Only one light source at a time?

[S3B4ST13N]

Yeah, instead you see those: https://www.frontier.co.uk/careers

Are you done with that foot yet? I think I see bone.

In particular:
https://www.frontier.co.uk/careers/disciplines/programming/graphics-engine-programmer

GRAPHICS ENGINE PROGRAMMER
QUALIFICATIONS

2 or more years games industry experience.
Graphics programmer on at least one game.
Enjoy exploring new graphics technology.

SKILLS

Advanced programming in C++ and HLSL
Strong 3D Maths
Expert knowledge of modern rendering pipelines
Familiarity with real-time rendering techniques
Optimisation for different hardware architectures


... shock. It's almost like COBRA is written in the same language as many other engines. :O :O :O :O

 

[Shadowdancer]

... shock. It's almost like COBRA is written in the same language as many other engines. :O :O :O :O

Maths?

 

[S3B4ST13N]

Maths?

3D maths

 

[Stachel]

In particular:
https://www.frontier.co.uk/careers/disciplines/programming/graphics-engine-programmer

GRAPHICS ENGINE PROGRAMMER
QUALIFICATIONS

2 or more years games industry experience.
Graphics programmer on at least one game.
Enjoy exploring new graphics technology.

SKILLS

PAY: Below three quarters of what you'd get around the corner... if you were good enough to be hired by anyone except Frontier.

This poor pay probably alone explains half of Elite Dangerous' bugs.

 

[Tomtom]

I seem to remember a comment from FDEV that the current lighting engine is merely a simple placeholder for a better system they are working on.
[...]
PS: That gives some hope for improvement, but who knows if it will ever see the light of day.

Pun intended?

[...] Any Cobra credit on any Frontier game before 2013.

Actually any mention at all during the first 25 years in which it was supposed to exist.

Feel free to waste your time searching, but I'll bet you'll find none of this exists.

Apart from the fact that the Cobra game engine logo appears on the back of the Kinectimals game sleeve, printed in 2010? It took all of thirty seconds to find, and didn't even need any advanced google-fu. It's so easy to find that I'm not even going to post a link. I can be edgy like that.

Granted, 2010 isn't 2004 or even 1998 but it is solid proof that the claim that "the Cobra engine didn't exist before 2013" is objectively wrong and anybody who holds this belief needs to reassess.

Jus' sayin'


Not sure what the pros and cons of working for Frontier have to do with anything.

 

[Stachel]

the Cobra game engine logo appears on the back of the Kinectimals game sleeve, printed in 2010

Thanks.

Granted, 2010 isn't 2004 or even 1998

Or even 1988, as claimed by Braben.

 

[ArchEmperor]

PAY: Below three quarters of what you'd get around the corner... if you were good enough to be hired by anyone except Frontier.

https://i.imgur.com/qlWgMIL.png

This poor pay probably alone explains half of Elite Dangerous' bugs.

It is because most programmers would PAY for working on Elite. That they get some pay at all shows how good they really are.

 

[Shadowdancer]

Granted, 2010 isn't 2004 or even 1998

I'm not sure if the whole "made with <engine>" fad or generally having anything beyond publisher and studio logos feature prominently on the box even was a thing so far back. Today you have everything from the engine through the usual middleware suspects (Havok, SpeedTree, …), down to the Villeroy&Boch toilets featured in the "tools credits" which are far more prominent that the people who worked on a project, but unless you had licensed a big ticket piece like Unreal, nobody gave a damn for the longest time.

(edit) Of note, the marketing page says "This modern Cobra platform represents the current state of an ongoing investment that Frontier has made in its proprietary engine technology and development tools since 1988", so the progeny would be in spirit and general experience much more than in an unbroken line of "Cobra engines" dating back to '88 (which would be ridiculous considering how much has changed since then.

 

[Neutronium]

I actually think that Elite does have multiple shadow sources. It's just that there is only one star at a time that gets a shadow source within a system.

The other shadow sources are vehicle headlamps. I seem to recall being out in my SRV on a planet surface, seeing the shadow cast by the star, and shadows cast by my ship and SRV headlamps.

Another good easy way to see multiple shadow sources in Elite is mining. Turn on the ship headlamps and watch as mined materials and limpets cast dual shadows on asteroids as they float around. One shadow for each of the two headlamps on the ship.

Correct. They decided to allow only one natural light source (i.e. star) to fully light and calculate shadows from. The remaining resources were allocated for close range lighting / shadowing (ship/srv/station/cockpit/lasers/guns/etc..etc..).
However if you go between two very close stars of different spectral classes you only get shadow from one star (the brightest) but you also get illumination from the lower strength one but without the shadow - you have to go very close to the orange/red one to see the effect. Try it on Castor (or Pollux - I just can't remember which one of those has 3 very close pairs of stars)

 

[Whitehair]

Or even 1988, as claimed by Braben.

Again... What is the relevance of the existence or not of a trademark or 'named' game engine to multiple light sources, and why the hell are you banging on about irrelevent off topic things?

Read the links that have been provided. All the correct information is in them.

 

[KillZoneGB]

PAY: Below three quarters of what you'd get around the corner... if you were good enough to be hired by anyone except Frontier.

https://i.imgur.com/qlWgMIL.png

This poor pay probably alone explains half of Elite Dangerous' bugs.

that's an eye opener.

only 28k in 2017, with brexit looming and with the cost of living(decent living), feel sorry for the programming team that still have student loans to pay off.

 

[S3B4ST13N]

I'm not sure if the whole "made with <engine>" fad or generally having anything beyond publisher and studio logos feature prominently on the box even was a thing so far back. Today you have everything from the engine through the usual middleware suspects (Havok, SpeedTree, …), down to the Villeroy&Boch toilets featured in the "tools credits" which are far more prominent that the people who worked on a project, but unless you had licensed a big ticket piece like Unreal, nobody gave a damn for the longest time.

I agree; I personally didn't really take any notice of engine advertisement until around the early 2000's; when UE2 was making itself famous with it's really awesome looking graphics in 2002/2003.

 

[dannysquid]

Correct. They decided to allow only one natural light source (i.e. star) to fully light and calculate shadows from. The remaining resources were allocated for close range lighting / shadowing (ship/srv/station/cockpit/lasers/guns/etc..etc..).
However if you go between two very close stars of different spectral classes you only get shadow from one star (the brightest) but you also get illumination from the lower strength one but without the shadow - you have to go very close to the orange/red one to see the effect. Try it on Castor (or Pollux - I just can't remember which one of those has 3 very close pairs of stars)

This is why I wonder if the problem is tied to shadow maps -- mind you, I don't know how ELITE does its shadows -- where calculating shadows across gigantic scales gives you all sorts of complicated mathematical problems.

These things are always trade-offs. Maybe it's a case where doing it this way is 100x faster or 10000x more memory efficient than doing it "properly".

Whatever, it won't be the case that it hasn't occurred to them or they're not good enough at maths or they're plotting to make us miserable or something.

 

[Stachel]

"This modern Cobra platform represents the current state of an ongoing investment that Frontier has made in its proprietary engine technology and development tools since 1988"

Well that's not true either. Frontier didn't exist then.

 

[Stachel]

that's an eye opener.

only 28k in 2017, with brexit looming and with the cost of living(decent living), feel sorry for the programming team that still have student loans to pay off.

I think it more likely many of Frontier's programmers are school leavers, so have no loan. There's no degree requirement in that Frontier job advert.

That's why the Frontier programmers' salary is so much below Jagex Cambridge, and 40% below the city average.

 

[Shadowdancer]

only 28k in 2017, with brexit looming and with the cost of living(decent living), feel sorry for the programming team that still have student loans to pay off.

Mind you, with a sample size of six under an unspecific "programmer" title. For what we know, those could all have been junior level web positions who left after a year. I doubt they'd have any employees if they weren't curving into competitive pay.

 

[CMDR-AD]

Correct. They decided to allow only one natural light source (i.e. star) to fully light and calculate shadows from. The remaining resources were allocated for close range lighting / shadowing (ship/srv/station/cockpit/lasers/guns/etc..etc..).
However if you go between two very close stars of different spectral classes you only get shadow from one star (the brightest) but you also get illumination from the lower strength one but without the shadow - you have to go very close to the orange/red one to see the effect. Try it on Castor (or Pollux - I just can't remember which one of those has 3 very close pairs of stars)

Indeed.

And the shadow source star does switch to the star nearest the CMDRs position, in multi-star systems. Since patch 2.3, the shadow source will bizarrely "fly" between each star as the CMDR moves between them. In systems with widely separated stars, this results in a very obvious movement of shadows across the ship and cockpit (shadows coming from no obvious light source, while the shadow source is moving).

A strange choice to animate this movement so slowly and obviously, unless it's a bug. I'd much prefer to see one shadow source star fade out, then instantly move to the next star position, and fade in again.

Hopefully this will change in 2.4, I didn't get time to check for it during the beta.

 

[Shadowdancer]

And the shadow source star does switch to the star nearest the CMDRs position, in multi-star systems. Since patch 2.3, the shadow source will bizarrely "fly" between each star as the CMDR moves between them. In systems with widely separated stars, this results in a very obvious movement of shadows across the ship and cockpit (shadows coming from no obvious light source, while the shadow source is moving).

That's already an improvement over the older/initial solution of having a hard cut between those situations, which was a lot more in everyone's face. I don't think that has changed for 2.4 though.

 

[Red Anders]

... in Cambridge. You're right .. it looks horrible.

http://www.visitcambridge.org/image...e-Bridge-of-Sighs-1.jpg&action=PageHeader3Col

That's the trouble with Cambridge. It's full of punts.

 

[Jenner]

Let's get back on topic, folks. This thread is about light sources, not pay analysis of programmers in Cambridge.

Also, leave out the personal sniping.

Thanks.