CGI-Quality said:
It'd be "nicer" if you had explanations. You're just running around touting: "ALL GRAPHICS ARE TRICKS"!! Tricks are used in game visuals, sure, but since you said EVERY game is nothing but tricks, can you elaborate further? |
Ok lets see, Take a fantasy setting, guy A has skin texture and armor on top. Guy B has the same armor texture but when you equip his model with armor it dumps the skin underneath because
1) you cant see it at the time
2) it saves memory for other things.
There simple example of a trick, ALL games use them.
WereKitten said:
KZ2 uses Quincunx, but samples 2x (on an X elongated g-buffer if I remember well), thus it's an MSAA (MultiSampling) technique and it would have been less costly to just use a pixel-grid 2xMSAA instead of the 2x(M)QSAA. They probably chose to also go Quincunx anyway because it gave better smoothing of low-angled edges and having pixel-crisp textures was not a priority in a game that uses so much motion blur, particles and postprocessing. Google for killzone 2 multisampling, you'll find discussions on beyond3D and proceedings of dev talks from GG about building a deferred-rendering MSAA engine. And what exactly does "scripted AI" mean? All Ai is scripted in some measure, the point is how flexible and reactive it is to the environment dynamics, including the player actions. And KZ2's is actually pretty advanced in dynamic terrain navigation, squad behaviour of the enemies and so on: proof is that it won the 2009 AiGameDev.com award for the best game AI. And GG produced some literature on the use of techniques for squad tactial behaviour that were previously only used in RTS games. Again, the Crytek guys are trying to sell their engine to developers. It's their job. The day a finisihed game will ship with physics, lighting and AI that all put KZ2 to shame will be the day when we can assess which one is the most technologically advanced in the contraints of real-world console gaming. |
Ovr 80% of PS3 games use Quincux. I know exactly how Quincux works. And I'm well aware of the discussions involving G-buffer. But no, you are very wrong in saying it would be less taxing to use 2xMSAA.
Also recently mentioned on this site is MLAA. Now the PS3 will start to use a modded version of which doesn't include vertex computing. Thats because SPU's cannot do Vertex computing. Yes MLAA does a tremendous job of edges, but again causes blurred textures. MLAA works via blending the 2 colours either side. Which causes any textures to appear fuzzy within this blend. But it does do a great job on the edges as I mentioned. Also MLAA like QSAA takes a much less hit on system resources. Try Crysis with any of these options. Noteably the best overall picture ( if your system can take it ) is MSAA. As much as 20-30FPS can be gained when using QSAA or MLAA on Crysis, but blurrs the textures somewhat.
This site is summed up right in this thread. The fact that anyone would even compare KZ2 to Crysis 1 was lol. But Crysis 2?
I love discussing tings with you and in no way am having a go at you. :)
But I really should drop it, because the discussion is just so wrong in this thread.
I thought this was about crysis 2 for consoles ? (vs KZ2)
Which would be a lot less LOLZ and more of an actual topic to be debated.
A Kz2 Vs Crysis 2 on PC thread would deserve a lock and a ban for stupidity.
@Selnor
Just note that:
- I'm not talking of a simple QSAA application on the final image. MSAA (including multi-Quincunx) techniques in a deferred renderer can work very differently than in a forward renderer depending on what buffer you apply them to.
- Techniques of edge blurring can indeed cause color artifacts, but the deal is not to touch textures far from edges, have a look at the rare GOWIII static pictures and tell me if you see overall texture degradation.
- And yes, SPUs can do vertex computing when it makes sense performance-wise... after all vertices are just vectors of numbers and the SPUs are general purpose processors. The Phyre engine (licensed for free by Sony and on which, for example, Flower is based) implements SPU-based tessellation.
With those notes, I'm out as well.
Edit: added the link
Crysis 2 looks better
they both look awesome but the more important thing is if crysis 2 will have a better gameplay than the first one , if not than it won`t matter how good it look`s it will still be only a good shooter but maybe i`m just to old fashioned :P
For me, Killzone 2 is still the best looking game on consoles. Crysis 2 surely will rape it on PC, a hard one on consoles. EA didn't manage to do beat anything with Bad Company 2 and let's face it, Crysis may be the best looking game ever but the engine...
| WereKitten said: So, let me understand something. Choosing the techniques you're going to use to ameliorate performance instead of screenshots is now "tricks" or something that is in any way despicable? Let me gliss over the MSAA/QSAA thing for a while (technically KZ2 uses a MSAA technique). It's certainly true that the Crysis 2 engine, for example, will focus much more on dynamic lighting than the KZ2 engine. The guys at Crytek are going to sell an engine. As such their agenda is to show off a wide variety of effects and to fill in what is commonly known as a feature matrix. Now let's judge their resume objectively: Crysis was the epitome of the feature matrix mentality. It was basically: we'll cram anything we could in our engine. If you need a PC that costs $4k to run it, who cares. Sooner or later the hardware costs will go down and you'll appreciate it at your budget level. It's basically an engine where people actually got kicks out of bad performance ("look, this game is so great visually that it runs at 10fps on my setup"). Now, on consoles you can't work in the same way. The hardware is fixed and you have to optimize for it until you get your 30fps. I give the Crytek guys the benefit of the doubt as they are esteemed professionals, but their track record on their ability to squeeze excellence out of constrained resources is quite unproven right now. It might very well be that in the end they will be able to crank out an excellent multiplatform engine for consoles that exceeds dedicated engines such as KZ2's when used in a real-world scenario. But to judge from a list of technical features and engine demo setups is very naive: what counts in the end is how all of it (graphics, streaming, AI, physics) comes together.
|
I remember Crysis running fine on high settings on my old 8800GT at nominal resolutions like 1280 by 720P. I don't believe Crysis was the result of anything but a desire to impart a certain look and environment onto the game. I don't believe there ought to be any doubt of their abilities to fit the game for 2 disntinct platforms (Console which means PS3 and 360 are almost identical on most counts) and PC when they have obviously set about from the start to do just that.
Arguing about track record is a red herring when they have staff members on board (Free Radical) whom are familiar with consoles and obvious technical expertise. I have seen few great studios stumbling on creating a console version and I suspect that fewer still from here on out will have problems due to vastly improved tools and libraries.
its best if people play killzone 2 instead, it looks amazing it really does.
even when you play it now it looks stunning, unfortunatly there doesnt seem to be a good bunch of screenies on the net for kz2.
...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...
PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk
really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
