Ah, so there's no difference at all between the exact Glide versions supported by nGlide and dgVoodoo 2, including 3.1 Napalm? That's great, but might I suggest updating your nGlide page to reflect this?Zeus wrote:They are supported. What you see in nGlide description are versions of Glide API main branches. If you're curious about an exact version of a DLL check its properties.
Thanks, I thought that might be the case. Wonder whether Intel's newer Iris Pro graphics are any better at DirectX compatibility?Zeus wrote:The answer to both questions is yes.
Thanks, lots of interesting info in there to go though! Right now I'm interested only in Glide wrappers that work with at least Windows 7, but later on older PCs the abandoned projects should be useful. Speaking of which, The Wrapper Collection Project sounds grand and all, but where's it hosted?!Stiletto wrote:glidenewbie, you may like this post in this thread where I go into some of the differences between Glide wrappers:
http://www.vogons.org/viewtopic.php?f=8 ... 93#p391593
We've been collecting all wrappers (not just Glide) for a while now (wonder when I'll find the time to resume that project again?):
Another thing that struck my eye while scanning the first thread - you linked to an old Glidos page that has version 1.7, whereas the current page has only 1.53b? What's up with that?
Ok... so how do I identify what to use if I have a choice? If I have a game that offers only Glide as an option then that's obvious, but if it offers Glide as well as OpenGL and/or Direct3D, does that mean a Glide wrapper is pointless? Would the game look just as good with OpenGL/Direct3D as with Glide?Rekrul wrote:Glide wrappers are mainly meant for programs that only offered Glide as their only accelerated 3D rendering method, or that didn't work properly with other methods like OpenGL or Direct3D.
So it basically becomes a trial-and-error game (on top of the actual game!) of figuring out whether a particular game looks and works best with Glide or OpenGL or Direct3D? Ugh...Rekrul wrote:For example, When I installed Star Trek: Klingon Honor Guard on my old system, it ran slow and didn't render ladders (I got stuck in a room that was supposed to have a ladder and didn't). I added a Glide wrapper, switched to Glide mode and not only were the ladders there, but the game ran much faster.
Since I'm currently looking at running games on a modern PC with Windows 7 and above, if I'm not mistaken I think I can rule out everything except nGlide, dgVoodoo 2 and Glidos. For older PCs I will certainly keep your recommendations in mind.Rekrul wrote:Forget eVoodoo and psVoodoo. I couldn't get them to work properly at all. dgVoodoo 1.4/1.5 has always worked pretty well for me. I think that's what I used for ST:KHG. Zeckensack's wrapper also works fairly well although it hasn't been updated in a long time.
If there's no advantage with any other DOS games then I will think twice before paying for it.Rekrul wrote:Glidos gives you the ability to add newer textures to Tomb Raider. Beyond that, I don't think it really offers anything more than other wrappers.
Thanks, this is all great stuff and exactly the kind of info I was looking for!Rekrul wrote:Instead, you can just drop the Glide DLL files into the game's directory and it will use them. This also makes it easy to switch Glide wrappers should you want to try out different ones. You just need to replace the existing DLL with the one from the wrapper you want to use.
You can use Universal Extractor to unpack the nGlide setup program and get the individual files. Alternately, you can install nGlide, copy the DLLs and the configuration program to a safe place and then uninstall it.
Yes, I'm aware they are crap. As mentioned above I was only testing nGlide out of curiosity on my cousin's system which doesn't have a graphics card installed, unlike mine. My friend though says that the latest Iris Pro graphics aren't complete trash. Nothing to beat a stand-alone graphics card of course, but should be sufficient to handle old Glide games with nGlide as long as the DirectX 9 compatibility has improved since their older versions.Rekrul wrote:I'll let you in on a little secret: Intel graphics suck. Not only can they not handle a lot of the stuff that a dedicated graphics card can, but they use the main system memory for textures and such.
Just to confirm, I place the Glide DLLs along with DOSBox.exe in its Program Files directory, and not along with the game EXEs in their directories?Rekrul wrote:Which means that using a Glide wrapper for DOSBox is no different than using one for a Windows game. You just drop the DLL files into the DOSBox directory and it uses them.
Understood. Just out of curiosity, do all the Windows Glide games work with the DLLs in their directories (or Windows\System32)? What I'm asking is, didn't any of them have the Glide code "built in"?Rekrul wrote:It should also be noted that not all DOS Glide games will work this way. Some were written with the Glide code "built in" and won't work with the standard DOSBox mode, which passes the calls through to an external library. The Daum SVN version also has built-in Glide emulation, which I think will allow those games to work, however it is much slower than using a Glide wrapper. My 2.4Ghz dual-core system couldn't run Tomb Raider at full speed using the built-in Glide emulation. It runs great with nGlide though.
Speaking of System32, here's a question for Zeus: I seem to remember the nGlide installer copying the DLLs to Windows\System32 on both 32 and 64-bit Windows (sorry if I'm mistaken). Unless they're 64-bit DLLs, shouldn't they be copied to Windows\SysWOW64 on 64-bit Windows? Yeah, I know it sounds weird but apparently that's how it's done.