/vr/ - Retro Games

>>7775568
>Bonus points for not being faked with dirty tricks that don't hold under scrutiny.
What does this even mean lmao

>>7775568
>Bonus points for not being faked with dirty tricks that don't hold under scrutiny
It doesn't get much simpler than gouraud shading, anon. It's computationally inexpensive.

>>7775568
Darklight Conflict, in combination with light sourcing and a more realistic flight model. It's a late release on the list(1997) but only because its history was troubled. Conceived in 1994, slated for 1995 release, shelved and released two years later into a time when DOS was on its way out and engines with 3D accelerated features took over.

>>7775568
Shrek on the original Xbox

>>7775572
GTA 3.

>>7775594
>Dot products and normalizations are inexpensive
lol

>>7775623
Yes.

t. plugin developer

>>7775568
>faked with dirty tricks that don't hold under scrutiny
You just descibed shading in general

>>7775638
>the usual Alias & Softimage stuff from that era
already Phong shading

>>7775635
>Multiple times
>Per vertex
>On machines that are already struggling with showing more than a few thousand polygons on screen

>>7775649
Yes. Entirely possible.
carefully manage your triangle budget
use lower precision if necessary
implement all low level functionality in ASM

>>7775656
Even if you are being clever like using Q_rsqrt, that's still a ton of work on top of something that grows proportionally with geometric complexity.
And you need a decent density of geometry to get anything that resembles a specular highlight.

>Yes. Entirely possible.
Anything is possible if you are extremely conservative with your budget, but that doesn't make it inexpensive.

>>7775687
I can still easily pull that one off... and so have countless other devs in the past.

>>7775726
>I can still easily pull that one off
On what?

>>7775638
>You just descibed shading in general
Shading still involves math that is loosely based on real physics.

I mean, you wouldn't call that gif background real since it's clearly just a flat image. Had it been done with geometry, it wouldn't be considered faked, just rough to look at.

It all depends on what you mean by fake and real.

>>7775932
You will never be a real girl

>>7775568
>Bonus points for not being faked with dirty tricks that don't hold under scrutiny.
Not retro

doom 3?
>>7777580
faggot

>>7775568
Sonic 3 uses lighting that predates everything in this thread and looks 1000% better.

Specular is literally always faked, 100% of the time, even in modern games. It's vastly more efficient to fake it and since it looks real when faked, only a retard wouldn't.

I think Brave Firefighters was the first game to do "true" phong shading.

>>7777639
Ah yes, it's faked as long as you aren't simulating every single photon quantum event. Pseudo RNG is not sufficient either, you need true cosmic noise with zero bias.

why did op derail his own thread with that stupid fucking qualifier

>>7777682
"don't hold up under scrutiny" is a stock shitposting phrase. My guess is that OP is testing the waters for a new daily dose, like the Sega System threads.

>>7775568
SGI flight simulator.