LGP Brings Over Original Shadowgrounds Game

[phoronix]

Phoronix: LGP Brings Over Original Shadowgrounds Game

For the better part of a year, LGP was porting Shadowgrounds: Survivor to Linux after in early 2008 we learned that Shadowgrounds and Shadowgrounds: Survivor were coming to Linux (back when they were being ported outside of LGP). However, in late August, Shadowgrounds: Survivor went gold...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NzU0Mg

[whizse]

Nice, there's demos out for both games too.

It doesn't seem to work with Mesa at the moment, not exactly a surprise, but I wonder if LGP is doing any testing on Mesa at all?

[Apopas]

Good, lets try the demos then.

[.CME.]

Well, i tried the demo on debian testing 64bit but:

http://pastebin.org/18783
anybody an idea how to fix that?

[grigi]

You know, I have heard of developers complaining so much about mesa, because it can only accelerate OpenGL 1.4, making the supported set seem archaic. I think that MESA needs to come up-to-scratch again, and will only do so with Gallium.

Until MESA is up-to-date enough, it is really a waste of time testing your game designed with shaders, to run on a shaderless stack

[whizse]

You know, I have heard of developers complaining so much about mesa, because it can only accelerate OpenGL 1.4, making the supported set seem archaic. I think that MESA needs to come up-to-scratch again, and will only do so with Gallium.

Until MESA is up-to-date enough, it is really a waste of time testing your game designed with shaders, to run on a shaderless stack

Mesa supports OpenGL 2.1

[whizse]

Well, i tried the demo on debian testing 64bit but:

http://pastebin.org/18783
anybody an idea how to fix that?

I guess you need ia32-libs-gtk or some other package with ia32 libs.

Anyway, 32bit support on 64bit is really bad in Debian, you're much better off just running a 32bit system until real multi-arch is implemented.

[.CME.]

I guess you need ia32-libs-gtk or some other package with ia32 libs.
[...]

thanks, that worked

[bridgman]

You know, I have heard of developers complaining so much about mesa, because it can only accelerate OpenGL 1.4, making the supported set seem archaic. I think that MESA needs to come up-to-scratch again, and will only do so with Gallium.

Until MESA is up-to-date enough, it is really a waste of time testing your game designed with shaders, to run on a shaderless stack

The level of GL support with mesa depends on the individual driver. The software renderer supports up to GL 2.1, and the Intel driver is at roughly the same level. The ATI drivers support roughly 1.5 with KMS and 1.4 without KMS. Note that shaders have been supported for a long time via the ARB_Vertex_Program and ARB_Fragment_Program extensions... it's the newer GLSL which is not supported on all drivers yet.

[grigi]

I'm running the 2.8 Intel drivers, and I can't get shaders to work at all. This is on an X3100 (G35) CPU. (KMS-enabled) (Mesa 7.5)

It reports OpenGL 1.4, but most of 1.5 features seem to be supported.

My point is, the software renderer works quite well, whereas the accelerated options have all kinds of issues. Until mesa can reach the maturity where we can fire up Doom3, and run the standard OpenGL ARB renderer implementation with only very minor errors, most game developers will probably not go through the effort of testing/bugfixing for MESA drivers.