scott escreveu:
>> Most games just precompute GI. (Usually at too low resolution...)
> 
> This is fine if nothing moves or changes colour in your game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqeXuO2AlEE

http://www.crytek.com/fileadmin/user_upload/inside/presentations/2009/Light_Propagation_Volumes.pdf

A GPU implementation of instant radiosity presented at this year's 
SIGRAPH.  Yeah, objects move around and affect GI.  be very afraid...

Of course, that's only in the triangle mesh-world, not in the world of 
perfect sphere surfaces...

-- 
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> this is an insanely amazing Crysis mod shot too:

What's insane about it?

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
>> this is an insanely amazing Crysis mod shot too:
> 
> What's insane about it?

DOF, sun pouring in from behind high-definition tree foliage, dust from 
the ground, and some glass thing just in front of you showing some 
(fake) refraction and dispersion.

Post a reply to this message

>>> this is an insanely amazing Crysis mod shot too:
>>
>> What's insane about it?
> 
> DOF, sun pouring in from behind high-definition tree foliage, dust from 
> the ground, and some glass thing just in front of you showing some 
> (fake) refraction and dispersion.

...all of which I'm pretty much sure were in the original Crysis game. 
Not saying it isn't impressive, but I'm not sure what this mod adds.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>>> this is an insanely amazing Crysis mod shot too:
>>>
>>> What's insane about it?
>>
>> DOF, sun pouring in from behind high-definition tree foliage, dust 
>> from the ground, and some glass thing just in front of you showing 
>> some (fake) refraction and dispersion.
> 
> ...all of which I'm pretty much sure were in the original Crysis game. 
> Not saying it isn't impressive, but I'm not sure what this mod adds.

oh

still impressive though... :D

BTW, saw the link to instant radiosity in Cryengine 3?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqeXuO2AlEE
http://www.crytek.com/fileadmin/user_upload/inside/presentations/2009/Light_Propagation_Volumes.pdf

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> I liked Crysis more than HL2, so I guess it's up to what you want out of 
> a game.

Same here; I'm about halfway through Ep1, and I just haven't picked it 
up in more than a week.

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

> A GPU implementation of instant radiosity presented at this year's 
> SIGRAPH.  Yeah, objects move around and affect GI.  be very afraid...

Yes I think dynamic GI is getting more and more realistic on the GPU, it 
makes a huge visual difference that is often hard to pin down (ie it just 
"looks better" but it's not massively obvious like adding reflections).

> Of course, that's only in the triangle mesh-world, not in the world of 
> perfect sphere surfaces...

I don't understand the fascination with perfect mathematically described 
surfaces, they are inflexible and slow to render.  If you use sub-divided 
triangle meshes you can make the output perfectly smooth all the time and of 
course do whatever transformations you like very easily by just transforming 
every vertex.  AFAIK all film-quality 3D animation is done with triangle 
mesh based renderers, and we can probably assume they have worked out the 
best way to get photo-realistic quality.  And the huge benefit for games 
(rather than offline rendering) is that it's very simple to reduce the 
triangle count to keep real-time animation.

Post a reply to this message

> this is an insanely amazing Crysis mod shot too:
>
>
http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/1578869/1024/Crysis/crysis64-2009-04-11-19-45-23-44.png

Imagine how long that would take to render in POV, media, DOF, refraction! 
And I don't think the result would be *that* different (maybe the refraction 
would look slightly different, but a normal person probably couldn't tell 
which one was correct, especially during animation).

Post a reply to this message

>> I liked Crysis more than HL2, so I guess it's up to what you want out 
>> of a game.
> 
> Same here; I'm about halfway through Ep1, and I just haven't picked it 
> up in more than a week.

HL2 was technically astonishing. (Remember, at the time the only other 
game I'd played was HL1. Oh, and Quake II.) But it wasn't all that much 
fun to actually play.

HL2:EP1 added even better graphics, but wasn't greatly more fun to play. 
(God I hate zombies!)

HL2:EP2 was graphically better still, but - far more importantly - it 
was *fun*! I actually played it more than once. (Didn't do that with HL2 
or HL2:EP1.) The final battle is absurdly difficult, but other than 
that, it's really rather entertaining.

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:

> I don't understand the fascination with perfect mathematically described 
> surfaces, they are inflexible and slow to render.

Really? I was under the impression that splines can describe any 
possible surface. Triangles, on the other hand, can only give a crude 
approximation to curves.

Post a reply to this message