Jump to content

NaomiLocket

Resident
  • Content Count

    80
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

19 Good

About NaomiLocket

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

308 profile views
  1. one might wonder why so called garbage content is vehemently described that, when it isn't physically the problem it is made out to be in every place on the grid. It just isn't how it works. But seeing as "someone making money" keeps coming up, it is probably self evident the real reason why this keeps happening even though the grid hasn't fallen over from a booggyman.
  2. Already done. They even zero out entire objects at distance. ahem.
  3. I want to apply three different reactions but I'm going to have to settle for just the one. Not my fault I do like your tongue in cheek post, though. props.
  4. I am presuming you will next go: aha, gotcha, it was one of those fancy render a 3D object on a webpage natively. As if the web browser dictates a 3d model for other engine contexts.
  5. You mistake disrespect for programmers with understanding reality and the difference between good programmers and not so crash hot ones. There is a fun little programmer joke that says "You don't need artists, you only need programmer art." Artists don't cry over it. Boo hoo. It means there is a minimal need for execution ie: proxy art. Various levels of art happen after. If you have not reached the limit of your style guide you have not finished polishing your product up to the time limit for production. So the work does not stop until then. Good luck with that "disrespect" out there. Al
  6. Not quite. If it grinds their own system to a halt or doesn't fulfill a purpose most of them aren't going to kill their own brand with it. There are some use cases where small bevels can be found in big titles. Just not "everywhere". But they do, do it. But you're arguing extremes contextually that are lost in scaling. They are making a killing because they made something someone wanted. It worked out long term and someone was a repeat customer, or they were not. Actual artists do have peer review. Yes I get you can make x thing, throw it out there with a price, and someone gets said thin
  7. That is however a two way street. If your studio CEO tells you, you will let his artists do more, you will or find another studio. Subsequently ID's CEO was right to tell his team they have every reason to be proud of what they had accomplished. Even when speedrunners were exploiting both code execution and level design. Right 100% that they should proud of what they accomplished. It is not just the artists that have to work with the constraints. You can have situations where you have worked under the constraints. A bad shader will alone will still wreck the scene regardless of the rest of the
  8. Your first paragraph argued against itself, re: admitting that ID software were indeed correct, you can protect against it. I don't argue that much about bottlenecks, they are everywhere. A lot of them before your art asset is ever a consideration in fact. Agreed what you do with the graphics pipeline has a lot to do with it. Which is also the very point that you can take a small file and make it a larger one at runtime easily - which has nothing to do with an artist. A technical artist can explain that, they also write code. It is good that you took courses, I also did. That doesn't make
  9. I would agree with you on balance, but not on strict principle. You're trying to apply a standardisation to a dataset that is already in general already standardised - but there is no such standardisation to a programmer. Yes there is peer review, but there is also revision history for a reason. The industry giants with art directors get this, which is why Digital Extremes reworked Warframe and rebelled against Nvidia's particle direction writing their own, because they could do it better and were long due to give back to the community that gave to them. And they did. They did not make excuses
  10. To be very blunt, if you read a 2GB text file all at once, you are to blame, not the text file.
  11. That is, and it is true. If you explore sorting algorithms you will not argue about it or make a logical fallacy. You would also not try to miss-represent it if you understood a file on a disk or in memory.
  12. Actually you do, because regardless every year every studio will progress to higher detail to write home about in their favourite magazine as they have always done. I never said they don't rework art assets to meet the balance between technology and a given software engineers teams capability. That was never asserted, but it was a nice attempt to make something up. Be more professional next time and expand your horizons across more studios - they've even written books about how to publish once for every platform in the past. People just didn't like the outcome of that kind of performance.
  13. Again, if it wasn't for people with TPV's challenging the status quo, you wouldn't have advanced lighting and better materials in all 18 years. They did, and so you do.
  14. That is mostly untrue, but you are entitled to your opinion. Finding performance improvements in code, or changing how you approach an existing problem has literally nothing to do with sansar or abandoning SL, at all. As for "gently punishing people that don't do how they want to do it" they already do through counting UV splits as extra verticies. They don't need to go further, and it isn't even entirely correct as demonstrated externally to SL that you can in fact build entire sims on a fraction of the texture use by increasing splits. You're preaching to the choir and missing too many ma
  15. The problem is that code comes first. Everyone knows that. Performance is entirely at the mercy of code, it always has been. It dictates how data is handled. As a graphics professional you also know that. You also know that there is more to art and context than a blanket "this is bad and not optimised", because you know what a budget is and basic math. Hiding the problem with overly reduced content is not optimising or addressing any underlying problem. It's also not in line with necessity being the mother of all invention either, that happened and the lab found single points of failure or tha
×
×
  • Create New...