Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The player may be standing in roughly the same area, but on 360 he's turned about 90 degrees to the left, with the sky in plain view. You can't compare the lighting in these completely different screenshots.flat lighting as you can ever imagine -the game doesn't look like that on the 360 in any way-
[...]
Same place on the Xbox 360
Crysis 2 PC, lowest setting, no Global Illumination, flat lighting as you can ever imagine -the game doesn't look like that on the 360 in any way-:
http://img861.imageshack.us/img861/2946/crysis22011031614544836.jpg
Same place on the Xbox 360, look at barricade by the left side of the screen, which is being lit by a light rebound:
http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/4/3/4/7/1/360_025.jpg.jpg
Might be pointlights used.
Which basically makes this whole witchhunt rather pointless unless one cares to go through the entire game with the editor. The actual tech discussion on CE3 has taken quite a downturn as of late just because of it. :/
Has anyone thought about the implications to the renderer with the GI setting off? As in... the entire RSM-LPV chain, memory consumption, shading? It's just on/off on/off on/off on/off on/off on/off on/off on/off on/off on/off on/off something something something Crytek promises on/off on/off on/off ...
I didn't get there yet.
But here are some examples -360 version-. Where you begin at Harbor Lights Pier stage:
http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles//a/1/3/4/2/6/0/5/360_062.jpg.jpg
Crysis 2 PC, lowest setting, no Global Illumination, flat lighting as you can ever imagine -the game doesn't look like that on the 360 in any way-:
Same place on the Xbox 360, look at barricade by the left side of the screen, which is being lit by a light rebound:
I'd love to, but I don't have a PC that can run Crysis 2 to make a comparison with the 360 version, so I am depending on fellow PC gamers.The player may be standing in roughly the same area, but on 360 he's turned about 90 degrees to the left, with the sky in plain view. You can't compare the lighting in these completely different screenshots.
When you say that "the game doesn't look like that on the 360 in any way", you'll really have to prove it by posting a screenshot with a similar point of view. Frankly, I'd be surprised to find that it doesn't look like that.
I don't like arguing on the net. I did sometimes but anyways... I feel dehumanized when I do that.Ehh they are basically the same, actually PC lowest should be better using higher HDR precision. Also your comparisions is heavily biased with staged view directions but looking at material lit it looks about the same. Anwyay everything is pointing to consoles not having RT GI. There are proper comparision pics of RT GI on/off vs console shots of same spot, the final config files says it is off. It's a shame but evidence here is of no RT GI is damn strong.
Our method has been integrated into the CryENGINE R 3: a multi-
platform (DirectX 9 and 10 on PC, Sony PS3 R and Microsoft Xbox
360 R ) real-time rendering engine. Due to the performance require-
ments the implementation uses only 2 SH-bands (4 coefficients) per
color channel for the LPV. The cascade consists of 3 grids, each
stored as three RGBA 16-bit floating point textures of size 323
(QUVW8 format, i.e. 8-bit signed integer per component, on con-
soles). The geometry volume is of the same format and resolution
as the LPV (but with only one texture and no spectral data), and the
surfels are created from the depth and normal buffers of the camera
view and RSMs. High-resolution buffers, e.g. the camera view, are
down-sampled prior to the surfel injection.
The RSMs store a depth buffer (32-bit float), and normals and flux
(RGBA 8-bit each) of size 2562 (1282 for consoles). This amounts
to 216 , or 214 , VPLs per primary light source. The VPLs are injected
into the LPV cascade using point rendering. This requires either
vertex texture fetches (used for DirectX 9/10, and Xbox 360), or
rendering to vertex buffer (faster on the PS3).
Detailed timings for the Crytek Sponza scene (see teaser)
in milliseconds for the individual stages (for one 323 LPV grid and
8 iterations). The three timings for the propagation step refer to:
no occlusion, fuzzy occlusion, fuzzy occlusion and multiple bounces.
Note that only the cost of the RSM rendering depends on the scene
complexity. All measurements at 1280x720 resolution (no MSAA),
and RSM size of 256 squared (=number of injected VPLs) for NVIDIA
GTX285 and 128 squared for consoles.
We demonstrate that our method produces plausible results even when
running on current game console hardware with a budget of only a
few milliseconds for performing all computation steps for indirect
lighting. We evaluate our technique and show it in combination with
a variety of popular real-time rendering techniques.
CR Categories:
I.3.3 [Computer Graphics]: Picture/Image
Generation—Display Algorithms; I.3.7 [Computer Graphics]:
Three-Dimensional Graphics and Realism—Shading
Keywords: global illumination, real-time tendering.
pong render targets) is 323 × (2 × 4) × 3 × (#cascades + 2) =
3.75MB for the LPV and 323 ×(2×4)×#cascades = 0.75MB for
the GV (for the consoles the memory is halved due to the QUVW8
format). Note that storing spectral reflectivity would triple the GV
memory and bandwidth; in our examples with multiple bounces we
used monochromatic reflection for further bounces only. Table 1
shows detailed timings.
Top left: rendering the Crytek Sponza (untextured for
comparison) with LPVs, 3 cascades each 323 , at 60fps. Top right:
ground-truth solution rendered with photon mapping and PBRT
(single-bounce indirect light only, 200000 photons, 1024 final gather
samples, approx. 45 minutes). Bottom left: difference image of the
LPV rendering and the ground-truth solution; green regions are too
bright with LPVs, red regions too dark. Bottom right: rendering
with Imperfect Shadow Maps [Ritschel et al. 2008] at 15.6fps with
256 VPLs.
As I said the game looks different to me on the 360 compared to PC low settings. There is a pic in this presentation.... http://crytek.com/assets/Crysis-2-Key-Rendering-Features.pdfBare in mind Crysis have already stated that PC Low is pretty much the same as console settings aside from platform specific features like texture formats. Doesn't really hold with the theory that PC low lacks GI while consoles do not.
My comparison is not biased, it's just a comparison; PC low settings-360. And they don't look the same to me. The lighting is very flat in that pic compared to what I am used to see in the game after what has been like 7-8 hours playing the game.
Things change overtime. Crysis was supposed to have indirect lighting but they ditched it.
long post
It seems to me we have the head in the clouds here in Beyond3D sometimes. I don't know a single comparison can be called biasing. Don't get me wrong, I can understand someone making a genuine error, like I can make sometimes, but while I am a console gamer I don't hate the PC. I didn't get emotional. Being aware of this definitely saves a lot of heartache down the road.Things change overtime. Crysis was supposed to have indirect lighting but they ditched it.
Well I be damned when one shot is facing the ground and the other is facing the sky with a 90 degree turn it is bound to look different!
Anyway I am outta here, just waste of time and it all taking the "sect" style turn with to much emotions involved biasing and ingoring proper posted comparisions aswell as not enough data for 100% conclusive answer. Also new thread for this stuff, chop it off.
The repetitive questioning of my methods do get annoying. I tried to understand how their solution works and I think I am almost spot on, at least for someone like me who isn't a developer. No one is saying that the GI isn't disabled on consoles, it might be a possibility but my eyes tell me otherwise. And the presentation's documents are pretty clear on certain things.Dude, considering how many times youve told us to trust what Crytek says and that they aren't lying, I'm finding it difficult to understand why you won't believe them yourself when they specifically say that the pcs settings on low are equivilent to console settings. You said yourself you haven't played the pc version and have only seen a single screenshot. Do you seriously think this is enough evidence to be basing such a contrary conclusion on?
I am very much in favour of something like that. Maybe Crytek would gladly accept an interview about technical details of their engine.But they seem to have had trouble reaching acceptable framerates on the consoles so decided to ditch GI at the last minute.
I know I would, since it seems so difficult to tell the difference between a few spot lights and GI.
If Nebula of all people, thinks GI is off, it probably is.(and why did he change his name to Neb?)
Someone should contact Grandmaster and get him to look into it (ask Crytek perhaps) Crytek shouldn't get credit for implmenting realtime GI on consoles when it doesn't actually ship with the retail title.
That's a very good comparison and it shows really well how GI works. I couldn't match the view either. I took these pictures and I think GI might be disabled on consoles for that particular place, but them it seems enabled in other places.I made 2 screenshots from PC version, from high (GI off) and Extreme (GI on) settings (sorry, without quick save function it's not easy to match the view)
http://img717.imageshack.us/i/crysis22011040101361437.jpg/
http://img22.imageshack.us/i/crysis22011040101435487.jpg/
Now, we need screenshot from 360/PS3 version![]()