*spin-off* Dynamic GI on Consoles

[RenegadeRocks]

You need to add a big "THIS IS FOR THE BETA" disclaimer on your posts just so that people don't start taking it as fact for the final released game, as the two may be very different.

Sorry about that. i was just excited about finally getting to see the tech I have been wondering about ! Anyways, i will get the game tomorrow, and keep this beta installed too, if it causes no conflict that is(Which i doubt) !

These are observations from the leaked beta !!!!!

The GI, it behaves a little differently than i thought. The Maxdistance value changes the distance from the player uptill which GI is calculated and displayed. But , somehow, it also changes the end result. it is understandable as it must be taking more objects into account when a bigger value for distance is specified, as a bigger distance from the player also means more objects get included in the calculation of GI. So what is happening is that if I specify a small value for e_GIMaxdistance, I get the colour bleed of red/yellow objects on the walls if I take them close to walls. But as soon as I increase the Maxdistance to see GI farther ahead, that colour bleed vanishes !!! I am guessing as more objects get included in the calculation, a lot more bounced light reaches the wall, each being differently coloured, and hence, in the aend, we end up with just a white light on the wall(or any surface).


Hmmm.......there must be a value where we can specify a radius for the GI calculation, so that objects outside that radius do not contribute to the solution at that vertex. That way, If I increase the maxdistance , so that I can see GI as far as I can see, I acould still kepp the individual GI calcualtions limited to small "spheres" and preserve the colour info I was getting.

Oh, BTW, it seems like a vertex based calculation as you can see GI appearing in steps as you walk if u keep the maxdistance value at around 10 to 15.

 

[RenegadeRocks]

The game looks fantabulous now !

 

[Shaderhacker]

See for yourself.

X360
http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/4/3/4/6/6/360_1080p_000.bmp.jpg

PC
http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/4/3/4/6/6/PC_1080p_000.bmp.jpg

Yeap. That looks like 360 doesn't have it enabled. But that doesn't speak for the PS3 version. There was a screenshot earlier that looked like the PS3 was using it. Also, can we be sure that the 360 screenshot was just taken from someone playing the current release version?

 

[Shaderhacker]

The GI, it behaves a little differently than i thought. The Maxdistance value changes the distance from the player uptill which GI is calculated and displayed.

Hmm.. Are you sure this isn't how far to look with respect to neighboring voxels in the 3D volume texture that represents the illumination points on all geo?

I can't imagine it using the brute force method of finding intersections (that would be slowwwww).

-M

 

[Cyan]

Yeap. That looks like 360 doesn't have it enabled. But that doesn't speak for the PS3 version. There was a screenshot earlier that looked like the PS3 was using it. Also, can we be sure that the 360 screenshot was just taken from someone playing the current release version?

GI was enabled in the multiplayer beta at least for consoles. I remember a B3D member noticing GI artifacts on textures and walls, appearing sometimes at once, but it was there.

In fact one of the things that hyped me the most about the game was the presence of GI, and Neb showed some config files were GI was activated, on consoles too.

 

[homerdog]

Are there any SP screenshots showing GI on either console?

 

[Cyan]

Are there any SP screenshots showing GI on either console?

I think these four images show what appears to be Global Illumination

http://www.abload.de/img/2011032515134520ause.jpg

http://www.abload.de/img/2011032400464214ln3t.jpg

http://www.abload.de/img/2011032222365364xnnl.jpg

http://www.abload.de/img/20110324011055192ugf.jpg

 

[homerdog]

I don't see it. In fact that third shot looks more like a counterexample

 

[_phil_]

Isn't GI supposed to be based on the main directionnal light only ?

Edit: no GI in there ,Cyan...

 

[ShadowRunner]

Anyone notice the issues with SSAO causing halos a couple of inches wide around everything? Noticed it first on PS3 but its the same on PC aswell (on advanced setting atleast).

 

[Gitaroo]

I notice that too, but not all shadows. So console version doesn't have GI?

 

[Shaderhacker]

Isn't GI supposed to be based on the main directionnal light only ?

Edit: no GI in there ,Cyan...

Ideally it would be every light source in the scene that is visible to the object. I thought I saw someone mention that this would be very time consuming so they only implemented the sun light source.

 

[nightshade]

Anyone notice the issues with SSAO causing halos a couple of inches wide around everything? Noticed it first on PS3 but its the same on PC aswell (on advanced setting atleast).

You'll find this particular artifact in most implementation of SSAO, even in Crysis/Warhead.
Infact it was much more noticeable in those games.

 

[homerdog]

Yes, that is the nature of SSAO.

 

[L. Scofield]

Oh, BTW, it seems like a vertex based calculation as you can see GI appearing in steps as you walk if u keep the maxdistance value at around 10 to 15.

No, that's because they use a grid method to calculate the GI.

BTW, have you tried using the Irradiance Volumes? According to CE3's main page they can be used to calculate radiosity.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I notice that too, but not all shadows. So console version doesn't have GI?

Am I missing something? Weren't we shown some gorgeous demos of their lighting engine, and then shown some computational data on the cost in the consoles to implement? It's as if they developed GI solutions on consoles, found they cost too much and ditched them completely, making much of this thread kinda irrelevant! What has CryEngine 3 brought new to consoles, if anything? If not much, couldn't the same game be created pretty much as is with UE3 or some other existing engine? Was the cost of CryTek creating this worth it? I suppose a lot of the value of CryEngine 3 is in the tool chain and the live edits.

 

[scently]

It doesn't make this thread irrelevant in anyway. This thread is about CryEngine 3 and the techniques they have introduced with it.

Their GI solution, whether or not it is in Crysis 2 on consoles is irrelevant, they have invented the technique and have shown the cost of implementation, which is something that is actually usable in today's console programming, contrary to previous belief. Now they may or may not have used it in Crysis 2, and I am sure they have their reasons for that. Engines are what they are, they come with a variety of features, it is now left to the developers to implement the features that would help accomplish their vision for what their game should look like given the resource budget, especially on consoles. You just don't tick a feature just because.

Now Codename Kingdoms can show up and have the said GI solution enabled, and it would been done because it fits their vision of what the game should be.

 

[_phil_]

There's not much point in discussing tech developpement for a multi-plateform scalable middleware on one hand and first party fixed hardware on the other .
It's really not the same priorities.

They didn't 'invent' the realtime GI ,they implemented a dynamic solution (with a compromise on quality a lot of developers wouldn't consider acceptable).They did that compromise because they have to stay dynamic in their tools taht need to stay customer friendly .

And their solution is, for a big part based on the work of many other research papers.It doesn't exactly comes out of thin air.
LBP1 had a kind of dynamic GI too.

 

[Cyan]

Am I missing something? Weren't we shown some gorgeous demos of their lighting engine, and then shown some computational data on the cost in the consoles to implement? It's as if they developed GI solutions on consoles, found they cost too much and ditched them completely, making much of this thread kinda irrelevant! What has CryEngine 3 brought new to consoles, if anything? If not much, couldn't the same game be created pretty much as is with UE3 or some other existing engine? Was the cost of CryTek creating this worth it? I suppose a lot of the value of CryEngine 3 is in the tool chain and the live edits.

It might be that they use GI on consoles, or at least their Light Propagation Volumes technology, but perhaps their solution on consoles involves a single rebound and less photons as in these examples of another GI offline implementation....

http://www.maruf.ca/files/catiahelp/psoug_C2/psougbt0101.htm

...while they use more rebounds or photon rebounds on the PC.

Whether it's an artistic decision or not, you never ever see dark areas like this in the game, because of the use of GI -I have the 360 version of Crysis 2-, I think.

For instance, this pic has a black ambient (to emphasize where Global Illumination affects the image)

Global Illumination OFF:

Now Global Illumination ON featuring colour bleeding, bump without light, while it's fully dynamic and real-time:

I have a feeling GI might be buggy or disabled sometimes on consoles for whatever reasons, but the game possess a "special" lighting, regardless it's a direct cause or GI, or just art direction. Plus, it seemed enabled on the multiplayer beta where you could see GI artifacts sometimes.

Their presentation says quite clearly that they use Global Illumination on consoles and the PC, featuring a rather fast implementation they have created. Does it mean that they weren't telling the truth in their presentations or in the leaked config files? I don't think so!

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=...lt/files/A_bit_more_deferred_-_CryEngine3.ppt

Also there are some pics showing Global Illumination on consoles. However, here it seems disabled on the X360 version of the game:

....and it's enabled on the PS3 rendition

Perhaps it's quite buggy on consoles. Whatever.

I believe most people would agree that it looks like it's enabled on consoles, for those who played the game. "Most" people... just can't share those thoughts with everyone.

Besides that, it's also a rather new technique, not a common technology we can compare much, not the archetypes that we know.

 

[Cyan]

There's not much point in discussing tech developpement for a multi-plateform scalable middleware on one hand and first party fixed hardware on the other .
It's really not the same priorities.

They didn't 'invent' the realtime GI ,they implemented a dynamic solution (with a compromise on quality a lot of developers wouldn't consider acceptable).They did that compromise because they have to stay dynamic in their tools taht need to stay customer friendly .

And their solution is, for a big part based on the work of many other research papers.It doesn't exactly comes out of thin air.
LBP1 had a kind of dynamic GI too.

I wonder then if we will be able to see a fully reasonable quality GI implementation this generation of consoles. Maybe we will have to wait until the next generation. Or see what happens with Battlefield 3.

I think some new technologies -i.e. virtual streaming, where you could just use more RAM- these days are ostentatious and I don't like them. But GI is something I really fancy.