Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
PC Games (Games) Entertainment

Dreadnought Demos Released 192

Posted by ScuttleMonkey from the shiny-bits-of-distraction dept.
John Callaham writes to tell us that Gamecloud is heralding the latest release from Torc Interactive and AMD. The latest demos for the upcoming FPS, Dreadnought, have been released. The first is strictly a gameplay movie while the other gives a comparison between the game running on a 64 bit processor (which it was ultimately designed for) and a 32 bit processor.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dreadnought Demos Released More

Dreadnought Demos Released

Comments Filter:

  • AMD64 (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mysqlrocks ( 783488 ) on Sunday October 02, 2005 @11:59PM (#13701657) Homepage Journal
    It's interesting that AMD is pushing their 64 bit technology with this game. If it weren't for video games then what other reason would we have to continue to build faster computers?

    • Simple (Score:5, Funny)

      by detritus` ( 32392 ) <awitzke AT wesayso DOT org> on Monday October 03, 2005 @12:01AM (#13701666) Homepage Journal
      If it weren't for video games then what other reason would we have to continue to build faster computers?

      one word: porn

      • Re:Simple (Score:5, Funny)

        by iibagod ( 887140 ) on Monday October 03, 2005 @12:15AM (#13701723)
        Thats just faster download speeds and bigger hard drives. My PIII plays all the porn I have.......uh, I mean... I IMAGINE my PIII would play any porn somebody MIGHT want to download.

        • Re:Simple (Score:3, Funny)

          by detritus` ( 32392 )
          Thats just faster download speeds and bigger hard drives. My PIII plays all the porn I have.......uh, I mean... I IMAGINE my PIII would play any porn somebody MIGHT want to download.

          hehe, i bet not the new 1080p true HD videos you can download, my xbox cant do them... ermm i heard you could download them, and that an xbox wouldnt be fast enough, thank goodness for the 360...
          • oh we're a porno connoisseur now? Next you'll be telling me about the well thought out plot lines and the cinematography of that last money shot. :)
      • one word: porn

        That's three words.

      • Mmmm interactive porn.
    • Well yes, gamers are usually the first on the bleeding edge and AMD64 is still considered to be just that. That said, my next box build would be an AMD643000 just for the fact its only 40$ more than the same speed AMDXP processor. I've been wishlisting forever and the AMD64 3000 hasn't budged from 146$ on Newegg. In fact, since theyve inflated shipping costs its pretty much gone up. Is it just cause the processor pricing is tierbased? And thats the lowest that proc will ever be, though it may be replaced
      • And thats the lowest that proc will ever be, though it may be replaced with a slightly better one in that tiers slot?

        Yup, you got it.

        The XP filled in for about two years as AMD's value line. Now that XP production has stopped, AMD has retired the Socket A platform. The Sempron (Athlon 64 on socket 754 with less cache) is the new budget processor.

        The Sempron fills the $140 and less market, and the Athlon 64 socket 939 is priced above that. Due to the fact that AMD holds the performance crown, this will no

    • Re:AMD64 (Score:5, Interesting)

      by tji ( 74570 ) on Monday October 03, 2005 @12:26AM (#13701756)
      HD video.

      MPEG2 is tough on a CPU, but within the capabilities of current processors.

      AVC / H.264 / MPEG4.10 is much harder. Doing 1080p AVC is beyond the capabilities of most current processors, and is certainly not do-able with other stuff going on (e.g. a MythTV PVR, recording a couple HD streams simultaneously, transcoding another, while viewing one.

      AVC, or future codecs, will require either much faster CPUs, hardware acceleration, or both.
      • mpeg2 hasn't been a problem for cpus since the days of the 300mhz chips.

        if you mean high def mpeg2 (1280x720 and above) though, you're right that current cpus can play it more than easily.

        on a 2ghz a64, it doesn't take more than 40% of the cpu time.

        AVC or mpeg4 part 10 is ridiculously overtaxing on cpus. and apple's quicketime7 is horrendously slow at playing them back (on x86 windows). try mplayer or VLC, they're far more smooth and take up a lot less cpu for the same content. though 1080 files won't play
      • I hope you're not making a straight logic implication that a 64bit CPU will solve these problems.

        It won't. All that 64bits has to offer, really, is in memory addressing schemes for things like databases and data intensive apps. Outside of that floating point operations will remain floating point operations, and as such, an FPU for a 64 bit chip can easily be 'mounted' on a 32bit chip as well.

        Unless you're into integer operations, 64bits makes practically no difference - in theory. Now if AMD chose to m

    • Re:AMD64 (Score:5, Funny)

      by parasonic ( 699907 ) on Monday October 03, 2005 @12:31AM (#13701769)
      what other reason would we have to continue to build faster computers?

      Windows Vista

    • Re:AMD64 (Score:3, Informative)

      by Comatose51 ( 687974 )
      Even dual Opterons with 4 GBs of RAM cannot handle some of the Excel spreadsheets used in the financial industry. Many gamers can't afford or are unwilling to shell out $3,000+ every 12-18 months for a workstation but that's pennies for a finance firm.
      • but the good news is that for 1500 bucks you can build a nearly top of the line gaming system.

        and in 2 years when you want to upgrade, for 6-700 bucks you can upgrade to the then high performance system.

        that's one of the reasons i prefer x86 systems. you cannot buy off the shelf mac cpus and motherboards. and you're tied to apple's prices. a good OS doesn't make up for these shortcomings. that and gaming is virtually a windows-only thing.

        "get a console" i hear you say.

        not in good conscience, i reply.

        i canno

        • Re:AMD64 (Score:5, Interesting)

          by lidocaineus ( 661282 ) on Monday October 03, 2005 @02:36AM (#13702112)
          anyway, the PC is far superior to consoles in every way possible save installation and compatibility.

          Really? When was the last time you played a silly game like Mario Kart DD on a 9' (yes, feet, not inches) diagonal HDTV projector with a bunch of your friends on the couch on your PC?

          While you may PREFER PC style gameplay, and the games can be (emphasis on CAN be) technically superior, it doesn't mean one or the other is far superior in general terms. You may consider superior to be high framerates and resolutions. My friends may consider superior to be locally shared gameplay experiences (not over the internet) and ease of use.

          Me? I can appreciate both sides of the coin. The platforms are so different that they can hardly be compared, aside from the crossover titles, which although growing, are not the norm.

          pc games are also cheaper at launch (i just saw a new game, black and white 2 for sale at 37 bucks) whereas to this day halo 1 for the xbox is still 20 bucks. the halo pc version now costs like 10 dollars less than 2 years later whereas it debuted for 35

          Wow, you pick the one of the few titles that Microsoft actually keeps at a high price to milk for all its worth. I rarely buy games that are over $20 for any of the consoles, and most of those are barely 6 months out. It's no different from the PC world. Just take a look at pricing for The Sims. Not the sequel. The original.

          in the end, pc gaming is only a tiny bit more expensive or on par. and a computer is far FAR more useful and versatile. that and for the time being, it is free from Digital Handcuffs and you can truly access and own your property.

          Please do the math for me for this one. Please compare the price of the console to the equivalent hardware you would buy for a PC at that time, because I have a hard time believing any of that. And digital handcuffs? You do realize that almost all PC games have copy protection on them, right? You can break it, but you can do the same thing with consoles too. And when do you not OWN the game? Microsoft can't revoke any license you have for a game. They can't send a signal down to your xbox saying, "HE CAN NO LONGER PLAY THIS GAME ANYMORE".

          a computer is far FAR more useful and versatile.

          Obviously. But as you said, the ones that can play games to the level you describe are far out of reach of most normal consumers, most of whom don't want to play on their computer anyway, and even if they did, they would balk at spending over $500 on a computer these days. A $500 computer isn't going to get you very far in high end gaming unless you start adding some heavy duty stuff to it.

          true... but you don't see companies still making ps1 games or dreamcast games. those systems are still very capable.
          no, to say that gfx aren't important would mean we would still be on a lot older hardware. current consoles can do absolutely everything next gen can do except for a few extra special effects.

          What a joke. Do you know how many people still play dreamcast and ps1 games? Ironically your comment is much more akin to the PC world. Most games are coded for much lower standards than the cutting edge, and have options to turn on the eye candy at higher levels.

          Here's a hint. It MOSTLY all about the gameplay. Take for example in the PC world. What's the most popular in terms of bestselling game ever? Everyone knows the answer, and it has nothing to with graphics. Or PC power. While there will always be graphic whores on the console and PC side, what makes the games worth playing is the gameplay. I have a feeling, however, that you only care about graphics. And just so you know where I am coming from: I have a VERY high end PC and a whole slew of mac, since I work in video. There aren't many games that I have to turn down to 1280x1024, and even then I can run most anything with 16x aniso and 8x aa at 30+FPS. What do I play the most? Pla
      • You'd think with all that money they could write a backend in a native language that communicates with the excel spreadsheet. But then when would you have time to read Slashdot?
      • umm shouldn't anything that large be handled by a REAL database?
      • Even dual Opterons with 4 GBs of RAM cannot handle some of the Excel spreadsheets used in the financial industry.

        I doubt anyone is doing that to poor little excel.
        Remember it can only handle 65k rows... Oh and then it crashes.

        Excel dealing with a 4G spreadsheet is like a squirrel wrestling a SUV...

    • Re:AMD64 (Score:5, Informative)

      by edo-01 ( 241933 ) on Monday October 03, 2005 @01:05AM (#13701860)
      It's interesting that AMD is pushing their 64 bit technology with this game. If it weren't for video games then what other reason would we have to continue to build faster computers?
      I work for a VFX company. Two desks over from me is a top of the line two CPU dual-core AMD with 3 gigs of RAM which we have brought to it's knees, rendering 2k res film frames of a photoreal CGI character. Hair passes, sub-surface scattering, motion blur, skin shaders, glossy reflection raytracing, volumetric dust passes to tie the character into the background plate, the list goes on. Give us any machine, with any amount of RAM and we will bring it to it's knees.

      So, yeah, for the average gamer, office worker etc you're right. Who needs the speed,, but there are plenty of people out there who can't get enough CPU power :)

      • I work for a VFX company.

        I'm guessing you don't do any writing for them, given "you're" inability to tell the difference between "its" and "it's."

        /fscking kids and "they're" shit grammar.
        • It's mildly annoying, that at 32 I still find I sometimes get my contractions mixed up. Especially if I am say, posting on slashdot in a hurry on my way out the door to lunch.

          Seeing as you're keeping score, I also used the expression "to it's(sic) knees" twice in one paragraph as well. Oh, plus there were two commas after the word speed.

      • I suggest you go and pick up NVIDIA Gelato.

        Using a general purpose CPU for this kind of work is like using your hands to remove a rusty bolt, just not the right way (tm).

        We are finding ORDERS of magnitude less rendering time using such technology, and much lower equipment costs.
        • much lower equipment costs.

          Eh?

          Scenario 1:

          Each farm node is a dual processor machine with a crap video card and 2G of RAM, and your 3D app either has unlimited netrendering (no license cost) or you've got a rendernode license on it for your current renderer ($800-$5000 per machine)

          Scenario 2:

          Each farm node is a dual processor machine with a horribly expensive Quadro FX video card and 2G of RAM, and you have to buy a new Gelato license for each node ($1500, or $3000 for interactive seats with Sorbetto), a

          • Essentially, you are pointing out your knowledge of the subject to someone else who posted with absolutely no knowledge of the subject at all. Talk about a typical Slashdot posting thread. It is unfortunate, isn't it?
          • I do, but maybe that's just because I own a few shares of NVDA.
          • For god sake consider thinking before you open your moth next time.

            Think for a moment about the fact that a Gelato rendering node is MANY times faster than CPU rendering, therefore either saving you significant amounts of waiting time (which is expensive, unless you think people work for free), or saving you from having to have many many more nodes, which is also a significant cost in equipment, licenses, and support.

            IF you are doing your rendering on a single node, then it is quite obvious that you are not
      • Just a genuine question - have you guys looked at the Orion 96 processor system? Is that the type of thing this computer was designed for, or is it still underpowered for your needs?

        -Nano. (not affiliated with orion in any way, shape or form)

    • Re:AMD64 (Score:3, Interesting)

      by sakti ( 16411 )
      A few off the top of my head...

      • servers - many server applications are very CPU intensive.
      • graphics rendering - ray-tracing, render farms, etc.
      • programming - faster CPU mean faster compile times and more time for programming.
      • gentoo users - heh.
    • Any visual difference you see in a game between an AMD64 processor and a 32-bit processor is a scam; people should boycott any game that includes content that loads exclusively on 64-bit processors.

      The reality is that 64-bit processors simply run games slightly faster than the same processor in 32-bit mode. This minor speed boost DOES NOT JUSTIFY higher detail via more doodads, higher poly models, higher res textures, more shaders, or anything else.

      This is just an extremely shady promotion, where most gamer
    • I still can't get over the fact that computers need more than 640kb of RAM... who could ever have predicted that?

  • 64 bit _Really_ necessary? (Score:5, Informative)

    by gl4ss ( 559668 ) on Monday October 03, 2005 @12:01AM (#13701670) Homepage Journal
    ******************
    # uncompressed normal maps allowing for higher texture quality and greater detail
    # significantly higher number of particle effects (e.g. more flames, more steam, more smoke, etc.)
    # persistent decals (e.g. bullet holes stay on walls and don't fade away over time as in 32-bit)
    # post-processing effects (e.g. screen glows)
    # more pixel shader instructions (the adrenaline vision mode is built upon and replaces the base lighting shader to produce the effect)
    *****************
    there's the rundown on the 32bit vs 64 bit changes.

    now, call me an idiot if you will, but none of those really smell like something they couldn't have done in 32 bit - which makes the 64bit vs. 32bit comparision TOTALLY FRIGGIN USELESS unless you're a phb or something. mostly it just seems like they assume 64 bit system to have more memory and a faster graphics card tied to it.

    • Re:64 bit _Really_ necessary? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Suddenly_Dead ( 656421 ) on Monday October 03, 2005 @12:16AM (#13701726)
      Compare this: 32-bit image [filecloud.com] vs. 64-bit image [filecloud.com].

      Seriously, this looks like a pile of BS. Unless it was running on full CPU (which is stupid and not sensible for real-world situations), the differences between those screenshots should be handled almost entirely on the GPU. The difference between 32 and 64 bit shouldn't really affect a lighting effect like that. As for the texture resolution, that's pretty much memory bound...

      (Not to mention that the graphics in these screenshots are not "advanced" by today's standards. It's pretty ugly.)

    • 64 bit... Uhuh... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by modecx ( 130548 ) on Monday October 03, 2005 @12:24AM (#13701748)
      All of what they say pretty much pertains only to the graphics card's capabilities.

      No compression for textures? Cards with 512MB are the hot things now, and there's not really a good use for it. With 32 bit addressing, we can address 4GB of memory. That's what? 8 times what's currently available on anything less than a ginormous SGI simulation center? Yeah. 64 bit doesn't help us there, not even in the long term.

      There's not a graphics card alive that's going to need 64 bit addressing to render literally billions of particles, and there won't be for at least 10 years, barring some extreme advances, or the use of alien technology (teehee). Same with decals, even if you "only" had memory to store the location of 512 million of 'em, there's no way the system will handle displaying even a few thousand all at once.

      Glows? Unless they need 64 precision math done on the CPU (which they don't), yeah, non-issue. Consumer GPUs are limited to what? 24 bit plus alpha? Same for pixel shaders, this has nothing to do with the CPU in almost all instances.

      So yeah, for games, as with most general purpose computing, this is pretty much useless. What's really sad is that they've rallied around arguments for their 64 bit push that are essentially limited by the decidedly non-64 bit GPU. Brilliant.

      • Re: (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Sycraft-fu ( 314770 ) on Monday October 03, 2005 @03:12AM (#13702201)
        Glows actually can be helped by 64+ bits, but not CPU bits. All of the latest generation of GPUs, and some previous (basically all DirectX 9 GPUs) support colour depths greater than 32-bit. A 32-bit colour depth is 8 bits per colour, and 8 bits for transparancy. Given that 8-bits per channel is the normal output, it was generally thought to be enough. However anyone who's worked with shaders will tell you that small errors start to add up, and you can get nasty results. So new GPUs support 64-bit and 128-bit floating point colour.

        Now because of the extra bits, and because it's a FP representation, you get much better colour, highlights, and shadows. Though the output is ultimately the same resolution, you don't have the clipping problems you used to, and you don't have errors that add up to incorrect colours.

        Both nVidia and ATi have a bunch of demos that'll show you this, if you like. Any Radeon 9 or X series or GeForce 6 or 7 series will handle it.

        However none of this is relivant to a 64-bit CPU. This can, and does work great on a 32-bit CPU. It's all internal to the GPU. Even if the CPU needed to do some work as 64-bit CPU would be irrelivant as only the integer unit is increased in size. FP units have been larger than 32-bits for a long time, current CPUs generally can handle up to 128-bit FP numbers, depending on what you are doing.

        So you are correct, all fluff as far as the CPU is concerned.
      • > With 32 bit addressing, we can address 4GB of memory. That's what? 8 times what's currently available on anything less than a ginormous SGI simulation center? Yeah. 64 bit doesn't help us there, not even in the long term.

        Technically, yes 32 bits permits an up to 4GB address space.
        The problems comes when you throw in memory mapping, virtual memory and protected memory.
        For these to work efficiently you need to have an addresse space which is way much bigger than available physical memory.

        Quick fast expla
    • 32-bit Windows splits the virtual address space in half, 2 GB for the OS and 2 GB for the app.

      Then it splits that 2 GB again, not in the most optimum fashion, for: code, libraries, stack, read-only data, heap, read-write data, etc.

      What you have left is probably less than 1 GB unless you juggle things around with some horribly complex hack that isn't likely to work with the next Windows release.

      I have no doubt that a game could use more than 1 GB of data. Well, there you go. The 32-bit game will need to comp
  • FTA ... You play a Special Forces operative sent to investigate, and if necessary, destroy the research results and scuttle the Kirov.

    So blowing away bots at will isn't the aim of this game ... I find that a bit hard to believe.

    This extract makes it sound like Sherlock Holmes :)

    • Re:FPS without destruction? (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Breaking the plot summary up...
       
      The Intro: You play a Special Forces operative sent to investigate, and if necessary...
       
      The Game: ...destroy the research results and scuttle the Kirov.
  • Images down already? Shame the servers don't run on that optimized 64-bit super-engine too.
  • I really want to sign up for that website really badly to see a video game for which I am unable to find screenshots or any information whatsoever.
  • How is this in any way original to countless other FPS games?
    • Yes, the Game Industry Bullshit Index has gone straight to the top, i don't know if it's me reaching 30 years or eveyone feels the same, but i haven't seen an innovative video game concept for the last 2 years, every new game that they promote hard (FarCry, Doom3 etc etc) they are seem to be made to sell you ultra expensive 31337 H4x0R cutting edge (insert your favourite video card and/or CPU hardware maker here) hardware needed to play it. In fact like someone said in this thread all those cool effects ca
    • It manages to get Slashdot to advertise the release of a demo.

      Admittedly though, no FPS in history has ever released a demo before, so this is pretty important news. ;)
  • I'm glad to see theyre marketing to all platforms, offering their gameplay files in .exe format.
  • This is an advertisement to try and get filecloud sign-ups. Take it down.

  • Hopefully not this [3dlabs.com].

    -:sigma.SB

  • oh slashdot, you card (Score:4, Informative)

    by mkavanagh2 ( 776662 ) on Monday October 03, 2005 @12:16AM (#13701724)
    This isn't an upcoming FPS. This is a tech demo for Torc's game engine and AMD's AWESOME64(TM) processors.
    • That used to be a tech demo and turned into a full-fledged game/series.
    • Why the sarcasm? The AMD64 IS an awesome processor and the dual-core units are even more impressive. If you have never really used an AMD64 processor, you wouldn't have the first clue why they better, but that is your fault and not the fault of AMD.

      Even in this article alone, there are a few posts referring to the superiority of AMD64 processors in production environments: Slashdot [slashdot.org]
  • SThis is just like the "Pixel Shader 3.0" fakery that happened with Far Cry.

    The only difference between the 32-bit and 64-bit versions is that they have disabled a lot of features on the 32-bit version. There is no reason why they could not look the same.

    Pure marketing BS.
  • or do the 32-bit screenshots actually look better than the 64-bit ones?

    I am referring to these screenshots:
    http://amd64downloads.filecloud.com/dreadnought.as p [filecloud.com]

  • Dreadnought = Nuke Missle Cruiser?! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by xxxJonBoyxxx ( 565205 ) on Monday October 03, 2005 @01:09AM (#13701873)

    The Admiral Ushakov is an old Soviet Kirov class nuclear missile cruiser which disappeared in the Barents sea 4 years ago and was believed lost at sea with all hands. It reappeared off the coast of Iceland recently and is believed to have fallen into terrorist hands and is being used to carry out bio-weapon research.

    1) Fer crying out loud. A "dreadnought" used to mean a kick-ass battleship, not some whiny little cruiser.

    2) If we can't find one fucking cruiser for 4 years with the satellites we have now, China deserves to kick our ass. (Or, just look it up on Google Earth.)

    3) OK, if a cruiser DID fall into terrorist hands and is parked out in the middle of nowhere: send a sub, sink the boat and move on to the next problem. (Unless you've seen one too many Steven Seagal movie, I guess...)

    4) Enough, already, my brain hurts!

  • LOL (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    First of all, I don't see how this belongs on the front page at all; perhaps in the Games section, but not on the front page. It's just a technology demo put out by some company working on some game engine. Maybe if it was the next Half-Life, Doom, or Quake engine, but not some no-name game.

    Secondly, it is a big fat load of bullshit. Others have pointed out the obvious.

    Thirdly, why the fuck is AMD teaming with these people? Hmm. If you were betting your company on the jump to 64-bit, what would you be
  • Why oh why do people post compressed videos as recompressed files in proprietary platform-specific .exe files?

  • FireFox AdBlock extension... (Score:4, Funny)

    by J_Omega ( 709711 ) on Monday October 03, 2005 @03:15AM (#13702209)
    doesn't seem to have removed this. Time to update my filter list!

  • .exe is a movie container format? (Score:4, Informative)

    by aarku ( 151823 ) on Monday October 03, 2005 @03:40AM (#13702278) Journal
    No, I didn't think so. Does anyone even use Windows around here? Right, so why post links to .exe movies?
  • ...that this isn't just like Battlecruiser [3000ad.com] only bigger...

    Chris Mattern

Slashdot Top Deals

Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.

Close