would this be a good suggestion for the EP3 engine? - Developers

displacements, instead of becoming hollow, should stay solid. and displacing them would cause changes to the brush as a whole.

You clearly don't understand how displacements work do you? In additionhow that would help anyone anyways?

water displacements to add realism to a river.

Water is generally flat due to surface tension...

rapids....

Would look like a load of fail with a displacement.

Water rapids would be a lot better if they had some sort of water dynamics where we could add waves and current.

The Crytek engine utilizes waves and current, if I'm not mistaken.

I don't see any practical use for rapids, especially in source engine, any riding in a boat will get you thrown off.

it takes massive super computers (IBM BlueGene/L) just to simulate wind and it's not completely realistic. The world will never be simulated in game engines accurately until maybe 20010. Yes, that is the correct amount of zeros.

[QUOTE=nicktelli;16809569]it takes massive super computers (IBM BlueGene/L) just to simulate wind and it's not completely realistic. The world will never be simulated in game engines accurately until maybe 20010. Yes, that is the correct amount of zeros.[/QUOTE] Well, if we continue our current technological advances we will probably be able to do so in around the 2100's.

[QUOTE=nicktelli;16809569]it takes massive super computers (IBM BlueGene/L) just to simulate wind and it's not completely realistic. The world will never be simulated in game engines accurately until maybe 20010. Yes, that is the correct amount of zeros.[/QUOTE] Look at hydrophobia made by blade interactive. Real Time water with waves and buoyancy physics, to be released this year. Displacements are meant to be a one sided plane, they are also not meant to be tied to water. Displacements are for terrain. If would want anything else, make the particle and a texture for it.

[QUOTE=nicktelli;16809569]it takes massive super computers (IBM BlueGene/L) just to simulate wind and it's not completely realistic. The world will never be simulated in game engines accurately until maybe 20010. Yes, that is the correct amount of zeros.[/QUOTE] well, if you want to calculate the location of every water molecule, then yes, maybe by 20010. That doesn't mean you can't fake it. Take a series of vertices for water, a water mesh. You apply a directional force (towards the shore maybe?) and tell the vertices to be displaced based on the force, apply smoothing groups to the mesh, and you should be good to go (at least for a bare bones water simulation, you can then take the velocity of the vertex and tell the vertices near it to move in a gradually slower fashion to create waves and such).

the water would most likely just be particles with a movement which can be done now, or if water physics comes to play in the future.

[QUOTE=nicktelli;16809569]it takes massive super computers (IBM BlueGene/L) just to simulate wind and it's not completely realistic. The world will never be simulated in game engines accurately until maybe 20010. Yes, that is the correct amount of zeros.[/QUOTE] You are wrong, we will soon have raytracking, and it will be much more realistic. And simulations of water, that you can but inside the barrel and then throw it are for normal pcs, ATI and Nvidia have their programs for it where you can simulate it. And when you play Crysis... It's fun to race with boats on waves.

i like how the first part of this thread went like this made me lol [b]ALT of Permaban[/b]: what about this? [b]Lord Ned[/b]: nope [b]ALT of Permaban[/b]: then this? [b]Lord Ned[/b] no [b]ALT of Permaban[/b]: this? [b]Lord Ned[/b] no *sigh* funny ^^

If what you are saying is: "We should have geomod" then I fully agree on all points.

[QUOTE=VG Cats;16815536]i like how the first part of this thread went like this made me lol [b]ALT of Permaban[/b]: what about this? [b]Lord Ned[/b]: nope [b]ALT of Permaban[/b]: then this? [b]Lord Ned[/b] no [b]ALT of Permaban[/b]: this? [b]Lord Ned[/b] no *sigh* funny ^^[/QUOTE] Thats most of perabanns threads.

While we're at it, why not throw in some dynamic water? :downs:

it would be nice if there where some effects where the water hits land just some sprites to make it look like water movement. Something like you get in age of mythology. That would be cool.

[QUOTE=IronPhoenix;16831023]Thats most of perabanns threads.[/QUOTE] And most of the one's I reply to.

you people. i was just suggesting solid displacements. god.

[QUOTE=ALT of Permaban;16850035]you people. i was just suggesting solid displacements. god.[/QUOTE] as far as i know displacements are solid o.0

no, there a flat plane. i want them solid so i can make a water displacement.

[QUOTE=ALT of Permaban;16850157]no, there a flat plane. i want them solid so i can make a water displacement.[/QUOTE] Oh i see what you're saying, this would make one of the maps i had to improvise on SO MUCH BETTER, would make it lovable. xD

spline based water would be kinda nice...so you could have water surface that moves around corners and stuff for a river

Just use a moving water texture with some particle effects. Ya faggots!

Spline based water is retarded in an engine like Source. Same with Spline roads/etc.

[QUOTE=snuwoods;16807811]The Crytek engine utilizes waves and current, if I'm not mistaken.[/QUOTE] A lot of engines use dynamic water today, so why doesn't Valve just swallow their pride and ask for help from someone? :P

afaik water that is not completely horizontal causes reflective issues. If they managed to revamp this part of the code, then I would love to see geometry based water, as opposed to the current planar water.