![]() ![]() ![]() The room with the 'ice' particles does turn blue but it's hard to say if that's light from the sphere that's generating them or the particles themselves. I've looked at this a few times and I can't really figure out if the particles are emitters in the GI solution. It's hard to say from a youtube video.Ĥ) Light emitting particles. Most likely MSAA but the shader aliasing looks solid as well. No jaggies visible to me in either video. There isn't a mind-blowing amount of texture detail here so its hard to say if there's any virtualized texture tech being used - at least nothing beyond ue3.ģ) AA. Obviously the mountains scream it and the main character's spikiness looks obvious, but are these displacement maps on conventional meshes? Are they using any higher order surfaces in general? It doesn't look like it to me.Ģ) Textures. Seems like a big deal to me.Īnyway, there are a few things here that haven't come up yet that I'm curious about people's impressions of:ġ) Tessellation. It's clever and efficient and now it's implemented in what's probably the most licensed game engine. I mean, the voxel cone tracing algorithm is awesome. ![]() Your choice of engine is merely how you like your toolset, or appropriate to your pipeline.Īs to why they continue to work that way? Because a lot of studios have large investments in not just architecture but also people.I was kind of expecting more discussion here. Tools are merely a way to get a vision that already exists in concept, to life. Which kind of goes exactly to the OPs question of How is something like COD4 done with scripting only?īecause tools dont matter artists matter – engineers matter. Programmer have been happy doing what we do with C++ alone. I’d qualify this to say approachable for the non-programmer. Unity and Unreal Engine made the whole process much more approachable. Lots of older, and even some modern game engines are very archaic, if you do one with wrong in a 5 part import process it breaks, you need tools and scripts to just import a simple asset/texture/model, a lot of basic functionality that should be exposed to artists and designers aren’t, and they have to talk with a programmer to get simple functionality added, which may take 10 minutes if it’s an easy fix, or weeks if they engine wasn’t designed around it. A lot of older game engines were just designed around having workable level design interface and managing assets/data and that’s pretty much it, everything else was hacked together, stuff hidden in menus, not a lot of options exposed, requiring a bunch of external tools, etc. Unreal Engine 3 and 4 were created around making something that’s great for designers and artists to work in. They are time savers, makes the artist job less tedious, and they make everything look better.īut yes, studios do often get stuck working with the same engine and editor because it works, and hundreds of people have a streamlined workflow using the existing editor. There’s reason why PBR, Substance Painter/Designer, photogrammetry, etc, were so quickly adopted. But studios generally cannot decide on a new workflow in the middle of full on production. Tools and workflows matter, especially if they allow artists to work faster and more efficiently. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |