Engine 1.4 , ITS real ??

[Xtermin59]

Hey i have make scene similar of Bannerlord Engine 1.4 video , check :

Bannerlord : www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=7&v=oUr-MRo0LZ0

Warband : www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmmb7-yH_3I


Your see a graphical difference ?? , I am really disappointed with graphics 


we are in 2018 not 2010 !

 

[Balexander]

Typical graphic fan boy 

 

[Dest45]

If you think this

隐藏

and this

隐藏

or
this

隐藏

and

隐藏

are the same thing, you are probably retarded.

 

[Ragratt]

Yea, are you # stupid?  If I watch Braveheart in SD it looks like Bannerlord.

 

[NPC99]

The point of the blog was to demonstrate the engine's capacity to incorporate computationally expensive 3D graphics. Photorealistic Global Illumination has been added for the static elements of a scene by pre-computing them so these algorithms are not repeatedly re-calculated in game.

Images rendered using global illumination algorithms often appear more photorealistic than those using only direct illumination algorithms. However, such images are computationally more expensive and consequently much slower to generate. One common approach is to compute the global illumination of a scene and store that information with the geometry (e.g., radiosity). The stored data can then be used to generate images from different viewpoints for generating walkthroughs of a scene without having to go through expensive lighting calculations repeatedly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_illumination

Compute Shader Skinning stores skeletal mesh calculations once per frame for reuse in each render pass to free up GPU time for larger battles and better fps. Similarly, the Particle Shading Atlas is all about reducing the fill rate (GPU cost) costs of particles.

The object of these engine enhancements is to free up CPU/GPU capacity, which can then be reinvested in either better graphics or better gameplay or a combination of these. In the main, I am happy with the graphics TW have showcased and hope they continue to invest any free CPU/GPU time into better game play - bigger battles, improved fps etc.

 

[Auldman]

All the mount and blade titles were behind in terms of graphics quality but it's not why we played them. Nobody enjoyed Warband because it had state of the art graphics. I think you're on the wrong forum.

 

[Feetandaxe]

But you don’t have global illumination.

 

[Ki-Ok Khan]

Warband looks like everything is made out of paper dude. What are you even talking about? Just because the assets look similar does not mean that the graphics,gameplay,content,mechanics etc are the same..

Just get over with trying to bash Bannerlord down people. You are embarrassing yourself.

 

[Vandien]

I'm sure there'll be graphical enhancement mods for the people who want them. I'm personally very happy with how the game is looking, and it's definitely a big improvement(you might want to get your eyes tested ).

Anyhow, the less graphically intensive the game is, the more people can play it - meaning more people to populate the multi-player servers(a lot of Mount and Blade players don't have high end gaming PCs). And the more soldiers you'll be able to have in a battle in single-player - I'll take bigger battles over graphics any day.

 

[VVyrd]

I had complained about graphics in the past, but with the more recent videos, images and information I just can't complain - It looks more than decent, and if it means we'll be getting a much better performance, much larger scenarios and bigger battles, then I'm all in. All those prettier AAA games are, for the most part, incredibly hard to run with even decent PCs, and are not really fun, let alone how incredibly expensive they are both to produce and then for the consumer to buy. Besides, all those nice little details they usually have, you don't even pay attention to them except when specifically screenshooting.

Not to mention mods.

 

[OnionKnight]

If you love graphics so much why even play mount & blade? Looks like something from a ps2 game






<---- Seriously look at that

 

[Kehlian]

I had complained about graphics in the past, but with the more recent videos, images and information I just can't complain - It looks more than decent, and if it means we'll be getting a much better performance, much larger scenarios and bigger battles, then I'm all in. All those prettier AAA games are, for the most part, incredibly hard to run with even decent PCs, and are not really fun, let alone how incredibly expensive they are both to produce and then for the consumer to buy. Besides, all those nice little details they usually have, you don't even pay attention to them except when specifically screenshooting.

Not to mention mods.

Wait AAA games run on consoles, meaning a mid-tier PC is enough. I got a GTX970, i5 4440k, and 16gb ram, and it runs everything but Star Citizen (which is NOT an AAA, it's indie) just fine with high graphics. My PC isn't even a high tier anymore. I think you mixed AAA and beautiful games. Most AAA are poor 720p ports not using half of what a PC can offer.

Now guys you have to admit. Bannerlord is far from ugly it's really beautiful.
You also have to keep in mind that if you want 600 AI fighting in a scene, you have to cut for performances somewhere, and graphical computation is currently the most expansive things because of shaders and post-process. You can't have star citizen graphics with 600 entities fighting and taking even semi-smart decisions in your surroundings, no PC can run that as of today.

 

[Graeghan]

I never felt there was anything really visually wrong with scenes in Warband, spare perhaps trees up close. It's the characters that were real eyesores. 

 

[VVyrd]

I had complained about graphics in the past, but with the more recent videos, images and information I just can't complain - It looks more than decent, and if it means we'll be getting a much better performance, much larger scenarios and bigger battles, then I'm all in. All those prettier AAA games are, for the most part, incredibly hard to run with even decent PCs, and are not really fun, let alone how incredibly expensive they are both to produce and then for the consumer to buy. Besides, all those nice little details they usually have, you don't even pay attention to them except when specifically screenshooting.

Not to mention mods.

Wait AAA games run on consoles, meaning a mid-tier PC is enough. I got a GTX970, i5 4440k, and 16gb ram, and it runs everything but Star Citizen (which is NOT an AAA, it's indie) just fine with high graphics. My PC isn't even a high tier anymore. I think you mixed AAA and beautiful games. Most AAA are poor 720p ports not using half of what a PC can offer.

Now guys you have to admit. Bannerlord is far from ugly it's really beautiful.
You also have to keep in mind that if you want 600 AI fighting in a scene, you have to cut for performances somewhere, and graphical computation is currently the most expansive things because of shaders and post-process. You can't have star citizen graphics with 600 entities fighting and taking even semi-smart decisions in your surroundings, no PC can run that as of today.

I've been running AC: Origins at 30 FPS with my GTX970, i5 7600k, and it doesn't even look that much pretty. Same can be said for many more AAA's I've played recently, with the exception of Dark Souls 3 and BF1, but those aren't even new. 30 FPS plus constant ups and downs are not really my cup of tea.

Besides, as you said, Bannerlord does look pretty. There's some few areas we've yet to see properly, but it does look good.

 

[578]

something special for our OP.

 

[Efe Karacar]

Warband v2 = Mount&Blade II

 

[lab637]

The point of the blog was to demonstrate the engine's capacity to incorporate computationally expensive 3D graphics. Photorealistic Global Illumination has been added for the static elements of a scene by pre-computing them so these algorithms are not repeatedly re-calculated in game.

Images rendered using global illumination algorithms often appear more photorealistic than those using only direct illumination algorithms. However, such images are computationally more expensive and consequently much slower to generate. One common approach is to compute the global illumination of a scene and store that information with the geometry (e.g., radiosity). The stored data can then be used to generate images from different viewpoints for generating walkthroughs of a scene without having to go through expensive lighting calculations repeatedly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_illumination

Compute Shader Skinning stores skeletal mesh calculations once per frame for reuse in each render pass to free up GPU time for larger battles and better fps. Similarly, the Particle Shading Atlas is all about reducing the fill rate (GPU cost) costs of particles.

The object of these engine enhancements is to free up CPU/GPU capacity, which can then be reinvested in either better graphics or better gameplay or a combination of these. In the main, I am happy with the graphics TW have showcased and hope they continue to invest any free CPU/GPU time into better game play - bigger battles, improved fps etc.

Gawd I love how informative all your posts are...