How hard would it be to implement Nvidia volumetric lightning solution which is running in FO4 right now?
@The_Distiller I see it the same way… I’m tired of faking all kinds of effects… Even console games are using volumetric light/fog… The Division, Until Dawn and many more.
It would be really time to push the engine with this “next gen” features like volumetric lights, fog, clouds and also some kind dynamic GI.
We talked already many times about all this on the forum, the need of this features… The very clear roadmap request from users… I still don’t understand why all this is just ignored by epic.
It’s not ignored, ultimately there are just other priorities at the moment. As a reminder, the votes on the roadmap do not dictate priority of a feature’s development. While I agree this is an awesome feature it’s also not one that will prevent game’s from being released and the overall result can sufficiently be faked to your artistic delight.
This feature was put on hold to get the forward renderer implemented, which is still being worked on. Hopefully after that research and development will pick back up, but as with anything no promises.
You are speaking here about something very interesting… Epic is cleary invetsting a lot of time and resources in technologys/features like forward rendering, VR etc…
All this things are really nice, no qiestion about that but are they really more important than pushing the main aspect of the engine? More important than resquested comunity fetaures for a long long time ?
From my understanding the standard “Non VR” games are still the money makers in the industry, by far. Just out of curiosity… why is a niche market more important than the actual main market ?
Please dont undersatnd me wrong, no offense… Im just curious why clearly missing features like the volumetric effects or dynamic GI are not a priority at all.
Here is a nice article from Dean Hall about VR games and the issue with profit.
I can’t speak for the teams directly for all decisions that are made for priorities, but as far as the forward renderer goes it can be used for more than just VR and the improvements in performance can be seen for games that use it. The forward renderer has much more impact on the number of games developed that it will affect than volumetric lighting will. The reality is that there are not unlimited resources to work on every feature everyone wants right away, some may take some time and some may never be implemented. If there is a feature that you absolutely need for your game and it’s not available in the engine you do have full source availability to add these features yourself. If you do not have the skill set you can always commission a programmer to implement them for your games.
As I said, I’m with you can I can’t wait to see these types of features implemented, unfortunately it may just be a bit longer.
I think it’s important to keep up with competitors, even if I personally don’t get anything from VR(And I don’t ). If Epic won’t push for VR development then someone else will fill this niche in the future when VR will be a serious business. Basically it is an investment which can’t be avoided. Plus mobile development improvements!
Volumetric effects are cool, but let’s be honest - it’s just a minor visual feature with high cost which can be artistically faked in most cases.
Dynamic GI is a different beast though, it unlocks a lot of possibilities and I would love to see it eventually and rather sooner than later
Well for sure the Volumetric Effects aren’t something total needed and can be hacked at some point as the GI can be hacked, and as many other visual contents that can be hacked, but well this was since 2014 before the VR and the BSP system was requested too since 2014 and the GI and better physics, tbh the physics and BSP are way more main problems requested since years ago and no fixed than volumetric clouds and volumetric light.
IDK if content requested 3 years ago and not fixed or added can be tagged as ignored or not tbh.
You got a direct godrays effect, and the mountains clouds from the top image can be hacked with layers of transparent meshes etc.
[MENTION=4894]Tim Hobson[/MENTION] but what when i can’t code it myself and dont have the money to pay someone for this feature ? :(
You’re marketplace creator, create more… Epic get the 30%… probably they can invest in something like this. Well if they add that kinds of features even the marketplace can evolve more.
Already working on new assets
I’m okay with Epic working on VR first. But we’ve never had any update regarding these topics (GI and Volumetric FX) except for Roadmap Card being backlogged.
I’d like to have statement regarding these topics.
Epic team researched dynamic GI solutions and as a result we got Height Field GI for landscape and Distance Field GI for static meshes(It’s barely usable though). However after initial implementation and some basic optimization it was backloggedand and rendering team was reassigned with global rendering optimization for Paragon release. Then VR thingie happened. I can only speculate, but I guess we might get progress on this side of things only after VR/Forward pass will be done, but I won’t bet my money on that :c
Too bad this guy suddenly stopped working on his integration. Maybe Epic can use it as a start or ask Ninja Theory to adopt their solution and in return maintain and optimize it.
I’m also wondering why epic isn’t simply using nvidias solution for volumetric lighting. From what i saw a user called galaxyman was trying to intergrate the nvidia volumetric lighting branch into unreal…
I disagree - all such effects would be largely static and you lose a lot of the dynamicness that makes volumetric lighting effects work. I’d also like to add that this has been a strongly requested feature now for eight or nine years - I’ve seen this pushed back a lot.
Didn’t UDK have Volumetric Lights?
+1 . I don’t know anything about light mapping and I don’t want to learn about it. I also don’t want to increase size of my game/product greatly by lightmaps and most certainly I don’t want to wait for baking that stuff.
@Adik: Good call. Since the website only lists “DX11” as a dependency, it should be GPU vendor agnostic. NVIDIA Volumetric Lighting | NVIDIA Developer
@Raildex_: No, but UDK has the light shaft post effect for point lights too.
Correct +1 you can hack windows etc and static elements, but you can’t hack moving objects as trees or other kind of elements…
@Hevedy I see it absolutely the same way…
By the way… This thread has reached almost 1700 views, so once again… the interest in this features is soooooo obvious.