Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

evildragon

Members
  • Content count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About evildragon

  • Rank
    Warming Up
  1. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    I'm not having any video problems.. Did you quote the wrong person?
  2. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    Oh it's disabled in the setup program? Ok, when I get home later I'll check it...
  3. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    Ok. Page 19 addresses why I have no music. Ironically it was me who brought it up.
  4. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    fwiw, i do have fully working sound.. midi is the only thing that doesn't work.. but perhaps it's because my Mac uses a PowerPC processor, and not an X86?
  5. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    Don't know, you'd have to ask the developer of Chocolate Doom. All the Doom engines I used that had music on my Mac, used QuickTime for it's MIDI use..
  6. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    I really don't know how an HD partition can mess up MIDI, but I don't know SDL very well. My problem is completely different than yours. I don't use Windows at all.
  7. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    What happens if you turn off "Correct Aspect Ratio"? Btw, Macs don't have the same MIDI engine as PC's, so Doom on a Mac lacks MIDI. Though DoomsDay does have music..
  8. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    Glad it got cleared up. Sorry if I seemed rude, having a rough day. I've been lovin chocolate doom since I got help in this very thread on the last page to get it compiled. Though without music for me..
  9. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    Here's how it works. Set the video mode like that. Then, the output is this double scanned 640x400 image. NO DIFFERENT than real 320x200 visually because the CRT gets the same sync either way. EDIT: Note that most Macintoshes only go as low as 480 lines, so 320x200 and 640x400 run in plain old 640x480 with letterboxing. (no matter what the aspect setting is).
  10. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    Probably more like never put the strings in the INF file. I hack my Nvidia drivers with custom resolutions right from the INF file. (or atleast used to some time ago). Thing is, the video card supports it, because DOS runs the DAC in the same 400 line mode as 320x200. So, it "can" do it.
  11. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    Your not understanding me. Chocolate doom will double scan 320x200 video in 640x400, so it will look EXACTLY the same. so it already handles your "emulate". Being old computers VGA (MCGA) 320x200 video was outputted as 640x400 from the DAC anyway, there's NO change. EDIT: Simply put, Chocolate Doom ALWAYS renders in 320x200...
  12. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    Chocolate-Doom does have 640x400, and PS, that's the far better choice than 640x480.
  13. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    Considering that the VGA monitors can't actually scan as low as 200 lines (lowest is actually 350 lines), and since 320x200 gets double scanned to 640x400, if you can do 640x400, just chose that. Even though in the frame buffer it's a different resolution, to the monitor, it's exactly the same. I got the specifics btw as to why it's double scanned, if you'd like to know. Got in contact with someone who programmed for PC's back in the days..
  14. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    Different boot ROMs, different video ROMs to interface them. You can't slap a PC video card in a PowerPC Mac, but you could on an Intel Mac. (haven't tested this, but intel Macs have EFI, and now have AT BIOS emulators, so it "should" work.. PowerPC macs have OpenFirmware, which a PC video card can't interface with) I haven't found the cause for the lack of low resolution modes, but I seriously suspect it has to do with the ROMs either on the boot ROM, or the video ROM. Nothing a hack couldn't fix. ;) EDIT: Oh, and operating system. (for mac os x, video modes are selected by monitors EDID. windows it's selected by video card driver)
  15. evildragon

    Chocolate Doom

    I can also explain this. A VGA monitor can not actually display 200 lines or 240 lines of resolution. So, the VGA card duplicates each line (double scanned), and 200 lines becomes 400 lines, and 240 lines becomes 480 lines. An old VGA monitor like the IBM 8512, will even have 3 POTs, one called 350 line, 400 line, and the other 480... Here's more information on how VGA works: http://www.stanford.edu/class/cs140/projects/pintos/specs/freevga/vga/crtcreg.htm http://www.kryslix.com/nsfaq/Q.7.html (I have a feeling Fraggle knows all this though ;) ) Thing is though, those monitors "guess" what the horizontal pixels are, because by rules of a raster CRT, you can put as many horizontal pixels as you want, but all the monitor looks for is how many lines.. So if it sees 400 visible lines, it assumes it's DOS 80x25, which is 400 lines with 720 horizontal pixels (if you edited the text characters to sprites or something.. the demo "Yo!" does this). Thing is, 320x200 uses this same exact mode on the DAC. Other "gueses" the CRT make, are if 600 lines, it must be 800x600, if 768 lines, it must be 1024x768. LCD's on the other hand, are a little smarter, and will tell you exactly what pixels are visible, as they have to lock on the phase and clock. BUT, on a Macintosh, 400 line modes do NOT exist, and won't exist. It is my guess that it's Apples way of making their Macs stand out from PC's, by removing the critical 400 line mode that was used for both text mode, and 320x200 modes. However, Intel Macs regain these modes, but PowerPC Macs don't have them even, and enabling it produces a Kernel Panic at boot.
×