I think he means that since in 3D they are optimizing the game to run as well as possible while rendering the graphics twice, will help them in optimizing the split screen better
[PS3] Killzone 3
- Thread starter patsu
- Start date
- Status
I think he means that since in 3D they are optimizing the game to run as well as possible while rendering the graphics twice, will help them in optimizing the split screen better
dragonelite
Veteran
Do I understand this correctly that the dev in the hip hop gamer video implies that the KZ2 lag was due to the massive processing of the bullet trajectories - if so, this is kind of lame to be honest, as no one needs real bullet physics in a game (heck, that is like implementing relativistic physics in car racing).
But I wonder if this is for real: the reduced lag, after the update is due to the reduced bullet physics? Kind of hard to believe, especially as the new mode goes by the name of 'high precision mode' ;-)
Hiphop gamer is already a laughing stock and probably the big reason why game journalism has taken a nose dive his flame/troll titles get clicks. He is the guy who said bayonetta ran at 1080p@60fps on his "promoted system" because his hd tv was 1080p.
Come on how can physics calculation have any influence on input lag.
Big question mark there.
probably went a bit off topic so /rant
.I did kinda liked killzone 2 aiming now hope the online atleast stays fun
at max level in killzone 3. I would just steal Bad company rush and implement it make sure crazy stuff happens.
Don't see killzone 3 getting competitive because being a big class based game if they follow killzone 2 online. Not a lot of those games are competitive unless they have good clan support/gameplay.
So if GG makes sure stupid and funny stuff happens and the game is fun to play the online will still be crowded in 1 year.
So yeah waiting for multiplayer info. Gamescom cant come fast enough if rumors are true...
Perhaps he's referring to Sony's patent application for using polarised images (like in fake 3D) for "split-screen"?
As a matter of fact they do, but this is pretty pointless to implement in a game because the correction is not done by doing some math in your head during the battle, but rather during gun calibration prior to engaging combat.
Since no single battlefield in is actually large enough to account for changes in the rotation of the planet, there is actually no point for the players to make any adjustments to their aiming - the planetary rotation remains pretty constant.
If you want to make a realistic simulation you can make the player calibrate his scope prior to the actual fight, but once he's done with that there is no need for making any corrections during the fight.
There are other factors which make much more sense if you wish to make a realistic simulation, such as wind calibration (probably first implemented in a game in the spitting competition in Monkey Island 2
), but even that might not be as fun or interesting to play as people might think.The interesting thing is that it seems that most developers first try to implement something to make it realistic and complex, but only after they implement it they realize that it's simply not fun. There is a very interesting post in the Medal of Honor developer blog discussing exactly this point (including the Coriolis effect of rotating planets):
Is Math Fun?
Also: Hi, first post.
Also: Hi, first post.
Hi and welcome.
Btw, as you are new, your posts were flagged as potential spam - which is why it didn't show up right away.
Thanks for the link ! ^_^ The gist of the argument is this:
... and I agree wholeheartedly. I reckon there are 2 exceptions:
* The enemy is moving because of very noticeable "platform" speed. This is similar to the moving train level in U2, and perhaps on an orbiting ship, or moon/asteroid.
* The ammo is slow, forcing the player to aim ahead to compensate for changing relative positions. This is similar to the Auger in RFOM, and MAG's AM50 sniper rifle when the enemy is far enough.
In both cases, even when the cross hair is placed on the target, the enemy may have moved on by the time the bullet arrives.
In KZ2, the player stablizes the sniper rifle using SIXAXIS motion tracking. May be the devs added planet rotation effect here for some subtle drift. I don't remember the effect though.
EDIT: I forced myself to watch Hiphopgamer's interview. Someone needs to pay me for this next time.
So the interviewee was referring to KZ3 when he said "track 20 variables when you pull the trigger". We shall see.
By right, if they use SIXAXIS or PS Move for combat, they would already need to track gravity (for accelerometer), magnetic compass reading (to compensate for gyro drift), etc.
Thanks.Hi and welcome.
Btw, as you are new, your posts were flagged as potential spam - which is why it didn't show up right away.
I'm a regular reader of Beyond3D, and can understand why new comments are potentially marked as spam (especially with all the controversy that screenshot analysis might cause sometimes). But since I wasn't paying attention for a few seconds after posting I guess that missed the "your comment is awaiting for a moderator..." (or whatever that message was) before the page redirected me back to the thread.
At a first glance it looked like the standard forum "you're message has been posted..." notice, so It took me another post to read more carefully and realize that it says something different. Maybe this message shouldn't be automatically redirecting you so people won't miss it?
Anyway, enough with the OT I guess
The main problem with trying make a realistic sniping model apart from the reasons mentioned above, is that real life shooting does not have to account for network lag, where in multiplayer games it is something that has a large variance.
Even if someone finds it compelling to actually do all this math and physics calculations in a game when sniping a target, it still won't produce the accurate real-life equivalent result (especially if the target is moving).
I've seen some experienced players sniping or even shooting in multiplayer games, and when they have a slow connection they tend to adapt and shoot where they expect the target to be considering the observed lag (as opposed to where it's located right now). I guess this is enough calculations for players to deal with
This is all in the context of sniping in FPS right? Because:
a) Math IS fun.
b) Many games have lots of math and are fun (RPGs like Deus Ex, Fallout 3, Baldur's Gate).
c) If I set my xhair on a target and shoot from the hip while I'm doing a running jump, should I hit the mark exactly as if I'm laying motionless on the ground aiming whilst holding my breath?
So, if we're just talking about sniping and most people don't want to play a game full of hill-humpers doing headshots left and right, what is the problem for the community at large if a section of the demographics has to do a little work to perfect their skills with a weapon?
If you don't want to do it for the sake of realism, do it for balance.
a) Math IS fun.
b) Many games have lots of math and are fun (RPGs like Deus Ex, Fallout 3, Baldur's Gate).
c) If I set my xhair on a target and shoot from the hip while I'm doing a running jump, should I hit the mark exactly as if I'm laying motionless on the ground aiming whilst holding my breath?
So, if we're just talking about sniping and most people don't want to play a game full of hill-humpers doing headshots left and right, what is the problem for the community at large if a section of the demographics has to do a little work to perfect their skills with a weapon?
If you don't want to do it for the sake of realism, do it for balance.
I sort of agree with Richard on this one, but I think there are limits on how far you can take it. Any adjustments you'd have to make while shooting would have to be clearly explained to the player. No one is going to miss their target and assume that it was the curvature of the earth, or the wind, and start correcting for it automatically. I do like a more tactical game, and forcing those variables onto the game would reward team strategy over pure individual reflex. But there is definitely a limit, and some things just seem stupid in the context of a game, like the rotation of the earth. Wind can be adjusted for by visual clues, like blowing dust and debris or moving flags and materials. Unless you can provide a strong visual indicator for what the player is adjusting for, I don't think it's worth having in the game.
The main problem is that the reward has to be commensurate to the effort. Also, balance has to be maintained. If it's much harder to use a sniper rifle but you're less effective (or even about as effective) as the dude with the battle rifle (whether by sheer # of kills, rate of advancement, K
) only the sniper fetishists will want to snipe. On the other hand, do you want a game where execution is the major limiting factor? Competitive-gaming grognards will say yes, but I'm not sure many people will play a game where only mutant Q3A railgunners can compete. It's just not where multiplayer gaming has been going in the last decade.
It's all a limited realism anyway. You have guns that have bullet drop, but no way to adjust your sights for range.If you don't want to do it for the sake of realism, do it for balance.
If we're talking about single player campaign, the shooting mechanics is usually ok (well balanced and less variable). Even planet rotation (KZ3 happens on Helghan and outer space) should not be a problem if it's visible and can be compensated by the users.
If we're talking about MP games, then the picture is a lot more complex.
However what some sees as additional issues, others may see it as opportunities to differentiate. e.g., RFOM has 2 different races with unbalanced capabilities, plus assorted weapons with secondary attack options; COD has perks. They have their own balancing strategies in the end.
Aiming and bullet path are only a small part of the big picture. But I think the developers may be gunning for immersiveness/engagement rather than realism. e.g. KZ2 has SIXAXIS aiming, plus wind speed that changes bullet and grenade paths, MGS has remote controlled Nikita missiles, RFOM sniper rifle has time stopping capability.
If we're talking about MP games, then the picture is a lot more complex.
However what some sees as additional issues, others may see it as opportunities to differentiate. e.g., RFOM has 2 different races with unbalanced capabilities, plus assorted weapons with secondary attack options; COD has perks. They have their own balancing strategies in the end.
Aiming and bullet path are only a small part of the big picture. But I think the developers may be gunning for immersiveness/engagement rather than realism. e.g. KZ2 has SIXAXIS aiming, plus wind speed that changes bullet and grenade paths, MGS has remote controlled Nikita missiles, RFOM sniper rifle has time stopping capability.
So I was playing KZ2 MP few minutes ago & I noticed something for the very first time. Its that the game's too damn close to "imitating" HDR. See I was playing this map called Suljeva Cliffside (DLC map), its a very bright daytime map with lots of bloom lighting. So here I was in one tunnel that lead me outside of my base (ISA base) & as soon as I approached the entrance I could see the light outside to be very very intense, but once I actually stepped out the intensity was back to normal.
Now I donno how they did this but I never heard of a case where someone imitates tone mapping without actually using HDR. Can someone who has the maps (and the time) look into it ? The tunnel I am talking about is the one at ISA base which you find once you take the left side route to exit from the base spawn point.
Now I donno how they did this but I never heard of a case where someone imitates tone mapping without actually using HDR. Can someone who has the maps (and the time) look into it ? The tunnel I am talking about is the one at ISA base which you find once you take the left side route to exit from the base spawn point.
Might be some cheap solution. Forza on Xbox had that when you passed through a tunnel. I recall some other games on Xbox that had it. They didn't have HDR though AFAIK. I recall seeing a solution for eye-adaption from cave/tunnel for an older game by script and shader to change contrast value as per location but game had no HDR.
Just noticed that...yep its the same thing I'm talking about.
Its here friends:
- Status
Similar threads
