Over halfway into the semester we've starting touching on subjects that I can't really wrap my head around, so this week I did some extra research on ray tracing and radiosity, and I'm going to compare the two. After I might look for some games with each style of lighting and see how they compare.
http://www.ultrashock.com/forum/viewthread/54289/
This forum thread helped distinguish the differences between the two and summarize how each method works.
The main difference is that ray tracing is dependant on the camera position, while radiosity works fine with any arbitrary camera in the scene. This means that any significant change in the camera's position will result in all the rays needing to be re-calculated again which is a relatively costly operation. Ray tracing sends the rays out of the camera and they bounce around a certain number of times before they are gone.
Radiosity can be considered an extension of ray tracing, in that they can both be used to make a scene look very good. It is calculated from the actual light sources, and the diffuse reflections of the light in the geometry of the scene. Calculating radiosity is very processor intensive but can produce more realistic results, and can be pre-calculated if the scene's light sources do not move.
An additional advantage of radiosity is that it can simulate colour bleeding from one surface to another. Since the calculations for radiosity only need to be done once, static scenes can take a lot less processing overall because you can freely move a camera around the scene after the calculations are performed. To get the best result, a combination of both methods will work but the best, but be the most taxing to compute.
http://www.gametrailers.com/user-movie/raytracing-vs-radiosity-tech/182176
This video demonstrates the major differences the two methods can produce.
Tuesday, March 6
Monday, March 5
Examining Linearity
As with most weeks I like to brainstorm a topic in digital games and then delve into it, comparing its various aspects. During this process I saw my Skyrim map poster hanging up to my left and it got me thinking about a topic I don't fully understand: the difference between linear and open-ended games.
Well obviously I know the difference between them, but I'm trying to figure out the reasons that both of them are appealing to players despite being at opposite ends of the spectrum. Furthermore I want to examine the MDA's behind these reasons to really get an idea of why these two different styles both captivate their audience.
Most RPG's and nearly all MMO's fall into the category of being open-ended games, featuring a large game world to explore. Going to the core of the avocado, in an open game your character may navigate the world at your discretion and go where you want, went you want. You can run, jump, swing your sword/use magic, harvest raw materials, and interact with the world's inhabitants. This means that every action is your choice, from fighting a bear to climbing a mountain to simply wandering aimlessly.
These mechanics develop the major dynamics such as exploring the wonders of the world and fighting creatures along the way. For example the player could run into a gigantic elite monster or find a creepy cave system to traverse. In MMO's a bold player can travel to areas with higher level enemies to test his combat abilities, or group up to tackle even greater foes. The idea is that each player may play at their own pace and with their own methods and preferences.
The aesthetics that come out of it are visually stimulating game worlds with awe-inspiring locales and a strong feeling of being immersed within a living, fluctuating environment. The player makes a journey out of the game instead of going on the game's journey. Expansive worlds like this take a lot of detail and effort to create but done well they can give a player many hours of enjoyment. Tons of unique quests, environments, enemies, and items can give these worlds a lot of depth and replay value.
Players enjoy this sense of freedom and exploration because we are naturally curious. Secrets and unanswered questions push the player to continue searching and discovering new things. Many of the choices in open games are big and lead down very different paths based on where the player chooses to go. This can be said for choosing your character's class and skills as well, as there are usually many to pick from and will make a big impact on the player's experience in the game.
The true downside to a huge game world is that sometimes it feels like nothing is extra-special in it. A lot of time is needed to create that much content, so the highlights are few and far between. Comparing this to a game like Uncharted, and its on a whole different level.
Linear games usually involve moving to the next area, shooting everything/navigating through the level, and repeat. The mechanics are actually very similar to an open game in terms of player navigation and possible actions they can perform. The difference comes from how the player is able to interact with their world, and the pacing of the action.
A linear game does not wait around for players to discover things or find secrets; there is almost always something going on. The dynamics in a linear game are how players must fight against increased numbers of enemies in more enclosed environments, kind of like a funnel. An analogy is being on a water-slide compared to a wave pool at an amusement park. In both settings there is moving water (conflict), but it presented to you at a different pace and you may choose to leave the wave pool.
Because the player in a linear game cannot pick and choose what experiences they have in the game, they often contain more dynamic engagements and unique elements. The Uncharted series is based off very intense 'set pieces' which are basically scripted events on a large scale. Each set-piece will happen once throughout the game's story line and is a memorable experience for players.
This set piece piece occurs in a sinking cruise ship, and the goal is simply to escape with your life. The player only has one path to follow through the level, but the dynamic and frantic nature of the level makes for a very memorable experience. It is moments like these that linear games focus on to make up for not having sprawling environments for the player to explore.
The aesthetics of these levels are often designed with great attention to detail to really keep the player in the moment. Because the designers don't need to create as many elements, they can focus on certain parts of the game in order to perfect them. Players thrive on these moments as the adrenaline gets pumping and they must keep focused in order to beat the level. It is a very different experience from an open game, but it is equally as enjoyable.
Many players like a continuous stream of action and linear shooters/adventure games deliver this with abundance. From taking on scary bosses to fighting off waves of enemies, linear games are meant to take a player through the whole experience without ever slowing down. From personal experience I've played both types of games, and what makes each type special is mutually exclusive from the other. I enjoy both types of games equally despite the very different sides they take on pacing and level design.
 |
| The expansive province of Skyrim; fully explorable from top to bottom. |
Most RPG's and nearly all MMO's fall into the category of being open-ended games, featuring a large game world to explore. Going to the core of the avocado, in an open game your character may navigate the world at your discretion and go where you want, went you want. You can run, jump, swing your sword/use magic, harvest raw materials, and interact with the world's inhabitants. This means that every action is your choice, from fighting a bear to climbing a mountain to simply wandering aimlessly.
 |
| If you can see it, you can go there. |
 |
| Ragnaros, a final boss in WoW. |
Players enjoy this sense of freedom and exploration because we are naturally curious. Secrets and unanswered questions push the player to continue searching and discovering new things. Many of the choices in open games are big and lead down very different paths based on where the player chooses to go. This can be said for choosing your character's class and skills as well, as there are usually many to pick from and will make a big impact on the player's experience in the game.
 |
| A few of the 15+ skills you can train in Skyrim. |
For
example in Skyrim there are various different questlines in different
guilds, and the player is free to do them (or not) in any order they
choose. I personally know that lots of players like to experience all
the other content before completing the main questline because it
usually contains the most intense set pieces and makes for a good
climax.
The true downside to a huge game world is that sometimes it feels like nothing is extra-special in it. A lot of time is needed to create that much content, so the highlights are few and far between. Comparing this to a game like Uncharted, and its on a whole different level.
 |
| Hellfire Peninsula is a big area...and it can get a little bland. |
Linear games usually involve moving to the next area, shooting everything/navigating through the level, and repeat. The mechanics are actually very similar to an open game in terms of player navigation and possible actions they can perform. The difference comes from how the player is able to interact with their world, and the pacing of the action.
A linear game does not wait around for players to discover things or find secrets; there is almost always something going on. The dynamics in a linear game are how players must fight against increased numbers of enemies in more enclosed environments, kind of like a funnel. An analogy is being on a water-slide compared to a wave pool at an amusement park. In both settings there is moving water (conflict), but it presented to you at a different pace and you may choose to leave the wave pool.
Because the player in a linear game cannot pick and choose what experiences they have in the game, they often contain more dynamic engagements and unique elements. The Uncharted series is based off very intense 'set pieces' which are basically scripted events on a large scale. Each set-piece will happen once throughout the game's story line and is a memorable experience for players.
This set piece piece occurs in a sinking cruise ship, and the goal is simply to escape with your life. The player only has one path to follow through the level, but the dynamic and frantic nature of the level makes for a very memorable experience. It is moments like these that linear games focus on to make up for not having sprawling environments for the player to explore.
 |
| The stakes don't get any higher than this! |
Many players like a continuous stream of action and linear shooters/adventure games deliver this with abundance. From taking on scary bosses to fighting off waves of enemies, linear games are meant to take a player through the whole experience without ever slowing down. From personal experience I've played both types of games, and what makes each type special is mutually exclusive from the other. I enjoy both types of games equally despite the very different sides they take on pacing and level design.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)