Product Chat / How To Make This Scene Better

Author
Message
LeeBamber
TGC Lead Developer
24
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Jan 2000
Location: England
Posted: 18th Apr 2016 18:53
I have a few ideas for visual effects I can add relatively quickly (anti-alias/FXAA, higher quality textures, higher resolution lightmapping on the shadows, SSAO, cube mapping through a dirt map) using the existing DX9 engine. Before I sprinkle them in as we move forward, does anyone have any specific suggestions about how we can make this exact scene (picture attached) better? I mean very specific things that you might expect in a 2016 game that you don't see in the shot. it would be great to start a discussion using this image as a starting point, so I can get a feel for what different users feel is important when it comes to visuals. It has often been levelled at GameGuru that the graphics are from 2001 or similar, but I want to know specifically what that means and now it can be addressed. Is it just new better assets, or can the existing engine do something to help existing assets too? Thoughts welcome!
PC SPECS: Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit, Intel Core i7-5930K (PASSMARK:13645), NVIDIA Geforce GTX 980 GPU (PASSMARK:9762) , 32GB RAM

Attachments

Login to view attachments
Dagger_Valley
8
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Dec 2015
Location:
Posted: 18th Apr 2016 20:23 Edited at: 18th Apr 2016 20:24
As a new user with little to no knowledge on polygons or coding or anything, I rely on FXAA far more than most people (and I'm ok with that). I never felt graphics mattered as to how enjoyable a game is so I think allowing the user to create a scene with simple, crisp images (such as taking a brick wall picture from Google and slapping it on as a texture) would be very beneficial for novices like me.
Unknown Nomad Studio
8
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2015
Location:
Posted: 18th Apr 2016 20:59
Did that scene use baked or realtime lighting?
I think higher resolution realtime shadows, that are rendered further away and FXAA would help best. SSAO would help also in this scene.
And what "cube mapping through a dirt map" means?

And last, make sure player can tweak those setting, not everyone have computer like you.
PM
3com
10
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th May 2014
Location: Catalonia
Posted: 18th Apr 2016 21:23 Edited at: 18th Apr 2016 21:25
Quote: "or can the existing engine do something to help existing assets too? Thoughts welcome!"


I know you know the display of images in Assimp, I thought about it this afternoon when I visualized my animated door, made me feel for a moment as if I knew design models, but only for a moment. LOL



I know perhaps does not directly relate with, but being able to change texture on fly via script, would be nice, and video texture, well.... not comments.

3com
Laptop: Lenovo - Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 1005M @ 1.90GHz

OS: Windows 10 (64) - Ram: 4 gb - Hd: 283 gb - Video card: Intel(R) HD Graphics

PM
smallg
Community Leader
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Dec 2005
Location:
Posted: 18th Apr 2016 23:18
i think this is also due to the serious lack of scenery in a GG game, when you look at other engines you always see nice looking plants, trees and terrain or inside there will be lots of detail in the rooms... in GG this is one of the things still very much lacking... give us the ability to easily create a nice looking, animated landscape with a decent frame rate (grass needs a serious improvement too) and then i think it'll be a lot nicer to look at
lua guide for GG
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=398177770
windows 10
i5 @4ghz, 8gb ram, AMD R9 200 series , directx 11
m2design
GameGuru TGC Backer
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2010
Location:
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 00:34
I 'm only speculating but this appears to be a baked scene. If you can do some tricks with the present engine, to give this type of resolution in a real time
scene then more power to you. If this is a baked scene then I can't see much that really might improve on a very good rendition of the subject. Where you might place your efforts would be a trick or two that would make a realtime rendering of the same subject look this good. I don't mind the time it takes to lightmap but the huge increase in file size puts me off. Back to your original request ... the cast shadows are too dark and they fail to include the type of bounce light that happens in real life. Perhaps you might use a more typical daylight scene as your subject example. Darkness hides a lot ... that might be why we call it darkness.

I think the idea that GameGru scenes look dated comes from the quality of the models created and the textures used. If you can use any tricks to improve this aspect then I say go for it.
Windows 10,64 bit|AMD FX-6200 Six-core-3.80 Ghz |CPU PASSMARK 6,142 |Memory 10GB |NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 660 SC |GPU PASSMARK 4,114
Belidos
3D Media Maker
8
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Nov 2015
Playing: The Game
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 09:00
Yeah, I agree with M2d, about the only thing on the rendering side that is wrong with that image that I can see is the projected shadows, they're way too dark, and they need to be more opaque. Surface levels may be a little bit high too, there's a bit of "shimmer" on the wooden parts you wouldn't see in real life.

i7, NV960 4GB, 16GB memory, 2x 4TB Hybrid, Win10.
i5 , AMD 6770 1GB, 8GB memory, 512GB Generic SATAIII + 2TB Seagate Baracuda SATAIII, Win7.
i3, Radeon integrated graphics, 4GB memory, 512gB Generic SATAII, Win8.1.
Q6600, Intel integrated graphics, 2GB memory, 180GB Generic SATAII, WinXP.
HarryWever
3D Media Maker
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Jan 2010
Location: below Sea level
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 12:14
I think the most comments about graphics of 2001, is more related to the screenshots you see of GG. and i think the terrain and grass and trees plays a big role in those comments. i agree with smallg about that. if you see a screenshot, for some reason, you can immediately see that it is from GG.
It feels flat.
Individual setups with assets and proper light what Lee posted or some screenshots from Rolfy , feels much better. But i suspect that you also notice that in the framerate. i think people turn off the high setting to get better framerates, but then the depth looks gone.
Not much of a help..i know
Harry
Harry
When nothing goes right, go left
PM
wizard of id
3D Media Maker
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2006
Playing: CSGO
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 12:38
Get rid of the bloom for one it's useless, High-dynamic-range rendering regardless of requiring more resources, will be 100% better then the bloom, apparently it suppose to be adaptive and has been broken for a while now, it affects fog as well as objects, as well as indoor areas.

HDR rendering, will bring out crisp textures couple that with SSOA and your done, no need for fancy PBR. Of course Adaptive DoF will not hurt.

That is the biggest problem still using bloom instead of HDR.
Win7 pro, Intel 2500K @3.7ghz 660GTX 8gig ram 16tb HDD
MooKai
GameGuru TGC Backer
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Jul 2009
Location: World
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 14:04 Edited at: 19th Apr 2016 14:31
Anti-alias , some nice reflections on metal surfaces, hires grass, hires ground Tex.
And something heavy..... global illumination that would be great....
And no more pre baked scenes, should be all realtime, but that's only my personal opinion.



Edit: more than 1 type of grass per scene would be great.
Old school FPS fan, DOOM!!! Why GG not working on my AMIGA 500?
PM
Wolf
Forum Support
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Nov 2007
Location: Luxemburg
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 14:08 Edited at: 19th Apr 2016 14:11
Quote: "And no more pre baked scenes, should be all realtime, but that's only my personal opinion"


most games out there don't have that.

Quote: " It has often been levelled at GameGuru that the graphics are from 2001 or similar, but I want to know specifically what that means and now it can be addressed"


Its the flat lighting in the engine and peoples horrible memories. I've had the same argument with people in skype and it usually boils down to them remembering the oldies looking far better than they actually do. Before making such a comment, googling for screenshots of games of that time period helps a lot.



-Wolf

"When I contradict myself, I am telling the truth"
"absurdity has become necessity"
MooKai
GameGuru TGC Backer
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Jul 2009
Location: World
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 14:19
That's right, most games don't have that.
Do GG need to follow the mass or should GG go its own way?
Old school FPS fan, DOOM!!! Why GG not working on my AMIGA 500?
PM
Wolf
Forum Support
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Nov 2007
Location: Luxemburg
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 14:32
It's simply because we don't have any methods to compute shadows effectively for many dynamic light sources at the same time, even on todays machines.
We can only render a few dynamic lights effectively in current games, anything else causes a ton of problems. My point is not about going its own way, its that these other games don't do it for a reason. That reason being its currently not possible. You would need an absolute pro at game design to do something decent with only dynamic lighting. A lot of games are good at giving you the illusion that everything is lit dynamically but I have yet to find a single one without prebaking of any kind.
And that would also murder the performance forever.



-Wolf
"When I contradict myself, I am telling the truth"
"absurdity has become necessity"
MooKai
GameGuru TGC Backer
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Jul 2009
Location: World
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 15:04
Maybe u should look at cryengine

http://docs.cryengine.com/plugins/servlet/mobile#content/view/1605645
Old school FPS fan, DOOM!!! Why GG not working on my AMIGA 500?
PM
Wolf
Forum Support
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Nov 2007
Location: Luxemburg
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 15:18
Those are the absolute pros I am talking about. Come on Mo, you really want Lee to tackle the high-dollar visionaires at CryTek with game guru? Not only that, but also on ground most other big-budget game designers don't dare to touch?
"When I contradict myself, I am telling the truth"
"absurdity has become necessity"
MooKai
GameGuru TGC Backer
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Jul 2009
Location: World
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 15:34
If u want in the future games with day and night circle, then pre baked light maps are not very useful.
Also the big plus of light maps (speed ingame) , I never had more frames with pre baked lights, but I had 3-5 more frames when I used the realtime option of GG, so for me I don't see a future of pre baked lights, not in GG or other engines.

Leave it like it is now, remove it with the dx11/12/13 update.
Old school FPS fan, DOOM!!! Why GG not working on my AMIGA 500?
PM
Wolf
Forum Support
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Nov 2007
Location: Luxemburg
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 15:45 Edited at: 19th Apr 2016 15:45
If Lee could pull it off, sure, it would be grandiose. But he is one man and this is something barely done by anyone so far. Game Guru as a cutting edge engine ready for the future? I just don't see that...but you are more optimistic and I can see your point.
Maybe Lee can sway in on this but I really doubt we'll see it... I lean more towards being able to correctly mix dynamic and baked lights like most games on the market.



-Wolf
"When I contradict myself, I am telling the truth"
"absurdity has become necessity"
MooKai
GameGuru TGC Backer
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Jul 2009
Location: World
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 15:54
It was just my personal opinion
Give me some AA and nice surface reflections and I'm happy with GG
Old school FPS fan, DOOM!!! Why GG not working on my AMIGA 500?
PM
Wolf
Forum Support
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Nov 2007
Location: Luxemburg
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 16:18 Edited at: 19th Apr 2016 16:19
I hear ya! But I agree it would be cool to have.

The notion that it looks like a 2001 engine is the way people don't complement their terrain with rock entities and the flat lighting that makes everything look kinda basic. Combine this with people using non-matching assets and we have a bad first impression. Many community members are working on good looking games, perhaps those should be shown in the news occasionally? What Science Boy is working would make me buy it far sooner than the video currently in the latest news.



-Wolf
"When I contradict myself, I am telling the truth"
"absurdity has become necessity"
Ertlov
GameGuru BOTB Developer
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Jan 2007
Location: Australia
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 17:00
Well, you are right about the wrong memories. 2001 was the year of Alien vs Predator 2:



And most of us do much better than that in GameGuru, visually. Let´s go to Doom 3, 2004.



This is something we could pull off and even surpass if we had shadows casted from own lightsources. This is really a must have, Wolf said already that in most cases, the flat lighting really kills off the mood.
Right now, the maximum I believe I could pull off in GG with throwing all my team and money at it would be something like Far Cry 2 (2008):



and then it would run fluently on machines with 8 - 20 times the power of those from 2008. The same team, however, can create with the same tools at hands something like that:



in Unreal 4, running at 90 FPS.

Now, noone wants GG to compete with Unreal 4, but it´s naive to believe it will be recognized as anything serious visually before it doesn´t provide at least the same visuals as older Unity 4.X free student games when you put it into the hands of pros.
AMD FX 8Core @ 4GHZ - 16 GB DDR4 - 2xRadeon7950 - Windows 7 Ultimate
devlin
10
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Feb 2014
Location:
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 18:08 Edited at: 19th Apr 2016 18:41
simple PBR.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwotHwt-YWk


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WirF2bV8iNk
PM
smallg
Community Leader
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Dec 2005
Location:
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 19:05 Edited at: 19th Apr 2016 19:07
i'm afraid i can't see any simple & quick fix being the answer here...

personally i feel GG is about at the
Quote: "Doom 3, 2004."
screenshot in terms of quality right now (minus the extra lighting)....
i agree on lighting and shadows, we have been asking for more in the way of shadows from things like the flash light and moving & flickering lights - doesn't need to support lots, just a couple here and there at a time would be fine but shadows really need to be more obvious in real time too, i find it very difficult to see them on anything but a very specific set up (dark lighting settings and light colour of textures) which leads to very limited uses.

also the stock terrain textures should be improved, with some time and effort the terrain can already look pretty good (in shape) but if you compare the textures to most of the other engines you will see it looks very basic... i know we can use our own or purchase a new 1 etc but as this is a question about how people see GG i think the first thing you see (the huge empty terrain) should be nice to look at at least.
- on this subject it might be worth changing the default new map to something a bit more realistic rather than completely flat so it looks better (but keep the option to create a flat map?
lua guide for GG
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=398177770
windows 10
i5 @4ghz, 8gb ram, AMD R9 200 series , directx 11
Tarkus1971
Audio Media Maker
9
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Feb 2015
Location: England, UK
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 19:12
realtime flashlight shadowing would be nice, would look good on interiors.
Aftershock Quad Core AMD FM2+ 3.5 GHz 8GB Motherboard and Processor, A7700k apu, AMD HD7870 gfx card.
King Korg Synth, Alesis SR18 Drum Machine, Akai MPX8 sample player, Roland Fantom XA Synth, Axus Digital AXK2 Digital Drum Kit.
wizard of id
3D Media Maker
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2006
Playing: CSGO
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 19:14 Edited at: 19th Apr 2016 19:17
Why PBR ?

It makes zero sense, the graphics engine is utterly incapable of using it fully in any ways.It ridiculous to think this engine still doesn't make use of point and spot light mapping and only directional, and that is still utterly useless leaking into objects and entities due to a poor baking system, FPSC did exactly the same.

There is simply no logic reason to have physical based rendering, 90% of gameguru users wouldn't even know how to properly implement it.The shadow prebake is horrid to say the least, there isn't the general fall off your would expect when a shadow casts off a building for example.

As far as I am aware you can't even get coloured baked shadows, naturally this has to be physically modified by using ambient sliders, and then the whole scene would be affected instead of per entity basis, baking over lapping lights don't work properly, needless to say people want PBR, when there are far more pressing graphical abnormalities and improvements that can be gained.The list just goes on and on.If you want drastic changes have a look at doing and improving the current entity shaders, it wouldn't surprise me if it's based on a cartoon shader of sorts, adding point and spot lights to the mix add HDR on top of that and SSAO you don't need PBR.

No reflections, no window shader, refraction, FSAA, specular is terrible, bump mapping is terrible, depth mapping and/or ambient occlusion could do a far better job then what bump mapping can.In reality all these shaders have one thing in common performance at the expense of graphics, high end guys were left out cold again and again and again, you ended up what should be build instead of what can be build if you throw technology at it and see what sticks, so what if you loose out on performance in the interim, at the rate new graphics cards are released that performance would have been made up 10 fold.

TGC's target was performance and they are paying for it dearly, graphics suffered greatly , I think definitely some time to throw stuff at the engine see what sticks and work your way to performance again.

PBR isn't going to fix or improve any thing not sure why people are pushing for it, it's rather silly at best.
Win7 pro, Intel 2500K @3.7ghz 660GTX 8gig ram 16tb HDD
rolfy
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jun 2006
Location:
Posted: 19th Apr 2016 19:14 Edited at: 19th Apr 2016 20:09
Quote: "The notion that it looks like a 2001 engine is the way people don't complement their terrain with rock entities and the flat lighting that makes everything look kinda basic. Combine this with people using non-matching assets and we have a bad first impression"
. This sums it up for me, you need more graphic control over individual entities in a product like GG where you are going to have a slew of mismatching models. If you are going to compare to big companies and their use of graphics you need to consider that assets are made for the game specifically and will have continuity in style and colour palette.
Engines like Cry, Unity and U4 have one outstanding feature missing from GG and that is material editors where at the simplest level you can apply textures,ambient and surface colour, glossiness, spec level etc for each model to tie it together. Ambient colour per entity using a colour picker would improve things immediately where mismatched entities could be blended into a level design. If it is too bright then add a little dark grey ambience to the model to bring it into line same with colour matching. It is just too limiting when specular,ambience and surface colour are global.

Some new shaders and a look at the offending terrain shader, which chews up frame rate would be nice and tying the entity editor into the shader pipeline. The frilly stuff? I wont attempt at suggesting a quick fix for the view that GG looks 2001, since for one I don't think it is, I believe in improving whats already there before adding in more stuff.

You won't get great graphics in any engine without some work this is why some screenshots look 'dated' and some are obviously not concerned with looks but gameplay, it is about different styles and skills. If you go by the general user GG aims at then it makes sense that no matter what you put in the engine the majority will throw a level together and expect it to 'automagically' make it look awesome, actually if you think about it, it does. It won't look like a AAA game since I am not a AAA game designer so I don't expect it to do that for me, if it did then all those pro designers are out of a job.

None of the above means I don't want to see things added to the graphics pipeline but maybe those already in there could be improved as little fixes here and there as development goes on. And please stop forcing us to work with one fixed sun light position of all the things I find boring and restrictive this is the one. I don't mean day/night cycle but it has been the same time of day/night for years now and I want long shadows for my Lone Ranger cactus scene.
m2design
GameGuru TGC Backer
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2010
Location:
Posted: 20th Apr 2016 00:59 Edited at: 20th Apr 2016 04:27
Same question but different daytime lighting. The first attachment is a quick attempt at creating a scene similar to lee's.
The first attachment is a test run with real time rendering. The second attachment is a test run after F3 lightmapping. (Baked)
The third attachment is just a screen shot of lee's night time scene.
The question is the same.. what could be done to improve the images.

None of the attachments show any cast shadows of the strapping, The cast shadows from the items fall short of being crisp and or definitive.They are not real, less like shading then shadow. It would be great if in both a realtime or baked scene, the jagged edges could be made to disappear.

The failure to cast shadows of the strapping needs to be corrected. All objects need to cast shadows not just some items.
The attacments were runs using the highest settings.

Is there anyway we can approach shadows similar to those shown in attachment 3 ? I'm realistic, it may not be possible in this engine, but I can dream.
Windows 10,64 bit|AMD FX-6200 Six-core-3.80 Ghz |CPU PASSMARK 6,142 |Memory 10GB |NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 660 SC |GPU PASSMARK 4,114

Attachments

Login to view attachments
science boy
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Oct 2008
Location: Up the creek
Posted: 20th Apr 2016 03:43 Edited at: 20th Apr 2016 03:58
well i think the shadows are doing too much popping and etchy jagged edges, maybe my settings are wrong. anyway glad to see it is getting addressed. i am still none professional so i will sit back and absorb the info
an unquenchable thirst for knowledge of game creation!!!
wizard of id
3D Media Maker
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2006
Playing: CSGO
Posted: 20th Apr 2016 06:12
@m2design

Bar the issues with shadows, shadows have bands of dark and light, it simply isn't just one band of shadow darkness, I am also curious of objects can cast multiple shadows from different light sources.But in other words there should be shadow fall off as well, it ends far too abruptly
Win7 pro, Intel 2500K @3.7ghz 660GTX 8gig ram 16tb HDD
Tarkus1971
Audio Media Maker
9
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Feb 2015
Location: England, UK
Posted: 20th Apr 2016 11:14
An option in tab tab to switch off the sun outside would be nice to have. That way if you are building interiors you could say, for example have the flashlight the only things which casts shadows. This could have a tab tab panel all by itself.

Flashlight colour R, G, B,
Flashlight toggle for LED or conventional bulb type
Flashlight Intensity
Flashlight Shadow Depth (darkness of the shadows)
Flashlight Shadow Length (how long the shadows stretch off for)
Flashlight Shadow Resolution (nice clean edges or blurry ones)

The performance cost shouldnt be to harsh because if the flashlight is used its generally dark so the GG engine could detect flashlight on and disable any other shadows in the distance, to avoid pop ups.
Aftershock Quad Core AMD FM2+ 3.5 GHz 8GB Motherboard and Processor, A7700k apu, AMD HD7870 gfx card.
King Korg Synth, Alesis SR18 Drum Machine, Akai MPX8 sample player, Roland Fantom XA Synth, Axus Digital AXK2 Digital Drum Kit.
Spotaru
Game Guru Backer
11
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Nov 2012
Location:
Posted: 20th Apr 2016 14:33
Other than the lighting and shadowing is wrong, the only specific thing other than tweaking the textures that will improve the scene is increase the bump/normal map effect in the shader. Every program I own has stronger normal map effects than GG. The reason everyone says GG looks flat is because IT IS FLAT !

The light is wrong because in that scene the light comes from one source and one direction only. Your eyes and brain automatically tell you something is wrong. Light will never be from a single direction in reality. Even if it is one spot light, the beams will bounce around and be absorbed or reflected by everything. Even air reflects light. So the total bright on the right side and total dark on the left in the picture is just wrong. It almost seems like instead of a
"Sun" lamp, you're using a very large and over powered "Point" light. And there is no other light in the scene. Anyway I'm confident you will figure it out
Ertlov
GameGuru BOTB Developer
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Jan 2007
Location: Australia
Posted: 20th Apr 2016 18:51 Edited at: 20th Apr 2016 18:53
Quote: "Other than the lighting and shadowing is wrong, the only specific thing other than tweaking the textures that will improve the scene is increase the bump/normal map effect in the shader. Every program I own has stronger normal map effects than GG. The reason everyone says GG looks flat is because IT IS FLAT ! "


well - nope. If you feed the right assets, it works.

This Picture + the frame is a simple plane with a customized Normal Map for the Frame, using the basic entity shader.

http://www.indiedb.com/games/antinomy-justice-not-vengeance/videos/relief-mapping-pictureframes#imagebox

And this was only a first try, we made some reliefs for stone walls that REALLY looked like relief mapping.
AMD FX 8Core @ 4GHZ - 16 GB DDR4 - 2xRadeon7950 - Windows 7 Ultimate
Spotaru
Game Guru Backer
11
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Nov 2012
Location:
Posted: 20th Apr 2016 19:20
Quote: "well - nope. If you feed the right assets, it works"


I did not say normal maps don't work. I have many built many flat assets that do work well. What I meant is, in the best way I know how to explain it.

If i build or import a model into any modeling program I own, and use nothing but a single sun lamp then load that same model into GG it always looks much less detailed. I then have to go back and make the normal map stronger by overlaying it multiple times to get the same effect in GG. In the original picture at the start of this post, the image looks very flat to me. That's why I said stronger normal map. I can even take any existing GG model and load it in any other program and the normal look much better, If no one else can see it then I guess my eyes are just messed up

@ Ertlov
beautiful picture

Wolf
Forum Support
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Nov 2007
Location: Luxemburg
Posted: 20th Apr 2016 21:34
Quote: "Why PBR ? "


Because it was cool at the time it was suggested and a bunch of people who where driving for this to have all the features of like cryengine demanded it. I assume that other people looked at professionally made screenshots, assumed that this was the mythical "make awesum graphix" button some people seem to be looking for and voted for it. Almost all of us who actually make the assets that people use didn't see the point and I have tried numerous times to explain what makes games look visually good or better yet: coherent and what is superfluous but a lot of it fell on deaf ears.

When I remember correctly most artists reacted to adding PBR with "Meh!".

I can type as long as I want, the people want whatever it is the big engines currently advertise themselves with or what they recognize from the graphics settings of their videogames rather what is objectively needed before that.

Just read youtube comments: Gamers and the uninitiated think that what makes good visuals is the engine, not the art department or designers. Its all of these things.

I wrote more about this in this thread, but allow me to link once again to what we really need. Good lighting and how games look without it.

My point being that I am all for PBR, I can use it, most of us won't or even worse: will use properly set up models in the same map with ones that are poorly made/converted and I am all for having cool graphical features. But those features are useless if we don't have a good, solid base. FPSCreator had a weak foundation with toys added on to that and it eventually crumbled under its own weight.

We can go next gen once we catch up with current gen. Not add current gen sprinkles on last gen tech.

Here are a bunch of comparison screenshots regarding the DX discussion. You'll see the difference but you also see that the heart of everything is the model and art design.



-Wolf
"When I contradict myself, I am telling the truth"
"absurdity has become necessity"
wizard of id
3D Media Maker
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2006
Playing: CSGO
Posted: 21st Apr 2016 06:03
@Wolf

Lol it was a sarcastic question It was directed at the user, I wanted to see if he could quantify it with reasons why it would benefit us. Devlin meant well, PBR is not the way, and like I said, you need the supporting graphics for it.

What has been indicated is a long list of graphics issues, the biggest being the light mapping and shadows.
Win7 pro, Intel 2500K @3.7ghz 660GTX 8gig ram 16tb HDD
Teabone
Forum Support
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Jun 2006
Location: Earth
Posted: 21st Apr 2016 08:29 Edited at: 21st Apr 2016 10:06
Much like what wolf mentioned, using just the basic shaders show great results if you really spend the time working on your normal and spec maps. Reason why it takes me so long to upload to the store; is because i spend a lot of time working on the details of the spec and normal maps to create realistic looking depth on simple flat surfaces. click on the image below to enlarge it and you can see the details in action using just the shaders within GG:



Back when I was using FPSC, I bumped into a video posted by bond1 that truly inspired me. I'm going to share that video with you guys, for those that don't really spent much time on their texture maps, to really see what kind of results you can achieve (and this was back in FPSC days):

skip to 6:35


To improve GG, I think we do however need more shaders. We had a lot to work with in FPSC. I also really admired the post-processing shaders. Also more lighting options. That's about all I can really suggest. I haven't really played around enough with the light baking yet.
Twitter - Teabone3 | Youtube - Teabone3 | Twitch - Teabone3

i7 -2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz - Windows 7 - 8GB RAM - Nivida GeForce GT 740
3com
10
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th May 2014
Location: Catalonia
Posted: 21st Apr 2016 11:14
Is "DarkShader" soft still in the market?, if so, can someone provide some usefull link?

thanks in advance.

3com
Laptop: Lenovo - Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 1005M @ 1.90GHz

OS: Windows 10 (64) - Ram: 4 gb - Hd: 283 gb - Video card: Intel(R) HD Graphics

PM
LeeBamber
TGC Lead Developer
24
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Jan 2000
Location: England
Posted: 22nd Apr 2016 10:38
We discontinued lots of our legacy products at the start of 2016 to focus on GameGuru
PC SPECS: Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit, Intel Core i7-5930K (PASSMARK:13645), NVIDIA Geforce GTX 980 GPU (PASSMARK:9762) , 32GB RAM

Belidos
3D Media Maker
8
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Nov 2015
Playing: The Game
Posted: 22nd Apr 2016 11:04 Edited at: 22nd Apr 2016 11:09
I'd also like to be able to get hold of a copy of DarkShader too, I've been told it's a great tool for displaying models and textures without having to go through the hassle of putting them in GG, then making changes, then deleting the DBO and applying the changes then reloading GG, rinse repeat. The only thing I've found similar is Marmaset ToolBag, which Is a very expensive piece of software

I think you guys need to take another look at all of the software you had on the old TGC site and bring some of it back, there was a lot of small pieces of software that were very useful for those of us creating models for GG, and even a couple of programs that were very important (mender and animer are two that I would say are fairly important to have if you are modeeling) which aren't available any more.

i7, NV960 4GB, 16GB memory, 2x 4TB Hybrid, Win10.
i5 , AMD 6770 1GB, 8GB memory, 512GB Generic SATAIII + 2TB Seagate Baracuda SATAIII, Win7.
i3, Radeon integrated graphics, 4GB memory, 512gB Generic SATAII, Win8.1.
Q6600, Intel integrated graphics, 2GB memory, 180GB Generic SATAII, WinXP.
Teabone
Forum Support
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Jun 2006
Location: Earth
Posted: 22nd Apr 2016 11:47
DarkShader was one of my favorite tools of TGC. I never got the chance to pick up Mender though.
Twitter - Teabone3 | Youtube - Teabone3 | Twitch - Teabone3

i7 -2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz - Windows 7 - 8GB RAM - Nivida GeForce GT 740
Spotaru
Game Guru Backer
11
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Nov 2012
Location:
Posted: 22nd Apr 2016 13:33 Edited at: 22nd Apr 2016 13:43
I still use the reloaded version of DarkShader. It was and still is a pretty good tool. But unfortunately, the model will look better in DS than it does in GG. I am not a coder so I know nothing about that part but what I see as an artist is that GG only seems to handle "direct" lighting and shadows. It actually does a pretty good job of it. Where the graphics fails is "indirect lighting". I really can't explain it better than that without writing a book. Most game engines have an indirect lighting system included or addon/plugin. Even DarkShader seems to handle indirect light better. Don't get me wrong I love GG and it is very good at what it does. I just want it to be better


PS: This is evident in the photo from teabone. The pole in the right front corner should be affecting the green box. It is not. The box it self puts the pole in the left rear in a semi shadow area but it is clearly brightly light as if the box doesn't exist. Also under the box in the forklift slots, the right side of the right slot should be in shadow. It is brightly lit. Your eyes and brain instantly pick up on these things and tell you something is wrong whether you want it too or not, we are just programed that way.

@ teabone nice models bad lights
Preben
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2004
Location:
Posted: 22nd Apr 2016 13:41 Edited at: 22nd Apr 2016 13:55
There is a lot of light/shadow map issues reported in the forum, so i think i will share a little trick , perhaps someone can use it

I have been trying to make a lightmapper ( shadow ) that is fast enoff to run on mobile devices, what this mean is the “quality” (Lumel) is worse then anything but i found some tricks that REALLY improve the quality of light shadows.

In my light mapper a 2048x2048 textures is covering the complete GG Level ( everything ), it need to be this way to run on mobiles, so each pixel must represent the light/shadow the best it can.

Perhaps this could be used to improve light/shadows in GG , its a simple halftone trick that take zero extra time to calculate in the lightmapper, no extra rays.

I know that GG use a UV type light mapper with a mush better lumel , but it could be used the same way.

First the section / object that need light/shadow is scanned for low X,Z high X,Z coordinates that actually have light or shadow. then the light mapper ONLY use this area in the light/shadow texture, so if a level only use half of the available level size the 2048 texture will only be used on this area, if the level only have 1 object all of the 2048 texture will be used on this single object.
The shader then scale the UV to fit this “improved” lumel/texture:


( lowlightxz.w and lowlightxz.z are high values ).
( UV is part of the vertex shader so the branch (if) don’t really have a speed impact. )

This way you get the best lumel possible using the lowest possible textures.

The trick is like an antialias, you just assign a halftone shadow to areas around the real shadow. This gives a smooth shadow falloff, the shadow pixels kind of fade away. The shadow is first assigned a halftone pixel , and only if the halftone pixel is reach again it will get the real shadow color.

It would allow the light mapper to go closer to the ray hit point to decide if its a false positive shadow ( you nearly can’t see false positive halftone ). So there just under the roof where the ray hit the roof from the top ( so close to the ray target ) it will get a halftone shadow, fading out the “light” line of false positive shadow you normally have in that area.

Sorry this post got a bit to code’ish so i will just include the AGK code i use , and hope somebody can use it for something

Lee: Its a must that the normal map is included in the light mapper calculation, i can understand that you need to replace the normal map with the light map to improve speed and memory, but if you make the normal map texture part of the light map texture ( as normal light/shadow pixels ) you will still have this cool effect, without the speed drop. Or perhaps its just a bug that normal maps is not there when you have a baked light map ?

Screenshots of a GG level using a single scaleable 2048 texture for the hole level, one using normal shadow and one with the halftone shadow. All objects will share this texture so dynamic objects also get the light/shadow effect.

Code:
best regards Preben Eriksen,

Attachments

Login to view attachments
3com
10
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th May 2014
Location: Catalonia
Posted: 22nd Apr 2016 13:55
Quote: "We discontinued lots of our legacy products at the start of 2016 to focus on GameGuru"


So I agree with that Belidos said above.
Please release them, and if you want advise there is not support anymore.
I've lived the last days of Classic, so unfortunatelly do not have time to know almost nothing abou it, reading some post in Classic forums, I had noticed I lose very good times.

3com
Laptop: Lenovo - Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 1005M @ 1.90GHz

OS: Windows 10 (64) - Ram: 4 gb - Hd: 283 gb - Video card: Intel(R) HD Graphics

PM
smallg
Community Leader
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Dec 2005
Location:
Posted: 22nd Apr 2016 15:01
@belidos you don't need to restart GG to change textures, just start a new flat map and replace the entity into the map should be enough (I believe it updates to the nearest minute so if you don't see any change try repeat again)
lua guide for GG
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=398177770
windows 10
i5 @4ghz, 8gb ram, AMD R9 200 series , directx 11
Belidos
3D Media Maker
8
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Nov 2015
Playing: The Game
Posted: 22nd Apr 2016 16:17
Nope, doesn't work for me, I spent an hour refreshing and creating new maps trying to get a completely different coloured texture to change live in GG, it stuck to the old one, I had to delete the DBO file and restart GG before it would change in GG

i7, NV960 4GB, 16GB memory, 2x 4TB Hybrid, Win10.
i5 , AMD 6770 1GB, 8GB memory, 512GB Generic SATAIII + 2TB Seagate Baracuda SATAIII, Win7.
i3, Radeon integrated graphics, 4GB memory, 512gB Generic SATAII, Win8.1.
Q6600, Intel integrated graphics, 2GB memory, 180GB Generic SATAII, WinXP.
shivers
11
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Nov 2012
Location:
Posted: 22nd Apr 2016 17:23
hello

To me the scene you made is to simple. Making a bunch of boxes look good is not so hard and I feel that your missing the point of a good scene. Your telling me that you have no clue as to what people are looking for when they say they want a game to have a good looking level???? All you have to do is look at just about any game that has been a number one for the past 10 years. How can you not see a difference between what unreal and cry engine and game guru. Personally I think the main difference is the details. We have light but be don't have light that bounces yes that's right , if you read unreal's specs there light simulates real light. And same thing with models ,the models we have are't bad but the are missing details for example the skeleton looks great but when you kill him he bleeds and falls like a human. Last time i checked skeletons don' t have blood and when the die they should break apart into a pile of bones . And the same goes with everything else in game guru it's not bad but it seems like you need to maybe put more thought in to how do things work and interact quality before quantity. I understand you are not unreal and cry engine but if you want to deliver better looking levels than your going to have to be able to give good lighting , good ai, quality models, good water effects along with weather effects. And that is just the start I thought lee would know all this as long as this project has been in production I can't understand how were still trying to understand what makes a good scene? Don't get me wrong but I'm not angry I think this comes off a little angry I'm not. Maybe just a little confused, as to how just about everyone has played a game with good graphics but every time the conversation comes back to what is good graphics and what makes things better.
PM
OldPMan
3D Media Maker
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Aug 2008
Location:
Posted: 22nd Apr 2016 17:55 Edited at: 22nd Apr 2016 17:56
I want to say that it would be a great help to the artists working on the possibility of textures in real time to reload the texture is like to see changes made at this time. Now it takes a long time to test the texture. Recreating the scene every time the texture changes. This is a very slow process of developing media for GG.

Another was, would be cool as mentioned above, have a reflection on the objects.

It would be very-well if there was an opportunity to have their my pre-bake lightmapping and put them on the object so as Normalmap and Specularmap. I could, would provide better coverage as an artist if I could load for the model of my own pre-bake lightmap and pre-bake lightmap of the GG did not change my coverage map during lightmaping level.
The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.
OldPMan
3D Media Maker
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Aug 2008
Location:
Posted: 22nd Apr 2016 18:34
I want to add my post. Another problem is when the pre-bake lightmapping for the same object is different in quality. This is a great visual problem in my opinion. That is why I ask consider adding my own lighting maps for the object.
The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.
Belidos
3D Media Maker
8
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Nov 2015
Playing: The Game
Posted: 22nd Apr 2016 20:09
Quote: "hello

To me the scene you made is to simple. Making a bunch of boxes look good is not so hard and I feel that your missing the point of a good scene. Your telling me that you have no clue as to what people are looking for when they say they want a game to have a good looking level???? All you have to do is look at just about any game that has been a number one for the past 10 years. How can you not see a difference between what unreal and cry engine and game guru. Personally I think the main difference is the details. We have light but be don't have light that bounces yes that's right , if you read unreal's specs there light simulates real light. And same thing with models ,the models we have are't bad but the are missing details for example the skeleton looks great but when you kill him he bleeds and falls like a human. Last time i checked skeletons don' t have blood and when the die they should break apart into a pile of bones . And the same goes with everything else in game guru it's not bad but it seems like you need to maybe put more thought in to how do things work and interact quality before quantity. I understand you are not unreal and cry engine but if you want to deliver better looking levels than your going to have to be able to give good lighting , good ai, quality models, good water effects along with weather effects. And that is just the start I thought lee would know all this as long as this project has been in production I can't understand how were still trying to understand what makes a good scene? Don't get me wrong but I'm not angry I think this comes off a little angry I'm not. Maybe just a little confused, as to how just about everyone has played a game with good graphics but every time the conversation comes back to what is good graphics and what makes things better."


I think you're kind of missing the point of the post, he's not really asking how to make a scene as in a compilation of items, what he's doing is gathering info on what we feel needs to be added to or adjusted with the settings and/or light mapping for the game. It's a simple object that gives a base example of the current system and he wants to know what we think can be changed to improve how the system can be improved, that info can then be taken and applied to bigger scenes later.

i7, NV960 4GB, 16GB memory, 2x 4TB Hybrid, Win10.
i5 , AMD 6770 1GB, 8GB memory, 512GB Generic SATAIII + 2TB Seagate Baracuda SATAIII, Win7.
i3, Radeon integrated graphics, 4GB memory, 512gB Generic SATAII, Win8.1.
Q6600, Intel integrated graphics, 2GB memory, 180GB Generic SATAII, WinXP.
smallg
Community Leader
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Dec 2005
Location:
Posted: 22nd Apr 2016 22:15
Quote: "I had to delete the DBO file and restart GG before it would change in GG"

yh, i just tried it again and it isn't working... i swear it used to but i could be dreaming, sorry
lua guide for GG
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=398177770
windows 10
i5 @4ghz, 8gb ram, AMD R9 200 series , directx 11
rolfy
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jun 2006
Location:
Posted: 22nd Apr 2016 23:47 Edited at: 22nd Apr 2016 23:48
Just so we're on the same page, personally I have never had to delete the dbo for texture changes, I do have to restart GG for changes but never have to delete anything.

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-06-26 07:56:08
Your offset time is: 2024-06-26 07:56:08