Turok Level Editor

[djdduty]

...

I couldn't help it, I wanted to see what the ambient occlusion and fxaa contributed to this scene... I got a little carried away but it works surprisingly well other than some exagerated halos (I turned the contribution and radius WAY up), I think we were stressing in our test cases too much.






It takes away most of the flatness that turok feels like it has, this scene doesn't even have lighting and it looks good. I like it. If you guys would like Ambient occlusion available as a post process let me / us know, it isn't the most optimized at the moment so we need to spend time optimizing it in order to make it more practical, and we can have some sort of interface for enabling them later on?

[djdduty]

So do to some *cough* unfortunate circumstances *cough* the culling and speed improvement that we mentioned was accidentally not working in the build at the moment, but this gives me a chance to show you guys what we mean by speed improvements through some screenshots!

Below is a side by side comparison of the render data before and after the culling takes affect, hz is just a fancy way for programmers to try and sound smart when they really mean fps. The millisecond calculation doesn't line up because that's going by the current frame, whereas the frame rate is the average frames per second over time.



Also, UI! (Coming soon)

[Jay Doomed]

I like the effects added to it, just looks better I think you should do both versions if possible. But either way the frame rates are much better with the effects. So overall I think that should be the deciding factor. But you know maybe some people want it how it was, me personally I would prefer it to be with the post processing, effects, and fast frame rates. This just made my day

[djdduty]

I like the effects added to it, just looks better I think you should do both versions if possible. But either way the frame rates are much better with the effects. So overall I think that should be the deciding factor. But you know maybe some people want it how it was, me personally I would prefer it to be with the post processing, effects, and fast frame rates. This just made my day

The added post processing effects actually slow the program down considerably, or we would have them enabled by default. The frame rate increase is due to the fact that before we were rendering every object in the scene all the time, and now we only render what's on screen. This feature will be enabled all the time no matter what as it doesn't change anything visually and it provides large performance gains. The post processes aren't optimized, so they bring the frame rate down all the way to 40 frames a second or so on my computer(down from 400fps), but if there is interest we can work on optimizing them.

[Adon]

The added post processing effects actually slow the program down considerably, or we would have them enabled by default. The frame rate increase is due to the fact that before we were rendering every object in the scene all the time, and now we only render what's on screen. This feature will be enabled all the time no matter what as it doesn't change anything visually and it provides large performance gains. The post processes are really optimized, so they bring the frame rate down all the way to 40 frames a second or so on my computer(down from 400fps), but if there is interest we can work on optimizing them.

That sounds like a good idea to make it only render whats on screen rather then the entire environment you are in. If it doesn't change the visuals and speeds up the games quality then that's surely the way to go with this. I personally like the idea of keeping it original because I think we would rather have this sooner then later plus it makes less work load on you guys. If anything work on that post processing stuff after all is well and in place for what you have planned. But it doesn't hurt to add that especially if optimized, either way I am sure people will be happy. This is very exciting to watch grow, love the work guys keep it up please!

[djdduty]

... I personally like the idea of keeping it original because ...

That's the idea, we are really just playing around with some modern rendering techniques to see what it looks like and add the features to our renderer, but the plan is to keep the original look. Currently Stinkee is investigating their lighting model to accurately re-produce their lighting and all the original shaders so that it looks more accurate. I am continuing to investigate performance of everything to see if I can make it even faster for everyone, but don't worry the basis for saving more advanced changes and the user interface is also in the works.

[Jay Doomed]

Sounds good man! I wish I could program and be apart of this in helping But programming is very hard to learn without years of focus for it. Either way it is really up to you guys we will be pretty much happy either way. At least I know I will be This rocks honestly, just think about it there has never been a way to create anything for Turok ever. We are talking about since 1997 this is far to long. So really I look forward to this kind of thing.

[Dinomite]

Sounds good man! I wish I could program and be apart of this in helping But programming is very hard to learn without years of focus for it. Either way it is really up to you guys we will be pretty much happy either way. At least I know I will be This rocks honestly, just think about it there has never been a way to create anything for Turok ever. We are talking about since 1997 this is far to long. So really I look forward to this kind of thing.

You just have to believe in yourself. I know you can do it

[operative lm]

Speaking of the lighting, I have a question for either or both of you: how broken is the PC version's lighting? It's something that's always bugged me. All of the foliage looks like it's fullbright, the muzzle flashes don't reflect onto the environment, and some textures, like the temples in Chapter 6, are glowing pretty obnoxiously. The console versions don't have these problems. So I'm wondering, since you guys are poking around in the game's files anyway, what's different with the PC version? Was it that there was some code that never made it during the porting process, or is something just not checked to "yes"?

EDIT: Also, I think maybe Revision A was re-uploaded in place of Revision B. Unless I'm just missing something, which is entirely possible. :V

[Froglegs]

Speaking of the lighting, I have a question for either or both of you: how broken is the PC version's lighting? It's something that's always bugged me. All of the foliage looks like it's fullbright, the muzzle flashes don't reflect onto the environment, and some textures, like the temples in Chapter 6, are glowing pretty obnoxiously. The console versions don't have these problems. So I'm wondering, since you guys are poking around in the game's files anyway, what's different with the PC version? Was it that there was some code that never made it during the porting process, or is something just not checked to "yes"?

The temples in Chapter 6 are like that for me as well and I thought it was some sort of texture error. I have also noticed some environment lighting doesn't match up in most of the levels either. It could be that the port to the PC was rushed and not thoroughly tested before release. Hopefully the community might be able to come up with some sort of fix for some of these bugs!