>I have YET to see a
>3D engine that actually looks
>real. Yeah OpenGL graphics
>are nice, but I want
>to see actual BLURRING.
>Focus is the #1 vision
>indicator for all living things
>that can see, and NO
>GAME HAS EMULATED IT CORRECTLY.
> I hate mountains that
>are miles away to have
>perfect edges.
>
Did you ever played Outcast? It has an intelligent focus system. I couldn't use it because the slow computer I have, but I could play it a little and actually see noticeable focus changement. And it doesn't require 3d acceleration, it was totally written directly to the processor. It has both good and bad factors. The good is that they fulfilled a graphic quality that no one could reach even at this moment. The bad one, is that it needed a hell of computer to use it at full graphics quality.
And about blurring, I agree with you. Sometimes everything is so "pixelatelly perfect" that bores me. (uuh, do you understand me when I say 'pixelatelly', right?)
>If someone were to implement that,
>they would BLOW AWAY the
>gaming community.
>
I think that games has to develop more on graphics (and they have a veeery long way until reaching perfection). And from what I saw, they have evoluted a lot since games like Duke Nukem 3D, or Quake2 (which was the first on incorporating an almost full 3d environment...you can still see some sprites while playing)
>>A nice quote:
>>"When Morrowind comes out, Bethesda just
>>may just show the world
>>that single player role playing
>>game genre is not dead."
>
>Dead? It revived with Fallout
>1.
>
He means that 80% of the gaming community has been submerged on the internet play and almost forgot the classic single player games. And that is a fact. Nowadays, a game that doesn't incorporates TCP/IP multiplayer features may be considered a heresy.
>>One of the most interesting things
>>is that they're gonna release
>>the full editor that they
>>used to create all the
>>game. Plus lots of features
>>to mod it. Also, it
>>says that it's very easy
>>to use...
>
>But you have to wonder if
>it will contain scripting like
>the Unlimited Adventures RPG toolkit
>(I've still got a copy).
>
From what I readed, they said that it was the only toolkit that they were using to create the entire world.
And if doesn't contain, The Mod Squad will make the programs to manipulate them
>
>BI doesn't release the mapper because
>it would only provide desolate
>places with no interaction.
>Interaction requires scripting, and truly,
>and this comes from a
>programmer, developing scripting languages are
>more pain than they are
>worth. They are clunky,
>they never have the effect
>you want, you have to
>document them, you have to
>ensure that the parser can
>handle bad commands, and they
>are slow. I can
>understand why they wouldn't release
>the code; they wanted to
>do it the easy way.
>
Look, what people wants is to modify tiles, put critters, objects, etc.
Controlling the scripts values that are stored in the MAPs isn't hard.
And with the info we have about scripting on Fallout, we could create a limited (but more than enough) script editor.
A Fallout MAP editor would help the Fallout Hacking community (that, possibly, is bigger than you believe) to create MAPs, and with that, understand the functionality of scripts.
You just have to dream. The hard part is to know how to use your dreams. (oooh, my bloated ego....)
And finally, if I receive 500 mails daily requesting me a stupid program to be released, I would upload it (if I know, of course, that I don't have any money and moral... well, actually only money loss)
>
>><double meaning>
>>Anyone on these studios built on
>>a *black* isle heard me???
>></double meaning>
>
>I find that if you add
>an editor, soon you get
>a bunch of sub-standard RPGs
>trying to emulate the glory
>of the first.
>
So?
[p align=center]
MatuX
Co-Leader and Chief Programmer on
http://clanfusionn.hypermart.net/tmslogo1.gif
[font size=1]GFX by Smackrazor
[font size=2]http://www.modsquad.f2s.com[/p]
