selden wrote:Ras',
Some games manage to have large enough budgets and staff to write the code necessary to use each of the competing cards optimally. Unfortunately, Chris is just one person: he doesn't have the time to write all the code needed to compensate for the differences. I can't blane him for concentrating on the hardware he knows best.
I'm not the only one working on Celestia
Anyhow, more of Celestia's graphical features will be viewable on other cards soon . . . I recently checked in some code to begin the migration to use the ARB standardized vertex program extension. But I also love to play with the features of new graphics cards and the GeForceFX can do some amazing things . . . I do try and strike a balance between implementing features that a wide audience can enjoy, and more fun, experimental stuff that only works on the latest hardware.
--Chris
It's useless if I have any desire to play audio.. even browsing the web with it causes choppy music playback. I've traced it back to NVidia's drivers.
I read about a `2k' texure on another post; what is a `2k' texture? I also read about an upper limit on numbers that appear to be texture resolutions (16384x8192) do these numbers represent pixels?--is this a limit above which Celestia behaves abnormally due to the nature of the code or there is a hardware limitation? Or, better yet, what IS the limit of creating high-complexity photorealistic graphics, assuming you have state-of-the-art hardware? Can someone post a link to relevant documentation in an effort for me to stop occupying your valuable web space with my newcomer's questions? 
It's a great conception! Pretty please, with sugar on top, keep maintaining it! 
The difference is enormous! I wonder how deep the rabbit hole goes 
