708
edits
User talk:Neo: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
m (minor stuff) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 370: | Line 370: | ||
::::::*Re: How the shadow mapping works. We are saying close to the same thing here. I don't dispute/care how the shadows are calculated from the characters' models, I just think they are generated on-the-fly, not being applied as decals. Decals are fixed images stored in a resource file, whereas these look more like shaded boxes being filled in on a grid using vertices (also you called our current shadow spot "dynamic", and it's the opposite, it's static). It would be very non-standard to use static decals for shadow mapping, but whatever. I don't argue Oni would have looked better as it was back then. If we could bring back that technology from within the code (which we probably can't, this is just a hypothetical sentence so don't flip out), then we could probably also increase the grid resolution and make it look nicer; otherwise it is just something I pointed out for the sake of pointing it out. And it's true that the ID didn't have the shadows, that's interesting. But I wouldn't automatically assume it looked crappy just because they didn't show it. Let's go a little easier on the cynicism pedal, now. | ::::::*Re: How the shadow mapping works. We are saying close to the same thing here. I don't dispute/care how the shadows are calculated from the characters' models, I just think they are generated on-the-fly, not being applied as decals. Decals are fixed images stored in a resource file, whereas these look more like shaded boxes being filled in on a grid using vertices (also you called our current shadow spot "dynamic", and it's the opposite, it's static). It would be very non-standard to use static decals for shadow mapping, but whatever. I don't argue Oni would have looked better as it was back then. If we could bring back that technology from within the code (which we probably can't, this is just a hypothetical sentence so don't flip out), then we could probably also increase the grid resolution and make it look nicer; otherwise it is just something I pointed out for the sake of pointing it out. And it's true that the ID didn't have the shadows, that's interesting. But I wouldn't automatically assume it looked crappy just because they didn't show it. Let's go a little easier on the cynicism pedal, now. | ||
::::::--[[User:Iritscen|Iritscen]] 21:30, 21 October 2008 (CEST) | ::::::--[[User:Iritscen|Iritscen]] 21:30, 21 October 2008 (CEST) | ||
:::::::*Hahaha, calm down guys, don't cut each other's throats on my talk page. | |||
:::::::*Yeah, Oni lighting/shading/"shadowing" pretty much sucks. Marathon has some sort of dynamic lighting, Quake II has both dynamic lighting and lightmaps (quite good ones for those times) while Oni only has static vertex shading which results in those dubious looking shadows Iritscen sees. Why? I really don't know. Maybe because neither Jason Jones or John Carmack worked on Oni, maybe because of the many large open spaces Oni has (both Marathon and Quake II featured mostly "tunnel" style worlds, I don't think there's a place in any of those that can be compared with the lab level for example). | |||
:::::::*Character shadows & shadow mapping: I have to review that movie but I doubt it that "decent" shadow mapping was possible at that time using a "normal" computer and as I said, there's absolutely no trace of such a thing in the executable. | |||
:::::::[[User:Neo|Neo]] | |||
---- | ---- | ||