PDA

View Full Version : Reflections in game graphic engine?



DarthBane_
05-02-2004, 01:18 PM
I did some texturing for bf1942, and noticed that textures have alpha channel that deffines reflection for object. I miss that since even jane's ww2 had reflections, why was that option excluded in il2? In all mensioned games it didnt seem to afect performance at all. Ofcourse reflections are not complete, only sky and land small bitmap pass for multitecsturing. This is GL game, what was the reason for excluding this effect? Could it maybe be included for new payed addon with many bombers and new maps. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

DarthBane_
05-02-2004, 01:18 PM
I did some texturing for bf1942, and noticed that textures have alpha channel that deffines reflection for object. I miss that since even jane's ww2 had reflections, why was that option excluded in il2? In all mensioned games it didnt seem to afect performance at all. Ofcourse reflections are not complete, only sky and land small bitmap pass for multitecsturing. This is GL game, what was the reason for excluding this effect? Could it maybe be included for new payed addon with many bombers and new maps. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

VW-IceFire
05-02-2004, 01:24 PM
What kind of reflection? If you mean the reflected shine from metal objects this game does have that but its a globally defined thing (i.e. one of the patches mentioned that metal skinned aircraft had increased metal shine).

I think only CFS3 had environment mapping.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

DarthBane_
05-02-2004, 01:30 PM
I mean the reflections you get on metal object while you move tham, some bare metal skins got tham simulated (mustang skin of capt. Lee example). When you have paint over the metal it is weak, but on places with rubbed off paint it behaves like mirror.

Agamemnon22
05-02-2004, 04:18 PM
I think you means specularity mapping. As to why its missing, I don't know, but since the alpha channel is already used (for opacity), introducing spec maps would mean another texture, meaning more memory requirements. As this game (at the time of conception) was already pushing graphics board limit, that's probably why it was left out.

DarthBane_
05-02-2004, 05:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Agamemnon22:
I think you means specularity mapping. As to why its missing, I don't know, but since the alpha channel is already used (for opacity), introducing spec maps would mean another texture, meaning more memory requirements. As this game (at the time of conception) was already pushing graphics board limit, that's probably why it was left out.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Time of conception was ages ago, i hope that we could get some eye candy that is pritty standard now (was present in janes ww2 years ago), current graphic boards are capable of pushing that, it would be major estetic improvement. Adding reflections, improving water effect (not like in perfect mode which is unplayable) and adding more planes, especialy bombers would be worth payed addon.
I noticed one more thing, this game is not optimised for nvidia FX cards, the difference in Ati and FX is more noticable in this game, than any other i saw. Strange, it would ruin my day if some politics is included, after all i am only a hapy pilot with hopes that this sim will look even better than now. I am allways ready to pay for improvements.

609IAP_Recon
05-02-2004, 06:47 PM
bump - I agree, this would be a major step in the right direction for this game imo.

Salute!

IV/JG51_Recon

http://www.forgottenskies.com/jg51sig2.jpg

Aaron_GT
05-03-2004, 02:05 AM
"Time of conception was ages ago, i hope that we could get some eye candy that is pritty standard now (was present in janes ww2 years ago), current graphic boards are capable of pushing that, it would be major estetic improvement"

Yes, but a new game engine is being worked on
for BoB. I doubt that working on that sort of
change for FB is a priority as BoB is probably
more than enough work. It's worth bumping to
ensure it is in BoB, though.

DarthBane_
05-03-2004, 04:26 AM
I forgott to mention the bumpmaping on the joints of metal panels and screw holles. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/smileys-gun2.gif, it is from Ubi also? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

VW-IceFire
05-03-2004, 06:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DarthBane_:
I noticed one more thing, this game is not optimised for nvidia FX cards, the difference in Ati and FX is more noticable in this game, than any other i saw. Strange, it would ruin my day if some politics is included, after all i am only a hapy pilot with hopes that this sim will look even better than now. I am allways ready to pay for improvements.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
What differences are you refering to? If you mean the benchmarking of the FB Perfect mode the only reason that the FX's score so poorly is because of the entire GeForce FX line in general being inferior in DX9 speed compaired to the closest ATI cards. This doesn't just apply to FB, its across the board...only the FX5700 and the FX5900 (and 5950, etc.) have come closer to addressing the pixel shader/DX9 performance.

Aside from that FX's do just as well as Radeon's do so I have no idea what you're talking about. Adding to that is the fact that nVidia cards have traditionally scored better on games running OpenGL. FB is a native OpenGL graphics engine.

Please qualify this. If you're refering to specific experience it may be a driver or system issue that you are having and is not related to FB at all.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

LeadSpitter_
05-03-2004, 06:40 AM
I asked this question myself along time ago, its needed especially for the aluminum aircraft, just have a seperate version of the aluminum aircraft p-51-d NA20 (A) etc. with the reflective channel would be so easy to do, it just a small change to the mdl file. How it would hinder performance i dont know.

I wish oleg would reply back to some of our posts now and then or anyone from the development team.

maybe if someone asked the question in the russian or french forum it might get an answer

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/newsig.jpg

DarthBane_
05-03-2004, 07:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DarthBane_:
I noticed one more thing, this game is not optimised for nvidia FX cards, the difference in Ati and FX is more noticable in this game, than any other i saw. Strange, it would ruin my day if some politics is included, after all i am only a hapy pilot with hopes that this sim will look even better than now. I am allways ready to pay for improvements.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
What differences are you refering to? If you mean the benchmarking of the FB Perfect mode the only reason that the FX's score so poorly is because of the entire GeForce FX line in general being inferior in DX9 speed compaired to the closest ATI cards. This doesn't just apply to FB, its across the board...only the FX5700 and the FX5900 (and 5950, etc.) have come closer to addressing the pixel shader/DX9 performance.

Aside from that FX's do just as well as Radeon's do so I have no idea what you're talking about. Adding to that is the fact that nVidia cards have traditionally scored better on games running OpenGL. FB is a native OpenGL graphics engine.

Please qualify this. If you're refering to specific experience it may be a driver or system issue that you are having and is not related to FB at all.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I didnt intend to go into this ati vs nvidia discussion, but to qualify that i must say that my frend has a lan gaming place with 30 comps(i did the enterior design), drivers are not the issue, fx5900ultra vs 9600 non pro (all kinds of graph tweaking in il2 setup) and it came out that game looks better on ati. Well it is ok http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif, but since it is a lan centar it has about 20 other games installed and ultra looks way better in ALL the rest http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif(top line games http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/smileys-gun2.gif), so it seems like support isue. Not perfect mode related but difference is HUGE when perf enabled (in ati favor), but i would like to go back to reflection which is specialy needed on mustang, yug and lightning. Bump maps also. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

DarthBane_
05-03-2004, 07:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
I asked this question myself along time ago, its needed especially for the aluminum aircraft, just have a seperate version of the aluminum aircraft p-51-d NA20 (A) etc. with the reflective channel would be so easy to do, it just a small change to the mdl file. How it would hinder performance i dont know.

I wish oleg would reply back to some of our posts now and then or anyone from the development team.

maybe if someone asked the question in the russian or french forum it might get an answer

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/newsig.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No way that it can ruin performance, it worked on ati rage in ww2 fighters, in bf1942 turning the env mapping on or off produces none of frames number decrease. Would be nice to hear someone from development team. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

clint-ruin
05-03-2004, 07:29 AM
Just to plug it again, Freespace 2s' Open source project hacked in specular maps with editable glows/normal maps and the results were awesome. Editable as a normal texture file too and a lot of the initial run were just autogenerated from the existing textures. Wonder how hard it could really be to add this into FB.

http://users.bigpond.net.au/gwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

VW-IceFire
05-03-2004, 07:12 PM
Yeah that adding of the specular lighting FS2 Open source wasn't terribly hard from what I can tell (compaired to the HT&L and DX8 upgrade). Its still quite cumbersome (PCX or TGA files to make it work).

Thing is that that team was able to get quite a performance boost out of using HT&L. FB already uses that so that "magic wand" is gone.

DarthBane: I don't do ATI vs nVidia arguments but I do take great interest in the competing cards and technologies. I'd love to hear more about the differences in image quality...everything that I've read puts ATI's image quality either slightly better or completly indistugishably the same. Just curious.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

DarthBane_
05-03-2004, 07:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Yeah that adding of the specular lighting FS2 Open source wasn't terribly hard from what I can tell (compaired to the HT&L and DX8 upgrade). Its still quite cumbersome (PCX or TGA files to make it work).

Thing is that that team was able to get quite a performance boost out of using HT&L. FB already uses that so that "magic wand" is gone.

DarthBane: I don't do ATI vs nVidia arguments but I do take great interest in the competing cards and technologies. I'd love to hear more about the differences in image quality...everything that I've read puts ATI's image quality either slightly better or completly indistugishably the same. Just curious.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agree, but this wassnt 9800pro or XT, it was 9600 non pro vs AsusV9950ultra, thats the reason i find it strange, anyway VIP with 10 comps is equiped with 9600. price+speed.

About reflections developers didnt say anything.
My first thread was question about changed camera in outside view (distance), didnt hear anything from tham eather.
Maybe im using wrong language.

VW-IceFire
05-03-2004, 11:59 PM
Generally there isn't much difference along the Radeon 9500+ and FX5200+ in terms of straight image quality. Speed is a factor obviously for playable quality but in-general the quality is the same across the companies core chips. Again, most places (two examples being Toms Hardware and HardOCP) usually (after extensive tests) find that there are no differences between the two competing companies (at least between a 9600 and a 5700/5900). Very intrguing to say the least http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Anyways, back to the shine stuff...it may just not be something they will want to devote time to. And I think thats ok...BoB will probably have this ability in spades!

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"