HL2 has parallax mapping

mrchimp

mrchimp

Newbie
Joined
Jul 19, 2003
Messages
1,928
Reaction score
0
Does the source engine use Parallax normal/bump mapping? or atleast
something with Parallax in the name :p

*** Yes.
Click to expand...

From what I can gather from these two links and some of my own knowledge:

http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=220134
http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/Forum3/HTML/011292.html

Parallax normal mapping is what the Unreal devs reffere to as "virtual displacement mapping" and my point is; Source has it. Although the new HL2 screens damn well don't show it.
 
You wouldn't see it in a static shot anyway. Parallax is an effect caused by movement :)
 
So... is that the next step up from ... ahem... "Normal" normal mapping?

I'd assume from the "Parallax" in the name that it takes viewing angle into account in its normal-mapped simulation of geometry?
 
Well...welll....I have something better than parallax mapping...I have a city map...Oh, wait, wrong type of mapping, D'Oh...

Well, good for HL2. So is it include in HL2 the game or just the source engine?
 
blahblahblah said:
So is it include in HL2 the game or just the source engine?
Click to expand...

It says it's in the Source engine in mrchimp's e-mail. So I can't see why not in "the game" HL2.

Anyway, I hope this gives it an edge compared to other shooters out today.
 
Brian Damage said:
Y'know, it could just be "something with parallax in the name" :E.
Click to expand...

try this on for size...parallax city maps...now that sounds impressive.

You know, parallax makes you sound like 10 times smarter for just using that word. I say Valve should change the name of their engine from Source to Parallax.
 
Anything with parallax in the name is cool...

Like parallax scrolling in old games... ancient technique, still looks awesome...

Hmmmm...

"Parallax Damage"...
 
not many people have the hardware to support this stuff, there not gonna waste time doing the maps for each texture when more than half there audience wont see them, its somthing they can use with source in later projects, or maybe update the hl2 content overtime, which is one of the purposes of steam.
 
The downside of it is that you get texture stretching and artifacts. While this is acceptable on walls and stuff, it isn't on creatures.
 
Lobster said:
not many people have the hardware to support this stuff, there not gonna waste time doing the maps for each texture when more than half there audience wont see them, its somthing they can use with source in later projects, or maybe update the hl2 content overtime, which is one of the purposes of steam.
Click to expand...

You can do it on all DX9 hardware and alot of people have DX9 hardware, infact you can probably do it on DX8 as well.

Maybe I should have made my question a little more accurate, something more like: "Does HL2 have virtual displacement mapping like UE3.0", although I doubt he would have given a striat answer as the UE3.0 technique might be "ViewDependent Displacement Mapping" which is similiar to parallax mapping but is better and takes up more memory. I have heard UE3.0's method reffered to as Parallax mapping many times though, it probably uses a hieght field (or whatever you call it) for self shadowing and called it virtual displacement mapping to confuse people, either that or they weren't aware someone had already called the technique "parallax mapping".
 
sweet....... Now i can include parallax flux-capacitor conversions in my mod.....
 
Brian Damage said:
"Parallax Damage"...
Click to expand...

That actually sounds good. man, you can use parallax on anything. ex. I will write myself a parallax note. woot. I proclaim parallax to be thee word for the 21st century.


seriously, what is the difference between bump mapping and parallax mapping?
 
I think the detail in parallax mapping can self shadow and obscure itself...
 
I think Normal Mapping is different.

Isn't normal mapping used to make a low polygon object appear to be a high polygon object?
 
Yeeeessss... It's a step up from bump mapping... whereas bump mapping uses a single colour channel (Greyscale image) to represent surface geometry, Normal mapping takes the orientation of the polygons that the geometry originates from into the map, using the extra channels available in RGB formats to represent X-Y-Z orientation...

... I think...

... I also think I just blew a synapse...
 
Isn't displacement mapping a new feature of pixel shader 3.0. When they showed off the new Nvidia cards they used some examples of PS3.0 vs. PS1.1 in the Crytek engine and talked about displacement mapping. Here is an article about displacement mapping. Just do a find on displacement in the article to find the bit on displacement mapping.

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjA5

I have no idea if parallax mapping and displacement mapping are the same though.


Here is an exerpt explaining displacement mapping.

A technique that allows you to move an object's vertices so that, during the rendering process, the object's geometry is altered to create a bumpy surface. Unlike regular bump mapping, the edges are visibly raised and can cast shadows. The roughness of the 2D texture is used to adjust the degree to which the object's geometry is displaced. Displacement mapping only alters the object's geometry in the rendered image and not the scene, so you can create highly complex objects without having to actually model them.

Here's an explanation of how it differs from bump mapping:

One of the more major upgrades in Shader Model 3.0 is the addition of Vertex Texture Lookups. What this allows is features like Displacement Mapping. If there is going to be any major difference in image quality comparing Shader Model 3.0 to 2.0 it is going to be with the use of Displacement Mapping. Bump mapping which is currently used now to give the appearance of height in textures is just an illusion. There is no physical difference in the texture, meaning if you look at the texture from the side or dead on you will see that it is still flat, only from far away does bump mapping work. Even then it isn’t the best option since the texture is physically still flat light and shadows do not reflect correctly. The answer is Displacement Mapping which physically adds surface detail by manipulating the height of the texture. Displacement Mapping can even go as far as to create the model itself. Displacement Mapping may be a huge boon to adding realism in games. If developers pick up on this technology and we see it implemented in games, this right here could be the deciding feature that shows the most difference between a game rendered in Shader Model 3.0 and a game rendered in Shader Model 2.0.
 
As I understood it, displacement mapping was where you take a low-detail model and actually add extra geometry(Ie: Extra polygons) using a map...
 
I think Gabe was confused. I think he thought you meant parallax effects in general, which is what the 3d skybox gives you. I don't think Source has what Unreal 3 has in it yet, though it's an easy addition once you support 3.0.
 
It's basically a pretty simple idea: things farther away from you move at different speeds, which gives the illusion of depth. Obviously, all polygon objects in a game do this already, since you are constantly at different angles and distances from objects, but bumpmapped surfaces need to fake it since the real distances aren't really there.
 
Fishlore: I'v heard that SM3.0 will allow for real displacement mapping but UE3.0 uses virtual displacement mapping (I heard UE3.0 was demoed on the r4xx which is apparantly not SM3.0 although there is a rumour it is or almost is). Why CryTech have decided to go for the real thing I'm not entirely sure, I would have thought UE3.0's method to be much much faster. Actually I do know why, to help Nvidia show off.
 
Well, we already know that the FarCry people have been a little disingenuous with what is really the difference between 3.0 and 2.0, given that they show 1.1 vs. 3.0
 
Apos said:
I think Gabe was confused. I think he thought you meant parallax effects in general, which is what the 3d skybox gives you. I don't think Source has what Unreal 3 has in it yet, though it's an easy addition once you support 3.0.
Click to expand...

Actually it was Rick E. I don't think he was confused but his answer was less specific than my question, which means I'm now confused.
 
mrchimp this may be a really stupid question. I haven't kept up with unreal for ages. Is UE3.0 the newest released unreal engine, or is UE3.0 a new one that is due out sometime in the future?
 
Future engine.. it was unveiled (or first shown) at the nVidia 6800 launch event
 
/me is embarrased cus he hadnt even heard of Bump Mapping or HDRR(high dynamic range rendering) or any of this Adv. graphical technology "crap" until HL2 came along :) this stuff is all very intimidating to someone who doesnt know when everyone is talking about :p
 
deathryuu said:
/me is embarrased cus he hadnt even heard of Bump Mapping or HDRR(high dynamic range rendering) or any of this Adv. graphical technology "crap" until HL2 came along :) this stuff is all very intimidating to someone who doesnt know when everyone is talking about :p
Click to expand...


its ok, alot of people have no idea what they're talking about and they seem to conversate about it perfectly fine, just throw in some buzz words, do a little jibberjabbering and blam!
 
If you look in the tech video you can almost kind of see that "bricks" effect in it. I kind of noticed it after I saw the unreal movie but thought I was seeing things cause HL2 never made a big deal out of that.
 
If qckbeam is reading this, ask him to give you a link to a parallax mapping demo. You'll see that it isn't infact all that special, just a cool trick that looks rather nice. Question is, will mod teams or Valve themselves make good use of it.
 
It doesn't matter if it looks good or not, as long as it says it on the box so everyone will buy the game!......
 
Why did the image in the UE3 demo seem to pop out so much more than the demo qckbeam provided? Was it the angle of the light or something else?
 
Well, the point is to make it look real, not to make you go "hey, there's that effect!" But that demo didn't seem to use "brick" shapes, and the technology is a lot more apparent in jutting shapes with flat edges.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Dekstar
Portal 2 summer mapping contest winners announced, GLaDOS resumes testing
Replies
4
Views
3K
Dekstar
Dekstar
Krynn72
Metro 2033 is out, and it has far exceeded my expectations.
3 4 5
Replies
194
Views
14K
Xevrex
Xevrex
Z
HL2 mod: Intelligent Design needs new blood
Replies
8
Views
942
Zunni
Z
Munro
  • Locked
Fortress Forever v1 Review
Replies
0
Views
30K
Munro
Munro
Back
Top