Cheat Engine Forum Index Cheat Engine
The Official Site of Cheat Engine
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Importance of graphics
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Cheat Engine Forum Index -> Game Development -> Gameplay design
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Member of the Year
Reputation: 198

Joined: 14 Jan 2009
Posts: 1820

PostPosted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SaberJaw wrote:
1 wrote:
! wrote:
The Dreaded wrote:
Your like the only one who posts here o.O I like good graphics because it makes the game more visually appealing, but gameplay is best overall.

Yes, this is my favorite section. Smile
But think of mario, visually good (for the time) and great gameplay. Balance between both can make your game a success.

True, Mario was the shit Very Happy

Mario still is shit.

While we're off topic, fuck off.
The Mario franchise is godly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Expert Cheater
Reputation: 0

Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 153

PostPosted: Tue Dec 29, 2009 3:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

World of goo is pretty good and it only has 2d art.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
How do I cheat?
Reputation: 0

Joined: 13 Feb 2011
Posts: 5

PostPosted: Sun Feb 13, 2011 5:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Graphics isn't just polygons effects and stuff. It's simply the visual looks of the game.

Sure you can put in billions of polygons, extremely gpu power exhausting effects and antialiasing method that completely erases ALL aliasing. But if a can in the game looks like a brick. If trees look like sticks from the ground...

For example, Metro 2033. When you see all the things it has. How powerful system you have to have to play it. You just think it would be photorealistic, but not, it utterly sucks. The same with crysis. The very early stages of it look like randomly generated.

You need to make the game look visually alive. A nice point, Rally Championship (2000), called Mobil 1 Rally in UK. It's such an old game, but it's graphics beat crysis so much. While playing crysis you just know it's not real.

Technical difficulties:

I think that textures must be photographed. The last game I saw using it wisely was Test Drive(7, called td:overdrive on xbox). There is a track in san franciso. You start at the golden bridge, then go through crooked alley and on the exit of the alley there is a building. Playing it I thought it was just a typical picture in the back ground. But I couldn't believe my eyes - it's an actual 3d object! The reason why was well, the textures were photographed. And the shadows were well high quality lightmap. By this point I signep up for a beta of videotrace - and I do all real-life 3d objects only with it. And I'm stunned by my own results. Small test - I've showed a 500 polygon car to a friend of mine, and he thought it was a photo. For the next 2 minutes he was just staring, and moving the object around. Then asked me how did I do that, and when I told him how he said "where did you buy it?"

500 f* polygons. I mean COME ON.
(btw if you want better results get a 3d scanner)

So that's textures and polygons.

One big difficulty is how much is the environment alive. Game devs today tend to make random environments and put random interactive objects in it. Bad choice. Random environments are okay, if they are based on reality. For example cities are easy to generate. And actually I like generated cities more then pathetic try of recreating a city. Viz. Mafia 2.
The best thing to would be making a prototype - creating the whole enviroment from 1 colo(u)r polygon blocks(2D/3D doesnt matter) and then identifying them with the colour - for example orange is obcastle red is interactive and so on. Then testing/creating the gameplay with it and then making/buying a huuuge set of 3D objects that fit in and just import Very Happy
Easy fast everything

One last difficulty I'd like to mention is visual technology. Today everything tends to be realtime. I hate it. Especially shadows. Those game devs can buy a 2xtesla machine, throw the whole game in there and pre-render more shadows then before, in higher quality and much faster to render on the consumer machine. Next thing I hate is polygons. I've seen some voxel renders. My eyes popped out. Unfortunately 0 or very little graphics card acceleration. Everything is done by cpu. And when you consider that a scene with extreme form of ray-tracing and looks like a real photo has been done by a cpu that has 10x less graphics power then a GMA500... and it's been done in an hour... COME ON!!! Let the voxels rise - the ratio of eye candy to power needed is extremely different from polygons.

Voxels do effects for you, they are super easy to allow physics, and they need let me calculate it... 360000x less graphics power to make a scene in crysis at the same FPS!

Other unused technologies, to sum them, ones that make super real lighting calculating shadows for you(some are modified ambient occlusion that in one run makes equialent to radiant per pixel lighting, SSAO and stencil shadows), tessalation methods(HW methods are very bad, I've seen some sort of flexible tessalation methods used in CGI - and procedural methods in well nothing. but they are much more powerful and beautiful then what nvidia/ati shows), colour fixing shaders(super rarely seen in some toon/comic/kids games... extraordinary beautiful), real HDR(sometimes called super or real high dynamic range... very powerful and very nice. unfortunately eats up something I don't remember, I think it might ate up buffer or memory...), animated lightmaps(sometimes seen in RTS games), extreme viewing distance shaders(they do very easy optical illusion, somewhat related to pre-rendering, never seen in games, almost thought seen in just cause but that was truly rendered and in no way illusion), topology/google engine based tessalation(seen in unlimited game engine or what was it called, quite nice idea must say), easy on 3d shaders(very simple VERY fast 3d(I've seen one faster then simple bloom wtf) solutions that require tv set with autostereography that can force/calculate 3d), CGI shaders that should have been in pc games for ages(but are limited by the fact they've been written in different languages).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
False Prophet
Expert Cheater
Reputation: -1

Joined: 28 May 2006
Posts: 121

PostPosted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 4:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When game designers begin using unlimited detail technologies then graphic engines won't matter anymore.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Cheat Engine Forum Index -> Game Development -> Gameplay design All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

CE Wiki   IRC (#CEF)   Twitter
Third party websites