Improving the Light Engine| What and How

[purepassion 22]

Made a Ticket here :)

Let's do it

[boredgunner 1]

Wow and I thought I was one of very few people not impressed by BF3 graphics. Lighting system is up there with CE2 (it really has no improvements), and the HBAO is nicer than other ambient occlusion implementations I've seen. Aside from that, it looks generic, subpar, and disappointing. I'm far more impressed by ArmA 3 graphics going by pictures and the not-so-high quality videos.

The lighting system looks good, but I still voted that it should be a very high priority since everything else seems to be great. They just need to implement picture and picture as well - for realistic optics and also mirrors.

[Minoza 11]

Wow and I thought I was one of very few people not impressed by BF3 graphics. Lighting system is up there with CE2 (it really has no improvements), and the HBAO is nicer than other ambient occlusion implementations I've seen. Aside from that, it looks generic, subpar, and disappointing. I'm far more impressed by ArmA 3 graphics going by pictures and the not-so-high quality videos.

The lighting system looks good, but I still voted that it should be a very high priority since everything else seems to be great. They just need to implement picture and picture as well - for realistic optics and also mirrors.

I can't agree on this one - CE2 doesn't feature GI (indirect illumination), and it can't have anywhere near the amount of active light sources as CE3 or FB2. So, it is improvement over CE2 by far when it comes to lighting - those are actually quite different engines. Horizont based AO is similar to the other (newer) AO implementations, what's cool about new Frostbite is actually screen-space AO. Blaming lighting engine for artist screw up (depending on how you look at it) is hilarious...

It looks generic, subpar, and disappointing because of artistic choices and poor quality environment models and textures. Nothing to do with the lighting engine, so stop mixing those... Their choice is probably for a reason though - I'd call it "optimization", maybe you haven't noticed, but BF3 runs pretty damn well with 64 players and rather big maps on even lower end PCs.

RTT has nothing to do with the lighting, but it would be a nice feature to have.

Edited November 15, 2011 by Minoza

[BobcatBob 10]

I know this is OT but im curios if anybody here has any sereious knowledge about this question: If Battlefield 3 was made as a High-end PC exclusive, could the graphics of the multiplayer matched the graphics found in the campaign?

[Minoza 11]

I know this is OT but im curios if anybody here has any sereious knowledge about this question: If Battlefield 3 was made as a High-end PC exclusive, could the graphics of the multiplayer matched the graphics found in the campaign?

As I mentioned earlier, it's cause of optimization, requirements of the SP campaign are not the same as the MP.

[shoomfie 10]

As with anything, every time you put something into a game, it takes more to get it back out (processing, graphics, audio drivers, etc.). But at the same time, I'd really like to see some improvements in A3 over A2, such as light not shooting through opaque objects, and light fade over a distance. The A2 flares and NVG effects, as well as it's post-processing effects, I found to be quite good as they were, but a few tweeks here and there would be an incredible improvement in night-based OPs.

[boredgunner 1]

I can't agree on this one - CE2 doesn't feature GI (indirect illumination), and it can't have anywhere near the amount of active light sources as CE3 or FB2. So, it is improvement over CE2 by far when it comes to lighting - those are actually quite different engines. Horizont based AO is similar to the other (newer) AO implementations, what's cool about new Frostbite is actually screen-space AO. Blaming lighting engine for artist screw up (depending on how you look at it) is hilarious...

It looks generic, subpar, and disappointing because of artistic choices and poor quality environment models and textures. Nothing to do with the lighting engine, so stop mixing those... Their choice is probably for a reason though - I'd call it "optimization", maybe you haven't noticed, but BF3 runs pretty damn well with 64 players and rather big maps on even lower end PCs.

RTT has nothing to do with the lighting, but it would be a nice feature to have.

I never blamed BF3's lighting engine for anything lol. Nice to know it actually has improvements, although I never noticed them in game. BF3 is indeed optimized well on higher settings, although the engine has no scaling at all (running terribly on low settings at 1280 x 720 on my secondary overclocked E6600/9800GT rig, which runs Crysis on high settings). I don't really care about that though, optimization on max settings is what I'm curious about for ArmA 3. :bounce3:

[dragon01 902]

The A2 flares and NVG effects, as well as it's post-processing effects, I found to be quite good as they were, but a few tweeks here and there would be an incredible improvement in night-based OPs.

And manual intensity adjustments. Default NVG intensity+AI habit to turn on the lights when left in a vehicle=blindness upon dismounting.

[wipman 1]

Hi, i think that the Light Engine should be very improved from what we see on the ArmA2, at certain times of the day (on the ArmA2) you can't distinguish anything; it's all flat and the HDR seems to be trying to re-create how a bad recording camera will work instead how the human eye work so at certain times of the day the game becomes unplayable, and the AI don't haves this problem... so that makes it even more unplayable. I hope that the ArmA3 have a much better Light Engine, i wouldn't buy it without it. Let's C ya

[purepassion 22]

agree :)

There is a lot of potential left for the Real Virtuality engine in terms of lighting and shaders

[NeMeSiS 11]

Rarely has a poll been so one-sided. I hope BI gets the hint. :)

[Opticalsnare 12]

Yus we need a new lighting system the current one is horrible. The HDR is out of control for starters. Its very unrealistic to have the screen go dark and you cant see anything cause your looking slightly into the direction of the sun, and when you look the otherway the brightness is increased ie looking at the ground. As for bloom things shouldnt glow unless they have something to glow from. Bloom should only be used for intense light objects or shiny objects creating glow. And shadows are also pretty poor, it would be nice to have dynamic lights & shadows. As in you can then have explosions cast shadows and buildings woundnt be so bright with proper shadows. The problem is the engine seems to be focased on ambient lighting rather than projected light which is where other engines have focased more on dynamic lighting with ambient being the very basic of the lighting system..

[Craig_VG 20]

Let's do it

+1.

[b00ce 160]

The HDR is out of control for starters. Its very unrealistic to have the screen go dark and you cant see anything cause your looking slightly into the direction of the sun, and when you look the otherway the brightness is increased ie looking at the ground.

I think you need to get outside more often then. :rolleyes: Namely at dawn or dusk, you'll have a very hard time seeing in the direction of the sun. I love ArmA's sun-blindness, very realistic and can be used as a tactical advantage. ;)

[Przemek_kondor 13]

The FoV in Arma is much different than you have in your eyes. It means in Arma you will see the sun much more often.

That is why I would keep sun-blindness but only when the sun is somewhere in the middle of the screen.

[dmarkwick 261]

The FoV in Arma is much different than you have in your eyes. It means in Arma you will see the sun much more often.

That is why I would keep sun-blindness but only when the sun is somewhere in the middle of the screen.

I should say that it's the other way around: you have a much narrower FOV in the game than you have IRL. However, IRL you can cover the sun with your hand, or squint. I agree however that the sun blinding effect should only take effect if the sun is close to the centre of your screen. That way you can "squint" or simulate covering you eyes by moving your view slightly, while still making it a bad idea to shoot into the sun.

[Opticalsnare 12]

I think you need to get outside more often then. :rolleyes: Namely at dawn or dusk, you'll have a very hard time seeing in the direction of the sun. I love ArmA's sun-blindness, very realistic and can be used as a tactical advantage. ;)

Im not talking about the sun-blindness. Im on about the light levels fading from dark to light when you move your vision alround. For example you look at the ground ingame and the light level increases like 5x and you look up and it goes back to normal and if you look slightly as in NOT directly at the sun but when the sun becomes into your view the light level fades darker. The problem is that the effect ingame is like +200% of what it should be.

Sorry but ive never in RL experienced daylight where it pulsates randomly when you walk down the road, if you do then i suggest you stop taking those psychedelic mind altering druuugs. :rolleyes:

[Smurf 12]

Im not talking about the sun-blindness. Im on about the light levels fading from dark to light when you move your vision alround. For example you look at the ground ingame and the light level increases like 5x and you look up and it goes back to normal and if you look slightly as in NOT directly at the sun but when the sun becomes into your view the light level fades darker. The problem is that the effect ingame is like +200% of what it should be.

Sorry but ive never in RL experienced daylight where it pulsates randomly when you walk down the road, if you do then i suggest you stop taking those psychedelic mind altering druuugs. :rolleyes:

Thats a major problem IMO. WHen you load the game with "-world=empty", the screen keeps "pulsing" due to the light reflection on the water and its fucking annoying.

[Flash Thunder 10]

This is what OpticalSnare is referring too, in case any of you don't understand.

6I5yQDH3DoA

Look at ground game gets brighter (thanks too stupid HDR implementation)

Look at sky game gets darker

HDR kill it with FIRE! :angryfire:

Edited November 21, 2011 by Flash Thunder

[metalcraze 290]

HDR makes lighting look more realistic. What you mean here is the flawed HDR calculation used in games - when there are a lot of dark objects on the screen HDR tries to make image brighter, same goes for light objects (sky) except this time it makes image darker.

It looks perfectly OK when camera looks at both sky and ground objects

Still ArmA2's implementation isn't as ridiculously awful as in BF3 where image sometimes becomes almost black and white which people for some reason bring as an example of good lighting here.

Edited November 22, 2011 by metalcraze

[nodunit 397]

HDR has some major flaws and has been the bane of many atmospheric missions as well as any thoughts of indoor missions, the moment you would into a building unless there is a window or something to view the sky with then BAM...instant over illumination.

It doesn't help that these games have no time to effect over the instant effects..afterall in real life the changing of light to our eyes isn't instant, it should take a few seconds at least and that is why it is so aggitating in Arma, the constant shifting of light without half a second, this made NVG's particularly useless in stock Arma2.

Edited November 22, 2011 by NodUnit

[NeMeSiS 11]

Still ArmA2's implementation isn't as ridiculously awful as in BF3 where image sometimes becomes almost black and white which people for some reason bring as an example of good lighting here.

Thats the color filter, not the HDR lightning. ArmA2's current HDR implementation is pretty retarded, though i do like the concept.

[dmarkwick 261]

HDR makes lighting look more realistic.

It makes it look more realistic if your realism is being captured by a camera. HDR as implemented in ArmA doesn't have too much use in simulating eye behaviour though.

Ironically, if it were to simulate high dynamic range properly it would simulate being able to see both very light and very dark areas separately as well as simultaneously. What it does ingame is to simulate how rubbish cameras are at doing that.

Edited November 23, 2011 by DMarkwick

[BobcatBob 10]

Im pretty sure I read somewhere here that the devs are planning on changing the HDR stuff from what it was in OA to something better in A3.

[nodunit 397]

Yeah waaaaaaaay back in the updates thread when they said the lighting is planned to be change, maybe that is why there are so little updates these days.