ZDoom

I'm setting it up now. I'll send you a PM when everything's ready.

Eruanna wrote:I hardly ever use it. I'm still willing to open Teamviewer on it. I went and installed Windows 8.1 on it because I got tired of the needless restrictions vendors put in place for Server versions of Windows.

Tell me what version of MSVC to download and we're in business.

We currently use Visual Studio 2015 for ZDoom. The Community Edition is ok.

Windows 8.1 refuses to even download on this Desktop of mine. An error always comes up and it has to reload and back up.
Alright. As far as I know, I checked three of the 1.x versions and they don't have any issues.
I truly appreciate the help I got.

I hardly ever use it. I'm still willing to open Teamviewer on it. I went and installed Windows 8.1 on it because I got tired of the needless restrictions vendors put in place for Server versions of Windows.

Tell me what version of MSVC to download and we're in business.

Eruanna wrote:I just tested, the 1.10.x builds still work just fine on the ATI I mentioned.

Too bad that I can't do some actual debugging on affected hardware. It wouldn't really surprise me if the reason for the problems is something really simple
Like last time I had the chance where the entire problem was that they implemented a single function incorrectly which could be worked around by calling another function afterward.

WinterSlave wrote:While my desktop runs an AMD A4, my laptop runs an AMD A8.

A series number is indicative of performance as much as your age being indicative of if you could run a marathon. The actual chip you have and its clock speed/number of cores/cache size/features would serve as a much better measurement.

I just tested, the 1.10.x builds still work just fine on the ATI I mentioned.

Sounds about right to me after this whole talk-- that being that the "about" side is what I don't understand. While my desktop runs an AMD A4, my laptop runs an AMD A8.
Yet my desktop runs... faster? Huh. Something feels off about that.

Using the old versions sounds like a plan, honestly.

I did some research about the system in question. It's a 4 year old APU, meaning it's definitely 2 generations old by now. And with AMD's pathetic track record for drivers I'm quite certain that they do not focus on such old hardware and will deprecate it as soon as possible, meaning no more new drivers.

As sad as it is, but it really looks that AMD deemed OpenGL 3.x a lost cause, their more modern GL 4.4 compatible hardware looks better, at least I haven't received any such crippling bug reports for it.
But it's not that bad. You can possibly use the latest GZDoom 1.10 devbuild, which is based on the same ZDoom code but uses an older renderer which is GL 2.x compatible.

WinterSlave wrote:I went into the device manager and it says the processors are up to date.

And on the topic of weird shit: It's not the first time?

No, I am one of the people Graf is talking about.

On my server system, I run an HD4850. It's a great card for its time but it is 6 years old. The latest driver released for it is glitchy as hell in OpenGL. Anything GZDoom 2.x+ will not render properly.

I reported the problem to AMD but they were less than helpful.

On newer ATI's, everything is fine and dandy - they get their driver updates and this particular bug is fixed. But if your ATI is about ~4-5 years old, you're screwed.

I went into the device manager and it says the processors are up to date.

And on the topic of weird shit: It's not the first time?

The hardware should be good enough for GZDoom 2.x. But this is not the first time that some weird shit got reported for some of the more obscure AMD GPUs.

Yep. The major version bump to 2.x is due to a new renderer which requires a higher OpenGL version (and thus newer hardware/drivers).

Alright. That does make a little more sense. As far as my driver goes, I don't believe I've had a driver update in a while. Only last year, I think. Thinking about it, could it be I need to update it? Or something else?
But as for specific GZDoom versions, it seems to happen with all of the 2.x versions.

It doesn't load any of those extensions. That's the one your hardware supports, i.e. what OpenGL returns when I ask it for its supported extensions. GZDoom only uses a tiny number - none of which your hardware supports. And that's what I wanted to know, if it's the modern render path that gets used here. It doesn't. Which also answers the question about '-gl3'.

But what about the driver? Do these problems coincide with a new driver version? Or is it something that happened from a specific GZDoom version onwards?