new HL2 screenshots from valve's siggraph2004 presentation

[Ninjaman09]

Originally Posted by majortom

OMG. that's real, right? that CANT be from a game (oh god, i'd freakin lose it if it was). OH GOD, PLEASE PLEASE DONT SUCK HL2!!!!!!!!!

Uh, Nv40 said in his original post that it was a raytraced shot created with professional raytracing software. The entire point of his post was to say that it WASN'T in-game and that Valve frequently releases raytraced shots instead of in-game shots, which can confuse people. Read the whole post so you can take it in context.

Originally Posted by Chippy

They need to raise the camera up by a couple of feet and decrease the field of view. That would be more life-like.

The angle and wide viewing area of the shots is what causes the distortion. Consider that a human being's focused field of vision is much more narrow than the screen shots you're referring to. This removes any basis of comparison to real life since you never have and never will see that wide of a view, unless you pulled your eyeballs out and turned them sideways (and they still worked). However, if you COULD see at that wide of an angle, that's what it would look like. Moving the camera around wouldn't change anything.

[OldOfEvil]

It looks good, but its not impressing me the way the Doom3 has, or the way Far Cry did - Far Cry sort of stole some thunder from D3, as I imgine Far Cry + D3 will do to HL2..

[killahsin]

No thats a photograph thats not polys whatsoever

[Vash]

Originally Posted by Ninjaman09

Uh, Nv40 said in his original post that it was a raytraced shot created with professional raytracing software. The entire point of his post was to say that it WASN'T in-game and that Valve frequently releases raytraced shots instead of in-game shots, which can confuse people. Read the whole post so you can take it in context.

Just ventured over to the PHL page that's got the screenies from the siggraph presentation... if you read the little tidbit concerning the images, it says that these are photos and screenshots, mixed. The photos are from on-site research that the art team did to get the right feel for a European city, and the screenshots are the finished product.

Not, repeat, not raytraced concept art. Not attackin' no one, just sayin'.

Looking back and forth from the photos to the screenies, I'd say that the HL2 team did a great job.

[Chippy]

Originally Posted by Ninjaman09

The angle and wide viewing area of the shots is what causes the distortion. Consider that a human being's focused field of vision is much more narrow than the screen shots you're referring to.

Er, yes I know that. That's what I said isn't it?

Personally, I think the camera is a bit low too. But that only emphasises the effect. Its like the actual player is 3ft tall looking up at everything all the time. Admittedly this is not always the case, but often it is.

Anyway, my point is, why do they insist on using a wider angle of view than normal human vision? Isn't that a bit stupid? Isn't the whole idea to make the experience as life-like as possible. All that effort recreating the smallest detail, the most exquisit lighting effect, the most accurate textures.... and then they screw it up by getting something as basic as the field of view wrong.

It beggars belief.

The thing is, ALL first person shooters do it. Its like the accepted norm. But I say the accepted norm is wrong. HL2 would look a whole lot better with a tighter field of view and less distortion.

Chip.

[gmontem]

Originally Posted by Ninjaman09

The angle and wide viewing area of the shots is what causes the distortion. Consider that a human being's focused field of vision is much more narrow than the screen shots you're referring to. This removes any basis of comparison to real life since you never have and never will see that wide of a view, unless you pulled your eyeballs out and turned them sideways (and they still worked). However, if you COULD see at that wide of an angle, that's what it would look like. Moving the camera around wouldn't change anything.

Well tilt-shift lenses and view cameras are around to correct for these distortions.

Hey Chippy, none of those screens are through Gordon's FOV, which in the end is all that matters when you play the game, so don't worry about it.

[Edge]

Originally Posted by Intel17

Thats a photograph. Notice how everything casts a correct shadow...which Source engine cant do.

Umm, since when? The Source engine can cast perfect environment shadows and even takes into account light bounce within the environment, hell the Half-life 1 engine did that. The Source engine does not, however, cast correct shadows when overlapping objects and multiple lightsources are involved. But most of the character shadows in the outdoor environments are quite realistic, probably even more realistic than Doom 3's since the edges look soft. They just aren't very adaptable to other situations.

[killahsin]

Originally Posted by Chippy

Er, yes I know that. That's what I said isn't it?

Personally, I think the camera is a bit low too. But that only emphasises the effect. Its like the actual player is 3ft tall looking up at everything all the time. Admittedly this is not always the case, but often it is.

Anyway, my point is, why do they insist on using a wider angle of view than normal human vision? Isn't that a bit stupid? Isn't the whole idea to make the experience as life-like as possible. All that effort recreating the smallest detail, the most exquisit lighting effect, the most accurate textures.... and then they screw it up by getting something as basic as the field of view wrong.

It beggars belief.

The thing is, ALL first person shooters do it. Its like the accepted norm. But I say the accepted norm is wrong. HL2 would look a whole lot better with a tighter field of view and less distortion.

Chip.

Thats because those screenshots are meant for widescreen monitors =)

It's the widescreen setting. hehe