The envisionment of SIN is to bring you what was promised by GSC for STALKER: Shadow of Chernobyl, instead of the gutted retail release we were left with. SIN aims to cover every aspect imaginable from gameplay intended to genuinely scare the player, to graphics for the absolute best visual experience, cut mutants, absolute realism, optimisations, stability, and a complete game mechanics overhaul, all without breaking the story. The idea is to present the player with a complete retail experience for the purist that liked SoC but wished it was far more fleshed out. In no way what so ever does SIN try to be like old beta or alpha builds of SoC, SIN aims to enhance everything SoC already has and give it continuity with CS and CoP - nothing more, nothing less.
Nothing but the best.
Sorry to say ket, but that description is obviously very biased and opinionated. I don't think this looks good at all, because of the following reasons:
-There's no fog for the lightbeams to go through;
-The 'rays' shouldn't adapt to the color of the background, rather create an overlay (Path to the zone does this right)
-The lighting in the scene is way too bright. For some reason the truck also looks odd because of the rust while the surrounding doesn't really fit.
-The rays also seem to blur the background. I don't know wether this is due to it moving or just the effect itself.
-Black glow, is always a no-go
1. Godrays do not require the presence of fog. In REAL LIFE (seriously, peole rarely ever think about this) Godrays can and are created simply by the height of the sun and something to obscure it, in this case the tree on the right.
2. Nope, just wrong.
3. Its a bright sunny period, when was the last time (again, in real life) you stepped outside on a sunny almost cloudless day and it wasn't bright outside?
4. The "blur" is atmospheric haze. As light passes through the earths atmosphere light gets scattered and blurred. Ask any astronomer.
5. "black glow"? No idea what you are looking at but I don't see anything to resemble that.
Well seeing as you don't accept critique or feedback, I'll just leave this here:
I673.photobucket.com
Ultra realism you say? Look at these photo's. Clear day, no fog, sun high.
Miriadna.com
Skana.com
Upload.wikimedia.org
Direct photo's of the sun. No rays. Sorry to bust your nut here, but you first have to know how real life works before you get the right to throw the word 'realism' around. Also, realism isn't that ALL of your textures are noisy and there's literally no indication of difference between materials because everything is cluttered in noise. Ultra HD textures for everything eventually tear the overall quality of the image down.
After a lot of studies you'll learn how to equalise and find a balance, even when it's at the cost of 'HD' in whatever you create.
Unfollowed the mod. I don't like your attitude anymore. You've always got an answer ready so why even bother.
To add onto my previous comment; I'll address your points here
1, like Loner85 said, air humidity is vital for light-rays to be present. Without moisture or dust in the air, you won't see them. Sure, in dusty polluted city like environments you can see them cast of the side of a building, but here in this picture it's clear day. So, no real argument given there other than false information you've learned.
2. Look at the real light-rays created by the sun. They should actually adapt just the colour of the source (sun in this particular case) and not cast the colours of the background through them. Sure, it might be a shader limitation, fair. But saying "nope, just wrong" is very weak for someone of your caliber.
3. In comparison to the sky (which lacks contrast because the blue is darkened while the white is as well, making for this un-contrasty shot) the ground is too light.
4. This is wrong. I've seen rays myself, why should I believe faulty shader code and big-talk of someone who doesn't know how sunlight works, to say it rather bold :V
5. Clearly recognisable as "motion blur" behind the objects, leaving a 'dark glow' also known as black glow around or behind them.
Loner, I've PMed you on that subject because I don't want to start any arguments here.
But guys, your opinions on fog might be valid but you're forgetting about something: What is required IN REALITY is not fog in particular but SOME sort of (large enough) particle interfering with the incoming light. This might be humidity such as in fog, mist or moisture, but it can also be dust, smoke or whatever dirt particles in the air, even if they come just from pollution in a big city. So, presuming that The Zone is a poisoned, dirty and polluted place, visible sun shafts might be likely in any location, even without having any fog.
Explain that to me again, since when are poison and dirt making large enough particles? This would only happen with some wind!
It's really hard to say...but LoNer1 is right. You probably should go out more often, ket, I have never seen these god rays in real life forests. God rays can only exist if there are big moving particles in the air, during rain or fog, in dry and old buildings with dust particles for example. But not in clear, normal fresh air.
The first example given by LoNer1, the Crysis 1 picture, shows 'rays'. And do you know why? Because the rain forest is water-saturated, 95-99 % humidity, many light-absorbing particles moving around. But you just won't find this in the area of Chernobyl, only after rain maybe.
But I agree with ket, the brightness and blur is okay, you just have to remove these rays. They aren't beautiful any more.
yum.
I'm REALLY going to hate myself for entering this discussion but after carefully weighing the numerous viewpoints in this thread I've come to a conclusion of sorts regarding the rays or "rayleigh scattering"
We are dealing with a work of fiction created by GSC. "Realism" in an environment filled with artifacts and blowouts (not to mention telepathic mutants) is what GSC defines it to be as it relates to the STALKER universe. Technically speaking, given the climate and atmosphere of the Ukraine, those rays would not be visible in the middle of the day without sufficient and specific particle density.
That said, GSC never explicitly stated (to my knowledge) the atmospheric conditions present in and around the Chernobyl area. Or rather the toxins, pollutants, natural weather phenomena, humidity and other particles that might produce the sun shaft effect. Given the fictitious environment, absolute certainty seems impossible.
I think it comes down to personal preference, if I had to choose between the images Ket posted or no rays, I might actually choose the absence of rays since the effect seems to overpowering and needs refinement in terms of blending, intensity and parameters. However, once again, the images posted are proof of concept and are not representative of a final product. I'm certain a solution regarding balance and blending will make it's way into the RC. Until then let's keep feedback BOTH welcome and constructive so we don't get sidetracked.
Let there be mod !
I am pretty sure this argument left people on defcon 4.
My opinion, they look kind of nice, but need to be toned down if you intend to claim 'realism'. I have never seen a godray like that in 'Real' life. But that doesn't stop in from looking cool.