Unreal Tournament 2K3 Gets Software Renderer

Thanks to an anonymous reader for pointing out that the official Unreal Technology page has been updated with a software renderer for Unreal Tournament 2K3. This is an interesting step for those gamers with fast CPUs but inadequate 3D cards. The Pixomatic technology powering it was co-developed by Michael Abrash, John Carmack's right-hand man during the development of Quake, and a famous programmer and writer (at Microsoft and elsewhere) way before then.

Comments

Huh?

[RaboKrabekian]

Who has a fast enough CPU to run this game, but *doesn't* have any kind of 3d accelerated video card. That kind of userbase must be incredibly small. I'm struggling to come up with any kind of user who would want to play this that wouldn't have at LEAST a TNT2 or GeForce. And a GeForce2 can be had for what, $20? Less than the price of the game. Please tell me who this is for.

Of course maybe there's a more important reason for the software renderer, but I'm not going to read the article for fear of being proven wrong.

Re:Huh?

[questionlp]

Where this could come into play are corporate desktops that have 2+ GHz P4 or Celeron's using Intel's Extreme Graphics integrated video (which is a wee bit better than the poor i740/i81x stuff).

Also, look at some of the eMachines and el cheapo systems that have decent processors (1.6+ GHz is fast in most cases) but use integrated graphic too.

Re:Huh?

[TimeTrip]

Maybe for people with pretty powerful laptops, but with a horrible graphics chip. Obviously they're not going to be able to get even basic 640x480 OpenGL quality.. but they at least be able to play it.... hopefully?

Re:Huh?

[Gadzinka]

And a GeForce2 can be had for what, $20? Less than the price of the game. Please tell me who this is for.

For anyone who has video card, not the game card.

My matrox g450 has perfect picture quality in 1600x1200@70Hz, very good Backend Scaller for video and very poor performance in 3D. While it can't compete in 3d speed even with TNT2 it's got better picture quality than several times more expensive GF cards.

If you spend 10+ hrs a day in front of the monitor you do care more about picture quality than 3D speed.

Robert

PS. ATI has much better picture quality than nvidia, but still loses with Matrox.

Useful for conservation

[WolfWithoutAClause]

In 15 years time, who will have a GeForce card of the right vintage anyway?

A software renderer means that the software will still run, whereas the hardware we have right now will be gone.