• Source 2 screenshot allegedly leaked
    249 replies, posted
[QUOTE=J!NX;43697807]it's not mean't to be "Super amazing" graphically source has always been a jack of all trades.[/QUOTE] That's kinda the point I made.
[QUOTE=Maloof?;43698158]Valve's gameplay style tends to favour a more closed-in, heavily tailored and more intimate design philosophy that I feel is best supported by the current format[/QUOTE] Valve had to go with closed-in environments because of the Source engine, and they can still do that approach it's 2014 and there's still map loading times when most modern games you just go straight through it without a map loading point in sight They can still use .bsp, it'll just need a different flavour
I going to start source mapping if this shit comes out, really excited about the automatic compiling.
Looks like a pretty strategical leak.
Looks pretty decent if this is the real deal.
I really hope Source 2 has map streaming, it needs it.
Still hoping the reason they're been negleting Hammer for the past years is because they're working on Source 2 and it's SDK.
The lighting on the buildings, trees and debris looks quite Source-like... Hope this is real, Source2 needs to happen. Hopefully they'll update the dang SDK while they're at it.
[QUOTE=Electrocuter;43698778]Still hoping the reason they're been negleting Hammer for the past years is because they're working on Source 2 and it's SDK.[/QUOTE] To be honest I thought this was obvious. Nobody in Valve in their right mind would still work with those tools.
[QUOTE=whatthe;43698964]To be honest I thought this was obvious. Nobody in Valve in their right mind would still work with those tools.[/QUOTE] I dunno, if you've used the exact tool for over 16 years, you get pretty good at it
[QUOTE=kaze4159;43699004]I dunno, if you've used the exact tool for over 16 years, you get pretty good at it[/QUOTE] Yeah but it would get boring so they'd spice it up a little, it's like SFM it used to be Steam Green and shitty and now they built it to be a powerful program
[QUOTE=kaze4159;43699004]I dunno, if you've used the exact tool for over 16 years, you get pretty good at it[/QUOTE] but the tools are so outdated and the content pipeline is atrocious
[QUOTE=ntzu;43697366]the illegible part seems to say something like Can be easily ---- with ---- and pre-game ----[/QUOTE] I think it says Can be easily accessed with steam and pre-game tools. Whatever the fuck "pre-game tools" means.
It just feels a little dated to me even though I know I shouldn't base it on tiny compressed .jpgs. However, Source has always been more of a contributor on the physics side, so I think it'll be fine as long as they come up with some really good simulation techniques that are a gameplay factor as well.
--Our expectations --The moons of Jupiter --The likely reality Honestly those screenshots look really disappointing. No radiosity lighting as far as I can tell. I know the models and textures seem largely from Source 1 but still, eugh. There's nothing here we weren't seeing from the Unreal engine 5 years ago. Prove me wrong, Valve.
[QUOTE=Strike 86;43699506]--Our expectations --The moons of Jupiter --The likely reality Honestly those screenshots look really disappointing. No radiosity lighting as far as I can tell. I know the models and textures seem largely from Source 1 but still, eugh. There's nothing here we weren't seeing from the Unreal engine 5 years ago. Prove me wrong, Valve.[/QUOTE] Keep in mind the screenshots are from 2011.
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;43697947]True, but I'm sure they've improved it, everyone knows how shitty SourceMP can get when its got tons of stuff happening at once [editline]28th January 2014[/editline] I know but I want to see screenshots and overviews of the new Hammer editor, not hear about what it can do[/QUOTE] Here's a post I made after Valve unknowingly leaked a ton of the new Hammer's icons: [QUOTE=WitheredGryphon;37117117]Hey guys while you were busy arguing away Valve snuck in more icons behind your backs: [img]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/69387792/screenshots/Source%202/new-icons.png[/img] What they are for respectively: Move: Obvious Pivot: Pivots an object, not sure how this will work with what's coming up. Rotate: Rotates an object (no more double clicking on a brush to rotate?) Mouse: Default mouse icon. Terrain Tool Add/Subtract: Adds / Subtracts terrain (creates a displacement?) Terrain Tool Delete: Deletes the terrain (similar to destroying a displacement?) Terrain Tool Hard: Not sure, probably has a literal meaning where it hardens the edge of a piece of terrain (similar to smoothing of displacements except this one edits the edges of a piece of terrain, no more subdivision?) Terrain Tool Extrude: Hm, not sure, perhaps similar to painting geometry in Source. Terrain Tool Flatten: Self-explanatory. Terrain Tool Push/Pull: Similar to sculpting in Source? Terrain Tool Ramp: This is new, perhaps creates a ramp so we don't have to use clip anymore to do that? Terrain Tool Select Cells: I have no idea, I'm stumped. Terrain Tool Select Edges: Selects the edges of the terrain. Terrain Tool Select Faces: Same thing except with faces. Terrain Tool Select Vertices: Same except with vertices. Terrain Tool Smooth: Exact same as Source's smooth tool. Makes the terrain all nice looking. Terrain Tool Toggle Cell Display: I have no clue. Cells could be the step looking line and the dashed could be the terrain? Terrain Tool Toggle Displacement: Turns the terrain into a displacement? A bit puzzling. Terrain Tool Toggle Hard Edges: Really weird, creates hard edges on smooth terrain I guess, or maybe allows hard edges on smooth terrain. Terrain Tool Toggle Normals: If this is what I think it is then yes, yes, yes. Toggles in-engine normal map display. Meaning we might have in-engine lighting preview that far surpasses Source's current one. Terrain Tool Toggle Wireframe: Self -explanatory, turns of the wireframe display of brushes as opposed to the normal textured-view. --- -snip I'm dumb- [img]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/69387792/screenshots/Source%202/terrain_tool_icon.png[/img] -- I'm a retard. After more research I found out valve has been storing their icons in that folder for ones they need to create. I realize this because they are missing the displacement source icon, and have replaced it with the terrain tool's icons. They left all the rest of the other source icons to remind them which ones they need to update so it's best to keep that folder in check for more updated icons. tl;dr Valve is using C:\Program Files\Steam\steamapps\common\SourceFilmmaker\game\platform\tools\images\hammer as a host for completed tool icons and uncompleted tool icons. Keep checking back there for more new icons.[/QUOTE] Albeit I can easily explain some of the ones I didn't know how to explain now: Pivot seems like it will rotate via X and Z axis while Rotate rotates around the Y axis. Terrain Extrude Tool: extrudes it in one direction instead of increasing it in every direction I believe cell display and cell select allow you to view the original displacement before it was modified and allow you to select that original displacement. The rest I still don't know. [editline]Edited:[/editline] And I would stop doubting Valve so much. Here's a few pictures of what someone on Interlopers made in the Source engine: [t]https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-fZdqMKdUEdo/T4vbg1c4d7I/AAAAAAAABbM/1QLE-9k9Rnk/s800/wip28_volcano_snow0010.jpg[/t] [t]https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-ukVOK0OAxRs/Ui1fqPcWRuI/AAAAAAAABuc/3r0MyIVecNQ/s800/gorge0001.jpg[/t] [t]https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-WXtL6JXQ7J4/UYpE6GQdnZI/AAAAAAAABnw/vqKDa-1ntro/s800/skybox_factory_old0006.jpg[/t] Imagine what will be possible with Source 2 then.
Grass sprites. Please no more grass sprites. I hope that picture is really early in development (if this is the real deal).
[QUOTE=tier22;43700122]Grass sprites. Please no more grass sprites. I hope that picture is really early in development (if this is the real deal).[/QUOTE] and again, the leak is from 2011
Looks pretty nice, but doesn't really blow my mind.
You guys seem to have something against baked lighting for some reason. I'd prefer if that still was an option, as baked lighting will for many years to come still be the best looking option there it.
[QUOTE=proch;43700194]Looks pretty nice, but doesn't really blow my mind.[/QUOTE] It's old and also unfinished. Unfinished stuff barely blows anyones mind.
[QUOTE=BCell;43698383]If this is only graphic update but not with physics simulation update like frostbite or cry engine, then Source 2 might be behind times. Hope Source 2 supports destructible environment and dynamic water simulation.[/QUOTE] What do you mean with dynamic water simulation, and why exactly that?
[QUOTE=Antimuffin;43700205]It's old and also unfinished. Unfinished stuff barely blows anyones mind.[/QUOTE] I really wonder if the real thing actually will.
[QUOTE=Maloof?;43698280]oh my bad Less suited for truly free form and open maps though right?[/QUOTE]BSP is just short for Binary Space Partitioning which is just a method of grouping volumes of the level into leafs which means for instance that you can skip rendering of leafs that aren't seen. But that whole thing isn't directly connected to BSP and in theory the leaves can be infinitely large. Too be fair, using BSP if you used a quick algorithm for choosing the rendered leaves can be a lot faster than not using it.
[QUOTE=Strike 86;43699506]--Our expectations --The moons of Jupiter --The likely reality Honestly those screenshots look really disappointing. [B]No radiosity lighting as far as I can tell.[/B] I know the models and textures seem largely from Source 1 but still, eugh. There's nothing here we weren't seeing from the Unreal engine 5 years ago. Prove me wrong, Valve.[/QUOTE] Maybe you don't know what that is then? Take a look again, it's pretty damn clearly there. Heck, wasn't it even a part of Source 1's light baking? Why would they remove it?
I really hope Valve's next addition to source are Euphoria-esque ragdoll physics. Source has always been known for its' physics, but their ragdoll physics were pretty meh
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;43698440]Valve had to go with closed-in environments because of the Source engine, and they can still do that approach it's 2014 and there's still map loading times when most modern games you just go straight through it without a map loading point in sight They can still use .bsp, it'll just need a different flavour[/QUOTE] I'd rather have the map load in then a fucking streaming mess of shite that most games seems to have now where suddenly it goes from low quality to high quality because its like "HEEEEEEEEHGGGHOLDONIGOTTALOADINRAELTIME!" Plus, deferred rendering has pretty much ruined any sort of not jaggy outlines.
I know that Facepunch is basically Valve jack-off central, but these screenshots, even for 2011 are disappointing as absolute shit. I hope I'm wrong, but it looks more like Source 1.5 and not Source 2.
[QUOTE=paul simon;43700201]You guys seem to have something against baked lighting for some reason. I'd prefer if that still was an option, as baked lighting will for many years to come still be the best looking option there it.[/QUOTE] If they somehow remove the limitations like "all of the model dims when one part of it is hit by a baked shadow", "props cast some weird pre-defined shadow which doesn't stack with other similar shadows", dynamic lights limit and the other things which are either workarounds or made so the computers from 2003 would run it. I think the only valve FPS where the lightning doesn't look so 2003 that it hurts to look, is CS GO. [editline]28th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Stopper;43700317]I know that Facepunch is basically Valve jack-off central, but these screenshots, even for 2011 are disappointing as absolute shit. I hope I'm wrong, but it looks more like Source 1.5 and not Source 2.[/QUOTE] Uh, what did you expect exactly? Which technologies?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.