The Order: 1886

I can confirm that headshots are a thing. The hitbox just seems smaller than I'm used to, I think. Also, I really miss gyro aiming (with Move or DS4) in this game. Other than that though, I'm enjoying it. I like the stories and characters so far. Lots of standout graphics and very few flaws. I saw one animation where someone just rotated on the spot before starting walking in a certain direction that stood out, and having conversations on a loop is very understandable, but still takes you out of it a bit. I'd almost prefer a button prompt for repeating it if I didn't listen the first time I proximity based triggered it, or actually have the chance to miss the conversation.

I'm currently visiting 'Q' ;)
 
MJP said:
In that image it looks like it's specular occlusion from the character's proxy occluder. It's not rasterized, it's an analytical calculation done using the position, size, and orientation of the capsule.
Click to expand...
Awesome.

As for the projection...we rasterize with a standard perspective projection, but afterwards we apply a full-screen shader to simulate barrel distortion.
Click to expand...
Figured it was something along those lines. Too bad rasterizers aren't happy with arbitrary projections.

MJP said:
I assure you that we shipped with MSAA. :p
Click to expand...
I'm willing to believe it.

It's hard, there's no visible geometric aliasing on thicker objects, and trying to pick out what's going on with extremely thin stuff in a very stable grainy image is finicky. Next time put more aliasing into your game! :yep2:
 
I've reached a point where I have to shamefully admit that I got my arse handed to me even on the default difficulty level. I guess I need a different tactic, because I died after a long gun-battle 7-8 times I think before I gave up frustrated.
 
Well I finally completed the game.

Firstly, it's been said to death but I have to repeat - just wow at graphics - it really is like playing CGI...amazing stuff and worth paying just for that (note I paid ~£20). As I've said before, I see this as a bit of an interactive movie experence, I would pay ~£10 go to the cinema to watch a 1:30 film, so why not double to interact with a similar media for ~7/8 hours.

Gamplay wise - so yeah, I get the main gripes. There are some good moments and overal the gunplay is pretty solid (although I couldn't find a shoulder-switch option which for me is a must in 3rd person shooters). I found some of the 'interactive' moments a bit 'forced' - almost 'why even ask me to press a button?' - one example being the top of the zeplin (I'll say no more). I found the balance of gamplay vs interactive movie a bit imbalanced, I'd like to have had more full action moments...it's a bit frustrating that the game can be great (running and climbing is also pretty well done) and then bring it crashing down a bit with a moment of walking really slowly. I get these moments are needed in games, I just felt the balance was off.

Overall I thought it was a solid game - 7.5/10 - I don't understand the bad reviews at all, I can see this getting a 6 from some areas but lower seems like clickbait rubbish.
 
goonergaz said:
Well I finally completed the game.

Firstly, it's been said to death but I have to repeat - just wow at graphics - it really is like playing CGI...amazing stuff and worth paying just for that (note I paid ~£20). As I've said before, I see this as a bit of an interactive movie experence, I would pay ~£10 go to the cinema to watch a 1:30 film, so why not double to interact with a similar media for ~7/8 hours.

Gamplay wise - so yeah, I get the main gripes. There are some good moments and overal the gunplay is pretty solid (although I couldn't find a shoulder-switch option which for me is a must in 3rd person shooters). I found some of the 'interactive' moments a bit 'forced' - almost 'why even ask me to press a button?' - one example being the top of the zeplin (I'll say no more). I found the balance of gamplay vs interactive movie a bit imbalanced, I'd like to have had more full action moments...it's a bit frustrating that the game can be great (running and climbing is also pretty well done) and then bring it crashing down a bit with a moment of walking really slowly. I get these moments are needed in games, I just felt the balance was off.

Overall I thought it was a solid game - 7.5/10 - I don't understand the bad reviews at all, I can see this getting a 6 from some areas but lower seems like clickbait rubbish.
Click to expand...

Shoulder switch is on touchpad the only problem with controls.
 
35932-0-losdoh-de-homero-en-las-20-temporadas.png
 
i had to see it for real and not in youtube vids, so i bought it.
Some Jaws dropped at the graphics

0jnCCJT.jpg


"excuse me sir, where are the toilets?"

4hqtogc.jpg
 
Laa-Yosh said:
Subsurface scattering is a possible implementation to represent translucency.

The Order uses a different, more simple implementation that has nothing to do with SSS.

Just getting some definitions straight here... again...
Click to expand...
It's more complicated than that, since almost all games have a hard differentiation between transparency and highly-scattered light, where "complex" generalized translucency doesn't exist at all. Hence "scattering" is used to refer to the light-spreading effect of extremely smeary translucency, rather than to a particular algorithm that explicitly checks scattering paths.

RAD's own slides refer to "scattering kernel" when talking about their skin diffuse, to differentiate from the usual "cosine kernel."

//===========================

(I was also using the weird wording to poke fun at the game; the image I linked is of a very obviously incorrect pathological case.)
 
Yeah I understand that games have to do things differently... My point was to try to keep it clear that realtime skin shaders are still using very rough approximations, at least in the tech, as stuff like Jorge Jimenez's work is looking very very convincing now. But I still think it's important not to confuse terminology, and this applies to a lot of other tech as well.
 
Laa-Yosh said:
But I still think it's important not to confuse terminology, and this applies to a lot of other tech as well.
Click to expand...
My point is that there are two languages being used here. The use of "sub-surface scattering" within the games industry makes sense.

It's understandable that you'd be annoyed at the realities of language divergence, and might want to bring consistency across industries, but there's nothing intrinsically "less correct" about the usage in gaming. (It might wind up being more susceptible to rapid change as technology evolves, however.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
PC cooling
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Scott_Arm
S
R
Gaming and gaming hardware trends
2
Replies
23
Views
954
Remij
R
W
New Qualcomm silicon for new Surface May 2024
Replies
19
Views
1K
Pressure
P
I
The first Evil Within still has remarkably sophisticated lighting
Replies
2
Views
493
Phantom88
P
S
The Talos Principle 2 (Nov 2nd '23)
Replies
11
Views
1K
Globalisateur
Globalisateur
Back
Top