CMx2 Graphics

[eichenbaum]

Originally posted by juan_gigante:

Unreal Tournament with tanks!?! I must have!!1!1!11!

Unreal is initially a FPS engine. Example of a war-game created with the Unreal technology:

http://www.menofvalorgame.com

Maybe BFC can afford it now to get some really cool shader scripts for Charles his engine?

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

One time we figured out that to do a suspension system, even a primative one, would take more polies than the entire tank it was attached to.

Panzer Elite had a good suspension system, as I recall. I don't know how they achieved it, though.

[Battlefront.com]

Panzer Elite had a good suspension system, as I recall. I don't know how they achieved it, though.

By not having dozens of Human figures running around in a 2k long map, which can be dense forest, along with 2 dozen AFVs.... that's how

When you boil things down to the most simple of notions, the computer hardware/software doesn't care what is displayed. All it cares about is how many polies it has to push around and how many different ways they can be moved. If a computer can comfortably handle 100,000 polies at one time, that means you can have a 90,000 poly tank and 10,000 polies left over for fairly limited environment. Or you can have a 10,000 poly tank and keep the sum total of everything else under 90,000 combined. Everything will be happy. But put two 90,000 poly tanks in a 10,000 poly environment... framerate goes right into the crapper.

So the more polies you put on to detail a vehicle, like suspension, the less of something else you can afford to do. For us we had to plan on at least a dozen vehicles and a fair amount of infantry being seen together in a pretty expansive environment. If a 1000 poly tank needed 1000 polies for a believable suspension, then that would have meant only a 1/2 dozen vehicles and all the rest. That's the kind of decisions that we developers have to make. And let me tell you... it sucks

Steve

[ July 26, 2005, 07:37 AM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

[Michael Dorosh]

Panzer Commander had the same deal; moving suspension and even track marks behind the vehicle (which disappeared quickly) - but no infantry, few vehicle types, and huge blocks of woods that were impassable.

[Sirocco]

I suppose there might be a solution with less detailed models at longer distances, but I can see the possible pitfalls of that.

If you can put more character into the vehicles with different camo patterns and unique vehicle numbers, that would mitigate it, too.

[RMC]

Originally posted by Sirocco:

I suppose there might be a solution with less detailed models at longer distances, but I can see the possible pitfalls of that.

Lots of 3d games do this. It would be nice if CMx2 included a Level of Detail dynamic too.

[Battlefront.com]

LOD (Level of Detail) models are already in CMx1, as recently explained in another thread somewhere. No 3D game can run without it unless the visual range is about a small room's length and the models aren't completely insanely detailed *or* the graphics are utter simplistic crap So obviously CMx2 will use various LODs for sure.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Charles just reminded me... for CMBO the poly limit we strived for was 300 per vehicle. Most had less, some had a little more. In CMBB we bumpped that up to 500, and in CMAK probably to 550. Compare this with a CMx2 soldier that has about 3000 polygons

Steve

[hellfish]

Wow... 3000 polys? I think most OFP soldiers are about 1000 and at the extreme 3000. Impressive.

Now if only we had a screenshot...

[Battlefront.com]

We'll have to see if they can remain at that resolution up close, but I think they probably can. All depends on how overall performance is once everything else gets in. The point of the numbers I presented was simply to show how things have changed from CMx1 to CMx2.

Steve

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

We'll have to see if they can remain at that resolution up close, but I think they probably can. All depends on how overall performance is once everything else gets in. The point of the numbers I presented was simply to show how things have changed from CMx1 to CMx2.

Steve

And a screenshot now - with you later finding you have to decrease the poly count once the terrain and vehicles are in - would be hugely disappointing, eh. Some people aren't getting it.

Tell us, though, Steve - how accurate will the camo patterns be?

[Frenchy]

I can see right now I am going to need a new computer rig!

[Sergei]

Steve, tell us one thing - in CMBO, you couldn't alter the level of details in any way to better match your system's capacity. Thus, either it was slow as hell on your stone age rig or then you'd get no extra eyecandy for a superhighperformance system.

Is there going to be a "video setup"?

[Battlefront.com]

Well, that's the rub we've been trying to avoid. We don't like to prelease information until we are sure it is going into the game as described. But it will be probably 6 more months before we are able to say for sure that our soldiers can retain 3000 polies or not. So it is either show you a "best guess" screenshot now, or keep telling you guys to hold your water for 6 months. I'd rather show a screenshot from someone else's game and claim it to be our own rather than put up with 6 months of constant complaining ;D

I'd say I'm about 90% certain that they can keep the guys at their current resolution. Rememeber, this is only for the up close and personal LOD... the medium, far, and very far LODs will be tons less.

Steve

[ July 26, 2005, 11:07 AM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

[Jack Carr]

Originally posted by Frenchy:

I can see right now I am going to need a new computer rig!

I think my next upgrade will be a powerful video card.

[Pzman]

I just upgraded with a used card, and now based on Steve's comments, I'm wondering if it will be enough.

[Battlefront.com]

The demo will tell you

Steve

[Soddball]

ARGHARGHARHHGHAGRAHRGHARGHAGRHA!!!!!

Stop torturing us!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:

[Battlefront.com]

(pushing Soddoffball aside for a sec...)

The best thing to do is not second guess what the hardware requirements will be. We'll let you know as soon as we have a good fix on it, but pesonally I wouldn't do anything until the demo comes out. The reason is that the new and used hardware available at that time will be better and cheaper than the stuff available today. We'll also know which cards work best with the game and (hopefully) which ones suck.

OK, Soddball... you can come back in now

Steve

[rleete]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

(pushing Soddoffball aside for a sec...)

OK, Soddball... you can come back in now

Damn, talk about a tease!

[Soddball]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

(pushing Soddoffball aside for a sec...)

The best thing to do is not second guess what the hardware requirements will be. We'll let you know as soon as we have a good fix on it, but pesonally I wouldn't do anything until the demo comes out. The reason is that the new and used hardware available at that time will be better and cheaper than the stuff available today. We'll also know which cards work best with the game and (hopefully) which ones suck.

OK, Soddball... you can come back in now

Steve

:mad: And after I went to all that effort to find you rubber road tracks for your weasel.

[Jarmo]

Duh. I was thinking of buying a new ibook as a temporary solution. (While waiting for the intel transfer dust to settle.) But given the graphics is still 32 MB's after the upgrade, it's probably not a very safe bet.

[von Paulus]

With 3000 polygons for a soldier I was wondering how realistic and detailed wounds should be ...

Can we expect to see as impressive injuries like in the opening scene of Saving Private Ryan or bullet hits like in Band of Brothers ?

Even something approaching that kind of animation would be very satisfying

If we have building damage like in Band of Brothers (especially the scene covering a battle in Holland), then I think the next CM would be THE BEST WWII game of the planet

Well, I was just wondering about that ...

Paulus

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

LOD (Level of Detail) models are already in CMx1, as recently explained in another thread somewhere. No 3D game can run without it unless the visual range is about a small room's length and the models aren't completely insanely detailed *or* the graphics are utter simplistic crap So obviously CMx2 will use various LODs for sure.

I was wondering whether it would be possible to have a more detailed running gear model close-up, but I suppose if you lose it above that kind of draw distance it's not worth the time and effort.

[slysniper]

I have set my forty dollars aside for the cmx2,

I have also been planning on buying my next computer about the same time. That requires a little more money, but my present machine is starting to have problems meeting the needs of the other stuff out there. This game hitting the market still looks to be a year away. Holding off for another year from buying a new system and giving me no clue what I would likely need is not making me very happy.