Support NeoGAF

[nemiroff]

There seems to be at least one guy in this thread who doesn't know you can set your own number of rays and bounces in CP.

 

[Three]

And this highlights the major issue with baked lighting and other raster solutions. Dynamic objects either get ignored or do not get adequate coverage by the GI.

It highlights what SlimySnake is saying. Look at overdrive. It's obvious that the games assets were not created for overdrive so there are things that are kind of broken with it. Look at the guys glasses. Look at the skin tone that doesn't look quite right and too dark due to it not doing subsurface scattering properly. Remember he isn't saying Cyberpunk doesn't look impressive or isn't one of the best looking games ever. he's saying that the flaws are overlooked by the likes of DF until they are fixed because they are gushing over it. Then they/we go back and say well it was pretty inaccurate look at this now. Judging by this thread that is also true of people here.

 

[Mister Wolf]

It highlights what SlimySnake is saying. Look at overdrive. It's obvious that the games assets were not created for overdrive so there are things that are kind of broken with it. Look at the guys glasses. Look at the skin tone that doesn't look quite right and too dark due to it not doing subsurface scattering properly. Remember he isn't saying Cyberpunk doesn't look impressive or isn't one of the best looking games ever. he's saying that the flaws are overlooked by the likes of DF until they are fixed because they are gushing over it. Judging by this thread that is also true of people here.

As people have said in this thread, in Alex's coverage of Overdrive he pointed out it's flaws. Whatever flaws you point out in Overdrive there is a laundry list of flaws in the rastered version. They are not equal in their flaws when comparing to Ground Truth which is what all of these techniques are striving for.

 

[Three]

As people have said in this thread, in Alex's coverage of Overdrive he pointed out it's flaws. Whatever flaws you point out in Overdrive there is a laundry list of flaws in the rastered version. They are not equal in their flaws when comparing to Ground Truth which is what all of these techniques are striving for.

Oh absolutely but from what I've read he isn't saying that they are flawless either. Simply that sometimes things are dismissed for being non RT because they're "less accurate" even though the scene/game with baked lighting can end up looking better or more convincing by faking some things that the, at the time, RT implementation doesn't do particularly well. For example sub surface scattering, faked baked bounce lighting in the example he gave of the Metro scene with the wife, the glasses of that guy on the bench not looking right due to it not doing transparent objects that well (same with some exterior windows) . That sort of thing. I don't think he is saying that rasterisation is closer to ground truth (particularly with very dynamic lighting), simply that sometimes the flaws in the RT implementation end up making a scene look worse and those flaws are often just ignored until they are fixed in future then, we highlight those flaws that made it look bad. What he's saying isn't that controversial to be honest.