Use lighting effects in 2.1?
- Thread starter Lat'
- Start date
- Status
Burning-Fox
Does not approve of rails.
Ahahahah. AHAHAH. AAAAHAHAHAH YOU MUST BE JOKING.
Ahem...
Well, the rest of your suggestion... "corona effects" is what I think they are called, are too much of a bitch to sort out and aren't really worthwhile. I assume you mean the glowing and all that from 1.09.4 in OGL? They're not really even lighting effects, they don't do MUCH. Sure, they look nice, but they're just... ugh. They don't contribute to much.
Anyway I'm sure I've seen this exact kind of topic before with the same question...
Personally I always found the old OpenGL corona lights a bit weird in SRB2. I mean, Super Sonic and the emeralds with those blinding colored lights, yuck.
Apparently the things never worked properly in the first place so I've heard, which is the reason they were disabled I believe? I don't know what was wrong with them so I can't help there. =S
Apparently the things never worked properly in the first place so I've heard, which is the reason they were disabled I believe? I don't know what was wrong with them so I can't help there. =S
Sonic adventure mode was made solely to shut up people who were asking for SRB2 to be more like sonic adventure by proving that they COULD do it, but specifically chose not to. The point was made by 2.0, so it was removed along with a number of other hanger-on features.
Aside from the only vanilla map being the example and light speed dash being wonky, I'm not sure where you're getting all of this.
Last edited:
Yes... I miss the Light Dash.
Anyways, if the corona effects and the SA mod won't be back... I think we can close this topic....
Autosaver
Member
When you mentioned that OpenGL features could be useful in dark sectors that also has a drawback.
If you're developing a multiplayer map and make it illuminated with OpenGL lights, wouldn't this cause an issue with users who play the same map on Software mode? It would cause an unfair advantage to people who can see the lights.
If you're developing a multiplayer map and make it illuminated with OpenGL lights, wouldn't this cause an issue with users who play the same map on Software mode? It would cause an unfair advantage to people who can see the lights.
Easier said than done though, FC. lat'.
Yes, and why don't we have perspective correction and slopes while we're at it
(Yes, I know they've been done elsewhere, but not every Doom source port is compatible with ours. ZDoom's renderer is very different, for instance.)
Zuko
Member
What would be the purpose about that? If I would wanted the Corona lighting effect I'd have liked if it worked correctly and also even if I remember correctly isn't OpenGL becoming less functional or unsupported still in 2.1? I also liked it but I got used to Software already anyway.
Last edited:
speed2411
Speed2411
Why not? Since Srb2 wants opinions about what features to include in Srb2, have us test it out is the best way to know. A "experimental" tab would not only show what Srb2 has planned for the future, but also give us fun features to play around with.
I am gonna put my two cents into this thread.
Lets be honest, the lighting effects you guys want, we're not working well in the beginning. Yeah, sure, the lighting effects we're in 1.09.4, but did they look terrible? Yeah they did. Should it be worth adding back into the new current release? No, because it is not needed, and it just look god awful. I for one rather see the important things finish, instead of the things that are not needed.
As for an SRB2 test program. No its just another thing for users to bug the developers to add useless things into a test program that would just never be touch either.
(Also I know you stated a tab, not a program. But if it was all put into one game, it was just be over load for one single program)
Also, openGL is still unsupported by the developers. They won't be looking into anything that relates to openGL, unless somebody wants to take the job, and work on it. In which in this case. It would be consider "Boring".
Lets be honest, the lighting effects you guys want, we're not working well in the beginning. Yeah, sure, the lighting effects we're in 1.09.4, but did they look terrible? Yeah they did. Should it be worth adding back into the new current release? No, because it is not needed, and it just look god awful. I for one rather see the important things finish, instead of the things that are not needed.
As for an SRB2 test program. No its just another thing for users to bug the developers to add useless things into a test program that would just never be touch either.
(Also I know you stated a tab, not a program. But if it was all put into one game, it was just be over load for one single program)
Also, openGL is still unsupported by the developers. They won't be looking into anything that relates to openGL, unless somebody wants to take the job, and work on it. In which in this case. It would be consider "Boring".
Metal96
Member
Honestly, it seems to me that it's quite possible. The old Doom renderer we're using here already has a built-in depth "fog" function that gradients the brightness based on distance from camera. To create a light--a very basic one would be one that "illuminates" at a brightness value from 0-255, like sectors--the driving code would simply modulate the darkness of the "fog" by the brightness of the light and the distance of the point currently being rendered from the light source. Hell, you could even optimize it by having the light object check the REJECT table and activating only if it can "see" the player's sector from its current sector--meaning the game would only have to render the light if the player could see it, a HUGE speed booster, especially due to each light requiring a small plethora of trig transforms to get fragment distance and intensity.
Maybe one of these days I should take up C and actually try out all these crazy ideas I have.
EDIT: A basic raytracer is probably also possible by simply having the light check rays cast to each vertex and generate a basic hard shadow "line" that would determine whether a sector/linedef/object should check its distance to the light object and therefore whether the light should illuminate them or not.
Last edited:
- Status