debate about Halo 2 and rendering and other stuff

Optimus Prime · 17-05-2011 9:22am

You should see the ammount of clowns we get in work after doing 4 years of college thinking they know everything about computers. You can see them melt when they are asked to make a change to AD or send something out to pcs that might affect 7000 users. The fact is experience is worth a lot more than a piece of paper.

Steve X2 · 17-05-2011 10:22am

keithgeo wrote: »

You should see the ammount of clowns we get in work after doing 4 years of college thinking they know everything about computers. You can see them melt when they are asked to make a change to AD or send something out to pcs that might affect 7000 users. The fact is experience is worth a lot more than a piece of paper.

I feel your pain man. I'm in the same situation here.
We have guys starting here out of college who expect to come in and start as senior system admins or infrastructure architects. They get brought down to earth very quickly when they end of installing PC's or doing basic stuff.
Qualifications get you in the door, then you have to prove yourself.
To be honest these guys are lucky to get any job without any real world experience.

In the area that I work it's very important to have those bits of paper, but that's just to get a job in this current climate. Nothing can replace experience or just common sense when it comes to actually doing the work.

I'd rather have someone with a bit of common sense working with me than someone who thinks they know it all because they sat some exams.

4162010103910AM_common_sense_-_so_rare_its_a_god_damn_super_power.jpg

4162010103910AM_common_sense_-_so_rare_its_a_god_damn_super_power.jpg

.

Jack burton · 17-05-2011 10:32am

Lots of people are like that when they have a degree in something though. They think they are the masters at it. Fella I was in college with went into a QS offices and within the first 2 days he was preaching some **** about centre line measurement to one of the senior QSs there, Who would have had about 20 years more experience than him. Needless to say he didnt last a week there.

I'd say its a lot worse with computers, **** anyone who reads custom pc thinks they are a computer wizard afterwards. And they think just because they bought a lot of standardised parts and put them into a case they are the man.

hooradiation · 17-05-2011 1:23pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

But isn't this the point I'm making, that they've gone too far applying shaders, increasing reading and writing to the ram and draining resources?

Not really. While everything a game does "drain" resources they're obviously not all equal and while applying a shader uses more resources than not applying one it's not a guarantee that this is the problem

For example, the generally accepted strategy for improving graphical performance is to batch primitives together to draw them all at once - that is to say that polygons that would have the same transformations, lighting, render state and textures would all be lumped together and drawn in one call. This gives far better performance over just drawing the individually.
However, this requires the use of a system for sorting and if this is either poorly optimised or prone to odd behavior in edge cases then you'll suffer from bouts of poor framerate.

Now, I'm not saying that this is what happened in Halo 2, but I'm using it to illustrate that framerate issues can and often do have their cause in places you might not expect, which is why blaming it all on shaders is a bit pointless. In the case I described they certainly wouldn't help matters but laying the blame on their use (or "overuse") would be attacking the symptom not the cause.

But, as I've said this is all just idle speculation, for all i know the shaders were written by the work experience boy and went out of their way to fuck with everything.

NeoKubrick · 17-05-2011 2:25pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

My opinion and I'm sure a lot of other people that read it will agree.

Correct, it is your opinion and if you took the time to construct an argument to support it, it would be rubbished. You keep resorting to bland and obscure "load of balls" comments to preclude creating a reasoned argument because there isn't one. You even have to qualify your "opinion" with the baseless prediction that other people would agree with your opinion, which is indicative of zilch. And you can keep a straight face while postulating about "intelligent conversation", eh?

Retr0gamer wrote: »

You're putting too much weight on a piece of paper here.

Yes, it is easier to debate with someone when you're fabricating text and falsely attributing it to them, Retr0. Could you quote where I claimed such? I scarcely understand your teaching an academic lesson when I had to point out to you that 'peer-review' isn't a silver bullet standard, which all, but the most indoctrinated of intellectuals, know.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

And no I don't need to know how to code to know what a resource intensive process is. What's coding got to do with this? It's efficient use of assets that's got very little to do with code optimisation.

Sums up this discussion.

EnterNow wrote: »

At the risk of getting myself into trouble here, that is utter rubbish. In the real world, a piece of paper with a qualification on it does not indicate knowledge about a subject. It indicates you've passed exams, not that you truly understand the subject.

Given that I've no training or qualifications in electronics, would you go so far as to say I've no idea what I'm doing modifying conosles & am only baselessly applying other peoples knowledge? If so, how would you explain me changing certain mods to fit my needs etc?

Here, read:

A graphics programmer is someone who is employed in the industry to practice graphics programming and coding. If he or she is not qualified to practice graphics programming, he or she won't be employed by the industry. So, a graphics programmer, by definition of practicing what he or she is preaching, is qualified to discuss graphical performance: whether he or she is discussing it intelligibly is separate as too is academic qualifications (which is pointing out the redundant obvious).

If there are no sources and you're not a graphics programmer with any experience of coding graphical solutions, then it is pointless participating in a technical discussion of graphical performance issues isn't it?

Retr0 brought up academic qualifications randomly and pointed out the redundant obvious to which no one argued with. Hence, the strawman argument reference to your previous post and now to his. To put it in a context that you may understand more, could anyone with absolutely zero experience with electronics talk in detail and intelligently about modding electronics and speculate about it? You're implying 'yes' by disagreeing with my previous post.

Retr0gamer · 17-05-2011 3:04pm

Doesn't change the fact that I'd still beat you at street fighter 2.

CiDeRmAn · 17-05-2011 3:34pm

Here's the various posts about this topic, lifted straight out of the "Post here when you have something new" thread.
Enjoy!

CiDeRmAn · 17-05-2011 3:47pm

Did I mention I like Firewarrior?
I wonder how many shady things they used there.

I prefer it to Gunstar Heroes as well, that game is pants, not nice girl pants either, big middle aged, grey pants, with a slight staining in the gusset... (actually, that could be a shader too!, yeahh, I get to join in!)

Retr0gamer · 17-05-2011 3:53pm

Craptastic :P

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQVRKh0yMTY

AI looks... eventful

CiDeRmAn · 17-05-2011 4:13pm

I know!
It's great isn't it!
I don't care if it's crap, I love it anyway!

I wonder though, why there weren't more Warhammer FPS games.

Also Retr0, you are making me feel all oppressed, please stop, with your contrary opinions to mine, how could you????

o1s1n · 17-05-2011 4:20pm

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

I wonder though, why there weren't more Warhammer FPS games.

Space Hulk on the ps1 was another one wasn't it?

Warhammer FPS seems like a really odd design move to me. It's a turn based table top/art and craft war game. It would be like making a chess FPS.

Retr0gamer · 17-05-2011 4:24pm

Space Hulk on the PC was fantastic, absolutely loved that game. I don't think the Warhammer franchise is that big in america, I could be wrong. Might not be that bigan audience for it.

The Warhammer RTS games though have been mostly great. Theones by Relic are all really good... well in multiplayer. They're pretty mediocre in single player. One game nobosy really remembers but was excellent was Warhammer: Dark Omen on the PC. Great little RTS with a decent story, amazing graphics for it's time, had a fire emblem thing going on with units left alive being carried over to the next level and also staying true to the tabletop game with stuff like enemies breaking formation and retreating.

o1s1n · 17-05-2011 4:27pm

Either myself or my cousin had Warhammer: Dark Omen for the ps1 years and years ago. It was enjoyable, to my shame I was more focused on the table top game in those days.

Had to stop when I realized the figures pretty much cost their weight in gold.

Steve X2 · 17-05-2011 4:44pm

I had/have Space Hulk on the 3DO and really enjoyed it.
When I load it up now though the frame rate is a bit shocking.
The atmosphere of the game was great for the time and those aliens used to freak me out, especially with the low frame rate, one second they're at the end of the hall and the next they're sucking the face off you.

.

Retr0gamer · 17-05-2011 4:49pm

Steve SI wrote: »

one second they're at the end of the hall and the next they're sucking the face off you.

Sounds like Coppers on a Monday night.

Steve X2 · 17-05-2011 4:53pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Sounds like Coppers on a Monday night.

Sounds like Coppers on any night you mean

.

johnny_ultimate · 17-05-2011 7:30pm

There haven't been enough anti-Halo jibes on this thread. For example:

"They should have transferred all the resources they wasted on pixel shading and made a ****ing ending instead, am I right?"

"Halo 2 - struggles to make 30 FPS, struggles to make more than 30 seconds of gameplay variety"

"Arbiter = Bollocks"

Retr0gamer · 17-05-2011 8:07pm

The Arbiter was a good idea wasted. Also a lot of the technical issues that europeans see in the game is due to having to play the game in either PAL 50Hz with the horrors that entails or an absolutely appalling PAL60 port. Halo 1 was pretty bad in this respect as well. Strange for a game to have a decent 50hz port and a crappy 60Hz one.

Even worse than the arbiter was the Gravemind. Just awful stuff altogether. Plenty of other deus ex machina. Something is happening at the other end of the galaxy and the master chief needs to be there? **** it just teleport him there!

I thought it would fix the big problem of Halo 1 of not enough big open levels and far too many levels constructed of the same corridors repeating but nope, Halo 2 is probably more lazily designed than Halo 1. And then they go and fill the levels with the Flood from an early stage so what little fun there could be is sucked out of them. Instead of half a great game like Haloyou get a game filled with mediocrity with intermittently decent levels of which there are too few. And then they decided to but in a sequel to the Library as if that was a good idea. A shame as well because up until you took control of the arbiter it was fantastic!

Multiplayer was alright I suppose even if it felt like playing Quake 3 in levels filled with treacle. By that time as a PC gamer FPS games had moved on so much then and for the last 2 years it was all about the infinitely better Battlefield and the first Call of Duty. It also bothered me that the far better Rainbow Six 3 was ignored on xbox live.

Hope that's enough to satisfy you?

o1s1n · 17-05-2011 8:18pm

Lets play Charades. Can anyone guess the Halo game? Retro should know this one :pac:

johnny_ultimate · 17-05-2011 8:25pm

Halo Reacharound: Make Love, not War?

Retr0gamer · 17-05-2011 8:25pm

Gaylo Reachar... no it's ODST!

johnny_ultimate · 17-05-2011 8:27pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

no it's ODST!

Was it not OSTD?

Retr0gamer · 17-05-2011 8:28pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Was it not OSTD?

unky chop chop · 17-05-2011 9:26pm

Vote for best thread ever:pac:

K.O.Kiki · 17-05-2011 10:51pm

unky chop chop wrote: »

Vote for best thread ever:pac:

No.

Those were the worst 2 pages I've read on boards, ever.

Retr0, for shame.
For shame.

CiDeRmAn · 17-05-2011 11:22pm

Some of us still have some love for Halo 2, feckin philistines, with their japanese dating sim/survival horror game fetish...
Anything Bungie make is great, just like Treasure really (pulled the pin on that grenade, now lets see it go bang!)

Retr0gamer · 17-05-2011 11:28pm

Don't even compare the two, it's an insult to Treasure.

Treasure make some of the most innovative and interesting action games ever. They aren't always successful but their portfolio contains some of the best games ever made.

Bungie made one innovative FPS game (Marathon not Halo) a great RTS game in Myth and then followed it up with a mediocre FPS series that's only claim to fame was that it was the first on consoles compareable to PC games. OK a bit OTT Bungie do have a more consistent record than Treasure since they haven't made any absolute stinkers like Treasure have. I'd call the Halo games decent them decent but the way some people jump up to defend them while ignoring any criticism is a bit much. Calling Halo 2 decent however is giving it too much credit for its single player campaign.

johnny_ultimate · 18-05-2011 1:57am

I actually don't mind Halo all that much. I think it gets seriously overhyped, but I enjoyed playing through part 3 and Reach. And the multiplayer component is always enjoyable - it's a relatively unique play style online.

Halo 2, though, was a disaster outside multiplayer. The ending still pisses me off: "Sorry we made you sit through a load of crap, something awesome is about to happen though! *end credits roll*

o1s1n · 18-05-2011 8:28am

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I actually don't mind Halo all that much. I think it gets seriously overhyped, but I enjoyed playing through part 3 and Reach. And the multiplayer component is always enjoyable - it's a relatively unique play style online.

Halo 2, though, was a disaster outside multiplayer. The ending still pisses me off: "Sorry we made you sit through a load of crap, something awesome is about to happen though! *end credits roll*

I guess it's the same as anything mediocre that gets pushed by advertising and overhyped.

When you see people frothing over it, your indifference turns to annoyance.

Why does absolutely EVERYONE seem to be wasting their time with this mundane rubbish when they could be playing so many other good games instead? Games which may not get the attention they deserve. Sheep! Sheep so they are! etc.

Just count yourself lucky that you don't have to walk by loads of cardboard cut outs of Master Chief on a daily basis...!

hooradiation · 18-05-2011 11:19am

o1s1n wrote: »

I guess it's the same as anything mediocre that gets pushed by advertising and overhyped.

When you see people frothing over it, your indifference turns to annoyance.

Why does absolutely EVERYONE seem to be wasting their time with this mundane rubbish when they could be playing so many other good games instead? Games which may not get the attention they deserve. Sheep! Sheep so they are! etc.

If your argument boils down to "guys! stop having fun!" you might need to step back and have a good hard look at what terrible choices you have made that have led your life to this point.

debate about Halo 2 and rendering and other stuff

Comments