TarrySruman Posted September 23, 2013 Report Posted September 23, 2013 The advantage being that you dont need to wait an hour to see what your lights look like in-game. Quote
FMPONE Posted September 23, 2013 Report Posted September 23, 2013 The advantage being that you dont need to wait an hour to see what your lights look like in-game. Having worked with both, it doesn't end up being an advantage, you just sit there tweaking stuff endlessly that needn't be tweaked. The Source bounce light system is way better, if you could remove compiling from the equation it would be hands down. The problem with NS2 lighting is that you can't set ambient light to go across the entire map uniformly, and the skybox has no impact on level lighting. Two huge problems that hold the engine back IMO, but then again it reflects the nature of the game (total darkness is sometimes required, such as when aliens cut out the power in a room) TarrySruman 1 Quote
TarrySruman Posted September 24, 2013 Report Posted September 24, 2013 Fully dynamic bounce lighting would be absurdly expensive wouldnt it? Or has some super bitchin engine of the future solved that problem already Quote
Thrik Posted September 24, 2013 Report Posted September 24, 2013 CryEngine has probably been doing that since 1987. Quote
Puddy Posted September 24, 2013 Report Posted September 24, 2013 Absurdly is the right word here. Quote
Rick_D Posted September 24, 2013 Report Posted September 24, 2013 cryengine GI is pretty decent, 10ms constant cost though and not quite as good as a precalculated approach. but they have it and it's not obscenely expensive. Quote
Taylor Swift Posted October 20, 2013 Report Posted October 20, 2013 awsome. i hope ns nothing will be made Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.