Guess The Screen Shot

[TripolySunni]

BTW the Jump from PS2 to PS3 wasn't all that impressive. The Poly Count Has Not increased Dramatically in Most Cases, They only Added Normal Maps (this Does Half The Work), They Increased The Texture's Resolution A Lot (did the Other Half) It has a Live Raytrace Render Engine To Give All the Reflections and Some Fake Refractions And they Also added a bit of a Specular Glow on Metallic Shader Models, and High Dynamic range lighting (been around since 2006 games), WHAT i Really Wanted to see Is The SubSurface Scattering.

BTW does Brothers in Arms Have SSS lighting in it, is there any other game that's suppoed to have that???

Has anyone tried rendering with PS3 using the yellow Dog thing for Linux ???

The real Shadows were Not that Good, (reminds me of low quality 256x256 Depth Map Shadows).

And ofcourse The Images Quality and Frame Rates Have Increased ALSO the Machine is Much Stronger and Can Take More Graphics On Screen At Once.

BTW have u guys tried the New 8Bit Megaman 9 game :)

[Red Phoenix]

Originally Posted by TripolySunni

BTW the Jump from PS2 to PS3 wasn't all that impressive. The Poly Count Has Not increased Dramatically in Most Cases, They only Added Normal Maps (this Does Half The Work), They Increased The Texture's Resolution A Lot (did the Other Half) It has a Live Raytrace Render Engine To Give All the Reflections and Some Fake Refractions And they Also added a bit of a Specular Glow on Metallic Shader Models, and High Dynamic range lighting (been around since 2006 games), WHAT i Really Wanted to see Is The SubSurface Scattering.

BTW does Brothers in Arms Have SSS lighting in it, is there any other game that's suppoed to have that???

Has anyone tried rendering with PS3 using the yellow Dog thing for Linux ???

The real Shadows were Not that Good, (reminds me of low quality 256x256 Depth Map Shadows).

And ofcourse The Images Quality and Frame Rates Have Increased ALSO the Machine is Much Stronger and Can Take More Graphics On Screen At Once.

BTW have u guys tried the New 8Bit Megaman 9 game :)

ahh, ahhhhh, so many questions...

eh, as far as i know such stuff as SSS are not directly supported by the low level hardware of the ps3 nor pc nor wii nor anything.
i'm not sure these consoles have texture size limits anymore either.

the low level hardware packs the processing power and the means to program those effects on the high level APIs, SDKs and 3d game engines.

i think the PS3 has a whole bunch of parallel GPU units that can run customized shader code that can render most of the things programmers think about as long as the realtime framerate is acceptable.

i do remember that the PS3 had a whole heap of parallel processors on it for the average game code.

so there is no just ONE WAY to render shadows or bloom or bump maps in PS3 hardware, although there are standard algorithmic methods used by many game developers when they create their game.
Subsurface Scattering or SSS is not supported in the low level hardware shader code, it's supported by the engines who can implement it efficiently, so stick around and u will see SSS someday if someone can code it fast enough for some PS3 game if they haven't already.

PS3's RSX is sort of Shader Model 3.0 - The INQUIRER

[TripolySunni]

Originally Posted by Red Phoenix

ahh, ahhhhh, so many questions...

What The Heck Is Going On with You !?


I agree they should hAVE figured out a way to code the SSS for PS3 in an efficiant way, But i beleive that a "FAKE SSS" is a healthy SSS, so they should just fake IT and refractions and i am sure this will save them time and almost no one will notice except for Probably you and me..and a few other aliens.

BTW u mentionned Bump maps, Is it true that they have used Bump Maps for Console Game? I think they are still using Normal Maps...Although i never really used any normal maps except Once I generated one from Z-brush then i installed a plug-in to use it and it never worked (complete waste of time) I think Bumps are easier for us Animators to generate.

Do u know of any game Using Mental Image's occlusion texture?? or any occlusion texture for that matter??

Ur reply is much appreciated. I am not an expert on game developping

[Red Phoenix]

Originally Posted by TripolySunni

What The Heck Is Going On with You !?


I agree they should hAVE figured out a way to code the SSS for PS3 in an efficiant way, But i beleive that a "FAKE SSS" is a healthy SSS, so they should just fake IT and refractions and i am sure this will save them time and almost no one will notice except for Probably you and me..and a few other aliens.

BTW u mentionned Bump maps, Is it true that they have used Bump Maps for Console Game? I think they are still using Normal Maps...Although i never really used any normal maps except Once I generated one from Z-brush then i installed a plug-in to use it and it never worked (complete waste of time) I think Bumps are easier for us Animators to generate.

Do u know of any game Using Mental Image's occlusion texture?? or any occlusion texture for that matter??

Ur reply is much appreciated. I am not an expert on game developping

i'm not an expert either :P

fake it? hell ya they should fake it, did u hear me say other wise ?
game coding has always been about faking it and not simulating it hehe
that's the magic of it, that's that's why John Carmack could get a bsp game like Wolfstein3D to run on a stupid 386 while it would have required a server mainframe if the more traditional approach of "simulating it" was adopted by academics.

it's all the art of elusion. that's magic for u.

as for bump maps, i see no reason why they can't be used with Normal Maps.
it all depends on what u can get away with, if u don't want heavy parallax calculations to be done on some objects u can use fast bump maps on them, u'll use normal maps for things that actually make a visual difference, and remember normal maps have more data in them and require more processing power to display than simple bump maps.

so u should check on a game by game basis, and inside each game u need to look at all the assets here and there. sometimes it's not that straight forward to make out the difference.

but if u want ur 2d map of a wall to 'move out' when u approach it, normal maps are the trick for u, they provide the required level of depth and illusion.

Mental Image's occlusion texture? i can't say i heard of it.
u got lots of texture packs in the market and u got lots of ppl making their own textures, so it shouldnt matter much really.

btw, z-brush is cool but u should ditch it and try out MudBox.
2.5 D is nothing compared to true 3d hehe

[TripolySunni]

Originally Posted by Red Phoenix

i'm not an expert either :P

fake it? hell ya they should fake it, did u hear me say other wise ?
game coding has always been about faking it and not simulating it hehe
that's the magic of it, that's that's why John Carmack could get a bsp game like Wolfstein3D to run on a stupid 386 while it would have required a server mainframe if the more traditional approach of "simulating it" was adopted by academics.

it's all the art of elusion. that's magic for u.

as for bump maps, i see no reason why they can't be used with Normal Maps.
it all depends on what u can get away with, if u don't want heavy parallax calculations to be done on some objects u can use fast bump maps on them, u'll use normal maps for things that actually make a visual difference, and remember normal maps have more data in them and require more processing power to display than simple bump maps.

so u should check on a game by game basis, and inside each game u need to look at all the assets here and there. sometimes it's not that straight forward to make out the difference.

but if u want ur 2d map of a wall to 'move out' when u approach it, normal maps are the trick for u, they provide the required level of depth and illusion.

Mental Image's occlusion texture? i can't say i heard of it.
u got lots of texture packs in the market and u got lots of ppl making their own textures, so it shouldnt matter much really.

btw, z-brush is cool but u should ditch it and try out MudBox.
2.5 D is nothing compared to true 3d hehe

Yea many people Told me to switch to mudbox But i feel that Z-brush is much more proffessional and has been there for quite a while so they have more experience in these things as well as more plug-ins, My freind from Gnomon school suggested that we stick to Z-brush because it has more resources.

But MudBox Is much more easier and userfreindly than Zbrush, i know a person that's using it (not very well) but he seems to be having fun.

Anyways i just use it in a Pipe-line, so basically i just extract a 32bit Displaycement map and a Cavity map as well as the bump map so that i can use them inside Maya's mental ray with approximation editor, You should see the results then With proper lighting and passes rendered AMAZING almost like PS5 graphics :) and It renders So Fast with scanline!!!

[Red Phoenix]

Originally Posted by TripolySunni

Yea many people Told me to switch to mudbox But i feel that Z-brush is much more proffessional and has been there for quite a while so they have more experience in these things as well as more plug-ins, My freind from Gnomon school suggested that we stick to Z-brush because it has more resources.

But MudBox Is much more easier and userfreindly than Zbrush, i know a person that's using it (not very well) but he seems to be having fun.

Anyways i just use it in a Pipe-line, so basically i just extract a 32bit Displaycement map and a Cavity map as well as the bump map so that i can use them inside Maya's mental ray with approximation editor, You should see the results then With proper lighting and passes rendered AMAZING almost like PS5 graphics :) and It renders So Fast with scanline!!!

hehe, no doubt man it looks good, they are using it in many movies. (typo hehe)

but on a side note, plz don't compare offline render software to realtime render engines, they have nothing in common and u would be committing a cardinal sin there hehe

[TripolySunni]

Me and you we should make a game or at least try to, whadya say ?

Even if i use Maya i can still export to u as .OBJ or somthing else with UV maps intact. i think they even created somthing that exports Joints and Iks between Maya and Max.

[TripolySunni]

Originally Posted by Red Phoenix

hehe, no doubt man it looks good, they are using it in many movies. (typo hehe)

but on a side note, plz don't compare offline render software to realtime render engines, they have nothing in common and u would be committing a cardinal sin there hehe

BTW do you remember Cardinal Sin for ps1 It was impossible to finish But if you put the Cd in the Ps vcd player you can see all the ending movies

[Red Phoenix]

Originally Posted by TripolySunni

Me and you we should make a game or at least try to, whadya say ?

Even if i use Maya i can still export to u as .OBJ or somthing else with UV maps intact. i think they even created somthing that exports Joints and Iks between Maya and Max.

y not, but all in due time, i'm kinda busy these days with something else but let's make a mental note to check this possibility some other time. i'll msg u if i have something.

as for exporting IK and joints, plugins always did this, and nowadays collada is the hype more than others between 3d asset software and 3d development software.

we all know what they can export, but we do need someone who knows how to rig the characters in a fashion that will not break when imported into the game engines and editors hehe

imagine exporting a character with 50 bones to an engine that can run only 8 bones in hardware for the skinning hehe.
then u got the weight issue when u export and how some engines skin differently than the modifiers of max hehe
then u need good animation or no animation at all, that's really important. and u need to check if the engine u are using uses procedure animation with each sub component getting animated alone and/or if it uses morphs targets.

and the the holy grail of getting ppl pissed off, is the design of the level and implemetation of the assets without killing off performance taking into consideration what type of 3d game engine is gonna get used.
portal engines are good if level designers know how to connect the zones properly together and bsp engines(may they RiP) kinda massacre any 3d mesh u export due to limitations but they usually run faster.

and none of this is of any importance if the gameplay elements are no fun hehe. a fault all too many ppl fall for.

i'm glad to note here that bsp engines are going the way of the dinosaurs, the last impressive game that was made using such an engine was doom3 and quake 4 i think.

and finally if things weren't complicated enough, do u go for a AAA engine that will cost betweem 150 000 $ and 1 500 000 $ or do u stick if u cant afford big licenses with small indie engines that will cost between 200$ and 1500$ and go berzerk trying to use their imcomplete toolset in the process hehe

[TripolySunni]

Originally Posted by Red Phoenix

y not, but all in due time, i'm kinda busy these days with something else but let's make a mental note to check this possibility some other time. i'll msg u if i have something.

as for exporting IK and joints, plugins always did this, and nowadays collada is the hype more than others between 3d asset software and 3d development software.

we all know what they can export, but we do need someone who knows how to rig the characters in a fashion that will not break when imported into the game engines and editors hehe

imagine exporting a character with 50 bones to an engine that can run only 8 bones in hardware for the skinning hehe.
then u got the weight issue when u export and how some engines skin differently than the modifiers of max hehe
then u need good animation or no animation at all, that's really important. and u need to check if the engine u are using uses procedure animation with each sub component getting animated alone and/or if it uses morphs targets.

and the the holy grail of getting ppl pissed off, is the design of the level and implemetation of the assets without killing off performance taking into consideration what type of 3d game engine is gonna get used.
portal engines are good if designers know how to connect the zone properly together and bsp engines(may they RiP) kinda massacre any 3d mesh u export due to limitations but they usually run faster.

and none of this is of any importance if the gameplay elements are no fun hehe. a fault all too many ppl fall for.

i'm glad to note here that bsp engines are going the way of the dinosaurs, the last impressive game that was made using such an engine was doom3 and quake 4 i think.

and finally if things weren't complicated enough, do u go for a AAA engine that will cost betweem 150 000 $ and 1 500 000 $ or do u stick if u cant afford big licenses with a small indie engines that will cost between 200$ and 1500$ and go berzerk trying to use their imcomplete toolset hehe

I leave all that up to you


BTW as an animator i worked on a game before but they never give you the headaches Above, You just do what you do best and they only give you a limit of faces and tell u if the Mesh should be triangulated or Not.

That's why i never enjoyed making that game much, I like to make Super-realistic Super Heavy Models and render them in the most expensive and sophisticated renderer i can find ;)