Graphics Crown still Crysis ?

[Staude]

ultima said:

Staude said:

 

Im not gonna talk about the rest. This is enough.

 

I said it had more polygonal detail because it has more polygons on its char models ? Like I said crysis uses normal maps for the char model details. Quite simply. Bump maps are a thing of the past. Normal and specular maps are what's the industry standard now.

 

Regarding the lighting engine, that's debatable. In some aspects sure, but in others it's been surpassed. I'm thinking particularly killzone 2 and all the different reflections in the game.. That being a part of the lighting engine counts.

 

Now i'm not gonna accept assault by various people for stating what I did, so before this gets out of hand I suggest you both actually care to read my posts.. That is also something I recommend in the future as I hate to debate over something pointless and state the same thing multiple times.

First of all, I'm going to adress your last paragraph. I'm not trying to insult you or anything and I'm extremely sorry if it seemed that way. We're just having a debate here... As for suggesting we read your posts, I wouldn't have replied if I haven't read your post. I could've misunderstood a point, but I certainly read it. And you contradict yourself by replacing half of my post by dots, implying you didn't care enough to read it.

Seriously, what makes you say that Crysis has low-polygon models? Can you prove to me that the detail is achieved using normal mapping? And what makes you believe that both weren't using the technique, which would still point towards Crysis having higher-polygon character models? My view on this stands, normal maps are used to an extent for wrinkles and such, but you cannot replicate these models with normal mapping.

Killzone doesn't have a comparable lightning engine to Crysis. First of all it has pre-baked lightning. Killzone may look incredibly good, but the light sources are always in the same position, casting pre-baked shadows. In Crysis, it's all dynamic. You can wait in one spot for the time of day to change and totally change the way the environment looks. This applies to every console game. No game (to my knowledge) has a real-time lightning engine to even come close to Crysis.

And here's my closing comment. You seem to think that technically graphics are subjective; they aren't. Either a game looks technically impressive or it doesn't. It's like math, even if different people correctly evaluate it, the result should still be the same. Artistic graphics are subjective. For example, RFOM looks really good to me, even though it uses a very simple graphics engine.

I've seen multiple threads that summerises how many polygons are in various games including crysis. Originally I thought they were 60 k but that was aparently only the ones from the intro. If you look around you can also find videos and screens where they show off the added detail via normal maps. I'm not gonna look for it now because last I did I couldn't find it, and I don't really have the time to either.

 

Most people don't want to have change of day. For instance, I work on a total conversion mod for a game engine from 2001. Even that old one has a dynamic time of day that can be set instantly and changed in realtime with no slowdown. The reason it's not used in many games is probably because they need it to be this time a day or this time aday to portray the game the way they want it to be portrayed.

Graphical talk like this IS subjective, if nothing else then simply because people have different ways of achieving the same results and because we don't have detailed engine structure for every single game to compare them completely objectively.

 

However, in the aspects of polygons vs so many other things, we can look at what the various things push, how they do it and draw a conclusion based partially on our own subjective opinion and partially on the objective data that we have, filling in the missing pieces with subjective opinion.