aka_tom_w Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 STOP Drooling! These are NOT CMx2 graphics! They are from Brothers in Arms by Gear Box . . . This one is new and looks very polished... This link is a QTRV 360 pano with animation of a solidier firing and using cover..... VERY well done!!!!.... Check it out! http://www.brothersinarmsgame.com/us/3dscreens/bia_fire_animation.mov (did that work? no sorry) Game features here. Sorry if it is off topic BUT it is a COOL new FPS game that JUST came out of the PC X-box and PS2 and it does LOOK amazing. :eek: -tom w [ March 09, 2005, 11:48 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 One of the few things they've divulged is that they're doing grass 'differently' in CMx2, using a computer algoryhm instead of bmp artwork ( and no, I don't know what they meant by that). So they may not have the grass tufts seen in picture one. Is it just me, or when you see those character faces in that game you want to slap 'em hard? Like characters from 'Dawson's Creek' go to war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willbell Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 A proceedural, or algorythm (snicker) texture is one where the program uses fractal algorithms to create textures. The simplest is where you fill a certain space with one color, say green. But by using fractal algorthms you can generate cool, kind of psychadelic, patterns. By experimenting with various variables they have hit upon certain patterns that look like grass, rock, cloth, etc., textures. Then you apply these to specific places on your model. The advantage is that you don't have to have a library of model specific pixel art, which takes a lot of memory. You just have to run the algorithm on a certain spot on a particular area when needed. Not to throw a damper on your enthusiasm, but graphics like this don't impress me relative to CMAK. When they can do it on an entire battalion in motion in real time, on the fly, then I will be impressed. But as far as FPSs go, it's pretty cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted March 9, 2005 Author Share Posted March 9, 2005 Oh Yes!! "But as far as FPSs go, it's pretty cool." you can say that again... -tom w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 I know that my opinion is in the vast minority here, but to me, game visuals don't impress me through tech-geek specifics (vertex, polygons, bump-mapping, whatever), but simply by looking realistic or not. These screenshots might be pushing a lot of polygons or whatever, but they look so far away from reality that I am not impressed at all. Good visuals are not only slapping together hi-res textures (and tons of them). Making it all blend together to give a realistic impression is something else totally. Less is more maybe? Don't know... Just a personal (and probably unpopular) minority opinion. I prsonally believe that we can do a lot better than that for CMX2 when considering the "total" visual impression. And with this, I move it to the General Discussion Forum... Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts