Sun glare

[nesrulz]

Hi,

Simulator is too much realistic with this.
Dev's, please improve this.

P.S.
This picture is from NR2003.
Only for example.

[AndroidXP]

That's something for S3. Also, do we even have skies with the sun so low it would blind you? :shrug:

[nikimere]

Nope, i dont think so.

[Hyperactive]

And it has that dirty windshield effect too :lovies3d:

[tristancliffe]

I hate the way other games (not just driving sims) try to recreate sun glare. Take a game with 'good' glare effects and take a mental note of what it looks like. Then look at a setting sun and see what that looks like. Not the same huh!


Disclaimer: NEVER look directly at the sun for any length of time. If you must, use welding goggles or something very very dark, or be totally safe, and project it via binoculars or a telescope onto a piece of paper.

[nesrulz]

On/off for offline

Admin right for online (DEDICATED HOST).

[durbster]

Glare would be good but not the stupid lens effect that so often plagues games. Flight sims have been implementing decent glare brilliantly for years.

However, surely glare is only relevant where time of day is an issue and in LFS at the moment, it's not. Most track stuff is done at times of the day when the sun is too high to be an issue.

[Lible]

My FS2004 has wonderful Sun Glare. Would be nice, but i think that its not the most important thing.

[AndroidXP]

What would indeed make sense is HDR :smileypul


But like I said, that's stuff for S3. I'd now rather have the aero fixed than getting some graphical gimmicks.

[ajp71]

N2003 has a good, not overdone sun glare. It's not really needed unless you simulate night racing.

[thisnameistaken]

What would indeed make sense is HDR :smileypul


All that Valve-hyped HDR stuff really irked me, especially with DoD:S. What does HDR do? It makes stuff shiny. Valve finally took the ultimate patronising step of simply making a game shiny to see if gamers would fawn over it - and they did! :pillepall Valve must be laughing their little heads off.

[Matrixi]

HDR is awesome. I'm sure it will be in all new major games in near-future. If you can't see the difference with HDR enabled/disable you are blind. It doesn't just make "stuff shiny", it makes viewing light much, much more realistic. For example, you walk outside on a sunny day, and you step in to a very dark corridor and you can't see almost anything untill your eyes adjust to the dark hallway and you start seeing in it.

If you actually want to find out how this awesome technology works instead of bashing it, download this tech demo which illustrates HDR very well.
http://www.daionet.gr.jp/~masa/rthdribl/

[AndroidXP]

@thisnameistaken: Yeah, what you refer to is crappy glow effects that indeed looks stupid sometimes. What he ^ mentioned is much more the effect I'd like to see in LFS, namely simulating the eye as it makes adjustments to the amount of light present.

[Matrixi]

I took some video captures of that tech demo some time ago, so those who can't be bothered to try it out or don't have the necessary hardware can just look at these captures:

http://nismo.1g.fi/temp/HDR/

Quality and speed might not be the best, since my hardware isn't top of the line either, but you get the idea of what HDR truly is.

[Kegetys]

The thing that makes HDR and focus effects pretty annoying in games is the fact that the game cannot know which part of the screen I'm looking at. This means that every time I want to look at something I would need to move the view to point directly at it, something that, for example in LFS is pretty difficult unless you have a device like TrackIR; Imagine driving behind another car for example, the focus and HDR effects would adjust to the car and the track around it would get over-exposed and out of focus, and you couldn't see where you're going anymore.

[thisnameistaken]

HDR is awesome. I'm sure it will be in all new major games in near-future.

I'm sure it will too, but not because it's "awesome". In fact Far Cry did HDR lighting a couple of years before it turned up in Valve games, although I can't remember how good their implementation was because I haven't touched that game in so long.

If you can't see the difference with HDR enabled/disable you are blind.

I didn't say I couldn't see the difference, I said it was shit.

It doesn't just make "stuff shiny", it makes viewing light much, much more realistic. For example, you walk outside on a sunny day, and you step in to a very dark corridor and you can't see almost anything untill your eyes adjust to the dark hallway and you start seeing in it.

Yeah, that's a neat effect, it also neatly demonstrates how limiting and frustrating your average FPS game's control scheme is. Most people move their eyelids unconsciously to limit/maximise the amount of light that the eye receives while the iris adjusts, but the HDR effects I've seen conveniently ignore this in order to show off a fancy effect.

If you actually want to find out how this awesome technology works instead of bashing it, download this tech demo which illustrates HDR very well.

I already checked out DoD:S and Lost Coast, seen it, done it.

My main beef here is not with HDR as-such, but with big-budget developers spending months developing techniques to make something shiny when they could be using that time to create an original game (when was the last time we saw one of those?). But of course, gamers like yourself wet themselves when something shiny is waved infront of them, and so the game developers take that as license to waste their time making stuff shiny. My problem is with thick gamers and spineless developers, not with silly lighting effects.

[Matrixi]

Heh, yet again one these people who don't want new and nice technology even though it's brought free at them. What do you have against having new and pretty effects and technology when it doesn't cost you a dime? Do you still prefer Wolfenstein graphics over the Source engine for example? Would you prefer no bump mapping, fancy shaders, HDR or other gimmicks that we are with treated with these days?

I'm guessing only HDR supported game engine you've tried is Source, which I think needs lots of improving with the HDR technology, but it is a good leap forwards. When you say you've got a grudge against big-budget developers spending months of development on "making something shiny", how do you know they aren't making something ground breakingly good as we speak? For example, Valve started making HL2 like almost as soon as they had gotten HL1 out and they didn't tell anyone about it until few years had gone by. And yet I do think the Source engine is the best FPS engine we've seen so far, alone thanks to the physics of it.

I don't go WOW when I see a new pretty technology demo released. I think it's cool for developers to actually DEVELOPE new stuff. Talking about originality you are partly correct, but there has been few good and original titles out in the past few years. I would like to play new games that are good as old classics like Total Annihilation, Monkey Island series etc. The truth is, games are very advanced these days and creating something original and appealing for all audience has become very difficult. But you go ahead, stick your head in to a bucket and play your oh-so-pretty and original Wolfenstein in peace.

[thisnameistaken]

First off: Sorry about being a bit nasty in my last post. This is just something that has been bothering me for a while and I didn't mean to take it out on you.

Heh, yet again one these people who don't want new and nice technology even though it's brought free at them. What do you have against having new and pretty effects and technology when it doesn't cost you a dime?

Well, potentially it could cost me a small fortune: Comparing the performance I usually get in Source-engine games, to the performance with HDR turned on, I'd need to invest in a whole new computer to get multiplayer-sensible frame rates. Luckily, I (like many) prefer the old versions of CS and DoD and haven't really bothered with the Source re-makes.

Do you still prefer Wolfenstein graphics over the Source engine for example?

No. Are you happy that you're basically still playing Wolfenstein over ten years later but with fancy textures and lighting effects?

When you say you've got a grudge against big-budget developers spending months of development on "making something shiny", how do you know they aren't making something ground breakingly good as we speak?

Because if any developers were making something original, ever, we'd see original games sometimes. Half-Life 2 was pretty, full credit to their art department because they really rocked it, but try to imagine playing it if it wasn't pretty - would you have bothered? Sure the physics were a new thing, so they were fun to play with occasionally, but they didn't make a great deal of difference to the gameplay - the same old gameplay we've been doing for over ten years.

When HL2 was slated for release it wasn't the physics I was excited about, it was the "revolutionary" AI. Remember how they hyped their fancy new AI? Remember how utterly average it was when you actually got the game?

Talking about originality you are partly correct, but there has been few good and original titles out in the past few years.

Like...?

The truth is, games are very advanced these days and creating something original and appealing for all audience has become very difficult.

Nah, it's become commercially impractical. It's nothing to do with how difficult it is, it's all down to where the money's coming from and what sort of a return you'll need to show for it.

It's just like the way the music industry has gone - What's the point in investing in something new and fresh when you can regurgitate the same old crap with a different face and the punters will still give you money for it?

Actually, if megacorp games developers were doing their jobs properly, do you think we'd both be here relying on the work of a little indie developer to provide us with a decent racing sim?

[deggis]

I hate this "shiny graphics boom" that we are having in games now. Every game has this OVER-EXAGGERATED boom/blur/post-processing/whatever HDR effects which makes it look like a Chistmas tree. This blooming effect boom started from console games 2-3 years ago. Need For Speed: Most Wanted really made a new milestone on this area: it's like playing a game after enjoying some LSD pills.

This won't make games look more fotorealistic, it's more like the opposite...

HL2's HDR looks pretty good but it's still way too over-exaggerated.

[Bob Smith]

The problem is that effects need to be applied quite subtly, you shouldn't go wow, that looks really cool, lots of effects there... because in the end the real world doesn't look like load of cool effects, so the games don't look realistic. I think Scawen has the right idea for LFS, anyone remember when the "haze" affect was added, and some people didn't notice?

[Anarchi-H]

The problem is that effects need to be applied quite subtly, you shouldn't go wow, that looks really cool, lots of effects there... because in the end the real world doesn't look like load of cool effects, so the games don't look realistic. I think Scawen has the right idea for LFS, anyone remember when the "haze" affect was added, and some people didn't notice?

Haha, I still don't know what it does :p

I think LFS could do with shader support, but only for subtle (perhaps a bit more noticable than haze :p) effects. I.e. cubic reflections for the cars instead of the rather weak environment map we have atm. It would be a subtle change, and older hardware could fall back on the env map, but it would look better.

[XCNuse]

if you want real effects, check out NFSMW, (yes i know i keep talking about it, but it does have many real.. stunning effects) ei: when nearing the exit of a tunnel, know how everything looks really bright outside? yep.. recreates that.. sun glare.. cant get much better either; cant see a damn thing (which .. is what it should be [only in morning and afternoon though.. i hope you dont see the sun any other time while driving lol])
motion blur has gotten better (except when you hit the nitrous.. thats still lots of blur).. but it has gotten much better, not like underground1 where you couldnt see anything.. what else.. oh.. headlights which stay on the whole time work when its raining.. kinda neat effect it gives.. leaves blowing! (thats really cool to see leaves float along when your going at normal speeds).. trees moving in the wind (as you see in LFS) but with realtime shadow effects.. always nice

you guys have to admit, all the companies that are under Electronic Arts sure are doing a fantastic job of recreating real world effects

[deggis]

you guys have to admit, all the companies that are under Electronic Arts sure are doing a fantastic job of recreating real world effects
Real world under influence of LSD?

[thisnameistaken]

you guys have to admit, all the companies that are under Electronic Arts sure are doing a fantastic job of recreating real world effects

Uh huh. Like the way hillsides change shape as you get closer in Battlefield 2. I've been waiting to see shape-changing hillsides properly represented in a game, I think it looks awesome ;)

How about some real innovation for a change. How about a game that is completely audio-driven, perhaps with no graphics at all? Or a game that has remotely interesting AI? Or a game which is entirely voice-controlled? Or a game that is dependant on narrative for progression (like... *eek!* a story!) rather than firing twelve rockets into the flashing red thing to get the blue keycard or whatever. Nobody's willing to take the risk any more - we'll probably only ever see stuff like this from the mod community or from indie developers.

Edit: To be fair, Black & White tried in a couple of these areas, but unfortunately they didn't put enough time into the actual gameplay. Top marks for trying though :)

[Matrixi]

First off: Sorry about being a bit nasty in my last post. This is just something that has been bothering me for a while and I didn't mean to take it out on you.

Np at all :-) I apologize if I was rather rude in the last section of my post.



No. Are you happy that you're basically still playing Wolfenstein over ten years later but with fancy textures and lighting effects?

This is what I totally agree with you, many FPS games are pretty boring these days. I liked Farcry for its quite open environments, I remember enjoying the demo when it was released and I could actually take separate routes to the top of the island, that was cool. Operation Flashpoint was also so incredible when it was released, those large open environments amused me.



Because if any developers were making something original, ever, we'd see original games sometimes. Half-Life 2 was pretty, full credit to their art department because they really rocked it, but try to imagine playing it if it wasn't pretty - would you have bothered? Sure the physics were a new thing, so they were fun to play with occasionally, but they didn't make a great deal of difference to the gameplay - the same old gameplay we've been doing for over ten years. When HL2 was slated for release it wasn't the physics I was excited about, it was the "revolutionary" AI. Remember how they hyped their fancy new AI? Remember how utterly average it was when you actually got the game?

If it wouldn't have had the Source physics and sweet candy GFX, no, I propably wouldn't have bothered with it, but it DID have those two party pieces and I still enjoy it. Ever heard of Garrys Mod? You should give it a shot. I do hate Valve for lieing at E3 for HL2:s AI and "non-scripted" storyline and levels, all the levels are the same pre-scripted crap back from HL1 :( Also the lies they said when the leaked beta was released on the net and Valve had been saying HL2 is almost done, the thing is that beta was one of the latest builds and the game was FAR from finished. After that Valve was blaming the people who stole the beta that now they have to "fix the code in case of cheats", which was of course utter bullshit.



Like...?

Well, I can't remember all the major ones but here's quite a few that I liked:
- Operation Flashpoint
- Gran Turismo 3 & 4 (the best arcade car games imo)
- Fable
- Everquest 2 (stopped playing this last year tho)
- Hitman 1 & 2
- GTA 3

Those are just few titles that I enjoyed playing very much.

[Matrixi]

if you want real effects, check out NFSMW, (yes i know i keep talking about it, but it does have many real.. stunning effects) ei: when nearing the exit of a tunnel, know how everything looks really bright outside? yep.. recreates that.. sun glare.. cant get much better either; cant see a damn thing (which .. is what it should be [only in morning and afternoon though.. i hope you dont see the sun any other time while driving lol])
motion blur has gotten better (except when you hit the nitrous.. thats still lots of blur).. but it has gotten much better, not like underground1 where you couldnt see anything.. what else.. oh.. headlights which stay on the whole time work when its raining.. kinda neat effect it gives.. leaves blowing! (thats really cool to see leaves float along when your going at normal speeds).. trees moving in the wind (as you see in LFS) but with realtime shadow effects.. always nice
:riceboy:

No, but seriously. NFS:MW looks realistic? No. Looks like American Hollywood action movies? Yes.

If you think all that blooming and crap looks real, you've been smoking something. I was never bothered to play the game further than the first races, since I do hate these modern EA crap arcade games and I usually avoid them like a plague. Just had to give it a shot to see what all the shouting was really about, and it was about nothing.

you guys have to admit, all the companies that are under Electronic Arts sure are doing a fantastic job of recreating real world effects
:wtf2:
What they do is create Hollywood-effect lookalike clones one after another and cashing poor people with the same shit being wrapped around in different paper.

[thisnameistaken]

Well, I can't remember all the major ones but here's quite a few that I liked:
- Operation Flashpoint
- Gran Turismo 3 & 4 (the best arcade car games imo)
- Fable
- Everquest 2 (stopped playing this last year tho)
- Hitman 1 & 2
- GTA 3

Those are just few titles that I enjoyed playing very much.

Well I'm glad you enjoyed them, but we were talking about original games released in the last few years ;) That means GT3 and 4 are out right away, and Hitman 2 (and Hitman 1 really, since Thief did that style of gameplay already), and EQ2 - again, a sequel. Fable I can't comment on because I don't really know anything about it.

GTA3 I'll agree felt pretty fresh in a lot of respects despite being a re-make of the 2D version, but of course they released another two follow-up GTA games to cash in on it, so I'm going to take away any innovation points they'd originally scored for the first one because of the other two :D

Anyway, it's 12:30am here and I'm still at least three hours away from finishing this job that I promised would be ready by tomorrow morning (because I'm an idiot), so I'd better stop complaining about computer games for now...

[Matrixi]

If you think any sequel doesn't classify as being original in any way, you should stop playing games this second :D Imho, even though a game is a sequel, it can be original in the way it has been developed further, refined in to a better game.

2:46 AM and I'm ending this argument on my behalf, it's stupid arguing over something that in the end is a matter of personal preference :)

[XCNuse]

@thisnameismistaken.. i've never seen a hill change shape in any of the BF's

@matrixi.. if your looking at the screenshots you dont see anything as to what the game looks like.. enough said at that

http://images.ea.com/sports/nbalive06/_img/screenshots/xbox360/Back.jpg
now if you call that 'unreal' .. shame on you; i mean these are GAMES we are talking about; not high poly photo reproduced renders.. these things go into games into a little amount of space and made to look real.. if you ask me, EA is definetly setting the standards here

hate me or not its the truth..
when it comes to criticism here.. alot of you cant back up anything
yall just say its 'not real' when.. if you ever went outside .. you would know that it is real..
and just for saying that; i've never heard of 'smog' being in england or anywhere but the US.. so.. dont say its not real.. because it is

here:
http://images.ea.com/eagames/official/nfs/mostwanted/us/screenshots/set16/2_full.jpg
not real eh?
tell me.. whats not real?
whats that? the sky? to brown? called a sunset..sky is like that alot here where i live during fall time during sunsets
http://images.ea.com/eagames/official/nfs/mostwanted/us/screenshots/set16/6_full.jpg
..see nothing wrong with that..

http://www.jeux-france.com/Webmasters/Images/40791320050824_035105_2_big.jpg
not much wrong with that either
(note the 'realtime' calculated tree shadows

sounds? what about them; recreated from scratch and sound just about right..
hear for yourself: http://files.ea.com/downloads/eagames/official/nfs_mostwanted/carsounds_hi.mov
(note.. they used a tuned murcialgo ingame so dont rant off about that either)

either way you have to admit they are doing a good job of what they are trying to do.. and you cant say no or else they wouldnt be selling anything..obviously..

[tristancliffe]

Didn't GP4 have the flare effect when you exitted the tunnel at Monaco? And the momentary extra darkness when you entered it?

If so, it proves it's not a fancy new effect. Still, it's hardly necessary, but could make LFS a little bit nicer for some people.

[P5YcHoM4N]

I hate the way other games (not just driving sims) try to recreate sun glare. Take a game with 'good' glare effects and take a mental note of what it looks like. Then look at a setting sun and see what that looks like. Not the same huh!


Disclaimer: NEVER look directly at the sun for any length of time. If you must, use welding goggles or something very very dark, or be totally safe, and project it via binoculars or a telescope onto a piece of paper.

Not totaly true. On V-Rally 2 there is a video of someone doing a mountian race in a pug of some sort (I forget which), and it has evil sun glare like you see in most games.

Although in a game it'd look best like this. Not too much, and not too little (Photo taken by me back in feb :p)

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/9616/p60600121vv.th.jpg (http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/9616/p60600121vv.jpg)

[thisnameistaken]

If you think any sequel doesn't classify as being original in any way, you should stop playing games this second :D Imho, even though a game is a sequel, it can be original in the way it has been developed further, refined in to a better game.

I think I am proposing much greater leaps of originality than you are. I'm saying for the most part I'm sick of the exist game "genres", and I'd like to see a new one, or a few new ones. Mixing <insert existing genre> with real-time strategy and calling it something new seems a popular approach lately, but I'm not fooled ;)

I'm just disappointed that the last ten years have been spent in desperate pursuit of realistic 3D, meanwhile innovative design has progressively gone down the list of priorities at most studios. It's because pre-release screenshots and graphics technology hype are what sell games, and that's why I was particularly annoyed with the way everybody creamed themselves over the Source HDR effects.

2:46 AM and I'm ending this argument on my behalf, it's stupid arguing over something that in the end is a matter of personal preference :)

Especially when it seems we basically agree on my main point anyway. It was nice to have the opportunity to get it off my chest though, thanks :D

[tristancliffe]

Not totaly true. On V-Rally 2 there is a video of someone doing a mountian race in a pug of some sort (I forget which), and it has evil sun glare like you see in most games.

Sure, but the video is on a camera, so the glare effect (and the rate the camera can react) is very different to the human eye. Whilst glare DOES have an effect with a low sun, it's nothing like camera's show in my experience. I'm not saying I don't want it, just don't fall into the trap that most if not all other games have done.

[P5YcHoM4N]

Sure, but the video is on a camera, so the glare effect (and the rate the camera can react) is very different to the human eye. Whilst glare DOES have an effect with a low sun, it's nothing like camera's show in my experience. I'm not saying I don't want it, just don't fall into the trap that most if not all other games have done.
Well it must have been pretty bad as the driver had to shild his eyes with one hand to see where he was going. But most games do seem to go ott. But then developers never go outside, so they base what it should look like from the photos and videos researchers give them.

[tristancliffe]

lol :D

[XCNuse]

yep.. thats the only way to really do it though.. cause you cant 'remember' what an effect looks like (..usually lol)

so for that picture p5ycho, heres a picture of the glare effects in most wanted
http://cerberus.gamershell.com/screenshots/8139/189146_full.jpg
looks pretty close to me.. especially for a game; you really have to play the game to know the effects though, few screenshots really show how the game is

[P5YcHoM4N]

yep.. thats the only way to really do it though.. cause you cant 'remember' what an effect looks like (..usually lol)

so for that picture p5ycho, heres a picture of the glare effects in most wanted
http://cerberus.gamershell.com/screenshots/8139/189146_full.jpg
looks pretty close to me.. especially for a game; you really have to play the game to know the effects though, few screenshots really show how the game is
I play the game :P And some of the effects are pretty good. But some have gone too far. The road reflection is way too much for one.

[XCNuse]

yep; when it gets late in the afternoon in the game there is a little to much; but majority of the time its pretty good (during the rain, its pretty good; not to much, not to little)
smoke is kinda odd though (especially when its dry and AI's have smoke comming from the wheels when they shouldnt)
overall.. they are getting there
but im afraid.. once 'we' are there and games do act and feel and look real.. i dont think they will be as enjoyable as arcade games are (some though will be, like shooting games and such.. dont really get chances like that IRL, but the gamer community i can say as a whole definetly doesnt want true reality.. thats just like going out wherever and doing it yourself.. kinda defeats the point of a 'game')

[mrodgers]

...but im afraid.. once 'we' are there and games do act and feel and look real.. i dont think they will be as enjoyable as arcade games are (some though will be, like shooting games and such.. dont really get chances like that IRL, but the gamer community i can say as a whole definetly doesnt want true reality.. thats just like going out wherever and doing it yourself.. kinda defeats the point of a 'game')
That is why so many of us like simulators instead of mere games. You say when it gets too real, just go out and do it yourself, many don't have the means to go to the track and race. It wouldn't be much fun at the track in my 4X4, or the wife's automatic Nissan Altima, or even the old 83 Honda Nighthawk (hmm, wonder where my online name comes from). Though the Honda might give me some pleasure as I can run it pretty hard and have some fun. It's not an R1 or anything though. Other's can have their games, I haven't played one since I started racing NR2002. I want simulators as real as possible as I can't take a Porsche ( or a Porsche/Ferrari mix, anyways) out to the track, nor will I ever jump into an F-14 fighter jet and fly around. Games are targeted at the younger ones, simulators are targeted at us who don't have the means to do it in real life long to do it.

[XCNuse]

yes but keep in mind that people like you (pro-simulator gamers) take up a small fraction of what sells.. especially in racing simulators (obviously.. not many companies make race simulators)
flying simulators are popular for obvious reasons.. my dad uses his sometimes before he goes flying somewhere or just to get a little practice in..
so thats where race simulators have a community flaw; simulators are really meant to use to practice on.. well.. who here races any of these cars lol? theres only 1 person i know that plays LFS that does race for a living

but when you really sit back and think about it.. why make a game and sell it to the public if it just simulates something you can do in life? (for things like you mentioned those are different) but for like.. soccer and football games.. whats the point of making it 'real'? lol just get a few buds and go out and play some ball

[P5YcHoM4N]

Not 100% true. A simulator gives you an idea. However you can never use one to practise. As real life can never be turned into a computer game/sim. I like sims over games mostly because... I don't have bottemless pockets, nor could I afford a car and keep it running well and all the other FIA mods you need to do to a car to enter it into most racing events. Plus the face I don't even drive on the roads, and I rarely get to go to the airodrone these days. So this is the next best thing. I can drive flatout, and not have to worry about what if I cock up the corner as next time I can break sooner (or later) and not have put anyone else in risk.

Though sims started out with a goal of training, after they made it into the markets they have become part of a new bread of gamer. Those who want more then a game where you can fly around a 90 degree bend at 200mph and not come off the race line.

And they are trying to make soccer games real. They are for the people who want to win the world cup, but suck too much to play the game. Same with baseball, and pussy rugby (aka American football). The list could go on. Example, I play NHL2002, I know it's not real, but it's as close to ice hockey I'll ever come, so it's the next best thing. If I could get an ice hockey game that was as close to real life as possable, I'd buy it in a heart beat. Because I know I'd never be able to play the game with the ammount of bone releated problems I have in my wrists (more so left) because of not sitting at a keyboard correctly for years on end. So I turn to the game world to get the face crushing, pushing little rubber disk into a net fun.

[XCNuse]

okay well.. they shouldnt be used for training (except flying simulators)
cause i dont know any games (i dont play sports games like you said)
they just say its used for training (ei: GTR and that exit screen [atleast on the demo] where it said used by real racers and whatnot)

[Stevan84]

OMG i was reading thread almost three years old! But hey no bloom or flare no glare nothing yet in lfs , but dont worry lfs team is capable making good graphic as good simulation!

[Gekkibi]

OMG i was reading thread almost three years old! But hey no bloom or flare no glare nothing yet in lfs , but dont worry lfs team is capable making good graphic as good simulation!

Yes, and it has been mentioned earlier. :bump:

[AndRand]

if you want real effects, check out NFSMW, (yes i know i keep talking about it, but it does have many real.. stunning effects) ei: when nearing the exit of a tunnel, know how everything looks really bright outside? yep.. recreates that.. sun glare.. cant get much better either; cant see a damn thing (which .. is what it should be [only in morning and afternoon though.. i hope you dont see the sun any other time while driving lol])
motion blur has gotten better (except when you hit the nitrous.. thats still lots of blur).. but it has gotten much better, not like underground1 where you couldnt see anything..
do you mean eye accommodation or camera - as it occurs different? Well, I agree with Kegetys that any game shouldnt mimic camera effects ingame (it could in replays)

And I do not fear unrealistic effects by Scavier - they do it as realistic as possible.

[Dajmin]

I remember a lot of old racing games using fake lens flare. It looked great like 10 years ago, but it needs hardware support to look good now.
And that would be one of the Dx8 or 9 Hardware T&L features that LFS doesn't currently support.

I dream of realtime lights and shaders :)

[mxpxun]

when u are driving with view from driver place u could not see that stuff, because in LFS all drivers uses helmets and those helmets are with black glass, that means u wont see anything like that, but thats only in view from inside :)

[DieKolkrabe]

^ But you wouldn't be able to see out either

Touche?

[Inouva]

+1 for me , add to to realistic sim =) , but in s3 , not now

Half life 2 :Lost Coast , have one of the best Sun Glare ever made , with the HDR :D

[mxpxun]

Half life 2 :Lost Coast , have one of the best Sun Glare ever made , with the HDR :D
Agree HL2 graphics are the best

[Gekkibi]

Agree HL2 graphics are the best

...And the physics when you drive the sand buggy... ;)

[Nitrous13270]

...And the physics when you drive the sand buggy... ;)

Max speed to 0 .... archived within less than 2 secs... very realistic... :scratchch

[Inouva]

...And the physics when you drive the sand buggy... ;)

And who are talking about the Havok Engine?

Do you play HL2:Lost coast? , Do you se the Stunning Visual they have?

I think the visual of HL2 :LC , have better Effect that crysis

[Gekkibi]

And who are talking about the Havok Engine?

Do you play HL2:Lost coast? , Do you se the Stunning Visual they have?

I think the visual of HL2 :LC , have better Effect that crysis

Oh, great! Once again graphics over anything else! I still play System Shock 2 and Operation Flashpoint. I don't give a rat's ass about shocking graphics and x999 anti-aliasing...

[Jakg]

Lost Coast looks nice but it still looks like a "game" with dead-straight lines and faces. Crysis looked MUCH better.


(FTR i'm talking about in-game experience maxxed out - screenshots or videos do neither game justice)

[mxpxun]

I suggest u to play HL2 ep1 first level , there is the best sun effect
P.S. HL2 with all its episodes is the best game i have ever played, but i was a bit disappointed about HL2 ep2 ending when Eli Vance Died.

[DieKolkrabe]

I suggest u to play HL2 ep1 first level , there is the best sun effect
P.S. HL2 with all its episodes is the best game i have ever played, but i was a bit disappointed about HL2 ep2 ending when Eli Vance Died.

...thanks for spoiling it, Now I won't bother buying Ep2

on-topic: No it isn't. You try going outside on a sunny day, and then do the same in a game, see how they compare.

[Jakg]

I suggest u to play HL2 ep1 first level , there is the best sun effect
I would if it was free. I got Lost Coast with my GFX card (it's free to all nVidia owners) and the only time I noticed HDR was when the windows in the Chapel(-thing) got shot out, which could of been done without using HDR (imo)

[Shotglass]

everything hdr does right now could be done without it since it doesnt actually used hrd but instead just over or underexposes everything as if you were looking at the world through a 1 year old camera sensor
in short its the same low dynamic range weve had for years with bloom added to make it look cool

in many ways older engines like lfs are more hdr than the current ones

[Inouva]

Oh, great! Once again graphics over anything else! I still play System Shock 2 and Operation Flashpoint. I don't give a rat's ass about shocking graphics and x999 anti-aliasing...

I dont under stand you , we are talking from Sun glare (Bloom Effect) and you jump with crap from the Havok engine of hl2 :shrug:

[Gekkibi]

I dont under stand you , we are talking from Sun glare (Bloom Effect) and you jump with crap from the Havok engine of hl2 :shrug:

I meant that "content over graphics". Someone said magic word Crysis in here. Does that game have something more than overly-ridiculously beautiful graphic-effects? No? I tought so...

Then, back to topic. Of course sun glare would be welcome addition to LFS (Or any driving simulator). However, it requires that sun is setting or rising. Won't happen in the middle of a day. Other great nuisance would be shiny asphalt (First it requires rain and/or wet track options). I think these would be great things not because then LFS would look really great (And lag really badly on some computers), but to dazzle the driver.

[Shotglass]

either way all things considered i think that screenshot from nr2003 in the opening post is a really neat example of sun glare done right
it has some suble bloom round the sun, reduced contrast that you get when you squint your eyes and a few beams of light which look like your brightly lit eyelashes you see faintly if you look directly into the sun

[LJF]

HDR is an awesome effect ......... so long as it's not misused ... :( Unfortunately I've yet to play a game that didn't misuse it. Recreate the kind of HDR that the human eye experiences and not that of a crappy camera.

[jervaughn]

no sun glare, has anyone here played the new forza? oMFG theres a track where the sun glare is soooooo intense its IMMPOSSIBLE to see where your're going its a matter of luck and trial and error to make that turn....:really:

[hazaky]

no sun glare, has anyone here played the new forza? oMFG theres a track where the sun glare is soooooo intense its IMMPOSSIBLE to see where your're going its a matter of luck and trial and error to make that turn....:really:
Comparing forza to lfs (and its dx8) is a crime.

Also, i dont need sun glare tho. :shrug:

[nikopdr]

Still, last time I checked, LFS was DX7.

[Whiskey]

It is DirectX7 with some functions of DX8, so you need DirectX8 to run LFS :thumb:

[jervaughn]

Comparing forza to lfs (and its dx8) is a crime.

Also, i dont need sun glare tho. :shrug:


I apologize!:thumb:

[Shotglass]

How about some real innovation for a change. How about a game that is completely audio-driven? Or a game which is entirely voice-controlled?

maybe try this on for size?
http://secretexit.com/freeware/racingpitch

[hazaky]

I apologize!:thumb:
No probs at all :)

Anyways, hmm. I wish it all was atleast on dx10 :( Dx8 is getting way too old now.

[Kristi]

maybe try this on for size?
http://secretexit.com/freeware/racingpitch
Wow thanks, its awesome. I love that game :P

[Crashgate3]

People are misunderstanding what HDR (and to an extent, bloom) actually is. HDR is just a way of representing brightness levels that are beyond the capability of the medium displaying the image (hence 'High Dynamic Range' - a monitor by contrast has a Low Dynamic Range).

One of the ways this can be implemented is by using bloom on areas that are lit brighter than the backlight of the monitor can acheive - like the sun, or a car's headlights. Whether or not you like bloom in a game (and I admit it is waaaaay overused by most) you have to agree that things like headlights look much better when they have glare, rather than just 'making the texture white' as is the current LFS implementation.

This thing of having the screen dynamically brighten and darken is just a way of coping with the fact that if it didn't you'd get points where the entire screen was either bloomed or dark. I know which I'd rather have.

[Shotglass]

theres another one kev may find to his liking
http://tigsource.com/articles/2010/01/31/gnilley

[pik_d]

Still, last time I checked, LFS was DX7.
I'm curious, how exactly are you checking this? :razz: