Timmoboy 10 Posted November 10, 2011 Just imagine Arma in that engine :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nodunit 397 Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) Mmm...nah, there is much much more to RV than simply looks, and I dare not imagine getting rid of those for better ashethic. The engine looks wonderful but that isn't exactly what RV is designed for. Edited November 10, 2011 by NodUnit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Timmoboy 10 Posted November 10, 2011 Did I say I wanted BIS to use that engine? Just wanted to share the video and dream about how arma could look in the future maybe ;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JdB 151 Posted November 10, 2011 Did I say I wanted BIS to use that engine? Just imagine Arma in that engine :) :rolleyes: That's saying it without actually writing it down imo :p Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Timmoboy 10 Posted November 10, 2011 Well I only meant " Imagine if arma looked like that", but I see your point. :) Haven't slept in 24h so I'm a bit tired and really don't know what I'm typing ^^ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
batto 17 Posted November 10, 2011 BLUR.Thats it. Don't act so fanboi-ish. It looks great, just admit it... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dmarkwick 261 Posted November 10, 2011 It does look great, I can admit it :) I doubt there's a real use for DoF though, that's a camera effect and people are not subject to it as far as FPS games go. I'd be more interested in how that foliage reacts to damage etc, if a player/AI 2km away knocks over a tree, will I see it felled when I get there? Stuff like that. RV engine is much, much more than just good looking, it has a fidelity that I think is difficult to get. Given fidelity concerns are solved though, to get ArmA looking like that would be nice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nodunit 397 Posted November 10, 2011 Well I only meant " Imagine if arma looked like that", but I see your point. :)Haven't slept in 24h so I'm a bit tired and really don't know what I'm typing ^^ Not a problem, we've all been there hahah. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pulverizer 1 Posted November 10, 2011 BLUR.Thats it. RV also features focal blur you can use for nice-looking camera flights. Only it would be ruined by LOD popping, z-fighting, terrible lighting and atomic glowing cows. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Timmoboy 10 Posted November 10, 2011 It does look great, I can admit it :) I doubt there's a real use for DoF though, that's a camera effect and people are not subject to it as far as FPS games go.I'd be more interested in how that foliage reacts to damage etc, if a player/AI 2km away knocks over a tree, will I see it felled when I get there? Stuff like that. RV engine is much, much more than just good looking, it has a fidelity that I think is difficult to get. Given fidelity concerns are solved though, to get ArmA looking like that would be nice. It probably wouldn't fit for a game like arma, but I believe that Arma 3 will come pretty close to that if they change the lightning. And if we are so lucky that we get Arma 4 I'm sure it will look better than that :D Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
svendejong 0 Posted November 10, 2011 that's a camera effect and people are not subject to it I wouldnt be so sure about that, our eyes are of wonderfull design but we dont have infinite DOF. Dont get me wrong I agree it's been overdone and abused in games. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nodunit 397 Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) Well we don't see sun flares and our eyes aren't as subject to HDR as they are in every game..I think that falls more under artistic license than replicating reality. The more I look at games I'm convinced they are trying to look life-like but not realistic. What I mean by that is..well walk in a forest, the colors are lovely but the shading is much different, shadows are less evident unless it's a sunny cloudless day. take skin for example as well, what normal maps do they do well but are a tad too pronounced when it comes to the shadowed area. Likewise foilage doesn't have much specular and you can stare at a white concrete walkway or metal storage building with hardly any glaring. Edited November 10, 2011 by NodUnit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NielsS 10 Posted November 10, 2011 Yay, another engine created for the aging consoles, ergo nothing new. This engine would not support a game like Arma as it would blow up those precious consoles. Remember when people went ape with Cryengine 3. At closer inspection it shows that it was a big step down from Cryengine 2 because of the consoles. Don't get fooled with shiny blurry graphics that a Pentium 4 could easily handle. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dmarkwick 261 Posted November 10, 2011 I wouldnt be so sure about that, our eyes are of wonderfull design but we dont have infinite DOF. Dont get me wrong I agree it's been overdone and abused in games. Well what I was meaning was that a camera has a fixed focus, whereas in a game simulating eyesight (i.e. any FPS game) there is no telling what the player will decide to look at, be it the rifle he's holding or the mountain far away :) Thus DoF is not really a suitable effect. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted November 10, 2011 seen that already, looks nice but to be honest it's just video of valley with lot of objects/assets (imagine A3 with lot of variety in vegetation)... now whenthe techdemo is released then we can talk about how / what is advanced ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pulverizer 1 Posted November 10, 2011 Yay, another engine created for the aging consoles, ergo nothing new. This engine would not support a game like Arma as it would blow up those precious consoles.Remember when people went ape with Cryengine 3. At closer inspection it shows that it was a big step down from Cryengine 2 because of the consoles. Don't get fooled with shiny blurry graphics that a Pentium 4 could easily handle. LOL'd :D Unigine is about as advanced as PC DX11 graphical engines get. I quote: Shader Model 5.0 support Hardware tessellation with displacement mapping Screen-space ambient occlusion (SSAO) Real-time global illumination Subsurface scattering Try running their old Heaven benchmark on your current PC and see how well that goes on max settings. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
froggyluv 2136 Posted November 11, 2011 LOL'd :D Unigine is about as advanced as PC DX11 graphical engines get. I quote:Shader Model 5.0 support Hardware tessellation with displacement mapping Screen-space ambient occlusion (SSAO) Real-time global illumination Subsurface scattering Try running their old Heaven benchmark on your current PC and see how well that goes on max settings. Hmmm max settings? I benched on Default and got average fps of 59.1 -not bad for 2 old 460's in SLI. Hey btw, that bench is absolutely sublime with some of the best ambient music i've ever heard -thanks! :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dysta 10 Posted November 11, 2011 LOL'd :D Unigine is about as advanced as PC DX11 Screen-space ambient occlusion (SSAO) I thought they're upgraded to HBAO and/or even HDAO. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
batto 17 Posted November 11, 2011 Hi. Unigine is about as advanced as PC DX11 graphical engines get PC DX11 graphical engines DX11 Can someone competent please explain to me what is so awesome on DX11? It's just API, isn't it? People on this forum glorify it like games will look awesome just because they'll use DX11 (an API). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted November 11, 2011 more features, faster (better multi-threading, tesselation, directcompute) lower or none restrictions on e.g. shader register sizes and so on ... there is way too much advances SM5 and DX11.1 and 11.0 what makes them worthy upgrade from SM3/DX9 .... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NielsS 10 Posted November 11, 2011 LOL'd :D Unigine is about as advanced as PC DX11 graphical engines get. I quote:Shader Model 5.0 support Hardware tessellation with displacement mapping Screen-space ambient occlusion (SSAO) Real-time global illumination Subsurface scattering Try running their old Heaven benchmark on your current PC and see how well that goes on max settings. I suggest you reread the info on the engine as it clearly states it is a Multicrossplatform engine. The term multicrossplatform is a bogus term as it simply means "designed for consoles". It does not matter how much flashy features like DX11 and Tesselation it throws at it, it's still designed for 6 to 7 year old tech. :j: Take Crysis for instance. When i play Crysis maxed out my PC has to work hard to keep the framerate smooth. With Crysis 2 it doesn't break a sweat even though it uses DX11. Why? Because Crysis 2 was made with an engine designed for consoles. Remember Sion Lenton's clusterfucks known as Dragon Rising and Red River? They were also made with a multicrossplatform engine. CODMW3 witch uses a FOV of 55-60 (WTF!!!) is also made with a multicrossplatform engine. Do i need to go on? The bottom line is that any game made with this new engine for the PC will be a console port so most of them will be mediocre at best.:( Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dmarkwick 261 Posted November 11, 2011 I suggest you reread the info on the engine as it clearly states it is a Multicrossplatform engine. The term multicrossplatform is a bogus term as it simply means "designed for consoles". It does not matter how much flashy features like DX11 and Tesselation it throws at it, it's still designed for 6 to 7 year old tech. :j:Take Crysis for instance. When i play Crysis maxed out my PC has to work hard to keep the framerate smooth. With Crysis 2 it doesn't break a sweat even though it uses DX11. Why? Because Crysis 2 was made with an engine designed for consoles. Remember Sion Lenton's clusterfucks known as Dragon Rising and Red River? They were also made with a multicrossplatform engine. CODMW3 witch uses a FOV of 55-60 (WTF!!!) is also made with a multicrossplatform engine. Do i need to go on? The bottom line is that any game made with this new engine for the PC will be a console port so most of them will be mediocre at best.:( What a disappointing post. What developers choose to do with an engine is up to them; but the thread is about what the engine is capable of. Take a look at the featureset and try not to imagine what a moron would do with it, try and imagine what a good developer could do with it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
walker 0 Posted November 11, 2011 Hi all The independent developer licensing pricing is very good. And the special offer is nice. http://unigine.com/press-releases/111005-indie-deal/ €999 is a good bait price. There is a try before you buy evaluation kit too; so worth a look. http://unigine.com/evalkit/ The licensing overall looks good as it is royalty free. $3995 for full kit any platform. $30,000. For the full pro kit per project. I wonder what the unlimited projects license price is? Kind regards walker Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1125 Posted November 11, 2011 Hi allThe independent developer licensing pricing is very good. And the special offer is nice. http://unigine.com/press-releases/111005-indie-deal/ €999 is a good bait price. There is a try before you buy evaluation kit too; so worth a look. http://unigine.com/evalkit/ The licensing overall looks good as it is royalty free. $3995 for full kit any platform. $30,000. For the full pro kit per project. I wonder what the unlimited projects license price is? Kind regards walker and yet it's completely overpriced compared with UDK which cost 0 for indies (until You go commercial release then You can decide if you buy license or pay % from income) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
