Conker's Bad Fur Day

[Ruroken]

Ok, well I'm trying to play Conker's Bad Fur Day and the audio is skipping. I'm sure my computers fast enough (Dual P3, 1gig each) just wondering if its a problem with the settings that i could change....

Also, what would be the 'optimal' settings for my computer?

Video Card : NVIDIA GeForce4 MX 420
RAM : 512 (i think. 512 minimum...)

Anything else you want to know just ask. :bouncy:

 

[Iconoclast]

You probably want to use an OpenGL plugin like Glide64 instead, as it's got some fixes for some graphics issues in this game and probably in your case is faster than a Direct3D plugin.

If you don't know how to install Glide64 to your plugins folder, potentially long story kept short, just install Mupen64. Project64 has core slowdowns in some parts of this game, anyway, once compared to 1964 and Mupen64.

 

[Ruroken]

Sorry, I'm just a bit confused.

I should use Mupen64?

And can i copy the plugins from Mupen to PJ64?

 

[CF2]

It will be smoother with Mupen64. Iconoclast is suggesting that you use the Glide64 graphics plugin (included with Mupen64). Unfortunately, Glide64 is difficult to set up, and requires a hefty graphics card to render the shadows in Conker. It probably wouldn't improve your speed either. I would recommend switching to Mupen64, but keeping Jabo's D3D8 plugin (you have to copy it over from the plugin folder of PJ64). One important thing though: your graphics card technically isn't good enough for either of those graphics plugins (you need at least a DirectX 8 capable card). You will probably experience graphical errors (well, more errors than usual ) no matter what emulator you use.

 

[Ruroken]

Alright, thanks.

(just another reason to update my computer =0 )

 

[Clements]

GeForce4 MX does not support OpenGL 1.5, so Hacktarux's wrapper will not work properly - if at all. Other wrappers do not support framebuffer and such.

Jabo's D3D8 won't work properly with a DX7 card either. Using the legacy pipeline may work, it may not.

Jabo's D3D6 1.5.2 is probably the best bet for that card. It works quite well with Conker, but has some problems. It may be your best bet with such an old graphics card.

 

[Legend]

Glide64 is very easy to install. Put the files in the attached "plugin" zip into the plugins folder and put the file in the "Glide3x" zip into the emulator folder. That's it. I think you'll find this to run the best. This is the most recent wrapper (Ziggy's RC1) and the most recent Glide64 (from Dec.). Don't use the ones with Mupen as suggested as they are very old and probably don't have the new FB effects supported or the new speed improvments.

PJ does have some core slowdowns when compared to 1964 or Mupen, but it's ok. Good luck!

EDIT: The wrapper attached should work on all cards and has been recently modified to be more compatable with older cards (1.4 & below). But I'm not sure how the dynamic shadows and stuff are going to run on your card in this game. Give it a try and let us know!

 

[mudlord]

But I'm not sure how the dynamic shadows and stuff are going to run on your card in this game

B/W effects (such as shadows) require pixel shaders in the wrapper....Other FB effects should work regardless.

 

[Ruroken]

Thanks guys

So i should use glide even though i don't have a voodoo card? (I think it said somewhere i need one...)

 

[squall_leonhart]

GeForce4 MX does not support OpenGL 1.5, so Hacktarux's wrapper will not work properly - if at all. Other wrappers do not support framebuffer and such.

Jabo's D3D8 won't work properly with a DX7 card either. Using the legacy pipeline may work, it may not.

Jabo's D3D6 1.5.2 is probably the best bet for that card. It works quite well with Conker, but has some problems. It may be your best bet with such an old graphics card.

dunno what your talking about, but Geforce 2mx supports opengl 1.5.5, so theres no reason that the MX440 doesn't.

 

[Ruroken]

is there some kind of vocabulary i could read? These posts arnt making much sense because of the vocab :bouncy:

 

[Clements]

dunno what your talking about, but Geforce 2mx supports opengl 1.5.5, so theres no reason that the MX440 doesn't.

I'm using OpenGL Extensions viewer and the GeForce4 MX does not support GL_ARB_occlusion_query or GL_EXT_shadow_funcs, and both are required for OpenGL 1.5.

 

[mudlord]

dunno what your talking about, but Geforce 2mx supports opengl 1.5.5, so theres no reason that the MX440 doesn't.

Seems like its only reporting OpenGL ICD version, and not the version actually supported by the card :matrix: ....Also, Clements is right about those 2 OGL extensions. In addition, GLSL support (fragment/pixel shader support) is part of OGL 1.5....which complicates things.

EDIT: Just check compatibility with wrapper on Geforce 4 MX. With glCopyTexImage2D.....no shaders are needed, thus B/W effects work,....thus shadows will work, as shown in pic. Naturally, for FBOs (which can be selected for use now, since there is two different methods of HWFBE implemented in the current wrapper), OGL 1.5 is needed.

 

[squall_leonhart]

actually, mudlord, the program is written to reflect the level of opengl it can use, it must support a certain number of extensions for it to use those levels.

be it as it may, i can play any game which *REQUIRES* opengl 1.5 on a geforce 2mx, with no issues., that goes to say, that Glide64 works fine on a Geforce 4mx, which i have just finished recapping, and installed to replace the geforce 2mx

 

[mudlord]

the program is written to reflect the level of opengl it can use, it must support a certain number of extensions for it to use those levels.

I don't think so....Look at the attached screenshots and you'll notice something....

I bet the coder for that app is using glGetString(GL_VERSION), to return version number, and not using checks that are based around actual extension usage at each tier. If so, then why does my app and that app return exactly the same values? I know for sure I'm not doing tier-based checking, but probing for whether specific extensions return available or not....

 

[squall_leonhart]

I don't think so....Look at the attached screenshots and you'll notice something....

I bet the coder for that app is using glGetString(GL_VERSION), to return version number, and not using checks that are based around actual extension usage at each tier. If so, then why does my app and that app return exactly the same values? I know for sure I'm not doing tier-based checking, but probing for whether specific extensions return available or not....

i doubt it, otherwise it would reflect opengl 2.0.1, as that is the version of the opengl icd in those drivers, the card only supports 80 OGL extensions which gives it the max version of 1.5, if you use Extension limit to limit the amount of extensions available, you can drop it to as low as 1.2.