Dynamic Light on HL2 , can be true ???

[-=DouglasteR=]

I was thinking , if the engine supports it , why dont use it ??

Dont you think that all the media already exposed just show the "Only Lightmap" lighting from the Visual option ??

Thinking in numbers , the HUGE part that will play HL2 and CSS will not have the required specs to use DL !

Its possible that valve was all this time hidden the dynamic on HL2 just because doom3 ??

Using DL on huge open areas is useless and painfull, but in smalls room , like Dr Kleiner's lab are possible and indeed NEEDED ! :flame:



what you think ?

 

[Shuzer]

HL2 features dynamic lighting.
It does not, however, feature dynamic shadowing.

The engine supports both. But only one is used.

 

[-=DouglasteR=]

HL2 features dynamic lighting.
It does not, however, feature dynamic shadowing.

The engine supports both. But only one is used.

Theres no chance to both be used ??

 

[gusolson]

I'd rather have precalculated shadows that look like shadows should than have dynamic shadows that look like crap. I also want more than a frame every five days... Plus we can't have HL2 stealing all of HL3's thunder can we?

 

[Shuzer]

They want to cater to lower end hardware, so no, there's no chance HL2 will have dynamic shadows.

Besides, lightmapping is a major part of their lighting "engine," you can't simply have both methods AFAIK, and have it as a toggle in the options menu.

 

[Gunner]

Theres no chance to both be used ??

Maybe in a mod.

 

[-=DouglasteR=]

Maybe in a mod.

Well , i still believe that will be a dynamic Shadows Option :cheers:

Let the time say ! :upstare:

 

[crownest]

yes it will on most things, a friend of mine who is a fan of a crappy game with plastic-like human models (A.K.A Far Cry) said he got a friend to email Valve and told him it will only feature in NPC models. But when i showed him a screenshot of the Bugbait video, he didnt reply me

 

[lans]

They want to cater to lower end hardware, so no, there's no chance HL2 will have dynamic shadows.

Besides, lightmapping is a major part of their lighting "engine," you can't simply have both methods AFAIK, and have it as a toggle in the options menu.

More improtanly, half-life 2 has so many physically stimulated objects to be picked up by the manipulator - plus so many things going around in the environment (e.g: the bugbait scene, combines/ant lions/squad = too many characters on screen). Just imagine the horror of your frame rate if everything casts shadows dynamically.

Games like Far cry and Doom 3 have an advantage of lesser items that are physically stimulated so you can't push them around and let them form their own dynamic shadows. Also, Far cry's enemies come in limited numbers and the bodies "vanish". Doom 3 has less enemies on screen at a time so they can bear with dynamic shadows.

 

[OCybrManO]

SIMULATED.

 

[The Dark Elf]

Ok a question to those who think dynamic lighting and shadowing all over the place is the most important thing ever and that a game is crap without it..


Why do you want it? hmm?

No really, come on. Give GOOD reasons why you think it will improve the game, loads seem to want it but I have YET to hear why and what real benefits it will bring. Or shut up and admit you just want it cause Doom III has it.

oh yeah, stop making these bloody threads, thanks

 

[PvtRyan]

Ok a question to those who think dynamic lighting and shadowing all over the place is the most important thing ever and that a game is crap without it..


Why do you want it? hmm?

No really, come on. Give GOOD reasons why you think it will improve the game, loads seem to want it but I have YET to hear why and what real benefits it will bring. Or shut up and admit you just want it cause Doom III has it.

oh yeah, stop making these bloody threads, thanks

Precisely, it might add gameplay to Doom 3, but not to HL2, it will even limit the gameplay of HL2 because a unified lighting system like Doom 3's adds limitations to the complexity scenes. So in the end it's pointless until pc's can actually handle it well.

 

[The Dark Elf]

Precisely, it might add gameplay to Doom 3, but not to HL2, it will even limit the gameplay of HL2 because a unified lighting system like Doom 3's adds limitations to the complexity scenes. So in the end it's pointless until pc's can actually handle it well.

Exactly.. It's a cool feature but technology isn't ready for it just yet. Thankyou for the bright spark of sanity PvtRyan, I thought all hope had been lost in the world

and IMO, if you can't get the effect you want, without having realtime lights everywhere, then your not very good at what your trying to do.

 

[lans]

Ok a question to those who think dynamic lighting and shadowing all over the place is the most important thing ever and that a game is crap without it..


Why do you want it? hmm?

No really, come on. Give GOOD reasons why you think it will improve the game, loads seem to want it but I have YET to hear why and what real benefits it will bring. Or shut up and admit you just want it cause Doom III has it.

oh yeah, stop making these bloody threads, thanks

You do know, that you have just pwned 100+ members on this forum who thought HL2's lighting was crap?

 

[The Dark Elf]

You do know, that you have just pwned 100+ members on this forum who thought HL2's lighting was crap?

Pretty cool huh :E

 

[Cyanide]

More improtanly, half-life 2 has so many physically stimulated objects to be picked up by the manipulator - plus so many things going around in the environment (e.g: the bugbait scene, combines/ant lions/squad = too many characters on screen). Just imagine the horror of your frame rate if everything casts shadows dynamically...

I wish I had more physically stimulated objects.

Anyway, Just to give an example of how resource intensive dynamic light and shadowing is. According to PCgamer and their interviewee from ID, there is no PC available today that can run Doom3 at 1024x768 with full detail and maintain a 60fps frame rate.

 

[lans]

I wish I had more physically stimulated objects.

Picky joe, are we?

 

[The Dark Elf]

I wish I had more physically stimulated objects.

Anyway, Just to give an example of how resource intensive dynamic light and shadowing is. According to PCgamer and their interviewee from ID, there is no PC available today that can run Doom3 at 1024x768 with full detail and maintain a 60fps frame rate.

Yep. And there's just no point to it. Sure, it looks pretty neat the first few times you see it, but past that. The current method of doing it just isn't upto scratch. You just know anyway that once all games have it. People will start to whine and bitch cause the shadows don't fade out over the distance from the caster and the surface the shadow is on.

Dynamic lighting/shadows is just a poor excuse right now to be lazy. They don't want to make an effort on the lighting so want to use something thats quick to setup. Many will be in for a nasty surprise when they realise it takes more realtime lights in Doom than it can manage, to create just a hint at the realistic lighting HL2 has. The same problem has faced and continues to face pre-rendered graphics for a long time. So I hope nobody is expecting a quick fix to turn up anytime soon. pre-rendered gets it first, and we ain't got it first yet. You CANT get HL2 level of lighting (radiosity), using just standard raytraced lights, without using hundreds of them, and even then its not too close.

Besides there's nothing special being done with them in DIII, lots of flashing lights and lights that spin around lighting up area's and casting shadows over things for the sake of casting shadows.. yup, lends absolutely nothing to gameplay that couldn't have been done with pre-calculated lighting.

But I'm wasting my breath, because those people just wont listen, until they find out for themselves, then they'll go quiet as the rest of us point at them and go "har har, told you so"

/rant off (for now)

 

[Brian Damage]

Nicely said, Fenric.

 

[Crusader]

*claps*

If only people wouldn't just flick over and not pay attention the the posts they don't want to see ^^

 

[Mechagodzilla]

I would only like them because the shadows are (IMO) the only thing that isn't photorealistic.

That's not to say I'd miss them though. I'm they'll probably come in an eventual source update, and definintely with a mod.

Framerates be damned!

 

[Adam]

I was thinking , if the engine supports it , why dont use it ??

Dont you think that all the media already exposed just show the "Only Lightmap" lighting from the Visual option ??

Thinking in numbers , the HUGE part that will play HL2 and CSS will not have the required specs to use DL !

Its possible that valve was all this time hidden the dynamic on HL2 just because doom3 ??

Using DL on huge open areas is useless and painfull, but in smalls room , like Dr Kleiner's lab are possible and indeed NEEDED ! :flame:



what you think ?

Anyone care to translate this to me? I read it twice and I'm still confused..lol :rolling:

 

[Wildhound]

Anyone care to translate this to me? I read it twice and I'm still confused..lol :rolling:

You'll probably need to run it backwards through Babelfish to get it in its original language. Then if you're lucky enough to be fluent, you'll understand that.

 

[Raptor6]

From a mappers perspective, hl2s lighting is the same old pain in the ass like in old hl.

Valve said, that vis will take only a couple of minutes to compile, but i dont think so....
Engines ala Doom3 and stalker will be better... only set the light parameters, klick the savebutton and start the game.

Only easy thing is, that you can use the same old bsp-tree like in hl, add some brushes, move some vertexes, add a couple of models with cycler_sprite (or some other entity) and your level is done.
You don't need no damn knowledge of Max to make the levels.

Every Game has its pros and contras. No game is perfect.

 

[Adam]

From a mappers perspective, hl2s lighting is the same old pain in the ass like in old hl.

Valve said, that vis will take only a couple of minutes to compile, but i dont think so....
Engines ala Doom3 and stalker will be better... only set the light parameters, klick the savebutton and start the game.

Only easy thing is, that you can use the same old bsp-tree like in hl, add some brushes, move some vertexes, add a couple of models with cycler_sprite (or some other entity) and your level is done.
You don't need no damn knowledge of Max to make the levels.

Every Game has its pros and contras. No game is perfect.

HL2 lighting is a small pain to the mapper, but a huge gain in performance for your gamers who will play your map in a higher framerate. Which would allow you to add more detail to your map anyways.

They said 3 mins for networked compilations, not a single computer doing the job. The HL2 SDK will come with the tool they use to distribute compiling of a map across multiple machines, but in reality I doubt most of us mappers have more than 1 pc to even take advantage of that. Even if we had 2 pc's compiling we probably won't be getting 3 min compile times, if you consider that Valve no doubt has an entire room full of pc's compiling compared to us.

 

[Wildhound]

From a mappers perspective, hl2s lighting is the same old pain in the ass like in old hl.

Valve said, that vis will take only a couple of minutes to compile, but i dont think so....
Engines ala Doom3 and stalker will be better... only set the light parameters, klick the savebutton and start the game.

Only easy thing is, that you can use the same old bsp-tree like in hl, add some brushes, move some vertexes, add a couple of models with cycler_sprite (or some other entity) and your level is done.
You don't need no damn knowledge of Max to make the levels.

Every Game has its pros and contras. No game is perfect.

Actually VIS has little to do with lighting. What I believe you're referring to is RAD.

Being a mapper (I'm actually waiting on a compile to finish as we speak) I can honestly say that the lighting in HL is not a pain in the ass. If you're referring to its flexibility then you'll find it's just a matter of gaining experience and bending it to your will. The end result is always pretty.

If you're referring to compile times, you'll find that VIS is the most time consuming part of a compile, not rad, which generally takes less than 10 minutes on a modern computer.

 

[InSaNe TuBaíNa]

please, what is dynamic lights and shadows?

 

[Adam]

I agree with Wildhound.

 

[Adam]

please, what is dynamic lights and shadows?

Lights and shadows that are not static.

 

[InSaNe TuBaíNa]

Lights and shadows that are not static.

i dont get it.. u mean lights and shadows that are in movement?

 

[Mendasp]

RAD takes longer than VIS if you're compiling a map that isn't a hollow box with one light_env and three lights... that's what I've experienced with all my NS maps, at least.

VIS takes 40 minutes and RAD takes 3 hours for ns_bast... of course, that might change with HL2...

And lighting might not be important to casual players, but it is to mappers... stop with the fanboyism, noone is saying that the game will be crap if they don't change the shadowing they are doing... it is perfectly fine, and they already said that the mods can change it if they want... now stop crying.

 

[Adam]

i dont get it.. u mean lights and shadows that are in movement?

Yes, those are dynamic in the most simplistic sense. But if you want to get on the level where everyone debates, you start talking about wether the lighting and shadows are fully calculated real time based on objects in the scene, or are simple precalculated lightmaps that move around the scene like the flashlight in HL1. Although the reality is that both these forms is dynamic lighting in itself, but when compared to each other, the former is more dynamic than the other, to the point where people will even argue that HL2 does not have dynamic lighting. (Even though a simple lightswitch turning a light on and off technically *IS* dynamic lighting..)

 

[Mendasp]

HL2 has dynamic lighting, the people is complaining about full dynamic shadowing...

ie. you shoot a light, it moves, and the shadow on the player model nearby moves according to the light source, too.

 

[Neutrino]

From a mappers perspective, hl2s lighting is the same old pain in the ass like in old hl.

Valve said, that vis will take only a couple of minutes to compile, but i dont think so....
Engines ala Doom3 and stalker will be better... only set the light parameters, klick the savebutton and start the game.

Only easy thing is, that you can use the same old bsp-tree like in hl, add some brushes, move some vertexes, add a couple of models with cycler_sprite (or some other entity) and your level is done.
You don't need no damn knowledge of Max to make the levels.

Every Game has its pros and contras. No game is perfect.

I'm highly doubting you're a mapper. HL1 lighting wasn't hard at all. And I'll think you'll be severly disapointed if you think mapping for D3 will be easy.

 

[InSaNe TuBaíNa]

hum... i think i understand now.. and the dynamic shadow is the change of the shados´s angle depending on the direction of the light?

 

[Adam]

RAD takes longer than VIS if you're compiling a map that isn't a hollow box with one light_env and three lights... that's what I've experienced with all my NS maps, at least.

VIS takes 40 minutes and RAD takes 3 hours for ns_bast...

And lighting might not be important to casual players, but it is to mappers... stop with the fanboyism, noone is saying that the game will be crap if they don't change the shadowing they are doing... it is perfectly fine, and they already said that the mods can change it if they want... now stop crying.

Your almost implying that all non NS maps are made from hollowed out boxes... kinda silly. Also, NS maps are all indoors, which would explain why RAD takes longer than VIS. Outdoor areas with mountains and high visibility to all areas of the map at the same time can cause a much higher VIS with it's much more complex vis leafs and increased portals.

 

[Mendasp]

I'm implying that NS maps are much big and complex than in other mods...

 

[Adam]

hum... i think i understand now.. and the dynamic shadow is the change of the shados´s angle depending on the direction of the light?

It depends. A dynamic shadow could be the distinction between a shadow cast by a static box, (precalculated in this sense from static light sources) and a shadow under an NPC that moves with the character as it walks around.

But others will bypass that true definition and come up with terms like "Complete fully emulated dynamic shadowing" which is used just to say that one shadow is not dynamic unless it is calculated on the fly, taking into account all light sources, all environment variables, weather conditions, moon phase, and weather it is a leep year, etc. It's actualy quite amusing sometimes.

 

[Wildhound]

RAD takes longer than VIS if you're compiling a map that isn't a hollow box with one light_env and three lights... that's what I've experienced with all my NS maps, at least.

VIS takes 40 minutes and RAD takes 3 hours for ns_bast... of course, that might change with HL2...

And lighting might not be important to casual players, but it is to mappers... stop with the fanboyism, noone is saying that the game will be crap if they don't change the shadowing they are doing... it is perfectly fine, and they already said that the mods can change it if they want... now stop crying.

My compile just completed. It is a very early version of the map, and granted the lighting is not very complex at this point, while the geometry is. It consists of various indoor and outdoor areas spanning a large area. VIS took and hour and fifty minutes, RAD took 2 minutes flat. Go figure.

 

[Adam]

I'm implying that NS maps are much big and complex than in other mods...

But that is not true. I made maps for many mods, and had to actualy change Zonners compile tools to be able to bypass certain limits the tools added that was restricting my maps from compiling anymore due to their massive complexity and size. And it was not for NS. Infact NS maps are not much more complex than most other maps, but NS does have the best lighting done I've ever seen in other maps. The NS mappers really know how to fully use lighting to greatly enhance their maps. The particle engine NS has helps alot too.