Unreal Engine 3.0 demo wows GDC

[DudeMiester]

I wonder if UE3 will have lightmapping as good as these guys:

http://www.artyshock.net/technology/demos_e.php

I tried the first two demos and all I have to say is WOW! The colours are so rich.

 

[Ostsol]

I think one of those movies from GDC 2004 mentioned that lighting and shadowing could be burnt into lightmaps for static geometry and lights.

EDIT: Though I have no idea what lighting model the use for that. . .

 

[Blazkowicz]

Anyway, here's some things that come to mind that Source supports that CryEngine doesn't:

Radiosity lightmaps
Ambienty lighting based on radiosity data
Cube-map specular

I believe the lightmaps in Quake 1 are "radiosity lightmaps" as well

 

[Ostsol]

Anyway, here's some things that come to mind that Source supports that CryEngine doesn't:

Radiosity lightmaps
Ambienty lighting based on radiosity data
Cube-map specular

I believe the lightmaps in Quake 1 are "radiosity lightmaps" as well

They likely only handled direct lighting and didn't account for reflections at all. Another point with Source's radiosity lighting is that there is an indirect lighting component for dynamic models as well, rather than just basic ambient lighting.

 

[ANova]

I decided to play some Far Cry last night and then afterwards HL2 and while the per-pixel dynamic lighting in FC is nice, I think Valve did a heck of a job using static maps coupled with blooms and HDR; to the point where I think HL2 just looks better. Of course I also think HL2 has superior quality textures and art design, but that's all imo of course.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both forms, the performance difference between FC and HL2 being the major one that comes to mind. At the same time dynamic lighting also allows for some interesting effects that are otherwise unattainable with static lighting.

 

[hovz]

I decided to play some Far Cry last night and then afterwards HL2 and while the per-pixel dynamic lighting in FC is nice, I think Valve did a heck of a job using static maps coupled with blooms and HDR; to the point where I think HL2 just looks better. Of course I also think HL2 has superior quality textures and art design, but that's all imo of course.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both forms, the performance difference between FC and HL2 being the major one that comes to mind. At the same time dynamic lighting also allows for some interesting effects that are otherwise unattainable with static lighting.

there is no hdr in half life 2

 

[ANova]

I decided to play some Far Cry last night and then afterwards HL2 and while the per-pixel dynamic lighting in FC is nice, I think Valve did a heck of a job using static maps coupled with blooms and HDR; to the point where I think HL2 just looks better. Of course I also think HL2 has superior quality textures and art design, but that's all imo of course.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both forms, the performance difference between FC and HL2 being the major one that comes to mind. At the same time dynamic lighting also allows for some interesting effects that are otherwise unattainable with static lighting.

there is no hdr in half life 2

We already went over this. Look at the sun in HL2.

 

[Ostsol]

there is no hdr in half life 2

We already went over this. Look at the sun in HL2.

Well, to be fair, HDR is not required for bloom.

 

[hovz]

anova is an idiot in all honesty. he doesnt even know what hdr is.

BLOOM IS NOT HDR GENIUS.

 

[ANova]

anova is an idiot in all honesty. he doesnt even know what hdr is.

BLOOM IS NOT HDR GENIUS.

HDR is incorporated to some degree. Yes I know the difference.

You continually come off as an ignorant SOB hovs.

 

[bloodbob]

anova is an idiot in all honesty. he doesnt even know what hdr is.

BLOOM IS NOT HDR GENIUS.

HDR is incorporated to some degree. Yes I know the difference.

You continually come off as an ignorant SOB hovs.

ANova the sun isn't a bloom effect its a light flare which is added in when the CPU thinks your looking near the sun it adds some sprites. Sure HL2 implements HDR rending in some parts of the pipeline but so does every other PS2.0+ game it doesn't make them all magically support HDR. The only game out their at the moment which supports HDR is far cry.

 

[AlexV]

SHould HDR be as noticeable as some ppl think?I think not.

 

[_xxx_]

SHould HDR be as noticeable as some ppl think?I think not.

It should make those "shiny/gloosy/plasticky everything" surfaces even more shiny until we all get blind just by looking at them.

 

[AlexV]

I think that the improvements will/should be subtle, rather than the impression that the in-your-face bloom has induced.The shiny things will be shinier then ever, sure, but that black will be a lot "blacker"TM also, so we`ll probably reach balance(I hope).

 

[aranfell]

Should HDR be as noticeable as some ppl think?I think not.

In the HDR images (not games, alas) that I've looked at, the HDR effects were not, in fact, very noticable. It was when I looked at similar non-HDR images that I noticed what fake washed-out indirect lighting I had been putting up with for all these years. It's like asking if edge anti-aliasing is noticable. No it isn't -- it is the aliased edges that are noticable, once one discovers that it doesn't have to be that way.

Enjoy, Aranfell

 

[AntShaw]

Screenshots do no justice.

Much better in motion.

 

[AlNom]

but that black will be a lot "blacker"TM also, so we`ll probably reach balance(I hope).

As in, no more banding, which is most noticeable in Doom 3? HDR couldn't come any sooner.

 

[KimB]

SHould HDR be as noticeable as some ppl think?I think not.

Well, I've used it in FarCry, and while it's far from a perfect implementation, it still looks worlds better than without HDR. As far as I'm concerned, the comparison isn't even close. I mean, daylight is actually bright. Without HDR, you just can't have that effect.

 

[AlexV]

I`m not arguing the benefits of HDR, which are major IMO.I`m just saying that if done correctly it`s not something that jumps out, but rather a subtle and tasteful improvement. As somebody posted above, it`s not something that you notice per-se, but it`s something that opens your eyes to how crap things were before.I can`t comment on FarCry as I haven`t got a SM3.0 card to test it, but I`ve seen some pictures with bloom that made my eyes bleed, but perhaps that was just someone going overboard with some of the settings.

 

[KimB]

I`m not arguing the benefits of HDR, which are major IMO.I`m just saying that if done correctly it`s not something that jumps out, but rather a subtle and tasteful improvement.

Oh, it can be quite dramatic. I was very impressed the first time I walked from a dark cave outside with HDR on in FarCry.