TheExpert:
Thanks for the nice compliments

Dabro0zar:
Your new image looks much better with this lighting. It has more depths and shadows. I like it.

Maybenew and Phemox:
I know that you are right. Model levels are the key for shader levels. But I see a lot of problems with this approach as well:

1) No scene management. Big levels are not possible except you program your own (slow) scene management

2) No shadows. You cannot use current shadow system for model based levels (at least not for indoors and even for outdoors you will experience problems). Shadows are only casted from the sun and you cannot enter shadow volume. So it will all look flat and false. Static shadows do not work on models and are not casted at terrain (currently).

3) Collision detection. I know several users complaining about collision in model based levels. Maybe there are work-arounds? Don't know.

My dream would be to create the complete level in Lightwave with lights, cameras and all materials. Then I export it via FBX into WED and Gamesutio creates some kind of visibility and shadow maps.
Vision3d works this way. Gamebryo works this way.

Another possible dream would be an in-game editor that deals with static and dynamic meshes and maybe blocks for portals and level optimizations. This editor could show particles, shaders, materials and whatever I need to create my level and to get what I see.

Unity-Engine calls it "you publish what you see" or "plug and publish"

Visually it can be very nice, you've proven that. However, the biggest difference is level design here, not visually. It's kinda unfair to compare anything to Doom3, but I do get your point. The Sauerbraten engine screenshot looks great, but I honestly think that using the exact same design, similar textures and perhaps even a similar shader for the water it would be quite possible to get visually the same results. Yes, 3d gamestudio isn't really fast, so it'll mean less fps for sure, but I wouldn't jump in to quickly just because of that.

Frank has a very good point, it would be nice to be building model levels all the way and export/import. At the moment it has it's disadvantages indeed. I haven't experience collisionproblems yet, but you can't really program in the exact same way you would for block based levels. People using the templates on a modelbased level probably will have problems, or may have some problems.

About point 2.) by the way, I really hope Conitec fixes this, because unless we use a shader based shadow something like Sphere, it's a real killer. Shadows really bring games to life, perhaps one of the most important things visually are shadows. (Take a look at Max Payne 1 and it's radiosity lighting and shadows (no high end shaders), man I would give anything for shadows like that with almost zero fps loss in 3dgs.)

Cheers

dragobazar, again i did not compare cube2 to A6, i simply made a statement on cube2.

Quote:

---

1) No scene management. Big levels are not possible except you program your own (slow) scene management

2) No shadows. You cannot use current shadow system for model based levels (at least not for indoors and even for outdoors you will experience problems). Shadows are only casted from the sun and you cannot enter shadow volume. So it will all look flat and false. Static shadows do not work on models and are not casted at terrain (currently).

3) Collision detection. I know several users complaining about collision in model based levels. Maybe there are work-arounds? Don't know.

---

you can work around each issue, but basically you are right, the only way to achieve good results with A6 is not by using its own features... you have to find tricks and workarounds to achieve effects other engines have implemented in its core. the only thing keeping me here are 5 years of experience with A6

"Shadows really bring games to life"

Indeed, shadows and lightmapping add a lot : )

one way of having very cheap shadows is to use texture projection ,
used a lot for trees shadows.
Doom3 uses texture projection also for simulating different and colored lights, in addition of a point light for basic normal and specular light.
Nice trick.
combination of lightmapping and real shadows is the way to go

proper games are using cube2 as a base for commercial products, it seems they have rewritten quite a part of the engine,

http://www.proper-games.com/technology.html

if you can't wait, here are the screens:

Very interesting.

Quote:

---

...as well as per pixel lighting, normal maps, offset bump mapping, directional light maps and real-time lighting...

---

Do you know what that means? Shaders + static lighting + dynamic lighting (per pixel) at the same time. You can create beautiful stuff with such a tool-set.

Unreal3 also uses directional light maps. The Lawmaker-engine will use it very soon. I don't know what method Torque uses, but they also claim that you can use static lightmaps with shaders (just like Irrlicht).

Did you realize that almost all engines can do that and that per-pixel-lighting is standard today?

news from the cube2-2007-12-22 "assassin" release! TRY IT it is so overwhelming. the map "thor" beats even the UT series.

new, exciting features:

parallax mapping, all shaders seem to be improved a lot!




on this pic, you can't see the gorgeous underwater effects... aww superb.

free floating 3d menus!


finally, md3 support! extended editing menus! seems to be improved in all aspects. and it's so fast, you won't believe your eyes. a killer, really.

Nice screens - worth to give it a (new) try.
Thanx for this info!

thanks for the info! definately download it when i am home..