Jump to content

2 previews with renders


ghost627
 Share

Recommended Posts

http://computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=152162

Your welcome...

"All I can say is that multiplayer will be much bigger than in the predecessor. The co-op part will be much bigger as well."

q da music

well there were two..i cant find the other one.....may have been removed...the other one talked about the explosions in more detail

Edited by ghost627
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17500 faces, and, by the looks of it, no spec map at all? :blink:

Oh, nevermind. This is next gen. How foolish of me, I was expecting efficiency and quality.

While I agree that 17500 faces isn't excellent, the lack of Specular Maps is actually comforting.

First: there aren't many elements of a soldier's outfit that need specularity. Second, so-called "next-gen" games tend to go way too far with the specular maps, and they end up with shiny... everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that 17500 faces isn't excellent, the lack of Specular Maps is actually comforting.

First: there aren't many elements of a soldier's outfit that need specularity. Second, so-called "next-gen" games tend to go way too far with the specular maps, and they end up with shiny... everything.

Anything that has light hit it needs specularity. A good spec map is what removes that shiny look, it's bad spec level that creates it.

And 17500 faces is a good four times what that character ought to have. Disgustingly inefficient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=152162

and

http://computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=152162

Your welcome...

"All I can say is that multiplayer will be much bigger than in the predecessor. The co-op part will be much bigger as well."

q da music

Ghost - yousay 2 previews in the title but the links seem to be pointing to the same page .. .is there a second article?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ghost - yousay 2 previews in the title but the links seem to be pointing to the same page .. .is there a second article?

I found the same thing. I just didn't want to say anything in case I was just missing something and I didn't want to embarass :icon_redface: myself. Where is the second article? :hmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ghost - yousay 2 previews in the title but the links seem to be pointing to the same page .. .is there a second article?

I found the same thing. I just didn't want to say anything in case I was just missing something and I didn't want to embarass :icon_redface: myself. Where is the second article? :hmm:

I am extremly used to embarrassing myself ... the only upside is that Raw and Ick ask even dumber questions ... :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that 17500 faces isn't excellent, the lack of Specular Maps is actually comforting.

First: there aren't many elements of a soldier's outfit that need specularity. Second, so-called "next-gen" games tend to go way too far with the specular maps, and they end up with shiny... everything.

Anything that has light hit it needs specularity. A good spec map is what removes that shiny look, it's bad spec level that creates it.

And 17500 faces is a good four times what that character ought to have. Disgustingly inefficient.

A simple Material would do the trick in this case. Say... a Lambert. That way the shader knows it's supposed to absorb most of the light, end of story.

~4000 faces is a last-gen character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A simple Material would do the trick in this case. Say... a Lambert. That way the shader knows it's supposed to absorb most of the light, end of story.

~4000 faces is a last-gen character.

With per pixel shading? That's incrdibly wasteful. Plus, unless the shirt I'm wearing is really unusual, fabric doesn't have a flat ramp sheen.

Last gen character? I'll pretend I never played gears of war. It's the 'this many polygons is NEXT GEN' thinking that's made so many ugly games run so badly over the last year. Efficiency is all that matters, and looking at that model I give him 3k for his face and 2k for his body; with good normals and spec a five thousand tri model would look exactly like this does in game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A simple Material would do the trick in this case. Say... a Lambert. That way the shader knows it's supposed to absorb most of the light, end of story.

~4000 faces is a last-gen character.

With per pixel shading? That's incrdibly wasteful. Plus, unless the shirt I'm wearing is really unusual, fabric doesn't have a flat ramp sheen.

Last gen character? I'll pretend I never played gears of war. It's the 'this many polygons is NEXT GEN' thinking that's made so many ugly games run so badly over the last year. Efficiency is all that matters, and looking at that model I give him 3k for his face and 2k for his body; with good normals and spec a five thousand tri model would look exactly like this does in game.

Looking good is all that matters...and good gameplay..... But i agree that you can use a bigger budget on a character that is going to be on screen at all times. they may have gone over the top though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...