Hey Mike, don't know if you've seen Mike Acton's first post, before the aforementioned one, here:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10068493&postcount=4862
I'm not sure this entirely relates to the context of SPE usage in this thread, but it's interesting nonetheless, in case you didn't see it. Oh and, it's Mike Acton, not Action. Unless you're doing it on purpose, which I entirely understand because it's so cool.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10068493&postcount=4862
Mike Acton said:Pimpwerx said:That said, I wonder what a 1/60th of a second "lag" is going to look like to the eye. I mean, it's gotta be really hard to see. But the eye picks up on the smallest changes.
This is an evolution of the model we used for RCF and I'm pretty sure it was totally unnoticed there, as I'd expect. There's no visible "lag". For effects that one would expect to be "in sync" and on the same frame as something else (e.g. attached to a moving part), they'd likely be classified as more the "immediate" type.
"Immediate" in this context means "the work will be done somewhere later in the frame" (so it's still technically "deferred", just not by a huge amount)
"Deferred" in this context means "the work will be done somewhere later than that, probably the next frame"
Kinan said:Biggest news is the use of deferred rendering in R2, which means that we may expect KZ2 quality lighting in the sequel. Cant wait for the first footage.
You can not infer "deferred rendering" a la Killzone2 from this use of the word "deferred", as filopilo pointed out. It just means "done later" - and it's used everywhere as part of normal asynchronous design. In this sense we have deferred updates for collision, animation, physics, effects, water and a ton of other things.
I'm not sure this entirely relates to the context of SPE usage in this thread, but it's interesting nonetheless, in case you didn't see it. Oh and, it's Mike Acton, not Action. Unless you're doing it on purpose, which I entirely understand because it's so cool.