The new r_speeds?

[medic]

What do you think the new r_speeds will be in HL2?
In the game today when we build maps we try not to go higher than 500-600 max 800 in transport areas... what will the new technoligy let us make! :bounce:

 

[AgentXen]

Originally posted by medic
In the game today when we build maps we try not to go higher than 500-600 max 800 in transport areas... what will the new technoligy let us make! :bounce:

800 was for the PCs 4 years ago. I try not to go higher than 10,000. and i dont think i would play a map that wont go higher than 6,000. 800 realy isnt enough for most everyones PCs.

 

[derby]

It depends o nt e engine. The Quake engine that was modified for half-life can't take really high poly counts even on brand new hardware. I guess an engine these days could handle a lot more on a 9800, but valve may have sacrificed map brush detail in favour of hight polycount models so we can't tell yet.

 

[Echelon]

even with a fast pc it tends to lag with high r_speeds above 2000 i think (tested it on my pc). it's not the hardware but the engine. and honestly i havent seen any official map for mods going higher than 1000-1500

 

[AgentXen]

The Map im working on wont go below 6,000 ploys in any room.

And let me tell you, It Looks Very Pretty.

 

[JohnnyBeverage]

I've seen maps around 2000 and they ran fine for me. The highest I've had on any of my maps is around 1300. No problems for me or anyone who played the map.

 

[Cipher]

I think agentX is conflating e/w polys with r_speeds. I can't even concieve of a map at 6,000 in r_speeds that has no latency issues when populated with 16 players on a server. I've got a bucket of maps on my hdd that just aren't released because I splurged on overdetailing the thing without considering the r_speeds in the process. I still try to stay under 800, though I think you could get away with 900-950 on the hl1 engine without people noticing too much.

As for HL2, I've been staring at screenshots to get an idea for the way the engine handles brushwork, and it seems that the poly count on brushes is taking precident over models. The models I've seen actually look relatively boxy compared to the detail of the environments they are surrounded by. I'd imagine with an engine as amazing as source they would be able to achieve comfortable r_speeds of around 1,500-1,750.

 

[AgentXen]

Originally posted by Cipher
I think agentX is conflating e/w polys with r_speeds. I can't even concieve of a map at 6,000 in r_speeds that has no latency issues when populated with 16 players on a server. I've got a bucket of maps on my hdd that just aren't released because I splurged on overdetailing the thing without considering the r_speeds in the process. I still try to stay under 800, though I think you could get away with 900-950 on the hl1 engine without people noticing too much.

Im Talking about Single Player.

 

[medic]

We are talking about mp i think...

 

[AgentXen]

And I Am Talking About Single Player

 

[Cipher]

well there we go then

For singleplayer, dude go friggin nuts. It's single player :cheese:

 

[medic]

What will the HL2 MP r_speeds be?

 

[Cunbelin]

hmm, I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that r_speeds are not how source rates things, apparently there is a different benchmarking system, that seems to go into more detail about what is slowing things down.

 

[smilez]

Yes there is a new benchmarking system because of the LOD implementation

 

[Plopfish]

ill third that, i would provide a link buts its almost 3am and i dont feel like it, sorry

but it should be cool, i think it can change the colors of your map depending on how taxing the enviroment is (like the darker the red the more taxing it is) etc

 

[derby]

What your source (pardon the pun) for this info, plopfish? I can't really see how reducing the colour depth on the fly will speed things up, as GFX cards use 16 or 24/32 bit colour modes.