WTF! 96kb and it looks this good?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Cooljt1

Golden Member
Jan 11, 2002
1,466
0
76
runs fine on my computer which is a 2.4 ghz pentium 4 and a 9800 pro and a gig of ram
 

flexy

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2001
8,464
155
106
Originally posted by: Oscar1613
no one else remembers the 64k demo like this they had a few months/years ago?

Of course i do !!! 64kb demo - every demo lover knows it !!!
 

flexy

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2001
8,464
155
106
tried the game, but its VERY choppy.....9800Pro here w/ XP1900+ and only 384MB of mem...but it runs at least
 

DurocShark

Lifer
Apr 18, 2001
15,708
5
56
BAH. Crashes on launch in my lappy... Though it doesn't meet the requirements. (P3 700 ATI Rage Mobility).

:(
 

biostud

Lifer
Feb 27, 2003
19,945
7,045
136
Originally posted by: JonnyBlaze
i just played it. thats amazing how its such a small file.

try it out

JBlaze

worked fine pretty impressive little FPS
 

sharkeeper

Lifer
Jan 13, 2001
10,886
2
0
tried the game, but its VERY choppy.....9800Pro here w/ XP1900+ and only 384MB of mem...but it runs at least

This requires 512MB of ram to work properly. All game code is rendered and stored in RAM for fast access. Runs fine on our systems here. Another fine work by Chaos and RYB.

Cheers!
 

zimu

Diamond Member
Jun 15, 2001
6,209
0
0
didn't work here; disappears after 20 seconds or so.

740 MB ram with a 64MB DDR graphics card, radeon mobility. more than enough HD space (64 kb? ;) )...

no clue why doesnt' work
 

spunkz

Golden Member
Jul 16, 2003
1,467
0
76
ya wow huge memory hog, but very impressive. works perfect but i have 3.0 ghz 9800 pro 512 ram
 

fs5

Lifer
Jun 10, 2000
11,774
1
0
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
It's slow because the engine sucks.. those graphics aren't that good.

the graphics, more importantly the textures, are rendered on the fly when you start the game. The engine is impressive for 96kb.
 

LiekOMG

Golden Member
Jul 5, 2000
1,362
0
0
Originally posted by: paruhd0x
Someone link a site with more of these.... I tried google and failed :(

I don't believe this is an official intro from Farbrausch, but if you're interested in more stuff like this, its known as "The scene". Try
www.scene.org - click on 'viewing tips' on the top.
Also, www.pouet.net is probably one of the best resources for your demo/intro appetites.


EDIT: Apparantly, this isn't made by Farbbrausch at all. Not sure why its named "the produkkt", since its not made by the same people as the original product.
 

phreaqe

Golden Member
Mar 22, 2004
1,204
3
81
go here to see a few more of these.

the game ran on geforce 3 ti500, but i could not control the person. everything was playing i could see the graphics etc. it just went in a loop after a while turning around
 

WinkOsmosis

Banned
Sep 18, 2002
13,990
1
0
Originally posted by: fivespeed5
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
It's slow because the engine sucks.. those graphics aren't that good.

the graphics, more importantly the textures, are rendered on the fly when you start the game. The engine is impressive for 96kb.

Rendering the textures after you start the game doesn't mean the game has to be slow. It's not rendering as you play.
 

SunnyD

Belgian Waffler
Jan 2, 2001
32,675
146
106
www.neftastic.com
These are so tiny because they generate the texture data mathematically (procedural textures), as well as do some amazing compression on the code and data. I remember reading about the demo scene once especially with .produkt - they were given approximately 72 hours to compete a demo, competely with 3d graphics and sound, using no external 3D API's, with code and data all together under 100K. They barely made it, and they were doing some amazing things like writing their own audio trackers and such using assembler in 100 bytes or so.

The procedural textures are huge when generated, 512x512 and more. Like I said, they're all mathematically generated, which is how they make the final product so small. Goes to show you that a lot can be done using math. However, not everything always looks good.
 

Amorphus

Diamond Member
Mar 31, 2003
5,561
1
0
2ghz Athlon (2400+) with 512mb ram (well, with lots running in the bg), as well as a 9800Pro.

Load time is worse than BF1942, the graphics look a few notches above Quake (smoother and not as pixellated, but still...), and my FPS is horrible. Plus, this thing NEEDS a crosshair. In addition, in the loading movie especially, the colors look washed out. Int he actual game (I only went in a little bit), the color is fine.
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
single-digit FPS...but wow!
It looks about as good as Q3A, and 96k. I wonder if maybe they are doing the texture work real-time? Seems like that could explain the not-too-impressive graphics and slowness. Great tech demo kinda thing, though.
 

Freejack2

Diamond Member
Dec 31, 2000
7,751
8
91
9800 pro
3200 P4 HT
1gig

Ran fine. Got stuck on a ledge when I tried to walk off of it. As a normal game it'd be ok. As a game that fits in 97kb it's very very impressive!