Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Can’t wait! That will go a long way to reducing all the fiddling currently required. Good work, Ralf.
Got it. Awesome that you are willing to work on/release a profile so quickly, and looking forward to it mature. Thanks.
Thanks Ralf!
I’ll know for myself in a few hours, but how are the new shaders working in 3D?
Fallout 4 is such a disaster in the shader department in G3D that I find it completely unplayable. I’m really worried some of that will carry over to Skyrim SE.
Opinions on lighting aside, what are the referred-to downsides of using VorpX with SE vs the original?
Ralf, why can’t VorpX just attempt geometry 3D in every game like Tridef and every other injection driver? It doesn’t have to work perfectly, but it might, and there’s no harm to having it as an advanced option.
Weird, 3rd time loading did the trick! Everything is in proper 3D now. Thanks!
The only remaining issue is that something with the scale seems to have changed from the prior version? Even jacking up the separation to the max (5.0), the world is still oversized. This wasn’t an issue in previous versions, where 1.2-15 was perfect. It’s also not an issue in other games (just tried Skyrim, for instance).
Yeah, some of the shaders/post-processing in MGE-XE definitely cause the white screen, but that’s not what I’m seeing. I’m seeing a perfectly working image – only it’s in 2D, no matter which 3D mode in VorpX I select. I didn’t change any settings at all in Morrowind except that I upgraded to the latest VorpX.
Glad that you love Morrowind as much as me :) VorpX breathes new life into it for sure.
Thanks for looking into it! I’m one of the many G3D-or-bust folks, so here’s hoping! G3D was so amazing in Morrowind in previous versions.
Ralf, you say you aren’t able to implement TrackIR emulation – is there any reason you couldn’t implement an open-source TrackIR solution such as OpenTrack?
Thanks for responding, Ralf. I’d like to throw my 2c in again by saying that it’s not just DK2 support people are impatient for – it’s all of the small features and everything that has been promised. You’re bundling too many features into each update. From what I’m reading, this update will include DK2 support, DX11 geometry support, lots of setting changes, fixed shaders in Skyrim, an automated licensing solution, and probably more that you haven’t mentioned. That is just NUTS. Hell, I’d be happy with the letterbox rendering changes only, which were supposedly resolved 4 months ago. Why do I have to wait for DK2 support for that fix? You’re trying to be Internet Explorer when you should be Chrome. Change your dev cycle to release small features silently and very often. It minimizes risk for you, keeps your community engaged and happy, and shows that you are constantly working on our investment.
The last update was in November of 2013. I think the OP has every right to ask. This was not a cheap piece of software, and frequent updates were promised outright as part of the purchase. That’s not even mentioning that specifically in these forums and on reddit, updates were promised in March, April, May, June and July. Obviously nothing was delivered.
Ralf, from one developer to another: small, timely updates keep the community interest in your software high. Broken promises, long delays, and vague release dates build resentment. We should all be here to talk about how awesome VorpX is, but instead, it’s been 9 months since we had even a minor update, and we’re all on the spectrum of impatient and pissed off. We’re a community of developers and enthusiasts. Save the polish for a consumer hardware release. Release what you have, whatever state it’s in, and frequently, so we can have fun with it and help you make it better.
Ralf, now that the SDK is out, when can we expect a long-awaited VorpX update? And for DK2 support, are you going to support all of the new SDK features, including:
– Direct display mode
– Timewarp (this would be a godsend for the geometry 3d performance hit!)Thanks for the reply. I just want to add my 2 cents that VorpX is getting a reputation as “not real VR” – or even worse, that such drivers will ALWAYS be worse than native VR, since most people don’t understand the difference in 3D rendering techniques – they just notice that the sense of presence is worse than in the Oculus demos. The plain fact is that stereo perception and sense of presence happens most effectively on near-range scenes, which is where z-buffer rendering just fails miserably. I understand the benefit of the performance gains, and the necessity in games where effect shaders screw up geometry 3d too badly, but I would really like to emphasize the importance of having first-class working geometry 3D above all else, especially in games that fully support it. It’s disappointing to hear that you’ve sacrificed fidelity in geometry 3D to support your z-buffer rendering. I sincerely hope that you reconsider and put in some effort to fixing the scaling issues… they are a dealbreaker for me and many others, and are ruining injection drivers’ reputation within the community. Again, thanks for your reply – I really appreciate your activist approach to support and community outreach, it shows you really care about your product.