Yeah, the new protocol has two-byte angles for client aiming (implied by the "Improved crosshair accuracy" feature) :) 

am i imagining it or are all the rotating objects smoother now? 

Monsters move prefectly smooth now on my Radeon 9000 Pro and Fitz 85.
Couldn't get it with Fitz 80 (really choppy movement at first, then
slowly gets better around the middle of the game). Previously only
Aguirre's GL ran pefectly for me. Now I got all those nice .lit maps
to try out, and still, the best looking animated sky ! 

Which other engines can play back Fitz 0.85/protocol 666 demos? 

None right now. I plan to look at aguirre's convdem tool to see if I could add support for this new protocol, otherwise I may write my own. 

great job!, yeah, there is a big difference between 080 and 085 as said previously :) 

http://www.quaketastic.com/upload/files/screen_shots/fitz85mech.jpg

Thanks !!! 

This does not open Warpb? 

Are you sure you're running Warp with increased heapsize and/or edicts? 

How do I increase edicts? I am running with Heapsize 120000 

in the console, type "max_edicts 2000" or similar. (default is 1024.) 

What's the technical solution used for "gl_flashblend 0" effects? Firing rockets with that setting is a real fps killer on my hardcore intel integrated graphics :( (apart from that FQ runs very well) 

the app keeps local copies of all lightmaps; when dynamic lights touch a surface, the dynamic light is added to the static light levels and the new data is uploaded to the texture using glTexSubImage2D.

Does fitzquake 0.85 actually run slower than earlier fitzquakes, or any other glquake ports with the same setting? 

vanilla Glquake also runs fine so I guess it has to be related to some of the changes you've made.

I'm mostly interested in figuring out the limits of the graphics card (GMA4500mhd) to avoid running into problems with projects of my own. It seems the intel drivers are lagging far behind in OpenGL support compared to DirectX and so far the lesson seems to be to stay away from OpenGL if you want to be safe :| 

well, adding colored light capability in 0.75 probably increased the total amount of upload data somewhat (3 bytes per sample instead of 1) but if you also have the problem in 0.70 i'm not sure what it could be. 

Fitzquake 0.80 had graphics problems on my Intel G945 card, but not 0.85. Aguirre's nehquake works fine also. 

there are a couple of intel-specific fixes in the latest build, for example the "loading" icon isn't drawn because intel doesn't like rendering to the front buffer. Plus, some sort of alt-tab fix. Glad it all works! 

If nothing related was changed between those versions. 

well, in my 0.70 changelist it does say "dynamic lighting has been moderately sped up." So maybe I actually did something to make it slower, instead, at least on some cards. 

and not just slower but awfully slow in this case.. one nice thing I learned by testing all the different fitzquakes was that generally FPS has been improved a lot and in 0.85 and seems to be in the 100-200+ range as long as there's no dynamic lighting but fire a rocket and it can drop as far as into the single digit realm. 

One thing that has bothered me for a while is that While playing Quake with Fitzquake/Aquirre Quake is that you sometimes get lower framrates when there a lot of of light flickering/torches, such as at the beginning of Nightjourney and Five Rivers Land, or Event Horizon. I know that r_flatlightstyles can be used to fix this, but then the flicker lights are gone also. However, If I use an Old version of Darkplaces, such as DPnehahra, DP1.05, or DP1.02, I can get good framerates as well as keep the dynamic light. Does anyone know why DP can do this and Fitzquake/Aguirre Quake cannot? 

i'm not really sure; in general, fitzquake and aguirre quake are much closer to the original glquake in terms of lighting code, and darkplaces is much more modified. As to why old darkplaces does it well and new darkplaces doesn't, that i also don't know.

How does glquake itself compare? And what about older versions of fitzquake? 

To be honest with you, I never noticed such frame rate drop down with my maps (i.e Five Rivers Land / Event Horizon), whatever the engine I used in between aguirRe's GLQuake, and your engine...
Maybe it depends also of the CPU speed ... though.. 

Metlslime:

I used to think that it was the flickering lights itself lead to the framerate drop, but then like I said, old DPs do not have this problem.

For the record, the Old DP did not have problems generating the Doors to Ricky's map either.

I don't have the original GLquake, but Fitzquake 0.80 also had the framerate drop, as did Agirre nehquake and nehwarp

JPL:

I believe the framerate problems were reflected in the FRL and the EH threads by multiple people. I used the old DP to run your maps because I think that dynamic lights adds to the atomsphere of a base map. Hopefully you won't place too many enemies alongside flickering lights in your next map because I know that it is going to break the limit of the old DP. 

I did notice it even on a fast computer. Try to add
-nomtex to the command line, that helped.