-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Deus Ex: Mankind Divided - Dawn Engine Tech Demo
- Thread starter Silent_Scone
- Start date
To me yes
What a silly question to ask! Of course it matters to lambchop
He refuses to play any AMD sponsored game, although he played bioshock infinite
Looks very nice, imo the volumetric lighting is overdone though.
No-ones perfect, although I must be close surely ?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
I honestly have no idea why anyone would add it, ever. The whole concept of depth of field is in real life if you focus on something far away then other stuff becomes blurry. That is great, but I'm focused on the thing I want to look at and it's not freaking blurry the crap I don't want to see is blurred and who the **** cares. Games do not have eye tracking, I hope they never will because what a damn waste.
It's NOT realistic, it's unrealistic, it introduces a situation that simply doesn't happen in real life, that is, the area I want to look at directly with my eyes doesn't come into focus.
I can understand it's use in video even if I don't really like it. In a cutscene or film then the director/whoever is making it can choose where the character is looking and attempt to make the focus real... but it's over the top and stupid. There are some games with epic areas, maybe a cutscene in space which blurs out all this really cool looking crap to get you to focus on something which may or may not be interesting. I still would prefer the player gets the choice. But in actual gameplay, not letting me choose where to look and blurring out stuff I'm actively looking at is beyond retarded.
You can't know what I'm looking at so stop attempting to blur other stuff out... not least because if I'm really not looking at it, it doesn't matter if it's blurry or not, if I am looking at it, it's incredibly important it shouldn't be blurry.
Even things like looking down ironsights, doesn't matter, in real life I can put a gun up and look down the barrel.... and still move my eyes left and focus on something entirely different.
The only time i have ever seen DoF work well is when it is used to blur distant objects. Not objects in the foreground like what seems to be the case in the majority of DoF implementations.
Motion blur is also a disgusting and cheap way to cover low FPS. Also incredibly unrealistic in the majority of implementations.
Motion blur is also a disgusting and cheap way to cover low FPS. Also incredibly unrealistic in the majority of implementations.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Broken, what do you mean. Bring up the awful clipboard with objective on it... can't read it because DoF blurs it out. If I'm remembering the right game that is.
It's retarded, I've never seen it implemented in a way that doesn't make a game worse and more irritating, I've never failed to turn it off in any game that has an option to turn if off.
In general motion blur and DoF was brought about, as Mauller said to hide performance issues and mostly covering distant views. Particularly on consoles you would have awful draw distance and extremely low quality textures not even that far in the distance then using blur to minimise the effect of such crap textures.
Actually rendering higher quality textures in the distance then using extra power to blur them out takes stupidity to a whole new level.
All these real world things depend entirely on where you are actually looking... a game that can't remotely know where you are actually looking should never ever attempt to imitate motion blur or DoF.
The latest thing is this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveated_imaging
I can foresee it being touted as a trump card for developers but users universally turning it off because it doesn't quite work like it's supposed to.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveated_imaging
I can foresee it being touted as a trump card for developers but users universally turning it off because it doesn't quite work like it's supposed to.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2007
- Posts
- 15,520
- Location
- Northampton
I just made sex wee 
That looks even more puke inducing than the DoF in this game engine. Would prefer if they took all the wasted processing power from these ****** side effects and used it towards some form of Ray tracing.
The voxel cone tracing global illumination that was touted for UE4 would probably run nicely in DX12/Mantle/Vulkan with all these effects disabled. Now that would dramatically improve visual quality.
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 12,884
- Location
- Surrey
Because sometimes art style and visual effects aren't necessary all about realism. Take the art direction of Witcher 3...the game had a very flat bleak look, which looks great in game but generally - trees and people don't look like that. They then changed ( a lot of things but not relevant here lol) the colour pallet and people went mental, when in actual fact the games default tone is more true to life.
Yeah good luck with that, when GPUs are capable of using compute to that degree in real-time none of us will likely give a damn. We'll be too busy waiting for the carer to come and give us our weekly bath.
Last edited:
They had it running on a 680 system at moderate framerate in 2012. IF you look on youtube you can find the videos. Their method requires a reasonable amount of cpu power to produce the Octrees, so they could implement this system better using a low abstraction graphics APi.