It's simply the lighting that makes it a very good graphics engine.
Oh boy are your wrong. Its not just the lighting, though thats a big part of it.
Its the polygon count and also streaming video tech that was introduced into MW2 but much more advanced. Shadows are much more dynamic and work in real time.
Theres a reason why you need a $3,000 machine to run this engine.
I just wish it had the destructibility of EA's Frostbite 2 engine * Battlefield 3"
Now I just wish they could make a genuinely good game with all their technology. Ah, I suppose I can dream.
On the bright side, this will make for some very nice environments in the near future....then again that will probably result in a greater reliance on CG than enacting stunts and events in near-reality which usually spoils it on some level.
Makes you wonder what we will be seeing in 10 years!!
This always makes me laugh. We think that we've achieved amazing realism and all that shit, but in ten years time we'll be laughing at all these statements, saying how dumb we used to be
Comments
Oh boy are your wrong. Its not just the lighting, though thats a big part of it.
Its the polygon count and also streaming video tech that was introduced into MW2 but much more advanced. Shadows are much more dynamic and work in real time.
Theres a reason why you need a $3,000 machine to run this engine.
I just wish it had the destructibility of EA's Frostbite 2 engine * Battlefield 3"
On the bright side, this will make for some very nice environments in the near future....then again that will probably result in a greater reliance on CG than enacting stunts and events in near-reality which usually spoils it on some level.
I'm not sure if I want this to work in practice.
This always makes me laugh. We think that we've achieved amazing realism and all that shit, but in ten years time we'll be laughing at all these statements, saying how dumb we used to be