Got this from the latest PC Gamer. It's a 96k downloadable FPS that's suposed to be pretty cool.
You need a a 1.5ghz, 512mb Ram and a GeForce 4 to run it. I'm going to try it when I get home.
www.theprodukkt.com or if you get the magazine with the demo disc, it's supposed to be on there (I get the digital online version).
If anyone gets it to run, post the details!
screenshot:
http://kk.kema.at/files/gfx/full4.jpg
SmackDaddy
07-20-04, 09:20 PM
Wow...it does indeed work. Of course it looks like crap for me since I'm using a GeForce3ti. But it does run. Pretty cool technology.
Abranut
07-20-04, 10:01 PM
Pretty damn_impressive.
Dan Average
07-20-04, 10:46 PM
Is that what they give for the minimum requirements? Just a warning, folks, this thing chugs on a 2gHz with a gig of RAM. It's a neat gimmick but there's a reason why this sort of thing (procedurally generated textures, mainly, although there's some other tricks in there) isn't done more often -- check out the task manager while it's running if you don't believe me (it uses about 300 MB of RAM). The binary size is impressively tiny, but it uses so many DirectX features that the actual application is many orders of magnitude larger and with no real benefit other than the ability to say "hey look at this neat program, it's only 96k!!!!!!!!" Since these guys are from the demo scene rather than the games scene that's not surprising but don't expect this sort of thing to make its way to commercial games anytime soon.
Trigger
07-20-04, 10:50 PM
I messed around with it a month or two ago... it was kinda buggy and it didn't look as good as the screenshots. I have a 2.4ghz and a GF4 and half a gig of ram.
Abranut
07-21-04, 05:26 AM
Originally posted by Dan Average
Is that what they give for the minimum requirements? Just a warning, folks, this thing chugs on a 2gHz with a gig of RAM. It's a neat gimmick but there's a reason why this sort of thing (procedurally generated textures, mainly, although there's some other tricks in there) isn't done more often -- check out the task manager while it's running if you don't believe me (it uses about 300 MB of RAM). The binary size is impressively tiny, but it uses so many DirectX features that the actual application is many orders of magnitude larger and with no real benefit other than the ability to say "hey look at this neat program, it's only 96k!!!!!!!!" Since these guys are from the demo scene rather than the games scene that's not surprising but don't expect this sort of thing to make its way to commercial games anytime soon.
I was wondering why my machine was so sluggish when I was shutting this game down. I have a Radeon 9700 p4 2.4g and 512 MB Ram. This game brought my machine to a crawl.
SmackDaddy
07-21-04, 08:54 AM
It would be intersting to see if they could come up with a compromise. Somwhere along the lines of reducing system demands at the cost of a slightly larger file size.
I mean, games are really getting out of hand with their size. Doom3 is 4 discs long.
The technology isn't there yet, but it's a pretty interesting concept.
sfsdfd
07-21-04, 10:27 AM
Originally posted by Dan Average
The binary size is impressively tiny, but it uses so many DirectX features that the actual application is many orders of magnitude larger and with no real benefit other than the ability to say "hey look at this neat program, it's only 96k!!!!!!!!"
And that's exactly why this entry completely misses the spirit of the "tightest code" running competition. It's hardly awe-inspiring that you can code up a 12-byte 3D engine, when it's really just a call to fire up DirectX.
Buy: