Source 2 believed to be in development - Games

[QUOTE=glitchvid;39954039]Currently FB3 is probably the best engine out there for this: but even that isn't fully real time, the AO and overall lighting schemes are pre-computed (and it takes a shitton of computing power). I'm personally holding out til REAL dynamic lighting (Raytracing) becomes fully realtime.[/QUOTE] Eh... I don't want to be the "hurr durr CRYENGINE" guy... but Cryengine.

It's really difficult to say how good Frostbite 2 is as an engine because DICE (or rather EA) doesn't want to release their stinkin' tools! Even if you judge it by games, BF3 has such an ugly style to it. Blue everywhere, supernova sun glare, dirty lens and no saturation/high contrast. The color palette makes the game look like shit.

The earlier versions of UE3 has a "plastic" look to the character models (which is the case for GOW, UT3, Batman Arkham Asylum/City, etc.) But the best UE3 game color palette wise/art style wise is Mirror's Edge (haven't yet played Dishonored). My point is with so few games released on the engine, it's hard to say how good it is. In BF3 it's more of the exaggerated post processing effects, lifeless colors and blue tint - that gives the ugly look.

[QUOTE=glitchvid;39954039]Currently FB3 is probably the best engine out there for this: but even that isn't fully real time, the AO and overall lighting schemes are pre-computed (and it takes a shitton of computing power). I'm personally holding out til REAL dynamic lighting (Raytracing) becomes fully realtime.[/QUOTE] What about Natural Selection 2's engine? Just about all of its lights are dynamic (provided r_shadows is 1) and cull really well. It will even automatically cut down the dynamic lights if there's a firefight or a ton of units on the screen. As for UE3, my problem with it is how just about every game will use really nice dynamic/deferred shadowing only on characters so the actual environment itself has really ugly prebaked shadows that stick out. The best example of this is probably Dishonored. However, some games like Borderlands use its dynamic lighting for everything, including the environment. Bit ofcourse this introduces a whole new set of problems like horrible striping on some objects (solved sometimes by upping the shadow res on the INI) or huge performance drops in large areas. Finally, valve PLEASE do not use way too much jiterring to mask the aliased bits in your shadows. This is what makes that awkward blur in all the Crysis games shadows while indoors. Ofcoursre I myself do prefer slightly (unrealisticly) sharp shadows and usually tweak the jiterring down in configs. (apologies for any spelling errors since this way typed on a android phone)

[QUOTE=IM BATMAN;39957421]What about Natural Selection 2's engine? Just about all of its lights are dynamic (provided r_shadows is 1) and cull really well. It will even automatically cut down the dynamic lights if there's a firefight or a ton of units on the screen. As for UE3, my problem with it is how just about every game will use really nice dynamic/deferred shadowing only on characters so the actual environment itself has really ugly prebaked shadows that stick out. The best example of this is probably Dishonored. However, some games like Borderlands use its dynamic lighting for everything, including the environment. Bit ofcourse this introduces a whole new set of problems like horrible striping on some objects (solved sometimes by upping the shadow res on the INI) or huge performance drops in large areas.[/QUOTE] light doesn't bounce in NS2 [QUOTE=SpotEnemyBoat;39957132]The earlier versions of UE3 has a "plastic" look to the character models (which is the case for GOW, UT3, Batman Arkham Asylum/City, etc.) But the best UE3 game color palette wise/art style wise is Mirror's Edge (haven't yet played Dishonored). My point is with so few games released on the engine, it's hard to say how good it is. In BF3 it's more of the exaggerated post processing effects, lifeless colors and blue tint - that gives the ugly look.[/QUOTE] I disagree - BF3's post processing / color grading isn't ugly at all

General consensus states it's the worst ever and it's a horrible product of its time. It's the early 2010's equivalent of 90's cross colors. In ten years we will look back and go "jesus christ look at all that blue and orange and lens flare" Battlefield 3's color grading isn't just horrible. It's part of the problem. it's part of the aesthetic plague happening right now.

ah I didn't realize there was an aesthetic plague to be wary of

So, I haven't been looking at this thread constantly, but is there any news about source 2?

So TF2 is getting Oculus Rift support, so that's that.

[QUOTE=sarge997;39957663]So, I haven't been looking at this thread constantly, but is there any news about source 2?[/QUOTE] Not yet... but I'm hopping it will be shown to the public at this year's E3!

[QUOTE=Juniez;39957630]ah I didn't realize there was an aesthetic plague to be wary of[/QUOTE] [URL="http://theabyssgazes.blogspot.com/2010/03/teal-and-orange-hollywood-please-stop.html"] yeah[/URL]

[QUOTE=xalener;39955725]Eh... I don't want to be the "hurr durr CRYENGINE" guy... but Cryengine.[/QUOTE] Ever downloaded and played with the CryEngine SDK ? It's pretty good, but it really isn't magically beautiful, the lighting isn't the best looking in most situations (It takes REALLY good time eating placement to look as good as it can in Crysis) While I'm sure FB2.5 suffers from the same downfalls, I doubt it does as much as CE3 (Since it [FB2.5] has a better indirect lighting engine)

I'm hoping they bring back the Russian laughing capabilities of goldsource: [video=youtube;9K2KciM90Qw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9K2KciM90Qw[/video]

[QUOTE=Juniez;39957485]I disagree - BF3's post processing / color grading isn't ugly at all[/QUOTE] Sure it isn't [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxUgvH5gtJc[/url] [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJU-JKFPsTo[/url]

[QUOTE=SpotEnemyBoat;39964744]Sure it isn't [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxUgvH5gtJc[/url] [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJU-JKFPsTo[/url][/QUOTE] 2nd video is a bad example, much of the BF3 art / textures, etc, where done with the blue color grading in mind (And the color grading is probably constantly applied, so whenever a developer made a new texture and viewed it in engine, he probably tweaked it to look good in there) That is why some of the colors look really off / weird.

[QUOTE=glitchvid;39964825]2nd video is a bad example, much of the BF3 art / textures, etc, where done with the blue color grading in mind (And the color grading is probably constantly applied, so whenever a developer made a new texture and viewed it in engine, he probably tweaked it to look good in there) That is why some of the colors look really off / weird.[/QUOTE] [img]http://cdn.overclock.net/9/94/900x900px-LL-9496f5d0_bf3-alpha47.jpeg[/img] Blue is bad.

In my opinion, the least Valve could do is move away from projected textures for dynamic lighting. Right now, if you shine a couple of projected textures on top of one another, you get all sorts of weird lighting glitches. They could also make flashlights look significantly better in multiplayer.

[QUOTE=SpotEnemyBoat;39964744]Sure it isn't [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxUgvH5gtJc[/url] [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJU-JKFPsTo[/url][/QUOTE] I know how it looks like without it, I'm just saying I don't find it ugly (at all, like seriously how does one find a color tint ugly?) and I don't understand why battlefield 3 of all games seemed to trigger everyone's criticism when color grading has been around for a forever and a half (in both games and films) imo it especially suits battlefield 3 because it goes in hand with the cinematic feel that the game's trying to make

Because they advertised it as a successor to the core BF games, and none of of them had a "art direction". In previous games Wake Island was fucking beautiful, now it looks dull and lifeless and that sun glare makes my eyes hurt. DICE just took the Michael Bay look way too far.

[QUOTE=SpotEnemyBoat;39965391]Because they advertised it as a successor to the core BF games, and none of of them had a "art direction". In previous games Wake Island was fucking beautiful, now it looks dull and lifeless and that sun glare makes my eyes hurt. DICE just took the Michael Bay look way too far.[/QUOTE] apparently taking the squad commander mechanic out / changing up the classes/ making everything faster paced didn't alert you to that fact that they were taking it in a new direction but no [i]the blue[/i] [editline]18th March 2013[/editline] + the fact that art direction rarely defines (or even stays the same throughout) an entire series

[QUOTE=wombo;39964949][img]http://cdn.overclock.net/9/94/900x900px-LL-9496f5d0_bf3-alpha47.jpeg[/img] Blue is bad.[/QUOTE] Yes, when you take pictures from a place that has 3 colors max (Blue, Orange, Red), of course my point won't be shown, but look at many of the outside maps: you can see that they have modified the actual textures to be more in-line with the blue grading.

[QUOTE=Amaurus;39965039]In my opinion, the least Valve could do is move away from projected textures for dynamic lighting. Right now, if you shine a couple of projected textures on top of one another, you get all sorts of weird lighting glitches. They could also make flashlights look significantly better in multiplayer.[/QUOTE] I think NS2's flashlight looks pretty good in multiplayer.

[QUOTE=Juniez;39965205]I know how it looks like without it, I'm just saying I don't find it ugly (at all, like seriously how does one find a color tint ugly?) and I don't understand why battlefield 3 of all games seemed to trigger everyone's criticism when color grading has been around for a forever and a half (in both games and films)[/QUOTE] God fucking damn it man. No one hates the fact that there's color grading. They hate the fact that there's color grading and [I]this is what they fucking did with it.[/I] Also, blue desaturated color correction looks like absolute shit in films as well. It's-- I already fucking explained this to you. If you don't get it, stop talking about it and let's move on.

[QUOTE=xalener;39969369]God fucking damn it man. No one hates the fact that there's color grading. They hate the fact that there's color grading and [I]this is what they fucking did with it.[/I] Also, blue desaturated color correction looks like absolute shit in films as well. It's-- I already fucking explained this to you. If you don't get it, stop talking about it and let's move on.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't mind if the colour correction was between .25 to .50, but not overdone like .75 to infinite!

Exactly. Even the level it was at in the bf3 beta was acceptable... Retail was fucking ridiculous.

And you want to know the dumbest part? The lead game designer for BF3 said that it was "too colorful" when players modded off the desaturated blue filter. Then they proceeded to fix the file structure again so CC couldn't be modded. EA in a nutshell.

[QUOTE=SpotEnemyBoat;39975011]And you want to know the dumbest part? The lead game designer for BF3 said that it was "too colorful" when players modded off the desaturated blue filter. Then they proceeded to fix the file structure again so CC couldn't be modded. EA in a nutshell.[/QUOTE] Sounds more like DICE did it that time because they didn't want to admit their mistake of making another brown and dirt shooter.

I thought this was a Source 2 thread, guys. ... On another note, [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMaL6j7Ry6c#t=3m36s"]this[/URL] is one of DICE's [I]worst[/I] citations ever. Talk about the difference all you want, it's still a bad idea. :tinfoil:

[QUOTE=J*Rod;39976604]I thought this was a Source 2 thread, guys. ... On another note, [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMaL6j7Ry6c#t=3m36s"]this[/URL] is one of DICE's [I]worst[/I] citations ever. Talk about the difference all you want, it's still a bad idea. :tinfoil:[/QUOTE] Uh no it supports the choices they made entirely.

[QUOTE=hogofwar;39967371]I think NS2's flashlight looks pretty good in multiplayer.[/QUOTE] NS2 went with there own engine, and dropped Source. Incase you were implying that they use Source.