[gevatter Lars]

I just found an old build that supported realtime shadows...but its is quite bugy.
Has their been any new development into this or a even finished build with that?

I liked the idea of these shadows a lot.

[karajorma]

Bob won't be working on shadows for a while AFAIK. That build was basically an experiment by him to find out what to do and what not to do when he implements the feature properly.

[gevatter Lars]

Oh to bad...well maybe sometime in the future.

[Unknown Target]

I actually used that build a lot, it ran pretty well on my machine, and added a LOT to the gameplay experience.

[Flipside]

Funny thing is I've noticed about a lot of Nvidia cards is that they are not happy with Shadow routines, you tend to get a lot of 'intersecting poly' flicker, this was true for X2, Doom3 and Children of the Nile to name but 3.

Oddly enough Bobb's shadow code worked just fine

[gevatter Lars]

Well for me its the opposite...X2 and Doom3 run well with my Nvidia card, but the shadowcode gave me trouble.
My build is called "fs2_open_shadow3.exe"
Is that the last one Bob made?

And I agree the shadows add a lot to the atmosphere.

[Flipside]

Well, I have a 5600 in one comp and an oclocked 5200 in the other, so while they are respectable (both have 512Mb) they are not exactly top of the range. Now I come to think of it, the most problems I've had is with the overclocked one, not the least of which is an incredibly loud fan

Yep, that's the last build, shadow1 was very pre-beta, shadow 2 had the Z-Buffer the wrong way round, so Shadow3 is the only one that works

[Bobboau]

it's what's known as proof of concept, I figured out what needed to be done, and how to do it, but in the process of learning I messed a bunch of other stuff up, and did a few things backwards.

[gevatter Lars]

Any plans on returning (not now) to the shadows or did you lost interest?

[Grug]

It would indeed be a giant leap for the graphics. As much as the glow and shine maps done.

[Bobboau]

I'd like to put it back in, but it's gona be a while.
what would you rather have? shadows or shaders, cause I'm the only guy who seems to have the will for either of these.

[Unknown Target]

Er...shadows, then shaders, imho.

[Grug]

****, didn't realize shaders were an option.
I'm impartial to either. I wouldn't mind either of them being in.

I'm not sure what form of shaders your putting in though. Are we talking about HL2 style shaders? Including bump mapping?
With shine and glow, shaders could probably come after shadows actually...

But yeah, I think that was probably retorical anyways.
Gods speed Bob. Do your monkey thing

[quadrophoeniX]

Shadows before shaders please, just simply because: shadows=> immediate improvement, shaders need models etc. takin use of it. Yeah, on the other hand, the earlier shaders are implemented the earlier we will see them being used in models, but as it might be known from my first posts I really dig the shadows build...

[Flaser]

All those who beg for shadows: I hope you realize this is going to be a further resource drain, whereas the implementation of shaders will finally kickstart another leap just like HTL used to be.

...moreover shaders will bring bloom, bump mapping/normal mapping and lots of cool stuff with it....and possibly make the implementation of shadows easier to its just a rough bluff.

[Grug]

It's up to Bob in the end, and by the sounds he's already made his decision.
I will worship him either way.

[DaBrain]

Although some mods (TI, SF:SoL, BSG) might really profit from the shdows, I think shaders are the better choice for now.

I love bloom effects, the will make the game look mucg better without touching the content.

Just take a look at this:
http://d3glow.clanugsm.com/
(It doesn't really work with FS2_open. I was only able to see whats in the framebuffer a few times.)

It looks just great with Doom3 and any other 'dark' games (if supported). It looks horrible with HL.

[Grug]

That's not really a large graphical upgrade though. It's more of a finetuning and polish.
Shadows would add significant atmosphere and could be very well implemented by clever mission editors.

But meh, its all kewl stuff to me.

[Taristin]

I'd rather have shadows than shaders, personally. Glow mapping, and shine mapping make the game look excellent, and shadows are about all that's missing.

Over exposure and all that... well... it's nice, but I can live without it, if we have shadows.

[WMCoolmon]

Hmm...bump mapping/motion blur/blooming, or shadows. Either one would be nice; I guess the biggest question is, what about the move to Dx9? If there's a lot of coding involved (ie ripping out the lowlevel DX funcs and reimplementing them) then we might as well have shadows to tide us over while DX9 is going in.

I don't really care about blooming (IMHO,everyone goes "OMFG!! Blooming!!" but when it gets right down to it, by the time it's at realistic levels there's not much difference. It always looks artificial if it's obvious.). I can't live without bumpmapping, though;play Halo and turn on the flashlight, well, practically anywhere but over grass or tress and be amazed.