Perfect timing! >:(

[karx11erx]

Got this from the DXX forums:

Despite reports it doesn't, D2X-XL runs decently on a lot of computers with integrated graphics

Actually, my laptop with an ATI Radeon Xpress 200M is only playable if I run it with a framecap of either 10 or 20 fps (i can't remember) which is only possible in the debug version. This is on lowest everything except resolution (1280x768). It ran fine with medium settings before the menu was redone. The 1.14 betas ran and still run fine. DXX runs perfectly, of course .

What's the difference between not capping the frame rate and capping it? Right, D2X-XL will run faster uncapped. Capping only inserts a loop after each frame where XL idles for a while to keep the frame rate down. A loop during which D2X-XL does nothing - not compute any effects, not determine lighting, nothing. How should that make it work, or work smoother? Posting what you wrote above is about the biggest bullshit I have read in a while. I also didn't say it works on all machines, you goddamn attention craving fool.

Would you try to think before you post something in the future? At least sometimes? Please?

[pokeman7452]

What do you want? A video? That can be done.
I know how framecapping works. Left alone D2X-XL is jumpy, that's what makes it unplayable. It is probably a conflict with a background program. Something in the background (antivirus or something) may be set to change it's priority if it does not get enough processor time. Thus if a program (like D2X-XL) is doing too much, it will freeze for moments to allow whatever it is to work. My point was that my laptop can barely handle the latest version of D2X-XL. I now realize that the rest of the post was not needed in that forum and I apologize.

[Yokelassence]

Its a bit harsh to call Pokeman a troll for that Karx.

He was just posting his own reflections, accurate or not. He was not seeking to get a raise out of your reactions.

But if that's what he intended on doing then he succeeded.

[karx11erx]

Yokelassence,

it's not just a matter of the what, but also of the where and when, as well as the history.

pokeman,

if there would be such a process, and it would get the time it needs with a low framecap in place (meaning it wouldn't need much time), why would it be then that it takes so much more time that D2X-XL doesn't work when there is no framecap?

[Ben K]

The idea of any version of D2 slowing down a system at minimum detail is absurd. There's something wrong with your machine.

[karx11erx]

That's what I think too. There's users with Intel IGPs who can run D2X-XL (with somewhat reduced settings), while others can't. Tells me that something must be wrong with the systems that can't.

[Kaizerwolf]

I agree with Ben. D2X-XL Hardly takes up any resources on my computer, at least it doesn't seem that way to me. I can have iTunes, IE7, MSN Email and Messenger open all at the same time, and D2X-XL still runs smoothly. There ahs got to be something wrong with poke's computer.

[Ben K]

Well, my reasoning is that even if XL was horribly inefficient, it would still run better than that on a Pentium 3 from 10 years ago with no graphics card at all if you had the settings at minimum.

[Pumo]

The same i think.

My PC is not exactly top-end (is a model from end of 2005) and it run D2X-XL pretty well, even with some settings at maximum (not all of course, specially some particle and per-pixer light related). I'm even making Pumo Mines with with smoke, hi-res textyres and the stuff on this computer without problems, and using XL even since some old/early inefficient versions of it (i'm using D2X-XL since the start of 2006).

So it's certainly a problem specific to poke's comp.

[Capt. Blackwood]

The idea of any version of D2 slowing down a system at minimum detail is absurd. There's something wrong with your machine.

seconded