Building Pop Up

[CharveL]

I didn't respond with specifics because it's been explained to you in the past and when you throw out words like "liars" it becomes obvious that it's more about getting attention than actually absorbing what people are telling you.

In other words it's a waste of time.

I don't want to come across as being offensive to you but here's a good example of why it just seems futile discussing it:

The supposed CPU bottleneck on buildings is due to bad optimization and tbh makes no sense.
1. Its because the cpu keep track of every building, irregardless of LOD or distance and has to tell the gpu to render shadows and lighting interactions on each of them irrespective of if we can see the effects or not = Gpu bottleneck. If not and it is purely CPU then I have no idea what the hell they are doing because you dont need to track a houses position, the damn thing is stationary. Why do you need to track its position if it is not visible? Because it blocks another object? Thats crazy, who the hell makes maps / engines that way? Also adding to that there no reason why they would need to track stationary objects for anything BUT LOS rendering on the GPU. Computers can dome enormous amounts of calculations per second, but its like we are adding 1+1 and we get 33.33333x66.6666^infinity. It just doesnt add up and it should not be an issue in the first place...

It's just that you don't have any clue - or the rest of us - what the hell you're talking about. I'm sure it makes perfect sense to you though.

[robtek]

Btw, they tried dx11, but atm it is still not stable enough the way it must used in CoD!
They still try to get it working in a later patch.
It's all been said already.

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by CharveL

I didn't respond with specifics because it's been explained to you in the past and when you throw out words like "liars" it becomes obvious that it's more about getting attention than actually absorbing what people are telling you.

In other words it's a waste of time.

I don't want to come across as being offensive to you but here's a good example of why it just seems futile discussing it:



It's just that you don't have any clue - or the rest of us - what the hell you're talking about. I'm sure it makes perfect sense to you though.

As of yet you have not made one valid/sustained or supported criticism about even one thing I have said, let alone a coherent argument other than "thats wrong" which is all that you keep repeating over and over without saying what exactly is wrong, how it is wrong etc.
The devs knew what they wanted out of the engine, they also have sold its features (fps like fidelity etc), but thats not the reality. Why should I care if I can see 1000 miles if I cant see a building 2 miles from me? They should implement a haze, which is 100% better then building pop,because haze is passive and in many ways completely realistic (often you cant see from horizon to horizon under the cloud layer, and above often clouds obscure any detail). On the other hand buildings popping up infront of you suddenly is intrusive, obviouse and distracting. If you care to converse on these points we can talk about them, but make sure to actually have an argument to back up your criticism.
Also if you check the link, the devs themselves are doing exactly what I said they should do months before that article came out and are addressing many of the problems talked about in this thread with the methods that I suggested previously (from the time I first started talking about dx11 just before it was pulled from the release version, to the time where they said they would only tesselate things like tires I was advocating strongly for every point and method they are now using DX11 to implement, and basically word for word for the reasons I stated).

@robtek - you need to make sure to read posts before commenting, because if you did you would see my link to a thread about a recent article/interview which is the first one every to specifically talk about dx11 features and implementation ever. I am also aware it will not be in the initial release.

[zauii]

Wow, you work at 1C don't you helicon?, puns aside seriously don't dive into something you do not have a clue about.
Or maybe you've some inside info regarding their engine and work flow that you'd like to share with the rest of us?

/flameON

[nearmiss]

You guys need to tune out the personal finger pointing the thread is losing it's value.

Couple more of the kind responses that precede this and thread will be closed.

It's your call!

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by zauii

Wow, you work at 1C don't you helicon?, puns aside seriously don't dive into something you do not have a clue about.
Or maybe you've some inside info regarding their engine and work flow that you'd like to share with the rest of us?

/flameON

No I dont work at 1c, and I know about their engine only through what they have shown, and what they have said.

I dont have a clue about what? Puns aside, when using the english language a sentence normally includes a noun...
Thats a clue saying if you are going to criticise someone about what they say, you really need to state what you are talking about and use something called an "argument/thesis" which you should base your post around.

Seriously one of the only forums where you get posts/trolls who cant even state what they disagree with. As far as the record goes (and I have no idea how accurate my analyses is other than from the pics/interviews) I believe my statements have more or less been confirmed by the devs. So until we see other evidence or info that explains the situation (engine, problems etc etc) better I would say that my post holds water, so if you have info that leads you to a different conclusion please post it, and if need be I have no problem with throwing what I have said out the window (I hope I am wrong).