Yeah that does look better than I thought it would. Performance will be the key factor. I'm hoping my 7870 + 3570k could push the game at full detail (or close to). Guess it depends on how much love PC is getting (other than TressFX)
Early reports talk about ~15-20 FPS hit, and zooming in into hair pulls the FPS down to low teens or even under
The video was taken on a GTX570.With what kind of hardware?
With what kind of hardware?
Compared to the earlier games, yes. Hence the jokes in some places that nV could always counter TressFX with BoobsFX.This is "smaller cup size"?
Shadows from single strands are also way too wide, would look better without them.The bounding box on Laras body is clearly too big indeed.
Someone at 3DC found these gameplay videos:
Appears that some rework of the the collision geometry could improve the results. Or didn't they take the new smaller cup size of Lara into account?
Yes, that is something a few others noted too. I guess they've chosen it to get a more visible effect and more movement, even if that isn't very realistic. But the mass or density of the hair should be a simple input parameter to the compute shader and therefore very easy to adjust. Furthermore, it would increase the realism, if the hair gets significantly heavier after Lara got underwater, maybe they should even reduce the amount of strands (and make them thicker) as it would be more appropriate for wet hair. But that's a task for the developer to adjust for it, the compute shader for the hair should be capable of it.For a brunette, the hair seems a bit too light. Reminds me of how my g/f's hair reacts to wind, but she has very very fine blonde hair.
I took a look at it in the lab last week and I was pretty wowed by it. On the PC she is rendered so well in the first place that this really adds to the overall effect of her in motion and adds to the immersion.