The Star Citizen Thread v5
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
If ever there was evidence of true delusion from the faithful, there it is.
What is your agenda?
I have a meeting over lunch and then it is back to here for dessert.
Can you explain exactly what you mean by "much simpler"?
Incidentally the only way to make this fair is for you to post a screenshot of SC's PG landscape generated by your own machine.
I have a Geforce GTX 970 which is a pretty standard consumer card. Post a screenshot of SC's PG landscape generated on a card like that to make it a fair test.
I await your screenshots....
Never mind.
Last edited:
I have just realized: did CIG show some of the "I am Star Citizen" videos on Citizencon?
This is a subject that interests me as I actually have created landscapes for a games company many years ago. I did something with some basic PG to create snow features.
I simply have no idea how "complex" SC's PG is beyond the handcrafted stuff, because you can't see what is PG in the video. I assume that the height map and mountains are.
With ED, because it's available for me to use there is some variations in "rules" which generate certain features and textures. Planets have different textures, impact craters and tectonic features. Nothing quite like that is evident in the SC planetary stuff I've seen yet. The textures look fine, but so far because they've only really shown a very similar textures on planets I'm assuming they are hand crafted to look like earth terrain. The rock features are placed as they demonstrated in the (very interesting) video. So as far as the PG tech goes, I just don't know if it's more complex because they haven't shown us enough variation and it's not on my machine to play with.
At the end of the day, SC's PG is being used like a "fill with texture" feature in a paint package. It's being used to blast a vast area with land stuff and then the artists are going in and adjusting it. Nothing wrong with that for a serviceable game world size, what remains to be seen is how practical this approach is, my thought is we'll have some very nice high detailed areas - but lots of filled desert areas in between.
I simply have no idea how "complex" SC's PG is beyond the handcrafted stuff, because you can't see what is PG in the video. I assume that the height map and mountains are.
With ED, because it's available for me to use there is some variations in "rules" which generate certain features and textures. Planets have different textures, impact craters and tectonic features. Nothing quite like that is evident in the SC planetary stuff I've seen yet. The textures look fine, but so far because they've only really shown a very similar textures on planets I'm assuming they are hand crafted to look like earth terrain. The rock features are placed as they demonstrated in the (very interesting) video. So as far as the PG tech goes, I just don't know if it's more complex because they haven't shown us enough variation and it's not on my machine to play with.
At the end of the day, SC's PG is being used like a "fill with texture" feature in a paint package. It's being used to blast a vast area with land stuff and then the artists are going in and adjusting it. Nothing wrong with that for a serviceable game world size, what remains to be seen is how practical this approach is, my thought is we'll have some very nice high detailed areas - but lots of filled desert areas in between.
Last edited:
Yes, clips of them filled up the hour plus delay for the "big show" that was awful.
EDIT: The show was awful, not the clips... well not as awful as the show.
Last edited:
Nice try, but we were comparing the terrain shown on an in-engine video. I posted a blurry screenshot from a video, so you already had an advantage from the start. Show me an real-time in-engine video and that will be a fair test.
What do you see in either picture that is in any way 'special'?
- it's a nice blue skybox.
- there's a metric ton of DoF (probably in combination with a cryengine's traditional gallon of chromatic aberation) this looks somewhat like a haze effect, but it's very uniform so is more likely just intended to blur distant detail to reduce pop-in.
- the image has a bunch of hand-placed assets on the horizon, and probably the giant rocks to the left (this was hand-crafted by a developer - and is comparable to 'Dixon Dock' or an engineer's base in ED).
- the foreground has very nice ground textures, but that high-res area fades very quickly with range. I don't know if that's intended or not.
- it has shadows from a single light source.
I don't know if there's something I'm missing - the handcrafted bits look good, as you'd expect (Dixon Dock etc look great also).
Last edited:
Sorry but hand crafted levels is nothing new, and ED does not use them.
You can actually see the PG terrain get replaced with the handcrafted one in that video.
clearly this is faked as well
heres a video of it
[video=youtube_share;nJLiB9z2Teo]https://youtu.be/nJLiB9z2Teo[/video]
That's still more simple graphics, they look a bit dated, like something from 2007.
Last edited:
…and yet, it's vastly more complex than anything CIG has ever shown. And it's actual in-game and in-client, as opposed to their special-purpose dazzle-reel stuff.
Or, wait, are you talking about what CIG showed? Because yes, their demo has a lot of the hallmarks of the kind of pre-baked non-dynamic world we saw in the late-Source/early-UE3 games of that year, only with less polish as one would expect.
Last edited:
So that makes SC's graphics look like they are from 2004?
Folks, he is getting us to go in circles on ED, again.
Let us not detract from the fact that what was shown to us was primarily hand crafted terrain while going at high speed across the proc gen terrain to hide its lack of detail.
Squadron 42 was delayed, again, despite CR himself promoting the demo beforehand.
Several threads popping up on RSI and reddit with disgruntled backers
The demo was full of distracting graphical bugs
Planet tech was not fully demoed, instead they showed us a mission that is likely not even representative of how missions will actually work
Floating buggy, no tread marks
No demonstration of updated space combat
Landing still looks stupid
Demo was a pit of wasted money when they have a game to finish
At least CR was straight with us about what still needs to get done...no dates, but at least he articulated what to expect
Let us not detract from the fact that what was shown to us was primarily hand crafted terrain while going at high speed across the proc gen terrain to hide its lack of detail.
Squadron 42 was delayed, again, despite CR himself promoting the demo beforehand.
Several threads popping up on RSI and reddit with disgruntled backers
The demo was full of distracting graphical bugs
Planet tech was not fully demoed, instead they showed us a mission that is likely not even representative of how missions will actually work
Floating buggy, no tread marks
No demonstration of updated space combat
Landing still looks stupid
Demo was a pit of wasted money when they have a game to finish
At least CR was straight with us about what still needs to get done...no dates, but at least he articulated what to expect
- Status