[QUOTE=glitchvid;42820424]It runs on Next-Gen hardware, it's next gen. It's not simply a Quake 3 engine with 'added bloat'. Saying that makes you look like a twat.
HDR, Dynamic Lighting, and streaming are ALL advanced technology: and each has completetly replaced any 'existing' 'quake 3' code that might have been there. IWengine is a close to Quake 3 as Source is to the Doom engine.[/QUOTE]
this is true but wow you chose the worst examples, i would have picked tesselation/sub-d/subsurface scattering, all of which are fairly recent features
ALTHOUGH outside of the completely modernized renderer you can still find outdated stuff in culling / physics, and even objectively speaking the Black Ops 2 engine made a bigger impact on the renderer
[QUOTE=SpotEnemyBoat;42821252]Also Quake 3 (with bloat) is a general expression, just like Goldsrc and Source are ID tech 2 with added bloat.
[/QUOTE]
well they gave IW6 / source their respective names for a reason - it'd be quite confusing to still identify them by their predecessors (unless you were using it as some sort of an insult)
I haven't played Crysis 1 so I can't compare, Battlefield 4 looks gorgeous though!
[QUOTE=Bloodshot12;42826314]That mod is literally just increased SSAO, contrast and "EyeAdaptation: Clamp" settings in the light properties, the engine is still perfectly capable of doing that out of the box with no effect on how the game runs.
[/QUOTE]
No, you can clearly tell it's running the High-Res foliage mod ([url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1bzTMSJhGM[/url])
[QUOTE=stargate660;42826971]I haven't played Crysis 1 so I can't compare, Battlefield 4 looks gorgeous though![/QUOTE]
Except for the obscene color correction. Also true of BF3.
[QUOTE=Juniez;42826944]this is true but wow you chose the worst examples, i would have picked tesselation/sub-d/subsurface scattering, all of which are fairly recent features
[/QUOTE]
I used them because he was talking them being bloat, which they certainly aren't.
[QUOTE=Bloodshot12;42826314]
And I think Crysis 1 runs pretty well compared to other games considering my 560 ti can max it out and still run at a smooth framerate during combat with how large the levels are and how many AI and physics objects are in the levels that you can interact with.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=stargate660;42826971]I haven't played Crysis 1 so I can't compare, Battlefield 4 looks gorgeous though![/QUOTE]
On my computer at-least, BF4 runs on High the same (and looks better to me) as Crysis does on Very High; performance is usually going to be different between brands (I'm using AMD).
[QUOTE=glitchvid;42827058]
On my computer at-least, BF4 runs on High the same (and looks better to me) as Crysis does on Very High; performance is usually going to be different between brands (I'm using AMD).[/QUOTE]
I would sincerely fucking hope so, because that would be pretty sad.
I thought we were talking about CoD?
Also that texture mod isn't what I was talking about, and you can't even tell from that distance. And the textures have no effect on the shading of the vegetation in that shot.
[QUOTE=Bloodshot12;42835830]
I thought we were talking about CoD?
[/QUOTE]
We were talking about the CoD:Ghosts engine.
[QUOTE=Bloodshot12;42835830]
Also that texture mod isn't what I was talking about, and you can't even tell from that distance. And the textures have no effect on the shading of the vegetation in that shot.[/QUOTE]
If you're comparing 2 things, you should use equivalent examples; not comparing a screenshot from youtube, to a modded version of the game. This is like basic science, you need to compare something from a set of controls and variables.
[QUOTE=Juniez;42826944]well they gave IW6 / source their respective names for a reason - it'd be quite confusing to still identify them by their predecessors (unless you were using it as some sort of an insult)[/QUOTE]
Yes they did, but from the majority can see that ghosts looks like dog shit which supposed to be using a next gen engine. It has all these features but yet it looks like COD4, why?
Bethesda gets criticized for reusing the gamebryo engine for all their new games, for example.
[QUOTE=SpotEnemyBoat;42878024]Yes they did, but from the majority can see that ghosts looks like dog shit which supposed to be using a next gen engine. It has all these features but yet it looks like COD4, why?[/QUOTE]
I dont know which Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare you played, but it
doesn't really
[t]http://steosphere.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/cod4_map_downpour.jpg[/t]
[t]http://www.charlieintel.com/wp-content/gallery/stonehaven/cod-ghosts_stonehaven-environment-2.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE=SpotEnemyBoat;42878024]Bethesda gets criticized for reusing the gamebryo engine for all their new games, for example.[/QUOTE]
yeah cause it's actually broken half the time and there have been no changes in engine features
not "it doesn't [I]look [/I]different" - it actually hasn't changed in an objective manner
(not talking about skyrim, which is a kind-of changed engine with at least an updated renderer)
[QUOTE=Drak_Thing;42819001]What makes an engine, deferred rendered?
I thought because Source renders everything in a "shader" - it's not a forward rendered, which explains why there's so much shader code?[/QUOTE]
deferred rendering first samples all geometry for objects 'elligable' for rendering, and then holds off on the lighting until all the geometry is processed
vs forward rendering, which lights one object and then lights the other object and lights the next object and so on
a big advantage of deferred rendering is that lighting (not shadowing, which is still done per-light and is still very expensive) is detached from geometry, so neither the amount of (unshadowed) lights or the amount of objects on screen will slow the shader down, making them essentially 'free' outside of the initial unavoidable calculation of geometry in the first place
HOWEVER you can't realistically have a completely deferred rendering engine in its pure state because there are a bunch of drawbacks - afaik transparency is one of the impossible things because shaders come after the geometry selection - the objects behind the transparent object would never be rendered in the first place. although there have been ways to get around it, as Battlefield 3 and Killzone 2/3 has used a deferred rendering pipeline
Real-time rendering I personally think is the future!
[QUOTE=glitchvid;42836361]
If you're comparing 2 things, you should use equivalent examples; not comparing a screenshot from youtube, to a modded version of the game. This is like basic science, you need to compare something from a set of controls and variables.[/QUOTE]
Im not sure how this post got rated dumb.
[QUOTE=Juniez;42880283]I dont know which Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare you played, but it
doesn't really
[t]http://steosphere.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/cod4_map_downpour.jpg[/t]
[t]http://www.charlieintel.com/wp-content/gallery/stonehaven/cod-ghosts_stonehaven-environment-2.jpg[/t][/quote]
but
[t]http://i1201.photobucket.com/albums/bb344/BlackMesaLegacy/codnextgen_zps6e1c633a.jpg[/t]
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubpKUvd8NXM"]note: lower sound before watching the following[/URL]
[quote]yeah cause it's actually broken half the time and there have been no changes in engine features
not "it doesn't [I]look [/I]different" - it actually hasn't changed in an objective manner
(not talking about skyrim, which is a kind-of changed engine with at least an updated renderer)[/QUOTE]
I was mainly talking about the changes from Oblivion/FO3 and now Skyrim, despite having updated shaders and lighting people still bitch about the engine. Sure in Bethesda games you can count on the the AI being shit, characters are animated poorly and a shit load of bugs, but Infinite Bored isn't any different.
[QUOTE=SpotEnemyBoat;42889650]but
[t]http://i1201.photobucket.com/albums/bb344/BlackMesaLegacy/codnextgen_zps6e1c633a.jpg[/t][/QUOTE]
[t]http://puu.sh/5kOd1.jpg[/t]
dude that looks crisp as heck (note tessellation and sub-d actively at work wink wink)
[QUOTE=SpotEnemyBoat;42889650][URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubpKUvd8NXM"]note: lower sound before watching the following[/URL][/QUOTE]
breaking news things look bad when u zoom in on them
[t]http://puu.sh/5kO2V[/t][t]http://puu.sh/5kNPD[/t][t]http://puu.sh/5kNPL[/t]
[t]http://puu.sh/5kO35[/t][t]http://puu.sh/5kNQ6[/t][t]http://puu.sh/5kNQ3[/t]
time to go home guys next gen is doa (not to mention the obvious fact that texture size literally doesn't say anything about the engine)
[QUOTE=SpotEnemyBoat;42889650]I was mainly talking about the changes from Oblivion/FO3 and now Skyrim, despite having updated shaders and lighting people still bitch about the engine. Sure in Bethesda games you can count on the the AI being shit, characters are animated poorly and a shit load of bugs, but Infinite Bored isn't any different.[/QUOTE]
yes and those complaints focusing on visuals are equally as moronic when directed at the [I]engine itself[/I] (obviously legitimate technical complaints are reasonable)
Looks like Valve will not announce L4D3 at christmas as I predicted. I am sad now.
why would you even predict that
[QUOTE=xalener;43317638]why would you even predict that[/QUOTE]
A combination of something I red in a news post and being optimistic.
l4d3 leak? source2? iuno
[img_thumb]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6362010/Untitled.png[/img_thumb]
[img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/9ii33Y4.jpg[/img_thumb]
(In-engine L4D2 map on top, new render on the bottom.)
[img_thumb]https://i.4cdn.org/v/src/1390852485302.jpg[/img_thumb]
[URL="http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=758999"]Source[/URL]
Redesigned Tools & Workflow
Powerful GUI front end for content authoring.
Can be easily extended with custom and per-game tools
Browser for quickly finding, managing, editing assets
Simple, automatic compiling of content
it came from crazy buttocks on a train (CBOAT for short), who is Neogaf's mysterious industry leaker who talks like a 5 year old discovered a keyboard so no one can quote him:
[URL]http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=758999[/URL]
CBOAT also leaked alot of Xbox one/PS4 Stuff perfectly along with some things before that. i would say this is reliable.
If that is what Source 2 actually looks like then I want to see more.
But i'm remaining at least slightly doubtful (even if it is a trusted source) since this is a rumor.
It looks okay i guess, can't really tell from such a small image.
[QUOTE='[T_T];43690988']Can be easily [obscurbed] and with in-game [obscured][/QUOTE]
Looks like it's "Can be easily extended with custom and per-game tools"
[IMG]http://abload.de/img/image70qc4.jpg[/IMG]
Here's another
Honestly now that I see the bigger image it doesn't look as impressive. Has foliage that looks similar to Portal 2. Has much better art assets and such. Looks like three or four texture blending on the ground. And of course a better lighting engine, probably deferred. Everything else looks pretty same, you can really tell the brushes on the mansion. The real improvement is probably the development pipeline and tools. And let's hope they actually release them.
[QUOTE=Armageddon104;43694401]Honestly now that I see the bigger image it doesn't look as impressive. Has foliage that looks similar to Portal 2. Has much better art assets and such. Looks like three or four texture blending on the ground. And of course a better lighting engine, probably deferred. Everything else looks pretty same, you can really tell the brushes on the mansion. The real improvement is probably the development pipeline and tools. And let's hope they actually release them.[/QUOTE]
I think the more impressive thing is the scope of this. If they've optimized it to a playable level, then it's fucking golden compared to Source. This seems to have a huge polycount difference for most props, or it's just a metric fuckton of props which is also very impressive to do compared to Source and Hammer. They've upped the handling of the engine which is why it's more impressive, and can make for more impressive creations.
[QUOTE=Armageddon104;43694401]Honestly now that I see the bigger image it doesn't look as impressive. Has foliage that looks similar to Portal 2. Has much better art assets and such. Looks like three or four texture blending on the ground. And of course a better lighting engine, probably deferred. Everything else looks pretty same, you can really tell the brushes on the mansion. The real improvement is probably the development pipeline and tools. And let's hope they actually release them.[/QUOTE]
The four-texture blending is actually something they added in the last CS:GO patch so it's something Source 1 can already do.
[url]https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Lightmapped_4WayBlend[/url]
[QUOTE=Dominik93;43694578]The four-texture blending is actually something they added in the last CS:GO patch so it's something Source 1 can already do.
[url]https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Lightmapped_4WayBlend[/url][/QUOTE]
I'm not talking about the 4WayBlend, I'm talking more about how the backend is improved and more limitless for the artist. The real reason this looks good is because it's using less brushes and more models.
Just saying, the leaked screenshot looks a [i]lot[/i] like early screenshots of Portal 2. At least the lighting does.
[QUOTE=ColossalSoft;43764001]Just saying, the leaked screenshot looks a [i]lot[/i] like early screenshots of Portal 2. At least the lighting does.[/QUOTE]
Sure looks a hell of a lot better though
It looks like they hired Fake Factory to do the foliage. :v:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
