, multiplayer support, and a few more things. Collision detection, multiplayer, weapons and all that is already implemented. What's missing is the implementation of the game rules, death and respawn code etc.

We are currently thinking about porting it to DX8 (right now it's DX7), but that would take great effort, so I was wondering what you guys think - is it worth the pain ? ;)

More screenshots can be found on Please tell us what you think!

Martin, Michael

Image of the Day Gallery


Message Center / Reader Comments: ( To Participate in the Discussion, Join the Community )
Archive Notice: This thread is old and no longer active. It is here for reference purposes. This thread was created on an older version of the flipcode forums, before the site closed in 2005. Please keep that in mind as you view this thread, as many of the topics and opinions may be outdated.

November 27, 2000, 11:10 AM

Cool game. Not sure if its worth the pain apart from the possible performance gain you could get :)

Tobias Johansson

November 27, 2000, 11:26 AM

Looks really nice, I like the nightvision screenshot on your homepage.
DX8 probably isn't worth it, unless you already use vb's alot.


November 27, 2000, 11:30 AM

I think it will be hard enough to finish the Project, so stick to DX7 and finish this cool looking bastard =)

BTW: when will you release a demo?

Phil Carlisle

November 27, 2000, 12:45 PM

Well, certainly looks fun, a bit spartan, but fun. Where did you get the tank model btw? I'm kinda looking for something similar :))

I'd say get it completed THEN port to DX8, it doesnt look like DX8 is going to offer you much anyway.

Keep up the good work!



November 27, 2000, 12:57 PM

If you are using an independent 3D module system go DX8, otherwise leave it as it is because the DX8 syntax has changed a lot!


November 27, 2000, 01:28 PM

at least from my last tries with DX8
there is very cool support for progressive
meshes - so why don't we go with it....


November 27, 2000, 02:05 PM

That looks very nice. When you finish the game, definitely post an IOTD so we can know to check out the game.

The Wolf

November 27, 2000, 02:20 PM

look real cool, are you using parametric clouds? and is it a skydome, skybox or a plane


November 27, 2000, 02:34 PM

DX8 is slightly faster, and allows index buffers to speed things up. Other good things are vertex shaders and pixel shaders, it looks like you already have some sort of shader system. The 3d part of DX8 is relatively straight-forward to port. Many things are the same except for 7 is replaced with 8. Some functions commands have slightly different arguments and names.

If you use any 2d blitting functions, it is a big pain to port over. Simply loading a bitmap from memory into a texture is much more difficult than it used to be.

I took about a week (only my spare time) to port everything in an engine only project.


November 27, 2000, 05:58 PM

First off - it looks awesome..! :)
Second - it's using a skybox, probably traced with the Lightwave skytracer or terragen or something.
Third - Finish the game, worry about dx8 later - the game is important, 5% render speedup isn't.
(Well, 5% is important, but will never be if you don't finish the game!!!)

fourth - it looks cooooooll!!! :)

Scrambled Monkey

November 27, 2000, 07:36 PM

About Tobias' comment ( cool site Tobias, by the way! ), "unless you already use vb's alot".. If you don't use vb's, then wow you better start :) It's a total waste to not use them, especially since DrawPrimitive() calls in D3D7 are batched up into dynamic vb's in the run time anyways ( sloppily ), so if you just dump your static vert data into static vb's and your dynamic vert data into a dynamic vb you'll get a big time speed increase, especially on TnL cards ( though not just on them ). If you use D3D, use vb's! :) I think that's all there is in D3D8 ( don't quote me on that though, I haven't really tackled much of D3D8 yet ) which is good because it's just better to use them... And now index buffers as well. Oh yeah, cool screen shots Martin, looks pretty damn sweet! That red sky looks awesome.. Dynamic weather?


November 27, 2000, 08:39 PM

That looks really nice! Stick with DX7 because you've gotten so far with it already, plus DX8 has quite a lot of problems already, so I've heard...


November 27, 2000, 10:52 PM

you are right,
but this is


November 28, 2000, 01:41 AM

Game looks great. Stay with DX7, even after your finished. Personally anyways, I don't like some stuff they did with DX8. You can't even compile old stuff directly with the ne SDK like you could with some previous upgrades. Plus, the shaders make it DX8 specific, no more multi-os support or module based rendering device any longer unless you want to make your own shader parser and compiler that only uses what DX8 has to offer, no customization (not easily anyways). This of course is all my own opinion, so judge for yourself. As for the shots, they look great. What kind of why are you using, it looks kinda like either a flat skydome, or that you have cloud layers rather than just a texture on the sky, it looks well done though, however ya did it! What kind of terrain rendering are you using anyways? LOD, Octrees, etcetcetc (soooo many different ways, soooo much aspirin required)

Oscar Rydberg

November 28, 2000, 03:44 AM

Very nice atmosphere You got there, and as many people already did - I'll suggest You to stick with DX7 as well!

Since You probably designed it for DX7, complete it with those specifications. Then, after it's polished and shiny, sit down and think of how You can improve the game (both visually, technically and "speedially") with the new features of DX8.

If You come up with enough ideas/reasons to make a DX8 version worthy, go for it!


November 28, 2000, 05:44 AM

Well.. hmmh.. this sure looks quite nice. I'd suggest, and somebody probably already did that but as we're all repeating each other in this thread i'll do it too, that you would make sure that the actual rendering engine is a separate module. Then, whenever you have time, slowly replace D3D7 code in that rendering engine with D3D8 code, just step by step. But anyway.. finish this game.. it looks nice :)



December 05, 2000, 11:08 AM


This thread contains 17 messages.
Hosting by Solid Eight Studios, maker of PhotoTangler Collage Maker.