Interactive physics, most modern games abandoned rag dolls for downed enemies, secondary objects in the scenes are no longer affected by collision from the player or gun fires and explosions. The player now influences very few objects compared to the past massively interactive games like (Max Payne 2, Half Life 2, Far Cry, Crysis, Oblivion .. etc).
I also second muzzle flash shadows, I add to them explosion shadows.
A proper HDR monitor in dark room would be the 'proper' way to handle these things, but might actually harm viewer so I'm not sure if it would be the right way forward.It's actually a rather clumsy system. If displays were HD, we'd have all visual artefacts apply naturally from our own eyes. The problem here is displays not working like real life.
What amount of HDR would be enough to emulate real life range?A proper HDR monitor in dark room would be the 'proper' way to handle these things, but might actually harm viewer so I'm not sure if it would be the right way forward.
Perhaps a careful scene design with tasteful glare coupled with a slow, eye like tonemapping would be the solution for games going for the 'realistic' look.
One would need to be very careful when implementing those effects.
If that's the case don't we already have thatthe bright sports just need to be 100x times (or whatever) brighter than the general brightness
I mean 100x brighter than 'normal' (I suppose the exposure point of the scene). A contrast ratio of 1000x on a display means that the brightest it can produce is 1000x brighter than 'black'. You need ordinary brightness to be 1000x the black brightness, and then the bright areas to be 100x that. Or whatever the real values are. As an example, a candle flame is not at all bright but it has significant glare when viewed directly in the dark. Your eye exposes for general brightness and it's overbright areas exceeding this exposure point that produce the artefacts.If that's the case don't we already have that
philps monitor spec
Contrast Ratio 1000:1 / 20000000:1 (dynamic)
for example
GI still has a long way to go before it becomes standard.Would GI be considered a graphical effect that should be standard ? If so do we know enough now to bet on a particular way of doing it in the future. Should we optimize the hardware to make this a solved problem ?? Is it voxel cones all the way down ???
This is something that @Shifty Geezer has proposed all along, I think, just not necessarily using VR technology and I think that a TV like the one shown in @turkey 's post might do the trick --the fact that they show it on a 32" monitor hints at the fact that the technology is in its infancy. Of course achieving VR immersiveness making you feel physically there can't be matched by current TV's tech (as in this recent experiment, NSFW)..
Yeah, only few games ever did that effect successfully, BF3, BF4, COD:AW, AC4, and GTA 5. UE4 engine seems to support the feature properly, I just wish games based on it will utilize it.You mean this?
Well, there are many explosions that would still produce shadows, fireworks for example, incendiary grenades explosions, electrical sparks, magical spells, etc. I assume flash bangs would qualify as well. So the window is wide open here.Which is similarly ironic because real explosions have very little by way of light. The power is focussed into the detonation and expanding gases, not pretty fireballs like Hollywood's gasoline-fuelled, remarkably non-destructive effects.