Jehar
Forum Regular
Posts: 789
Registered: 05-04 |
Sodaholic said:
What I think would be a true improvement is not focusing so much on texture resolution, but rather effects. These engines are modern enough to have sourced lighting models, so stencil shadows and normal mapping (when done well) would be feasible and could make things look far better. Also replace what you can with higher poly models with less awkward animation. Lastly, maybe a subtle (emphasis on subtle) touch of bloom and a bit of motion blur, and it'd look much better than straight up using flat, non-bumpmapped texture replacements. Also, if possible, try to increase the size that the texture covers, in order to break up obvious and frequent tiling.
Even then, not much you can do about poor texture alignment and blocky geometry. :/
Which is exactly how I have Darkplaces configured - global illumination combined with the original textures (especially, in my opinion, GL_NEAREST) looks downright fantastic.
The point made about Quake and Unreal not aging well has more in my mind to do with texture filtering than the textures themselves (more in Quake's case; I always thought Unreal just had poor art). Unfiltered textures might not do as well with Unreal due to the draw distances involved, but I'm sure that's something SSAA or some other post effect could handle.
Back to the original post, I see a lot of retexturing projects fail due to inconsistent design across artists. What's worse is inconsistent resolutions, and simply hoping filters/detail textures will cover it up. In case this needed pointing out, a 512x "grit" texture over a 128x bilinear texture looks horrible.
|
11-16-12 01:11 
