CCS64 Forum
http://www.ccs64.com/forum/

How about a DX8 version of CCS64 3.0 Beta?
http://www.ccs64.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=11
Page 1 of 1

Author:  MethodGit [ Mon Sep 01, 2003 3:59 pm ]
Post subject:  How about a DX8 version of CCS64 3.0 Beta?

Hey, boardmasters! Thought I'd help make the board alive a bit by being the first member to join your somewhat ignored board. :D

I just wanted to ask: why exactly does the new 3.0 beta require DirectX 9 to be installed? Are there any effects which you specifically cannot pull off without this particular version? What about those people who don't have a DX9-compatible motherboard/soundcard/videocard/whatever (I believe I read somewhere that DX9 apparently isn't very useful if your parts aren't compatible with it or something)?

If anyone is still monitoring this board, could they give me their comments on this matter, thank you! :)

Author:  Stuart Toomer [ Mon Sep 01, 2003 11:24 pm ]
Post subject: 

CCS64 V3.0 BETA has been specifically implemented in DirectX 9 for compatibility with Windows XP (which comes pre-installed with DirectX 9) and cannot be coded in a prior DirectX version. There is a DirectX 8 version of CCS64 V2.0 BETA (not CCS64 V3.0 BETA), available on my web-site, which can be downloaded from the "Emulators - Resource Links" page [part of the CCS64 V2.0 BETA (Win-32) Final Package]. CCS64 V2.0 BETA is no longer being developed, since CCS64 V3.0 BETA has now superseded it.

It's better in DirectX 9, since there's lots of fixes in DirectX 9, and it's compatible with Windows XP, which was a big complaint of CCS64 V2.0 BETA users.

Author:  MethodGit [ Thu Sep 04, 2003 11:24 am ]
Post subject: 

Stuart Toomer wrote:
CCS64 V3.0 BETA has been specifically implemented in DirectX 9 for compatibility with Windows XP (which comes pre-installed with DirectX 9) and cannot be coded in a prior DirectX version.


Erm.... do you have a different version of XP to me? That OS actually installs 8.1 by default. :?

Author:  Stuart Toomer [ Thu Sep 04, 2003 6:58 pm ]
Post subject: 

Sorry - I thought that Windows XP came with DirectX 9. Anyway, CCS64 V3.0 BETA is DirectX 9 only, since Hakan has re-implemented the whole graphics engine in Direct3D 9. You need to upgrade to DirectX 9, which is freely available from:
http://www.microsoft.com/directx
Make a System Restore Point first, before you upgrade.

Author:  RFBcsa [ Sun Sep 07, 2003 5:23 pm ]
Post subject: 

Yep, XP comes with DirectX 8.1.

Author:  cadaver [ Mon Sep 15, 2003 11:01 am ]
Post subject: 

Sorry, I still consider the requirement of very latest DX version(s) unintentionally funny :P (how come every emulator didn't need update to DX9 code to work with XP?)

In theory all an emulator needs is to write to bitmap screen, output sound stream, and to read inputs. Can be done with no DX at all :D

Author:  StevenRoy [ Thu Sep 18, 2003 1:30 pm ]
Post subject: 

I would imagine that the main advantage of using DirectX 9 function calls is that Direct3d, if I remember correctly, now provides functions that'll let the running program choose the refresh rate of the monitor. Yay, true 50hz emulation! ...At the cost of compatibility, no doubt.

Author:  Stuart Toomer [ Thu Sep 18, 2003 7:57 pm ]
Post subject: 

Yes, Hakan is using Direct3D 9 to allow window re-sizing and custom re-fresh rates etc. You have to draw the line somewhere and I think Hakan made the right choice. Everybody should be using a DirectX 9 compatible PC nowadays (i.e. not DOS/Win95/WinNT).

Author:  cadaver [ Fri Sep 19, 2003 5:25 pm ]
Post subject: 

Hmm yes, you're probably right about that custom frame rate, though "forcibly" choosing 100Hz (that's supported by default by most graphics drivers) and updating each second frame would have been accessible long before, using DirectDraw 2 or later :)

This window-resize thing I don't understand.. many emulators have done hardware stretch-blits in windowed mode long before. Maybe it's more advanced through Direct3D or something?

I just have the need to be the devil's advocate in this :D Of course I understand people will need newest machines & DirectX9 to enjoy Half Life 2 and such anyway.. but unless CCS64 is updated to hog far more resources it works just fine on very archaic software/hardware (better than VICE, I think)

Author:  Cybernator [ Wed Oct 22, 2003 12:38 pm ]
Post subject: 

I simply can't understand why people are sticking to windowed mode ('cause Stuart said that DX9 was used to allow window resizing). I was impressed by the first DOS version (1.09). Fullscreen display, smooth animation, like a real C64. This immediately made CCS my fave emulator. And what happens now? Windowed mode, Direct3D(!), DX9 compatible card...
Why people complain if CCS doesn't work under XP, but no one complains because there isn't DOS version?

This is just an emulator, right? So why should I care? Simply because it was an awesome masterpiece, and now it's getting worse. Other people may have different opinions, though.

Author:  Stuart Toomer [ Wed Oct 22, 2003 3:34 pm ]
Post subject: 

You can't please everybody, can you?

It's a case of advancing things, as the platform advances. Also, DirectX 9 has bug-fixed functionality over previous DirectX versions, so Hakan went for the most up-to-date DirectX, which is supported by all current flavours of Win-32 (i.e. Win 98SE/ME/2000/XP). DirectX 9 also allows other functionality that previous versions did not that users requested (i.e. a Windowed mode that works properly and custom refresh rates).

I personally think that CCS64 V3.0 BETA is fantastic - it should have been like this ages ago. That is my personal opinion, though.

If people like MS-DOS, then don't upgrade your CCS64. But for the price of a modern computer, it seems daft to stay with MS-DOS.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC + 2 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/