Jump to content

When are the effects getting a face lift?


Flanker15
 Share

Recommended Posts

I wanted to ask this for a while but didn't know how to say it without sounding negative.

So new game, new opportunity for improvement but the effects are still so, soooo yuk.

I'm talking about the explosions and fire in particular, the smoke and dust is great.

I want to be honest, they look worse than the effects in CM:AK '04 and it's been almost 7 years (jeez that long!) since they arrived in Shockforce.

You can change the sprite to a different sprite but it's still just a single sprite (and a bunch of brown squares flying out if its on the ground) or a bunch of identical sprites scattered over a burning vehicle.

Everytime the game gets updated graphically the effects stuck in '95 stick out more and more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Oh so many issues with this sort of thinking. First, here is what 3D games looked like in 1995:

rott1.gif?w=655

I think we look a little bit better than that :D

Second, "sprites" are 2D characterizations of 3D elements. We've never had any of those, not even back in CMBO days. "Fake" 3D games (isometric, mixed 2D/3D, etc.) have sprites. I'm mentioning this because if one wants to gripe about graphics, one should at least try to know what one is talking about. Just saying!

Third, we are improving the graphics over time. Each release we've done has not only improved graphics quality but more importantly increased graphics speed. We've added things such as dynamic lighting, bump and normal mapping, various shaders, "Movie Mode", and other effects. Therefore, saying we haven't made improvements is either a statement of ignorance or a statement made by someone with visual impairment. Either way, it's factually incorrect.

For CMRT's release we've done a bunch of things, but the most noticeable one is definitely hit decals.

I don't mind being criticized for not having the state of the state of the state of art graphics. I do mind gross mischaracterizations of what we do have.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume the extra detail in the mods like Aris and Vein uses more processing power. Is that another reason to keep the 'effects' as they are? I know and appreciate that the engine isn't coded with bleeding edge rigs in mind. Mods are optional extras that are there for folk with the processing grunt to spare for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For CMRT's release we've done a bunch of things, but the most noticeable one is definitely hit decals.

I don't mind being criticized for not having the state of the state of the state of art graphics. I do mind gross mischaracterizations of what we do have.

Steve, no doubt you guys have done a lot to improve the special effects. The fact remains, however, that the flames that show up when a vehicle catches fire are very...dated, shall we say. The graphics for the flamethrower effect also look very dated and primitive. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but those graphics look like they were lifted directly from CMx1. Don't you think it's time to spruce those up a bit, especially considering the detail now being given to vehicle damage with the hit decals?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't you think it's time to spruce those up a bit, especially considering the detail now being given to vehicle damage with the hit decals?

That's not really fair. Tanks getting hit has been in since 2007 and CMSF, but the decals have only just been included. Flamethrowers aren't even available publicly yet, and already you want their graphics updated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not really fair. Tanks getting hit has been in since 2007 and CMSF, but the decals have only just been included. Flamethrowers aren't even available publicly yet, and already you want their graphics updated?

Judging from what I've seen of the flamethrower effects, yes, I do. IMO they look really out of place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judging from what I've seen of the flamethrower effects, yes, I do. IMO they look really out of place.

Might be because they are still BETA?

I think CMx2 looks good and it has improved in several ways since the first relsease of CMSF. Its also a good idea to take into concideration that less umpf in graphics make the game playable for more people with less hardware.

If one wants things to look even better there are always mods. Vein and Aris have released some quality stuff.

ChrisND said flamethrower graphics are work in progress.

Personally, my biggest gripe with the game visually are soldier models (German ones at least) and ground texture resoultions.

You using any mods? Aris has HD textures for all terrain. There are also excellent uniform mods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh so many issues with this sort of thinking. First, here is what 3D games looked like in 1995:

rott1.gif?w=655

I think we look a little bit better than that :D

Second, "sprites" are 2D characterizations of 3D elements. We've never had any of those, not even back in CMBO days. "Fake" 3D games (isometric, mixed 2D/3D, etc.) have sprites. I'm mentioning this because if one wants to gripe about graphics, one should at least try to know what one is talking about. Just saying!

Third, we are improving the graphics over time. Each release we've done has not only improved graphics quality but more importantly increased graphics speed. We've added things such as dynamic lighting, bump and normal mapping, various shaders, "Movie Mode", and other effects. Therefore, saying we haven't made improvements is either a statement of ignorance or a statement made by someone with visual impairment. Either way, it's factually incorrect.

For CMRT's release we've done a bunch of things, but the most noticeable one is definitely hit decals.

I don't mind being criticized for not having the state of the state of the state of art graphics. I do mind gross mischaracterizations of what we do have.

Steve

Sorry I didn't mean any mischaracterization, "sprite" to me means any 2d bitmap other than the background/skybox, anything that can be ripped from the game and still look the same in a paint editor, so excludes anything with more than 1 polygon.

I picked 95 as a joke, effects are better than doom but worse than Duke3d hence '95.

Also this is only about the explosion and fire "sprite", all the other effects are great.

Here's a pic for example from a game you should be familiar with.

_-Combat-Mission-III-Afrika-Korps-PC-_.jpg

The explosion has 6 separate sprites moving independently to give a volumetric effect and the bits flying through the air are their own little sprites that spin and fly out instead of squares.

Also very happy with hit decals, if they weren't coming this thread would probably be asking for them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 points:

1) BFC (and numerous others) have been very careful to point out that the new effects are currently BETA ONLY!

2) I am concerned about the presumption towards flashier and 'flamier' special effects, and them being better. I have seen (RL) muzzle signatures and the impact of everything from small arms to 155mm (including 120mm tank guns). Flames are notable for their absence (or small size). 'Flashier' is not the same as 'better' in my book. Flamethrowers are the exception to this, and I think a suitable image will be hard, but will appear in time.

I will really enjoy hit decals, but will not (and have not to date) gone for the flashier mods. If you want WW2 as fought in the movies, that is up to you, but I think we should be slow to criticize BFC for 'aged' graphics if only for this reason.

Call me a Grog, but I have always struggled reconciling this games audience split - half of us will criticize the lack of inclusion of the 'known' tendency of the Pzkw VIIXF2 to fire too far left due to the uncorrected coriolis effect on APC shells manufactured on 23rd Feb 1944 and supplied to the Italian front, and others criticize the graphics for not looking like a Hollywood action movie. I sympathize with BFC and would imagine that their in house definition of stress is 'that feeling brought on by wanting to rant at their customers impossible demands, but having to resist for sound commercial reasons' :)

Finally, I dare say BFC could have devoted effort to this earlier... which module or update would you like to have sacrificed to get them in? I want more options for year/place before major graphics update... (I'll have the updates as well mind!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

Call me a Grog, but I have always struggled reconciling this games audience split - half of us will criticize the lack of inclusion of the 'known' tendency of the Pzkw VIIXF2 to fire too far left due to the uncorrected coriolis effect on APC shells manufactured on 23rd Feb 1944 and supplied to the Italian front, and others criticize the graphics for not looking like a Hollywood action movie. I sympathize with BFC and would imagine that their in house definition of stress is 'that feeling brought on by wanting to rant at their customers impossible demands, but having to resist for sound commercial reasons' :)

...

True dat !

Even when I myself have posted some ( IMO legitimate ;) ) gripe, I often imagine the guys at BFC reading it and collectively groaning :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am concerned about the presumption towards flashier and 'flamier' special effects, and them being better. I have seen (RL) muzzle signatures and the impact of everything from small arms to 155mm (including 120mm tank guns). Flames are notable for their absence (or small size). 'Flashier' is not the same as 'better' in my book.

Amen, brother! I have commented before that a large segment of players (or at least posters on this board) are more concerned with depicting their favorite war movies than with anything approaching historical reality. Well, okay, I suppose that is one way to look at the world. I have my doubts that in the long run it is the sanest way, but I don't want to make a federal case about it. I just hope that the mods will continue to be available for them to get their kicks without spoiling the game for the rest of us.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't care very much about the quality of the graphics. I started gaming when they were all just text and you had to imagine everything. I would always opt for more complexity in the AI and mechanics over prettier images.

Whippersnapper. I started gaming when they were all just (mostly unpainted) models on a green baize offcut with step-hills (yes, they're only your hills cos the step pyramid entombed your mom)... And Fog of War meant a hasty sketch on the back of an envelope that you could only check after the game was over for "creative interpretation"... You youngstes don't know how good you got it. Now where's my lawn?

(How'm I doin' Mr Emrys?)

[Please take the above with as many smileys as you need... :) ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whippersnapper. I started gaming when they were all just (mostly unpainted) models on a green baize offcut with step-hills ... :) ]

You.. didn't.. paint.. all .. your .. models !? :eek:

Heretic !

< he says, quickly shuffling the unpainted half of his 15mm Carthaginians behind a big box...> ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He he, you grandpa's would be content with anything graphical thrown towards you. Us youngsters are spoiled brats, graphical whores who also want to get top AI and a massage when our backs get too stiff from all the gaming.

I would say that from graphical point of view the game would get 75 to 80 points out of 100. Plenty of room for improvements and every time we get one by the devs I accept it with a huge satisfaction and excitement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say that from graphical point of view the game would get 75 to 80 points out of 100. Plenty of room for improvements and every time we get one by the devs I accept it with a huge satisfaction and excitement.

Yeah I'd give it a 75 80 out of 100 too but it's not so much the graphics overall (which are good) it's the trough that a couple of the effects sit in next to the overall polish of the rest.

A man can dream though

2cib2g3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You.. didn't.. paint.. all .. your .. models !? :eek:

Heretic !

< he says, quickly shuffling the unpainted half of his 15mm Carthaginians behind a big box...> ;)

I was 8. And I've always been a bit ham-fisted. Trust me, it was better that way :)

Not that I've ever cared very much for whether a figure/model is painted, or even, some of the time, whether it was actually what it was meant to represent... Played too many more abstracted games to worry about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...