Is Homefront: The Revolution the most graphically ambitious FPS game ever made? It has dynamic pebble shadows...

Is Homefront: The Revolution the most graphically ambitious FPS game ever made? It has dynamic pebble shadows. Are there any other games where every single pebble, rock, and blade of grass gets its own dynamic shadow cast from the sun?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Z5BsJ1TRMh8
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

...

I will buy Homefront 2 when they patch out Denuvo.

That'll probably be sooner than later. I'm personally more annoyed they encrypted all the game files. We could have had some really badass mods.

>Is Homefront: The Revolution the most graphically ambitious FPS game ever made?

No

Name a game more graphically ambitious, then. With screenshots.

Witcher 3 is the most ambitious graphical game. The thought put into those grafix is out of this world, whether you like the game or not.

youtube.com/watch?v=Z5BsJ1TRMh8

>Are there any other games where every single pebble, rock, and blade of grass gets its own dynamic shadow cast from the sun?
Thousands of games? I dont think you understand how video game shadows work

Not him, but Crysis 1.
It's a PC exclusive FPS that pushes visuals and interactivity.

If it's available on consoles, by default it's not ambitious at all.

I know exactly how they work. I also know almost nobody makes PEBBLES cast shadows because it's super expensive, especially when your game has a day/night cycle so you can't just cheat and prebake everything.

see

what does graphically ambitious even mean?

good lighting, ground textures look worse than GTA 5 tho

>If it's available on consoles, by default it's not ambitious at all.
Crysis 1 is also available on consoles. Homefront: The Revolution's console version has dramatically cut back draw distance, reflections, and shadows.

Witcher 3 doesn't even have grass shadows, much less pebble shadows.

proactive flexibility

>what does graphically ambitious even mean?
It means, "Fuck performance, let's make grass cast shadows. No wait, let's make every single pebble on the ground cast its own shadow. And let's also make sure the game has a full day and night cycle so we can't cheat."

Blast processing

doesn't change the fact that the gameplay is painfully average

another example of graphics not making a good game

I missed the part about "FPS".
There's nothing ambitious about grass shadows. A game world that had a ton of thought put into it, down to the way roads curve and split and the scattering of rocks, is an ambitious graphical experience.

>Crysis 1 is also available on consoles.
That's an unusual case - Console Crysis 1 is a complete remake that is both graphically and gameplay-wise inferior to the PC release.

I'm not buying your game no matter how many of these threads your make.

It's not expensive at all, most games with dynamic shadows just have everything cast shadows (except transparent objects), if you aren't seeing the pebble shadows it's because the shadow map resolution is likely too small.

Do pebble shadows contribute to the gameplay?

>It has dynamic pebble shadows

Do people really not know how 3D lighting works?

Do you really think that having a static cast a shadow is "technology"? Like, you think they need to individually program each fucking mesh to cast a shadow?

>I also know almost nobody makes PEBBLES cast shadows because it's super expensive

Dude, no it fucking isn't. Most GPUs do screen-space shadows with no tax at all, because it's just simple vector math.

>There's nothing ambitious about grass shadows.
Name some games with grass shadows if they're so non-ambitious.

>I'm not buying your game no matter how many of these threads your make.
I'm never buying Uncharted 4. I can still appreciate its technical ambition, although it wasn't ambitious enough to have grass shadows.

>It's not expensive at all, most games with dynamic shadows just have everything cast shadows
No, they don't. Very few games have grass shadows because it's a titanic drain on performance. Seriously. Name 5 games released in the last 3 years that gave grass shadows.

>Do you really think that having a static cast a shadow is "technology"? Like, you think they need to individually program each fucking mesh to cast a shadow?
It's expensive. Like, super, super expensive.

Static lighting is harder to implement than dynamic, it just runs better. You could call it laziness.

How much extra did it cost per pebble? With screenshots.

>Name some games with grass shadows if they're so non-ambitious.
You fucking faggot, most developers don't use grass shadows because they rape the framerates harder than HairWorks on x36 antialiasing and are honestly not worth it when most hardware can't even cope, not because they're difficult to achieve.
Also, why did you make two of these shitty threads praising your garbage game with its glorious pebble shadows?

>Dude, no it fucking isn't. Most GPUs do screen-space shadows with no tax at all, because it's just simple vector math.
Aren't screen space shadows just an extension of SSAO? You get useless "soft" dark areas that are useless for, for example, rendering shadow maps from individual leaves sitting on the ground.

40 dollars for an average game is a steep price. Especially on pcs.

>You fucking faggot, most developers don't use grass shadows because they rape the framerates harder than HairWorks on x36 antialiasing and are honestly not worth it when most hardware can't even cope, not because they're difficult to achieve.
So in other words, Dambuster had the ambition to do what other developers were scared to do? I guess they really are carrying the torch from Crytek.

>It's expensive. Like, super, super expensive.>>
Nigga, this ain't 2002. It's seriously a built-in feature of every single engine.

Is this thread a joke?

>Very few games have grass shadows because it's a titanic drain on performance
games might not have grass shadows because grass is often rendered as an alpha-blended billboard which would create shitty looking shadows, it's not about performance, there is not a linear scene complexity to shadow rendering time relationship. Many games DO have grass shadows though, I've barely even played 5 games in the last three years though so I'd have a hard time naming any. Far Cry 3 maybe?

Stop this stale funposting

>Far Cry 3 maybe?
Nope. I think Far Cry: Primal has them, but only on PC, and I don't think it has them for smaller clumps of grass.

>Far Cry 3 maybe?

GTA V doesn't have grass shadows. Shadows are the biggest weakness in modern 3D games because they're very expensive. You want to render a field of grass where each clump casts a shadow and also receives shadows from other clumps of grass? That shit will absolutely destroy performance. But it looks really really good, and it's impossible to unsee how bad games like MGS V and GTA V and The Witcher 3 look when you see nothing is casting a shadow like it should.

It's not ambition. Their game wasn't a graphical revolution. It had some shadows on grass, something that was already done years ago.

I can't keep on arguing with this brick wall of shitposting so I'm just gonna reiterate that a graphically ambitious game is The Witcher 3 because they they put a lot of thought and care into their game world, much more than the usual and much more than anyone would have expected of them.

>It had some shadows on grass, something that was already done years ago.
And pebbles. If it was already done years ago, name the game, user.

Not OP, and not meaning to shitpost, but one of the few things that break the immersion in TW3 is the quality of the grass/trees. To me everything else looks perfect on max settings, but the foliage always looks like it's on medium/low regardless. It's cool that it moves in the wind, that's more "technology" than anything in this mediocre shitshow, but they could've stepped it up a little IMO.

>It's cool that it moves in the wind, that's more "technology" than anything in this mediocre shitshow
Homefront's vegetation also moves in the wind. Crytek PIONEERED shit moving in the wind.

Far Cry 4 had some astounding looking AO on grass

>You want to render a field of grass where each clump casts a shadow and also receives shadows from other clumps of grass? That shit will absolutely destroy performance.
That's not how rendering works at all
stop talking out your ass
Shadows are cheap compared to the shitty full-screen effects like SSAO and motion blur and the cost of rendering shadows does not go up with the complexity of the scene. It's because shadowed grass will look like an aliased mess

Sure let me fire up all my five year old games and look at all the pebbles

>Shadows are cheap compared to the shitty full-screen effects like SSAO and motion blur and the cost of rendering shadows does not go up with the complexity of the scene. It's because shadowed grass will look like an aliased mess
That's why soft shadowing was invented. And no, shadows are not cheap. SSAO is cheap, which is why most games just stick some crappy SSAO on their vegetation and call it a day.

Crytek had Crysis 1. They've been riding that single game ever since, and not even because it was a good game (which it was). They removed the cool tree felling stuff in later Crytek games, made it all rubbery and cartoony and overly shiny (including reflective matte surfaces), all the while forgetting about the gameplay.

Does it even matter when the game play is a pile of trash and it has all the stability of a whore on Christmas who just lost her mother?

real-time rendering can't really do true soft shadows, and shadows are way cheaper than SSAO, stop talking about things you know nothing about

>cheap compared to the shitty full-screen effects like SSAO
SSAO is literally an effect designed from the ground up to be cheaper than actual shadows mate

>It's because shadowed grass will look like an aliased mess
Homefront's sun shadows look fine, though. So what's their excuse?

Don't bully whores, user, especially at Christmas.

>You want to render a field of grass where each clump casts a shadow and also receives shadows from other clumps of grass? That shit will absolutely destroy performance.

This was true with forward rendering. Deferred shading is used in every modern engine and it makes no difference anymore. Performance in a fragment shader will be constant no matter how many shadows you have in a scene.

not entirely sure what you mean user
Homefront's vegetation slowly waves from side to side, Witcher 3's vegetation actually looks like it's being moved by powerful winds. It also applies to everything from the small bush 50 meters away to the trees on a hill 2 kilometers away.

no it's designed to approximate global illumination ie. indirect shadows as opposed to direct shadows which is what the normal shadow system handles

Please, OP, prove to me you can shitpost competently. Try and justify the gameplay of Homefront: The Revolution. Do your best to defend that burning garbage truck.

If they didn't want to be bullied they wouldn't be whores

>Does it even matter when the game play is a pile of trash and it has all the stability of a whore on Christmas who just lost her mother?
Runs fine on my machine (TM).

In motion you can plainly see that the foliage looks 2D, it doesn't move well IMO. You can see where the individual clumps of grass start and end, where they were dropped by the level designer. It's not low resolution, I just feel that many games not known for their graphical fidelity still do grass better. I know dense grass is hard to accomplish but my expectations are unfairly high since they nailed everything else almost perfectly. Blood and Wine especially is phenomenal.

What's with Homefront devs shilling their shit game on Sup Forums?

It's either the devs or one assblasted guy who bought it for full price at launch only to find out it's a shitty Far Cry 4.

MUH CRYTEC
MUH 2007 GAEM MOTHAFUCKA

probably the same marketers who make all the paragon threads

>Try and justify the gameplay of Homefront: The Revolution.
Gunplay is fantastic. Guns feel punchy, and enemy hit reactions are solid. AI is a bit unstable, but surprisingly competent. And it's great how the game really captures how it feels to be outgunned by a superior force. The urban design is basically peerless. The yellow zones are generally better than the red zones, but Old Town is absolutely fantastic.

People where complaining about crashes from day 1 user patches do not count towards stability rating if they can't release a stable product it's forever an unstable poorly optimized mess

you realize that a lot of games that don't have shadows on grass and minor things do so just to save performance right

if you really wanted to a lot of games can cast shadows on absolutely fucking everything, even oblivion (see shademe)

>People where complaining about crashes from day 1 user patches do not count towards stability rating if they can't release a stable product it's forever an unstable poorly optimized mess
DOOM crashed constantly for thousands of people and iD took months to fix it.

Eh, 6/10. What was your favourite moment while playing? Everyone here knows if you want to shill properly you have to invent a bullshit greentext story that didn't actually happen. I'm giving you all the chances you need, user.

>you realize that a lot of games that don't have shadows on grass and minor things do so just to save performance right
That's exactly my point. PC games and especially Crytek games are all about saying, "Fuck performance. And fuck your GTX 1080 Ti, too."

Yes so it's an unstable piece of shit this is how this works user

Is the game actually good?

>What was your favourite moment while playing?
Escaping from the KPA when you first arrive in Ashgate with that glorious, glorious Graeme Norgate music playing. Game needs an OST release badly.

>the game really captures how it feels to be outgunned by a superior force
yeah, that only happens when the blimp spots youy and sends a couple dozen enemies

>Is the game actually good?
If you like Far Cry 3 clones, yes. Funnily enough, those screenshots are from the DLC, which isn't open world and is therefore immune to 90% of the criticisms of the main game.

Wouldn't arma be more ambitious since you're able to render shit like 12000 meters away from the infantry perspective?
It runs like shit if you render shit further than 1500 meters though but optimization isn't ambition.

>yeah, that only happens when the blimp spots you and sends a couple dozen enemies

In the yellow zones, there are no blimps. There's just a lot of soldiers who are remarkably good at navigating building interiors to find you.

OP thinks optimization = grass and pebble shadows, and isn't impressed by anything on a larger scale. He's like pixel peepers on /p/ who won't be satisfied unless their shitty photos are sharp as a knife, not even caring that the photos themselves are shit.

Not enough screenshots ITT

sorry, meant ambitious, not optimization

>Wouldn't arma be more ambitious since you're able to render shit like 12000 meters away from the infantry perspective?
There's nothing impressive about rendering massive draw distances when you're rendering a big empty world where the grass doesn't cast shadows. Delta Force games had insane draw distance.

What about this? Is this also a shit photo?

...

yes
looks like Crysis 2

I bought this game played it til I realized it was double tap forward to sprint which made sneaking a chore and got a refund almost immediately

Makes sense I know nothing about photography

>I bought this game played it til I realized it was double tap forward to sprint which made sneaking a chore and got a refund almost immediately
On PC, you sprint by pressing SHIFT. Just like every other Crytek game. I thought you just held down one of the sticks to sprint when playing with a controller.

No i would tap forward to inch along and suddenly take off like a damn bullet train alerting whoever I was trying to sneak up on

It began development right after Crysis 2, and used Crysis 2 as a base for a few years.

...

...

There's no excuse for games to lack proper shadow casting on PC. Performance shouldn't matter.

How do you take your screenshots?

Not mine. Found these on NeoGAF. Think they used ingame supersampling.

Also, they patched in extensive HUD settings so you can turn various areas of the HUD on and off and also disable the HUD entirely, which is useful for screenshotting. And turning off the minimap makes the game more tense and immersive, although it also turns off the counter that shows how many healing needles you have left.

They'd have to. My screenshots look like shit at 1080p, even with decent AA.

But the grass does has shadows, granted it can only go for about 200 meters but 200 m of everything casting shadows is pretty good.

>But the grass does has shadows
Screenshot?

Turns out I'm full of shit and the only 'grass' to have any form of shadows are one type of rice paddy on the expansion map.

Is there multi-player in this game? Not really interested in a single player fps