Comparing the source engine to what the new games nowadays are using, source is shite
If valve is making a new engine then it should be called "Source Elite"
boxes and disagrees in 3...2...1...
Source died.Long live Sauce.
[U]I would like to see it this way:[/U]
When they're done with EP3 which will include good but not major improvements (like in EP2) they should update all the older source games (HL2, CSS, Etc.) with that version of the engine. But when they do I would like it if they keep an "original graphics" setting, for the people that want to play it like they did on the release. Achievements would also be awesome.
For HL3 I would like to see a complete new version of the source engine with major improvements like parallax mapping and way more dynamic non-scripted stuff. The Cryengine 3 is a nice example of neat shit that they could put in.
[QUOTE=ferdam;20497208]
Yeah. I think this is one of the reasons why people don't like BSPs, looks like that it's too heavy and also needs pre rendered shadows :/[/QUOTE]
however, you can do quality ray-tracing and global illumination. doing that real time smoothly is pretty hard. I'll bet that valve will modify the bsp structure again.
[QUOTE=Xelatomis;20494069]My theory: Valve will announce that Ep3 will be released in 2019 on December 21st, 2012.
World proceeds to end.[/QUOTE]
This isn't funny, stop posting it.
hey, i was wondering what is the thing that they do in the GTA series called? You know, it renders a radus around you, and when you move, that render radius changes. That would be useful for HL2.
Because they sure as hell don't render the GTASA game world in that loading time.
I hope hammer stays the same, cause I don't wanna re-learn it.
If it's called "Diamond Source" or "Silver Source" or anything including minerals i win a free game.
[QUOTE=FPChris;20516828]If it's called "Diamond Source" or "Silver Source" or anything including minerals i win a free game.[/QUOTE]
If it's called any variation of the name (Super source, Source 2.0, Source redefined, Sauce) I win peggle deluxe.
[QUOTE=Prism;20490249]I hope so.Source Engine is a bit old now.[/QUOTE]
Update!!!! That is how the graphics roll!
[QUOTE=ZestyLemons;20497340]Imagine if everything was super bright and nothing casted shadows
Now imagine you painted things over with black paint to give the appearance of actual lighting and shadows
Now imagine how now you can't get rid of that paint, ever.
BSP is a clunky, pre-render everything piece of crap, and unoptimized to hell. It needs pre-rendered lighting (HDR too), skyboxs, shadows, and can't support the slightest bit of dynamic lighting that's not a flashlight-effect.[/QUOTE]
I disagree.
The pre-baked lighting is not just some black paint, it is overlayed over the fullbright portion of the map.
So if there is another real-time light source it behaves exactly as it should, the "black paint" is removed from the lit areas.
This is exactly as it should be, it is how shadows behave, why replace a static light with a dynamic one if it's not going to be doing anything?
Dynamic shadows on the other hand, are missing.
If you know your way around the SDK, you can create some impressive stuff with the content that's already there.
I did some tests with maps where I had lifted the limit on projected textures, which is what the flash light is.
(light sources w/ dynamic shadows)
I used only those as light sources except for a few static lights where it really wouldn't have made any difference.
If you can set up triggers to disable the lights when they're not visible you pretty much have a map with dynamic lights.
I added some color correction while I was at it, It looked like something out of Doom 3.
The point I'm trying to make is that you can accomplish a great deal with a few tweaks.
The best solution I feel is a mixture of dynamic shadows along with pre-baked and dynamic lighting.
If all three of these can be used where the dark and light areas of each system can seamlessly blend into each other, that's really all you need.
Oh look it's this thread again.
It always turns into "NEW SAUCE SHOUD HAVE DYNAMIC *insert something here*".
Look guys, yes on a good machine Source game don't look as good as say most of UE3 ones.
But on older/low end machines Source DOES look better. Way better actually.
On my weak laptop I can run L4D2 at 1280*720 on high, yet I struggle with Mass Effect at 640*480. And Valve has made it clear that they want to target this demographic.
Sure .bsp is a pain sometimes, but hey it works and it's simple to use.
[QUOTE=latin_geek;20517097]If it's called any variation of the name (Super source, Source 2.0, Source redefined, Sauce) I win peggle deluxe.[/QUOTE]
if it has a name i win valve complete pack :downs:
If they do use a new engine, it [highlight]MUST[/highlight] still use Havok physics.
Or else I won't buy it.l
With every new game on the source engine released, Valve adds more content to the engine that keeps it on par (for the most part anyway, a physics engine update would be nice) with most other games out there. When you compare HL2 and HL2:EP2 or L4D2, there's a huge graphical difference. And yet they're still the same engine.
I'd hate to see any game from the Half Life series on a new engine, because it just wouldn't feel like Half Life. You can almost always look at a screenshot and say "Yep, that's the source engine". I hate change. :3
[QUOTE=KingKombat;20526346]If they do use a new engine, it [highlight]MUST[/highlight] still use Havok physics.
Or else I won't buy it.l[/QUOTE]That is another thing Source really needs.
A new version of Havok. Havok 2 is really, really outdated.
[QUOTE=Ultragamer05;20527525]That is another thing Source really needs.
A new version of Havok. Havok 2 is really, really outdated.[/QUOTE]
It's based off Havok 2. But most of it was designed by Valve. Their physics engine is still phenomenal compared to some games. It just needs support for destructible environments, maybe soft body physics here and there, particle physics and maybe liquid physics.
We will see eventually. Bad Company uses havok, it would be cool to see it used like it is in a new source game. That would probably require them to get rid of bsp's though, and go the mesh route.
I bet Valve is trying to perfect dynamic water and create puzzles with it and that's whats taking so long.
I think Valve have announced and/or have previous hinted that EP3 will have a new engine
I want a simplified version of Hammer, like Far Cry 2's map editor.
[QUOTE=Dr Bob;20533520]I want a simplified version of Hammer, like Far Cry 2's map editor.[/QUOTE]
Hammer is already really simple.
I wish they made a whole new engine.
I want half-life3, along with TF3.
Why would they want to make a new engine? Why would they want to rewrite millions of lines of code just to add in some new features? They can just extract the redundant parts and slap the new ones in. They've been doing this for ten years or so, and the only people complaining are those that don't know what they are talking about.
Oh, well then.
They better extract the living shit out of redundant parts and make some new cool stuff.
[QUOTE=Kowalski;20533543]Hammer is already really simple.[/QUOTE]
sorry but when it comes to having to optimize things manually (visleafs, hint brushes...), it's a fucking pain in the ass
[QUOTE=Max of S2D;20536133]sorry but when it comes to having to optimize things manually (visleafs, hint brushes...), it's a fucking pain in the ass[/QUOTE]
It's simple enough.
If it's such a burden, encase every part of the map in giant area portals, and set up some triggers to open and close as you move around.
if they make a new engine then it will b half life 3... not episode 3.
It won't be a new engine. They just added a new version of Source with L4D and L4D2, so why would they make a new version of Source right when they have a whole new engine almost ready? (I say almost ready because how much longer can VALVe take? I know about VALVe time, but it doesn't take forever...)
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
