Recent content by EasyRaider

DK3, you say? Well, here's a different project, new kickstarter: War for the Overworld The video hit the right notes for me. Backed.

Latency is more noticeable on a touch screen. Furthermore, 2 or 3 frames of latency doesn't get you very far with a temporal compression scheme like H.264. In order to produce the final data for frame N, you may need frame N + 15.

But there's a huge difference. The Wii U can't use a pre-compressed video stream for games, it has to compress frame by frame in real time in order to get reasonable latency.

I like the details, too. My preference would be nicer shadows, but lower, sub-HD resolution on consoles, and higher hardware requirements on PC. And I'm not asking for perfection. That's not feasible with current technology. I just want something that isn't quite so far away from perfection...

They could most certainly have simplified something. Does the game need so much foliage? Makes for nice screenshots I guess, but the amount could be cut in half and I wouldn't miss it while playing. There's a heat shimmer effect or something which I find completely redundant. And I'm sure the...

Looks much worse in-game. The stairstepping and holes in the shadow create intense flicker as they move. And this is not a rare, isolated thing, I see these issues in almost every shadow at this distance. All right, enough bitching, I'll shut up now.

In the air, I think the game looks very good. It's closer up, like in the beginning, that things get nasty. The aliased shadows just draw my eyes to them, much like crawling geometry edges. I would be fine with just 2xAA, or 4xAA at very low res.

No, honestly, they just jumped out at me after a minute or two, after I stopped focusing on the info pop-ups and really looked at the scenery. Granted, that was at default settings. It's not quite as bad at high shadow settings, but once I noticed, it became very hard to ignore.

So, you notice the miniscule difference between 4x and 8x AA, but not the blocky, shimmering shadows? In some places, the shadow texels look about as big as 4x4 pixel blocks, so roughly 1/16 of a sample per pixel. 8x AA, that's 8 samples per pixel. That's something like a factor of 100...

It looks overly soft in contrast with the hard shadows further away. Would it be feasible to extend the distance the soft filter is applied, or use it everywhere? The soft shadows aren't great, but good enough. It's the transition and the aliasing beyond that really annoy me.

OK, perhaps not the best reference point. How about Far Cry then? Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me, but at high settings, the shadow maps never made me think "Wow, that looks crap". In this demo it happened right at the very first area. My point is, I would have been fine with simpler...

Simply using less detail would have been better, at least as far as I'm concerned. I'd be happy with UT2003-like graphics. Or better yet, optionally allow less aggressive optimisations. I'm not expecting perfect shadows. But we're in 2010, so I do expect aliasing and conspicuous LOD transition...

http://www.hostanyimage.com/files/97958115832501693861.png http://www.hostanyimage.com/files/23242415672779197096.png Notice how the shadow of the bush disappears as you move a bit further away (second screen). Also look at how the shadow of the palm tree on the right abruptly goes from soft and...

Shadows disappoint Seems like a fun game. Too bad that the shadows are a fugly mess. It's about as bad as having no AA! Yes, I tested with MSAA disabled (shudder) and the resulting crawlies weren't really any more distracting. Setting shadow quality to "high" doesn't really help, as the filter...

The TB/s figure relies on an extremely wide memory interface. I can't see more than 256 GB/s (or thereabouts) external bandwith being realistic for a console. And that would (probably) be in total, for CPU and graphics.