home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Toolkit for DOOM
/
DOOMTOOL.ISO
/
news
/
0400
/
0495
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1994-07-30
|
2KB
Path: cdrom.com!barrnet.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!jobone!lynx.unm.edu!mack.einet.com!mack.einet.com!not-for-mail
From: sda@mack.einet.com (Scott Amspoker)
Newsgroups: alt.games.doom
Subject: Re: PC Doom SUCKS compared to this...
Date: 30 Jul 1994 21:24:04 -0600
Organization: Engineering International Inc.
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <31f5gk$rpi@mack.einet.com>
References: <31bb8m$jp3@eis.wfunet.wfu.edu> <31cg6m$ce7@illuminati.io.com> <31cimu$mun@eis.wfunet.wfu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mack.rt66.com
In article <31cimu$mun@eis.wfunet.wfu.edu> ahn@wfu.edu (Dave Ahn) writes:
>hardball@io.com (Hardball) writes:
>> What is 'quadruple pixelling'???...
>Basically, it takes each pixel in a 320x200 screen and doubles, triples
>or quadruples its size (i.e. takes up 2x2 or 3x3 or 4x4) so that the
>screen can be seen on a 1280x1024 workspace. Maybe it's an illusion
>(or maybe it's just the superfast graphics and the 21" trinitron screen),
>but it just looks a lot better than what I remember from playing Doom
>on a PC. It doesn't appear that Id used any pixel averaging or smoothing
>technique, which is disappointing.
I assume that they would adjust their projection calculations so that
textures/sprites mapped their pixels on a 1:1 scale when the object was
further away from the viewer than before. This would simply mean
that distant objects would hold their resolution better. This alone
would a noticable improvement although not as good as antialiasing.
--
Scott Amspoker |
Basis International | [X] None of the above
sda@rt66.com *or* |
scott@basis.com |