I'm still trying to decide what to think about that project. My attitude keeps flipping from "it'll be a disaster", to "they might be on to something", changing from one day to the next.
OpenAL vendor string: OpenAL Community
OpenAL renderer string: OpenAL Soft
OpenAL version string: 1.1 ALSOFT 1.16.0
OpenAL extensions:
AL_EXT_ALAW, AL_EXT_DOUBLE, AL_EXT_EXPONENT_DISTANCE, AL_EXT_FLOAT32,
AL_EXT_IMA4, AL_EXT_LINEAR_DISTANCE, AL_EXT_MCFORMATS, AL_EXT_MULAW,
AL_EXT_MULAW_MCFORMATS, AL_EXT_OFFSET, AL_EXT_source_distance_model,
AL_LOKI_quadriphonic, AL_SOFT_block_alignment, AL_SOFT_buffer_samples,
AL_SOFT_buffer_sub_data, AL_SOFT_deferred_updates, AL_SOFT_direct_channels,
AL_SOFT_loop_points, AL_SOFT_MSADPCM, AL_SOFT_source_latency,
AL_SOFT_source_length
EFX version: 1.0
Max auxiliary sends: 4
Supported filters:
Low-pass, High-pass, Band-pass
Supported effects:
EAX Reverb, Reverb, Chorus, Distortion, Echo, Flanger, Ring Modulator,
Compressor, Equalizer, Dedicated Dialog, Dedicated LFE
OpenAL vendor string: Creative Labs Inc.
OpenAL renderer string: Software
OpenAL version string: 1.1
OpenAL extensions:
EAX, EAX2.0, EAX3.0, EAX4.0, EAX5.0, EAX3.0EMULATED, EAX4.0EMULATED,
AL_EXT_OFFSET, AL_EXT_LINEAR_DISTANCE, AL_EXT_EXPONENT_DISTANCE
EFX version: 1.0
Max auxiliary sends: 1
Supported filters:
!!! none !!!
Supported effects:
!!! none !!!
... however it seems to prefer the OpenAL32.dll in UT2004/System to the OpenAL32.dll in sysWOW64 (in short, it chooses OpenAL32.dll in UT2004/System > OpenAL32.dll in sysWOW64 > DefOpenAL32.dll in in UT2004/System, unless UseDefaultDriver=True, in which case it uses the latter).