Šta je novo?

CryEngine 3 - Coming 2011 on PC, PS3, (PS4) & Xbox 360

Ja bas i nisam odusevljen. Mislim sve to cepidlacenje koje bi trebalo da nas obori sa stolice ,a kada puca u lisce palme ono se i dalje samo leluja a ne daj boze da se koje parcence otkine. :p

Uz sve to, posto se radi uporedo i za konzole, cisto sumnjam da ce ispasti onoliko dobar koliko bi bio da se radi samo za PC.
 
Ako mislis na CE3 i DX11, da- endzin ce podrzavati DX11.

Hvala na informaciji.
Sto se tice pucanja i lisca, koliko vidim to je dodato u CE3.
Bice to dobro za PC, verujte. Sad samo stek i uzimanje hardvera da se spremimo za prolece :banana:
 
Ja bas i nisam odusevljen. Mislim sve to cepidlacenje koje bi trebalo da nas obori sa stolice ,a kada puca u lisce palme ono se i dalje samo leluja a ne daj boze da se koje parcence otkine. :p

Uz sve to, posto se radi uporedo i za konzole, cisto sumnjam da ce ispasti onoliko dobar koliko bi bio da se radi samo za PC.

Izbor je sledeci:

1) JEDNA igra sa ultra giga mega grafikom i osrednjim gameplayom ili
2) gomila igara razlicitih zanrova baziranih na najnaprednijem enginu danasnjice (koji mozda ne izgleda WOW kao sto je u Crysisu svojevremeno izgledao ali ce u svakom slucaju biti napredniji od CE2).

Ja biram ovo drugo.
 
Can Consoles Run Crysis?

Digital Foundry charged accomplished Crysis modder Nebula with an uneviable task: to recreate the console look within the existing PC game. CryTek's engine is so scalable and so flexible that for someone with an intimate knowledge of the game this isn't quite the onerous task you might imagine. CE3 appears to be based significantly on the core Crysis tech, so it's no surprise that we're able to scale back CE2 to give a very close replica of console CE3, even if some of the headline tech (such as the hugely impressive global illumination engine in CE3) can't be copied.

The tech is so flexible that in the right hands, it is capable of more subtle, realistic lighting and more apparent atmospherics. Despite the increase in overall image quality, the mods run with no performance penalty over the unmodified game, as you can see in the debug readouts in the top-right of each screen

The major differences between the replica and the console CryEngine3 are twofold. Firstly, CryTek has created a custom skybox which is not seen in the original game and significantly alters the overall lighting scheme. Secondly, it's worth bearing in mind that matching exact time of day wasn't possible, and this has potentially the most dramatic impact of all on the closeness of our replica shots.

Overall, it's clear that CryTek has had plenty of fun tweaking the Crysis Island level within its spiffy new editor. There are changes that are not wholly attributable to the new engine: geometry and object placement are sometimes different, for starters. However, what is perhaps most exciting from what we've seen of the tech and its editor is that all the PC effects of CE2 are there, and more: it's just a case of how many can be deployed on console while maintaining frame-rate.

CryTek's technical showcase on console is an intriguing mix of sub-medium-level settings for some elements, all the way up to "very high" in others. It's clearly had a lot of time and effort put in to run the demo to a graphically pleasing degree while simultaneously maintaining performance good enough for the purposes of the demo.

Consoles are effectively memory-starved up against even an entry-level PC, and Crysis requires a huge amount of RAM to run well compared to what's available in the consoles - it makes sense that a lot of the developmental effort in transitioning CE2 across to the multi-platform CE3 was spent in reducing the memory footprint

It's also a matter of fact that CryTek's zero-compromise coding techniques result in some pretty massive source code. One developer recently told me that just the source for creating normal maps in Crysis is bigger than that for their entire engine - which has been used to ship over half a dozen games. There's no doubt that console development is a world removed from the cutting edge land of PC development that CryTek has prospered in, and despite the impressive demos, the firm still has it all to prove in the console space.

However, the fact that Frankfurt's finest are not producing a straight-up port of Crysis is also very significant. Moving onto a sequel allows CryTek to concentrate on levels and gameplay that do suit a cross-platform product. For example, level design with more occluding elements in the scenery could serve to boost performance significantly.

According to comments from the developer, shader-heavy work favours 360 while physics work is more suited to the Cell within PS3. The engine's "WYSIWYP" editor allows for scene-by-scene optimisation that gives the developers the best chance to achieve parity between the two consoles.

The CryEngine3 demo on console appears to be running at native 720p with no anti-aliasing, and based on this demo, performance is somewhat variable. It seems to be the case that in some sections (Crysis for sure), CryTek has v-synced the demo for more consistent image quality, but this can see the frame-rate vary from anything between 15FPS to what we can assume is the target 30FPS. It is disappointing to see sections of Crysis running so slowly, especially when our visual approximation on PC runs lightning fast on even a relatively "lite" computer.

Our experiment in modding Crysis to replicate the console look also suggests that PC owners have little to worry about. While Crysis 2 may be console-focused by financial necessity, it's fair to assume that the PC version will benefit from higher-quality artwork, and will receive an enormous visual upgrade by default simply by scaling up many of the powerful environmental variables built into the engine by design.

It's also fair to say that PC owners should be able to get performance that far outstrips the 720p30 we can realistically expect from the PS3 and Xbox 360. The scalability of CryEngine3, along with the existence of those higher-quality assets designed for PC, also means that CryTek could conceivably release a supremely impressive version of Crysis 2 for the next-gen consoles when they materialise in the expected 2011/2012 time-frame. The developer is already on the record as saying that CE3 has been designed to scale up to accommodate the next generation of console platforms.

Another factor computer owners should consider is that the optimisation work required to get CryEngine working on console will inevitably lead to significant performance boosts when rolled back across to PC, a point of view expressed in this GDC presentation from Valve, which discusses in depth the challenges of moving from a pure PC development environment to multi-format. There was a useful performance bump between Crysis and Warhead, but both games still targeted a dual-core CPU for optimum performance. Bearing in mind the six hardware threads available in the Xenon CPU, plus the six available Cell SPUs, CryTek would have been hard at work in scaling their engine to work across many more processors. The best gaming CPUs on PC right now are quad-cores, so those efforts will transition across back to PC very nicely


The question is: will they jump onboard the CryEngine Express, which for all its promise is essentially an unproven technology for multi-platform development? This is where Crysis 2 will be the ultimate litmus test, and while its debut may be too late to seriously threaten the dominance of UE3 on PS3 and Xbox 360, when the next-gen consoles launch there'll be everything to play for.

Bottom line: we would hope that Crysis 2 will be a technical showcase regardless of platform, scaling to match the power of the system you run it on.


Dakle, win-win za sve.
PC je "fist of the fury" platforma.
18p4wi.gif
:D

* btw, komentari na EG kao i uvek na "osetljivu" temu... :d
 
The CryEngine3 demo on console appears to be running at native 720p with no anti-aliasing, and based on this demo, performance is somewhat variable. It seems to be the case that in some sections (Crysis for sure), CryTek has v-synced the demo for more consistent image quality, but this can see the frame-rate vary from anything between 15FPS to what we can assume is the target 30FPS. It is disappointing to see sections of Crysis running so slowly, especially when our visual approximation on PC runs lightning fast on even a relatively "lite" computer.

Tolika je frka za VRAM, da nisu mogli triple buffering da implementiraju. :|
 
Pa dobro, radice fino na konzolama.

Sto se tice konzola i podesavanja za njih. To je kao da uzmes neki osrednji (mada svi kompovi su osrednji kad dodje novi Crysis :D) komp, i stavis vecinu podesavanja na medium, nesto na high, nesto na very high, iskljucis AA.

Pa to smo svi radili i na pc-ju :D.
 
Poslednja izmena:
Pa, double buffering mora da bude, svaka igra u proteklih ne znam koliko godina ima double buffering. :)

Radi se o tome da je izmedju double bufferinga, double bufferinga sa vsyncom i triplebufferinga (sa vsyncom, naravno, posto i nema neke svrhe bez :)) razlika drasticna.
 
Da, ali je zato cena toga input lag :). Pitanje je trade-offa, nema savrsenog resenja ***. Mada, do izlaska imas jos dosta, ne mora da znaci da ce ovako i ostati.
 
Poslednja izmena:
Memorija je ovde ogroman problem, pa texture u krizi za fcking travu su 1024x1024 pixela a pricamo o triple bufferingu, koji bi sam po sebi odneo pristojnu kolicinu Vrama, mogu samo da zamislim kolicinu osakacenosti tekstura, field of view-a , bits per pixel tehnika, pretezne zatvorenosti prostora koje ce se manifestovati na konzolama kada igra izadje. Nema tu neke magije, kriza je sirov endzin, 'ono sto vidis to je tu'. Levat levati i dalje, samo ovog puta konzolase, jer ovde je ocigledno ciljna grupa sledeca generacija konzola a ne trenutna. Sve ostalo je kajmak za poneti....
 
Poslednja izmena:
Koliko ja znam, triple buffering povecava upotrebu VRAM-a u 720p rezoluciji za oko 10MB-a, sto je smesna kolicina za sprecavanja tearinga ili drasticnog pada performansi.
Input lag se, takodje, povecava u minornoj i neprimetnoj kolicini.

Ubedljivo najbolje resenje za igre na konzolama, kao i na PC-u.
 
lol Ne znam gde si to procitao i kako je to neko mogao da izracuna, kada kolicina buffera zavisi kako od rezolucije, tako i do velicine tekstura, kolicine boja, nivoa AA i AF-a i jos po nekih detalja. Za veliki prostor i svega 256vrama sve je bitno,nista nije zanemarljivo i u ovom slucaju sigurno nije resenje...
 
Pa, imas primer u Unchartedu 2 - ekstremno detaljne teksture, 720p sa 2xMSAA itd. itd. a koristi triple buffering. :)

Moze se sve strpati u 256 MB VRAM-a, ako pametno koristis streaming tekstura.
 
Da druze :), ali ovde govorimo o cryengine-u, i ne mislim to zbog nekog velicanja, vec na osnovu nacina na koji taj endzin funkcionise. I da, sve se moze strpati, ali u ovom slucaju, siguran sam, bice veoma sakato. Nisam igrao poslednji UNCHARTED (al otju), pa tju onda sebi dati za dozvolu da pricam o tome. Odo pajkim :)
 
PC Play intervju

December 18, 2009

PC Play: CryEngine 3 is obviously a really complex set of advanced tools, so for a start let's cover some basics. Just like CryEngine 3 for dummies :) So, how does it differ with CryEngine 2, why is it better and what it makes easier for developers than its predecessor?

Carl Jones: CryENGINE® 3 is a powerful technology with some really easy to use tools, which give developers genuine power to rapidly create the most complex environments and gameplay possible in the current generation. The key differences between CryENGINE® 2 and CryENGINE® 3 is the support of console platforms for the first time, the increase in real-time development – our “What You See Is What You Play” tool design now applies to all platforms, simultaneously. We’re also adding LiveCreate functionality to all pipelines and development processes, making CryENGINE® 3 100% Real-time, all the time. On top of that, we’ve made huge improvements in rendering power and features, so in a nutshell, CryENGINE® 3 delivers the most power and speed to developers possible.



PC Play: Just one question regarding CryEngine 2. Can you tell us how well did it go with licensing, and did it satisfied your expectations at that matter?

Carl Jones: Licensing a PC-only engine was made difficult in the last few years due to the changing nature of the games market itself. Piracy hurt PC-only games in terms of sales figures, so publishers and developers moved away from making such titles. As a result, console middleware was more widespread than PC focused technology such as CryENGINE® 1 and 2, but we have had some great successes and developers are working on great looking games that will launch soon, that started out on earlier versions of CryENGINE®. We’re happy with the quality we achieved, but circumstances limited the quantity of licensees we signed up. That won’t be an issue with CryENGINE® 3!



PC Play: Your new engine is targeted for PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 out-of-the box, which was not the case with the past one. Was CryEngine 3 made entirely from scratch, or you heavily modified CryEngine 2 to meet consoles' hardware environment?

Carl Jones: Our aim was to maintain the quality of output and tools from CryENGINE® 3, and make the support of consoles painless for our licensees. As such the console versions of the engine plug in seamlessly to CryENGINE® 3 Sandbox on PC, allowing developers to build on 3 platforms, simultaneously. This is no simple trick and it did require that the console engines were built from scratch – this is not a port of PC technology, by any means – such solutions have been proven to fail in this generation of consoles.



PC Play: Can you tell us something about sheer hardware power of today's consoles, specifically PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360? How much are you able to squeeze out of them with CryEngine 3?

Carl Jones: Always for Crytek, the PC will be the highest performing platform and CryENGINE® 3 is no exception – simply because PC technology has upgraded several times during the life cycle of the console. Having said that, we’re delighted with the performance we’re achieving on PS®3 and Xbox 360™ – we can run massive worlds at incredibly high quality on both platforms. We’re confident we’re going to set a new benchmark for what is possible in the current console generation.

PC Play: How well does CryEngine® 3 use the advantage of dual-core and quad-core PC CPUs? From a gamer's standpoint, if I own an Intel Core2Quad, will I have to upgrade to i7 in order to flawlessly run upcoming CryEngine 3-powered titles?

Carl Jones: CryENGINE® 3 has been built to take full advantage of multi-core systems, past, present and future. You will get great performance in CryENGINE® 3 on your dual-core and quad-core CPUs, but of course, if you upgrade, you’ll see the performance increase further. In the development of CryENGINE® 3 we have been working really hard on solutions that enable phenomenal looking games on both the low and high end - so you won’t need to upgrade by any means to get great results from CryENGINE® 3 games.

PC Play: Now some platform-specific questions. Can you tell us something about difficulty of development with CryEngine 3 for each of the platforms; PC, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360? How much do they differ with each other?


Carl Jones: There is no difference, that’s the beauty of CryENGINE® 3. You build your game in Sandbox and the engine takes care of making your content work on each platform. You then spend your time tweaking your assets, game design and level design to take advantage of each platform’s slight differences.

PC Play: Since multiplatform games are what many publishers want nowadays, how are they easy to make with CryEngine 3 and how compatible is CryEngine 3 between target platforms? More specifically, if PC is a lead platform of my game, but I want it to be on PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 also (and vice versa), how easy is the process of porting with CryEngine 3?

Carl Jones: With CryENGINE® 3 – you don’t really port to each supported platform – you build your game to run on CryENGINE® 3 and it will run on PS®3, Xbox 360™ and PC. Your lead platform is now simply a matter of design – not a requirement to favour one development approach over another due to technical limitations. There are differences between the platforms, but these are easy to play with in Sandbox and CryENGINE® 3, allowing you to mix and match solutions, asset quality and quantity to get the best results on each.

PC Play: What are the new technologies you're able to use with CryEngine 3 which were not available with the CryEngine 2?

Carl Jones: We have implemented more multi-core support, streaming, a new rendering technique: Deferred Lighting, which allows for a huge number of dynamic lights in a scene, without requiring a high amount of processing power, we have real-time global illumination in the engine, plus a host of smaller, yet important improvements to all our technologies and features.

PC Play: In CryEngine 3 demo we've seen even more destructible environment than it was the case with CryEngine 2. What level of destructibility does it offer? Will we be, for example, able to destroy entire buildings, skyscrapers and similar stuff?

Carl Jones: In CryENGINE® 3 you can destroy anything you want to build as destructible. We have a procedural system that can be used on any material in the game, as well as more traditional asset-based destruction. Procedural destruction is more expensive in processing power, so we tend to recommend using it when you want the player to control the destruction precisely. But with the latest hardware, blowing up a skyscraper using full procedural physics would definitely be possible!



PC Play: Sandbox Editor was a huge addition to Crysis for modding community. I mean, I've seen really incredible stuff those guys do with it. Can you tell us something about new features and possibilities of the new Sandbox Editor?

Carl Jones: Our new sandbox editor just makes things easier and faster for the user – we’re improving the basic interface and interaction with the editor, adding new features, such as visual browsers for various game assets and we’re adding more and more to LiveCreate, which makes a real-time connection to content creation tools such as Photoshop, enabling instant update of assets in-game.

PC Play: What kind of genres do you expect developers will use CryEngine 3 for?


Carl Jones: CryENGINE® 3 isn’t genre specific – you could use it to make any game. Ultimately it delivers the ability to have large, fully-interactive worlds, with near CGI quality graphics, so it lends itself to any game that wants to achieve a movie feel. A lot of Action games, RPGs, MMOs, but really any genre that benefits from the power of the engine.

PC Play: Last, but not the least: how do you think PC gaming will develop and evolve in the future?

Carl Jones: PC gaming will go online much more in future – communities and users will become vital parts of PC games. PC will also lead the way in terms of graphics quality, we are not far away from movie quality gaming experiences on home PCs. The new hardware will instigate a renaissance in graphics programming as new technologies will support multiple rendering solutions in a single game or game engine. We’ll see graphics and a level of interactivity with game worlds that will amaze gamers. Making games this real and accessible will further increase and broaden the gamer demographic, so more people will be playing better games with more connectivity to their fellow gamers. Greater gaming is on the horizon and we are heading towards it as fast as possible!
 
Carl Jones: Licensing a PC-only engine was made difficult in the last few years due to the changing nature of the games market itself. Piracy hurt PC-only games in terms of sales figures, so publishers and developers moved away from making such titles. As a result, console middleware was more widespread than PC focused technology such as CryENGINE® 1 and 2, but we have had some great successes and developers are working on great looking games that will launch soon, that started out on earlier versions of CryENGINE®. We’re happy with the quality we achieved, but circumstances limited the quantity of licensees we signed up. That won’t be an issue with CryENGINE® 3!

Drugi Epic.
 
To je realnost, hteo to neko da prizna ili ne.


Nek' "zahvale" Microsoft-u zbog nacina na koji tretira PC kao gaming platformu gde je GfW "tek da se kaze da imamo", dok je naravno Xbox glavni fokus (zasto bi se odrekli finog rojatlija na igrama i koje ce dalje "pomeriti" jos veci broj hardverskih prodaja -> vise para u dzep?) i sto ih je primorao na takav "business model". Ne mogu PC igraci da ocekuju da neko ulozi milione dolara i godine u razvoj "bleeding edge" PC-only igre, a da razvojni tim ima neki bedni ROI na tome. Suludo je, jednostavno. Sistem ne moze tako da funkcionise i nije odrziv na duze staze. To je mozda moglo da funkcionise pre kada je kompleksnost razvoja neke AAA igra bila daleko manja nego danas, a pogotovo cena i vreme, gde je najskuplji deo kreiranje visokokvalitenih "assets-a" (btw, koja rec je adekvatna sprska rec za ovo? :)) koje ce einge iscrtavati na ekranu. Jedino Blizzard i eventualno Relic imaju "luksuz" da rade tako + da kao nezavisni developeri imaju budzet i dev-time skoro kao konzolne ekskluzive - "cuveno" when it's done, it's done, jer imaju ogromnu fan bazu na PC-u (sto im garantuje koliko-toliko sigurnu prodaju i povratak ulozenih sredstava) i ogranicenog kontrolnog sistema za njihove igre na trenutnoj generacija konzola. Kad tad ce i oni probati sa nekim vecim "eksperimentom" na konzolama, pogotovo Blizzard sa nekim next-gen MMO-om.
Nece razvojne kuce kao Crytek doveka da glume "PC entuzijaste", kad ionako vecina "lojalne" PC baze na njihove igre gleda kao "kul ste vi momci, super vam je engine, mis'im 'vo-ono, ali gameplay sux, malo brckanja nogu u toj lepoj izsejdiranoj vodi, *** sta da vam kazemo, biosokovi, prototajpovi, nastavci igara iz 2001. i ostale imaju atmosVeru, vase igre to nemaju, sorry but life sucks". Za sta onda da rade, tapsanje po ramenu? Koje dolazi od ljudi koji sebe nazivaju "elitnim PC igracima/glorious PC gaming master race :d"., medju kojima vlada misljenje da se za konzole prave "igre za decu", "dumb-downovane" za najsiru mogucu populaciju radi boljeg "sales reporta", a oni su sami sebi kontradiktorni, i dokaz da dobar deo PC publike ustvari (gle cuda, ljudi su isti) nije nista drugaciji od "dirty console gaming peasants", da zele iste takve "limunadice" samo upakovane u lepsu i ukusniju oblandu da bi mogli da bustuju "better graphix than teh consoles !!111!!one!!" ego?

A i zasto da se ne oprobaju na nekom drugom trzistu, zasto da gledaju kako neki "uMreal" engine kupi sav kajmak?

To sto pricaju Crytek-ovci i Tim nije nikakva "prazna prica" i ne treba da sluzi samo za "podizanje obrva", vec da resi stvarne probleme (ako uopste postoji zelja za tako necim) koji evidentno postoje (menjanjem cenovne politike/biznis modela, "resetom/re-think" celog koncepta PC-a kao platforme za igranje, kako god, ostaje na "njima") , i koji su narasli do te mere da je prakticno sacica (ne-MMO) razvojnih kuca ostala PC-centric. Ako kompanije ciji profit dobrim delom dolazi od proizvoda koji su namenjeni PC igrackoj publici nemaju inicijativu da ista promene na bolje, super, nek' nestane onda! As simple as that. Ko nece/ne zeli da se menja, i treba da propadne.


Evo info iz prve ruke jednog dev-a:

It's significant, but a drop in the bucket compared to the PC piracy side. I've seen the numbers through a publisher friend, they are brutal. Some PC titles with 80%+ piracy, PC games with high metacritic ratings that people on forums think were successful yet they actually lost money due to piracy (can't name names but trust me, you know them). The PC piracy problem often happens right in the duplication/distribution chain, meaning the game gets out on torrents in huge numbers before it's even released. Between that and no real way to stop pirates on PC, it puts the PC in a league of it's own when it comes to piracy. There's a reason why the PC can rarely support AAA games on it's own now.

I always thought it was bad, but I'll admit even I was surprised by how bad it really was when I finally saw the data. It definitely affects future publisher decisions as well. For example, I was shown a sequel to a known PC game. I got to play it, it was about 90% complete. It still needed polish, tweaking and qa, but it was mostly done. Seemed fun as well. But they had no interest in publishing it. Why? Because it was PC only, and therefore it would lose them money to complete and ship it. Instead, they asked developer 'x' to deliver a console version as well otherwise it wouldn't see the light of day, at least not from this publisher.

It's quite shocking to see PC gaming having come to this, and honestly it's quite sad especially for us old school gamers that have played on PC going back to the 80s'. But that's where it's at.
 
Poslednja izmena:
Nastavak one price o GI...

[YOUTUBE]<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vPQ3BbuYVh8&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vPQ3BbuYVh8&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

2zyj66a.jpg
 
Poslednja izmena:
E sad 45 minuta po ovoj slici , pa na cemu su renderovali , komodoru?
Cisto sumnjam da bi trebalo vise od 3-4 minuta po slici na nekom normalnom kompu, za ovu scenu.

120 slika u sekundi nije tesko izvuci na ove kockice od objekata i 2 texture.
I naravno, sencenje je na ovim slikama 3x bolje u Mental Ray-u.
 
Moze i za 5-10 minuta, ali ako se omasi neki parametar...onda, ~45 :) Ili Single core procesor, neki slabiji dual core, MR koristi CPU, a cryengine graficku kartu....Sencenje jeste bolje u MR, kao i precizniji GI, i tako i treba da bude...jer je raytracer u pitanju.

A 120 slika u sekundi sa ovim objektima na sceni nije neki problem, ali poenta je u GI, i tome da se postigne priblizan kvalitet offline renderera. Sve i da ovu scenu MR renderuje za 5 minuta, 120FPS-a u realtime je i dalje uspeh vredan pomena, zar ne?
 
Ja sto vise citam o Unigine sve sam manje impresioniran onim sto CE3 nudi.
 
Ne mogu da verujem koliko si subjektivan kada je Crytek u pitanju. Da pomisli covek da te Turci placaju :p

Kod Unigina mi se dopada to sto ce igre bazirane na tom enginu raditi na Linuxu (OpenGL 3.0) za razliku od CE3.
 
Pa to je sjajno:D
 
Nemoj molim te o tom unigine-u, nijedna igra nije izasla a i kad nesto bude izaslo cisto sumnjam da ce ikad imati optimizaciju i kvalitet cryengine-a.
 
A 120 slika u sekundi sa ovim objektima na sceni nije neki problem, ali poenta je u GI, i tome da se postigne priblizan kvalitet offline renderera. Sve i da ovu scenu MR renderuje za 5 minuta, 120FPS-a u realtime je i dalje uspeh vredan pomena, zar ne?

To jeste . Razlike ce biti jos manje u kvalitetu slike kada se budemo kretali kroz te scene.

Ali mi i dalje tu nesto ne stima... isuvise je to dobro po meni. Iskustvo i zivot u ovoj zemlji me je ucilo da pocnem da se brinem kad god je nesto isuvise dobro :d
 
Konacno se neko dosetio da odradi u nekom enginu pasivno difuzno osvetljenje. To je bas nekako falilo, pa su zato sve senke po igrama bile inace preterano tamne...

Inace super izgleda ona maglica u kombinaciji sa ovim difuznim svetlima, to ce dodatno omoguciti umetnicima da se poigraju svetlima i da razmisljaju o boji pre svega, jer ce sada dodtano svetlima moci da boje enterijer.

Sve us svemu, SUPER! :D
 
Sto bi neki rekli, oprema u fullu. Sa ovakvim alatom u rukama bih cak i ja napravio opasnu igru.
 
Nazad
Vrh Dno