jetrii said:
Words Of Wisdom said:
Mummelmann said:
The graphics, textures and fixed mesh is one thing. Post processing and lighting/shadows in real time and emotive AI that acts naturally (or even at all) outside of scripts are the real taxing bits of a game, sound also draws quite a lot, especially in games with so much going on.
The animations, synching, particle effects, tracers and lighting in the E3 2005 trailer of KZ2 is beyond this generation of hardware (even top end PC's can't do that in-game just yet).
When this eventually happens, it'll be a PC title, that much I'm sure of, and it'll be a few years yet.
Like the OP says; the graphics are uncannily close to the target render, but the target remains a render at that, with many additions and details the PS3 (or 360) hardware has no chance of putting forth. |
Surprisingly so. When I first looked into such things, I was really shocked at the amount of resources sound can use when there is a lacking of dedicated hardware for it.
|
If you think sound is a resource hog, don't even look at shadows. Most games have pretty bad shadows, and the ones that have good shadows use tricks to make it look better. Real quality shadows are amazingly taxing and can lower frame rates by over 50%. I think next generation we will see a slow transition from using tricks that complicate programming to actually using dynamic elements that makes things easier but also require a lot more power.
|
I'm actually keenly aware of shadows too and this comes from experience of PC gaming with an older machine. The difference between shadows off and shadows even on low quality is painful if your PC isn't up to spec.
Of course, on old hardware I've noticed that few things will bring it to its knees faster than particle effects like smoke.
Sound is just interesting because I had no idea it was so taxing on the machine.
