Lol does that graph show your bandwidth topping out? I seem to be throttled to 40k a second, and I'm at work where I can regularly download at over 900k per second, so instead of a 4 or 5 minute wait, I've still got over an hour to go :'(
Originally Posted by RostokMcSpoons Lol does that graph show your bandwidth topping out? I seem to be throttled to 40k a second, and I'm at work where I can regularly download at over 900k per second, so instead of a 4 or 5 minute wait, I've still got over an hour to go :'(
Welcome to bit-tech!
video1.bit-tech.net's connection is maxed out indeed. You can always use the fileshack mirrors ;)
Just setting up another mirror on one of our servers (100mbit link)
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi I can see any ability to give Christmas bonus' evaporating in a bandwidth bill :P
;)
I'm not sure how serious the cost of something like 2TB up uploading is, but in situations where there were several hundred MB's of vids like that, has it been considered that they could be torrented? I would have been happy to download them all in a single package, using a torrent.
Originally Posted by specofdust I'm not sure how serious the cost of something like 2TB up uploading is, but in situations where there were several hundred MB's of vids like that, has it been considered that they could be torrented? I would have been happy to download them all in a single package, using a torrent.
Sure - if you want to register a torrent to a tracker i'll gladly host the .torrent file afterwards :)
Sweeeeet! Ive wanted to see DoF in games for YEARS! I hope it'll work with aftermath... we deserve a reward for waiting this long!
I think DoF will work well in game though, and could be used to make some interesting scripted encounters for future single player games, just as fancy physics did for HL2 originally.
Originally Posted by bigz I don't know, I've always seen DoD as 're-living a true story' -- a bit like Saving Private Ryan in that sense, so I think cinematics in Day of Defeat make sense. :)
DoD... a true story? Play Call of Duty 2. DoD is the WW2 version of CS, pretty much. BF2 without vehicles.
And this isn't going to do ANYTHING to make the game any better. Take off the 32 players hard limit. That's the only thing that will make DoD good again.
Originally Posted by Dreyfuss And this isn't going to do ANYTHING to make the game any better. Take off the 32 players hard limit. That's the only thing that will make DoD good again.
its going to make it look better :D
if they take off the 32 player limit they'll have to make the maps twice the size, it gets pretty manic with 20+ players on the teeny maps
its already good :p
Originally Posted by Dreyfuss DoD... a true story? Play Call of Duty 2. DoD is the WW2 version of CS, pretty much. BF2 without vehicles.
No, read what I said again. Day of Defeat is based around the World War II era, and World War II happened right? I'd love to see 64-player Day of Defeat, but I completely disagree with you saying that Day of Defeat is not a great game. I love Call of Duty 2, but as a multiplayer game, Call of Duty 2 is poor - for a start, there isn't the community support there. Did you read about the community threatening to take strike action by shutting down the servers? They want anti-cheat, they want patches, they want to know Infinity Wards are behind the community and willing to support it.
How many other developers update their games as many times as Valve? Personally, I think Valve's attitude toward the community is much more admirable than the majority of competing ISVs. Many people hate Steam with a passion. I sympathise with the people who have had bad experiences with Steam, but it serves very well at protecting Valve's content and providing regular patches to their games.
Also, Day of Defeat is nothing like CS. The mechanics of the game are completely different, as are the weapons. The only things that CS and Day of Defeat have in common is the fact that both use the Source engine and are developed by Valve Software.
As a gamer, I try to get the best possible KDR, but if there's all these effects going on, I think it's gonna make games a LOT harder. I mean, motion blur is nice and all, but I saw that everything got a little blurrier, even the walls... that isn't quite right....
And shouldn't we try to simulate what we would feel as if we were in the war? I don't want to watch an interactive movie of a war, I want to be IN the war.
I think if this is implimented, all real hard core gamers aiming for high score or during multiplayer, or if you want to play it on hard difficulty, you'll have to turn this stuff down, because it basically impaires your vision, and therefore impairs your ability to kill.
I think it's nice that valve is developing something, but I jsut don't think this is a step in the right direction.... Ex. this would be completely useless in CS:S
I read in the article somewhere that says movie makers try to make the audience feel like we're at the location, but Valve wants to make us feel like we're watching a movie????.... I rather valve spend it's time finishing the trilogy known as Half Life......I wonder who G-man really is........
No one has to agree or disagree with this. Most likely we will be able to turn it off or on in the options... and play what we like. More possibilities... More re-playablity... More awesome I say, even though I might not want to play full game like that.
My question... Lets open 50 1024X768 images in photoshop....lets create an automation of Filters>Artistic>Film grain.... Apply the filter and see how long it takes for photoshop to apply film grain effect to those 50 images... now imagine your PC doing that every second + runnin the game.
However if you would take the game 3D maps and scenes and actors all the polygons into any regular 3D program and render a small movement animation... Man you could take few day vacation for few minutes of animation. Now in games that happens in real life. That is so amazing to me. Having to know only a little bit about one game engine- unreal1-2. I see few ways how game engines manage that, however 80% of the process is such a wonder to me.
as far as i can say (still waitng for the movie to dl) boooooooo. i payed for a game not a movie. especially not a movie thats ww2 era in picture quality. i'm a realism buff (i play with no hud at all) and i think they should spend the efforts on making the world more realistic. for example, when using voice chat, the futher away you are from other players the quiter you voice becomes . not making it look like you watching a news real from 1944. or even to go as far as adding bullit drop and windage effects, not to mention propore bullistsics for the weapons (no more of this equality bs, wars not far). basicaly tryig to simulate real intence combat, so ppl want to play the game. not just to wonder around goin ooooo awwwwwww thats purdy. and from what i've seen in the past is all the eye candy games fad away while the games with awsome game play last for ever EX. half life. but this is all just my opinion.
Originally Posted by bigz I love Call of Duty 2, but as a multiplayer game, Call of Duty 2 is poor - for a start, there isn't the community support there.
Thats true, but if you were to watch the DoD trailer compared to the Call of Duty2 one, it's likely you would be unimpressed. DoD is a better game, but it takes playing it for hours/days to realize it's the superior of the two..... to the noob/average consumer.
I totally agree with everyone saying its a step in the wrong direction, because it is. Were playing a multiplayer game, I want to feel like im back in the 40's fighting for my life. Im sure everyone realises that the world wasnt in black and white back then. I agree with adding depth of field as this is how we see things, thats a step in the right direction.
HDR is very beautiful but, the world isnt like that, the way it looks in the game is far more apparant than what it is in real life, things need to be more subtle to make it real.
I wish the developers would stop wasting their time adding useless effects and start making games more real, textures have for a long time been the downfall of games. We need more detail.
can all you people stop complaining about how these effects are going to adversly impact on your gameplay? you'll be able to turn them off, surely- you can turn off hdr can't you? with the customisable colour correction menu its allmost guarenteed that there will be an advanced effects menu to go with it, as others have allready said.
that said, werent alot of these features allready in the source engine? garrys mod enabled depth of field (allthough not adaptive), adjustable fog, fully customisable colour correction, fully customisable motion blur etc.
I agree that they could be putting more effort into debugging/fixing map exploits etc, but theyre probably in different departments anyway - you dont need a graphics coder to fix something a mapper could do in 40 seconds (not counting recompiling, of course)
-probably just doing it to keep employees on their toes
Comments 26 to 50 of 76
http://gir.bit-tech.net/~rtt/elmo100.png
they'll probably do the best part of terrabyte in the next 24 hrs and then another tb over the next week
I know I'm regurgitating what everyone else has said, but those two effects while looking nice will actually detract from the game.
Motion blurrrrrrr and HDR great, those add to the experience and are workable in game.
Welcome to bit-tech!
video1.bit-tech.net's connection is maxed out indeed. You can always use the fileshack mirrors ;)
Just setting up another mirror on one of our servers (100mbit link)
I can see any ability to give Christmas bonus' evaporating in a bandwidth bill :P
;)
got dugg :o
I'm not sure how serious the cost of something like 2TB up uploading is, but in situations where there were several hundred MB's of vids like that, has it been considered that they could be torrented? I would have been happy to download them all in a single package, using a torrent.
Sure - if you want to register a torrent to a tracker i'll gladly host the .torrent file afterwards :)
I think DoF will work well in game though, and could be used to make some interesting scripted encounters for future single player games, just as fancy physics did for HL2 originally.
Sitting in the airport now waiting for my plane home. I think I'll be sleeping all the way, pretty much.
DoD... a true story? Play Call of Duty 2. DoD is the WW2 version of CS, pretty much. BF2 without vehicles.
And this isn't going to do ANYTHING to make the game any better. Take off the 32 players hard limit. That's the only thing that will make DoD good again.
if they take off the 32 player limit they'll have to make the maps twice the size, it gets pretty manic with 20+ players on the teeny maps
its already good :p
How many other developers update their games as many times as Valve? Personally, I think Valve's attitude toward the community is much more admirable than the majority of competing ISVs. Many people hate Steam with a passion. I sympathise with the people who have had bad experiences with Steam, but it serves very well at protecting Valve's content and providing regular patches to their games.
Also, Day of Defeat is nothing like CS. The mechanics of the game are completely different, as are the weapons. The only things that CS and Day of Defeat have in common is the fact that both use the Source engine and are developed by Valve Software.
As a gamer, I try to get the best possible KDR, but if there's all these effects going on, I think it's gonna make games a LOT harder. I mean, motion blur is nice and all, but I saw that everything got a little blurrier, even the walls... that isn't quite right....
And shouldn't we try to simulate what we would feel as if we were in the war? I don't want to watch an interactive movie of a war, I want to be IN the war.
I think if this is implimented, all real hard core gamers aiming for high score or during multiplayer, or if you want to play it on hard difficulty, you'll have to turn this stuff down, because it basically impaires your vision, and therefore impairs your ability to kill.
I think it's nice that valve is developing something, but I jsut don't think this is a step in the right direction.... Ex. this would be completely useless in CS:S
I read in the article somewhere that says movie makers try to make the audience feel like we're at the location, but Valve wants to make us feel like we're watching a movie????.... I rather valve spend it's time finishing the trilogy known as Half Life......I wonder who G-man really is........
My question... Lets open 50 1024X768 images in photoshop....lets create an automation of Filters>Artistic>Film grain.... Apply the filter and see how long it takes for photoshop to apply film grain effect to those 50 images... now imagine your PC doing that every second + runnin the game.
However if you would take the game 3D maps and scenes and actors all the polygons into any regular 3D program and render a small movement animation... Man you could take few day vacation for few minutes of animation. Now in games that happens in real life. That is so amazing to me. Having to know only a little bit about one game engine- unreal1-2. I see few ways how game engines manage that, however 80% of the process is such a wonder to me.
Thats true, but if you were to watch the DoD trailer compared to the Call of Duty2 one, it's likely you would be unimpressed. DoD is a better game, but it takes playing it for hours/days to realize it's the superior of the two..... to the noob/average consumer.
HDR is very beautiful but, the world isnt like that, the way it looks in the game is far more apparant than what it is in real life, things need to be more subtle to make it real.
I wish the developers would stop wasting their time adding useless effects and start making games more real, textures have for a long time been the downfall of games. We need more detail.
that said, werent alot of these features allready in the source engine? garrys mod enabled depth of field (allthough not adaptive), adjustable fog, fully customisable colour correction, fully customisable motion blur etc.
I agree that they could be putting more effort into debugging/fixing map exploits etc, but theyre probably in different departments anyway - you dont need a graphics coder to fix something a mapper could do in 40 seconds (not counting recompiling, of course)
-probably just doing it to keep employees on their toes
here