Heh, that's funny, I've just seen a Crysis 2 commercial saying that over 75% of reviewers gave it a 9/10.But I hear that the first few hours of Crysis 2 are boring then everything else is incredible afterwards and some boss fights are memorable.
@JID: From what I can tell from that video, they seem to be using some manner of parametric surface (something like NURBS or a hybrid surface type, like polygonal tessellation), although I could be wrong, I'm not sure if the video has any explanation (I'm in a lecture so I can't turn the sound on). Whatever the case, they were showing off a very static environment and renderer, there was no shadowing and only static lighting. The most impressive part was the Sierpinski Pyramid of thingies, but even that isn't that impressive, cause graphics cards have supported instancing for years.
If they are using tessellation, then games are already using it, if it is NURBS, then games aren't using it (due to it being somewhat slow), although 3D modelling programs do use NURBS.If they released a video of all that only with dynamic lighting, then it would be impressive.
The (Crysis2) campaign's great, beginning is a tad slow though. Took me about 7 hours to beat it though, I'm assuming that's quite longer than a CoD campaign. And the multiplayer is better than CoD simply because it is not CoD. It's refreshing to play something different. Amazing game. And the music is amazing.
Unlimited detail is a stupid concept that will never happen. Having "atoms" will somehow stop stuff looking shit up close? No, unless you have an infinitely detailed model you'll end up with a grid of floating points (or blurriness) when you get close. It would also render all existing hardware, software, and development expertise completely useless. Never going to happen.
As for the guy that brought up Frostbite… really? I think Bad Company looked quite nice apart from horrible shadow tearing but compared to Cryengine? lolno good sir. The new version has some nicer radiosity effects going on but it essentially looks the same but with lower saturation, higher contrast, and more fucking grit on the screen making me feel like I have no perpherial vision (whats this about a fov slider? its not like PCs have differing sizes and resolutions or anything….)
All of those screens of the points stuff just looked like something I once viewed under a microscope back in highschool.
No. I'd rather stick with polygons. I can't imagine modeling something with just points.This just can't happen. That's what textures are for.Although the day Zbrush models are able to be used directly in game (the ones that get up into the millions poly count)…I will be a happy gamer.
Lionhead have experimented with that one, actually. Not actually rendering several hundred million polygons, but baking the required data straight into the level's megatexture right from the zbrushed stuff. Looked neat.
Also, since when did a game getting 9/10 make it good? Surely on the 7.5-10 scale, 9 is slightly above average :P
I played Crysis 2 for about 5 minutes before getting bored of it.
@Extravisual
Heh, that's funny, I've just seen a Crysis 2 commercial saying that over 75% of reviewers gave it a 9/10.But I hear that the first few hours of Crysis 2 are boring then everything else is incredible afterwards and some boss fights are memorable.@Avatrol: Pfft, Cascaded Shadow Maps << Exponential Shadow Maps.
I hope that video games use this eventually or something similiar:
Then games will look better than real life LUL!@JID: From what I can tell from that video, they seem to be using some manner of parametric surface (something like NURBS or a hybrid surface type, like polygonal tessellation), although I could be wrong, I'm not sure if the video has any explanation (I'm in a lecture so I can't turn the sound on). Whatever the case, they were showing off a very static environment and renderer, there was no shadowing and only static lighting. The most impressive part was the Sierpinski Pyramid of thingies, but even that isn't that impressive, cause graphics cards have supported instancing for years.
If they are using tessellation, then games are already using it, if it is NURBS, then games aren't using it (due to it being somewhat slow), although 3D modelling programs do use NURBS.If they released a video of all that only with dynamic lighting, then it would be impressive.The (Crysis2) campaign's great, beginning is a tad slow though. Took me about 7 hours to beat it though, I'm assuming that's quite longer than a CoD campaign. And the multiplayer is better than CoD simply because it is not CoD. It's refreshing to play something different. Amazing game. And the music is amazing.
Unlimited detail is a stupid concept that will never happen. Having "atoms" will somehow stop stuff looking shit up close? No, unless you have an infinitely detailed model you'll end up with a grid of floating points (or blurriness) when you get close. It would also render all existing hardware, software, and development expertise completely useless. Never going to happen.
As for the guy that brought up Frostbite… really? I think Bad Company looked quite nice apart from horrible shadow tearing but compared to Cryengine? lolno good sir. The new version has some nicer radiosity effects going on but it essentially looks the same but with lower saturation, higher contrast, and more fucking grit on the screen making me feel like I have no perpherial vision (whats this about a fov slider? its not like PCs have differing sizes and resolutions or anything….)I gotta get Crysis 2, LA Noire, Mass Effect 3, Battlefield 3, Gears of War 3, a Playstation 3 to play Uncharted 3 and Batman:Arkham City.
Damn, that's a lot of games I want to get…All of those screens of the points stuff just looked like something I once viewed under a microscope back in highschool.
No. I'd rather stick with polygons. I can't imagine modeling something with just points.This just can't happen. That's what textures are for.Although the day Zbrush models are able to be used directly in game (the ones that get up into the millions poly count)…I will be a happy gamer.Lionhead have experimented with that one, actually. Not actually rendering several hundred million polygons, but baking the required data straight into the level's megatexture right from the zbrushed stuff. Looked neat.
Also, since when did a game getting 9/10 make it good? Surely on the 7.5-10 scale, 9 is slightly above average :P