Hehehe... My own Quake engine support "soft shadows", that its the "commercial name" for something to avoid hard shadows. But use painter tricks, not the ortodoxical mathematical calculus.
Yea, artist often can "draw" something its still imposible. Because artist can "cheat" and this own art work, you cheat the eye. You dont draw a real snow, but a polygon en white color, or a dot.
I think this "http://www.valvesoftware.com/sourcelicense/enginefeatures.htm"; its the work of pure genious even if tecnically its inferior than Doom3. Because the eyecandy its superior than doom3 eyecandy, the resulting effect its much better. Effects not only work at mathematical level, but on artistic psychological levels. I think Dan misunderstand Valve, or its valve that use not-perfect correct words.
Notice 68% what you can read on that webpage ITS NOT a engine feature, but game features. This text its marketing text, NOT coders text. And ALL marketing text has errors, mistakes, etc... because,.. .helll.. Marketing people dont know nothing about coding. And coders dont know nothing about marketing, then the resulting text its a few broken for marketing people and coder people. I often write text with marketing people and ITS A PAIN. Its imposible to write a text that fit marketing needs, and coders needs. I think even use different dictionary, what I mean about textures its not what a marketing bot mean.
Do you remenber Dilber on sales?
Dan Partelly, have you ever write a text with marketing people?
Hell.. LOOKS THE CODE:
</font></span><span style="mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt"><font
size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica"
color="#d8a248"> </font></span><span
style="mso-bidi-font-size:9.0pt"><font size="2"
face="verdana,arial,helvetica" color="#d8a248">. </font></span><span
style="mso-bidi-font-size:8.0pt"><font size="2"
face="verdana,arial,helvetica" color="#d8a248">Create world brushes<br>
</font></span><span style="mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt"><font
size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica"
color="#d8a248"> </font></span><span
style="mso-bidi-font-size:9.0pt"><font size="2"
face="verdana,arial,helvetica" color="#d8a248">. </font></span><span
style="mso-bidi-font-size:8.0pt"><font size="2"
face="verdana,arial,helvetica" color="#d8a248">Terrain editor<br>
This crap has been written with Word!.. lol
Bob Aman wrote:
It *should be* painfully obvious to any student of computer graphics technology that the claim is false.
Why? [snip]
Unfortunately, you make one big assumption that is flawed because you failed to take into account the possibility that Valve isn't worried about modelling radiosity completely accurately. You'd probably be 100% correct if Valve was claiming to have fully accurate realtime radiosity support. However, they do not make this claim, and it seems to me that given that there are articles out there on doing inaccurate realtime radiosity, you're probably overreacting.
For instance: http://www.gamedev.net/reference/programming/features/rtradiosity/
Amusingly enough, I found an article on ACM about doing realtime radiosity as well, but it basically consisted of "throw lots of hardware at the problem". -- Bob Aman http://www.rapidcanvas.com
_______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
