View Single Post

Default 

June 13th, 2013, 20:08
Some of that money's coming from Nvidia I guess. Look at their fancy new physx fur and hair technology. Realistic bush, hurray! And screw everyone on a diferent brand or lower end model. You might say Tomb Raider did similar for AMD hardware, and I would agree that was also bad form, but at least Lara still had hair, animated hair, affected by gravity and wind, without tressfx. Lara didn't go bald when you turned it off.

The wolf model in the presentation looked like bald crap without it since the model is made with the fur layer in mind with no alternative version and you probably won't even have halfway settings like getting the fancy fur shaders without the physics on top, as if only nvidia's latest GPUs can render any kind of fur shaders, an effect possible to create (obviously in different quality and implementations) since what, forever, considering some GameCube games had it (animating by wind and other stimuli, even!).

I guess it's possible they didn't show the real alternative model in the presentation just to better demonstrate the benefits of the physx effects but somehow I doubt that's the case and will continue to do so until they show otherwise. Bad form, CDP. Spend a tiny sliver of those millions for real alternative wolf (and whatever else extensively require fur to look decent) models with non physx fur shaders or at the very least a wolf that has the size and silhouette of a furry wolf even if the fur is only a texture/normal map (although again a shader should be more than possible with a little effort).
Last edited by Al3xand3r; June 13th, 2013 at 20:50.
Al3xand3r is offline

Al3xand3r

Watcher

#13

Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 41