The new Shader release issues... 0.12 vs. 0.13 =(

[sayber1]

Hi, Interkarma. I'd like to provide these screenshots to more clearly indicate my point.
Those screenshot were taken in simillar conditions(and even if slightly different, I believe the difference is too drastic to ignore) so they would be good illustation.
I've also googled for other DOS screenshots to see it's not a mistake on my end, and they line up with what I see in DOS.
http://sakatacc.blog.fc2.com/blog-entry-40.html

EDIT: Added winter scene comparison.
Also while testing DOS version, I found there are some standing NPCs(Regular moving NPC, just not moving and standing) in city streets, don't remember seeing them in DFU

[King of Worms]

Its about getting used to it.. new light is better for vanila game. You just got used to old light, which is really not that good. Give it a time. Than switch back to 0.12 and u will see the truth.

For PBR materials, I liked the 0.12 better. Specifically the reflective surfaces get more reflective with distance and less reflective as u get closer to them in 0.13

Imagine a long narrow dungeon passage with a torch at the end. Imagine it being a sewer with wet walls. That torch will cast very strong reflections in the distace and as u get closer the reflections will almost vanish. The reflections at distance look really bad.

0.12 was the contrary and it was much better. Working around this is pain and removes the possible variations of shaders.. because to make this scenario look good at 0.13 requires basically removing the reflections, so the wet look is gone

I needed a break from it honestly....

Making Dream look as good as it was in 0.12 is kind of impossible in many cases. In some cases it looks good tho and better than in the past. Esp the sprites... Im split on this. But this game is about looking good in vanilla, so the look of PBR mats is secondary and I get it.

[Interkarma]

Hi Sayber1. Yes, there are some fundamental differences in how lighting works between the two engines. Classic uses palette/LUT changes and DFU has the luxury of using true-colour gradients. This has always been the case and isn't going to change. It's a necessary to use 32-bit wide RGBA to always support modded assets mixed with classic. There's no capacity to freely mix materials and techniques while being purely limited to VGA in the way classic is. This may frustrate purists, but it's a technology trade-off that provides mostly benefits.

But this isn't something new to 0.13 and is getting away from the topic here of 0.12 vs 0.13 shaders. For another comparison, here's the exact same location and camera angle in Wayrest at the same time of time of day in 0.12 vs 0.13 vs DOS. I'm using retro mode 640x400 with palettization in both DFU screenshots.

wayrest-comparison.jpg (895.28 KiB) Viewed 1041 times

You will notice that 0.12 improperly shifts lighter colours towards very bright. This is one of the specific problems solved by 0.13. In 0.13 image, textures are now displayed using the correct image data rendered almost perfectly compared with their raw source assets (as you would see exported from gamedata in Daggerfall Imaging, for example).

So why does the cobblestone and grass look darker in DOS then? What you're seeing in the DOS screenshot is not entirely the result of lighting. It's also an outcome of how DOS version needs to manipulate available palette data. You'll notice the grass texture is also collapsed into fewer colours and is missing lots of details in DOS. This isn't a lighting thing, this is a technical limit. This is the same reason skies will have strange colours when you look at your save games in DOS. It only has so much to work with and has to constantly shift palette data around to do the job.

The goal of DFU is not to perfectly emulate DOS. The goal of DFU is to be Classic+, an elevated version of the game as imagined if Daggerfall had a few more years to cook and was released around 1999 with early GPUs. The goal is to try and bring the best out of the available assets with practically none of the disadvantages of classic.

On the topic of 0.12 vs 0.13, I think 0.13 clearly has the best looks here. The source colours are nicely reproduced without being too dark or too light. The DOS version is not reproducing the textures as crisply as it could, and shouldn't get a pass here just because it's the original. It has problems all of its own and isn't some kind of holy grail. The 0.13 environment is clearly a huge improvement over 0.12, without being so obviously bright as 0.12 and so obviously murky as DOS.

Of course, taste is always subjective. I understand it's never possible to make everyone happy. But I hope the above helps expand on the different trade-offs and goals in a clear way and doesn't derail topic.

[Interkarma]

For PBR materials, I liked the 0.12 better. Specifically the reflective surfaces get more reflective with distance and less reflective as u get closer to them in 0.13

Yeah, 0.12 was PBR all the time - even when it shouldn't be. The new default materials aren't PBR and intended to best match classic textures, while still being able to mix with PBR in same scene. DREAM still uses the same Standard and Autodesk shaders it did before, the key difference in this case is the Gamma vs. Linear change. These calculate lighting differently and is a more difficult problem to unpack. Materials that look good under gamma won't look the same under linear.

I'm happy to kick around ideas with you if you're getting sick of it all. There's the possibility of custom PBR shaders to your spec where we might be able to find solutions not possible with the built-in shaders. Up to you if you want to explore this.

[sayber1]

Thanks for reply, Interkarma. I thought it may be a concious choice to keep the colors the way they are now, but as this discussion has started I did feel the need to point this out just in case.
Think I am going to edit some of the ground textures later, to provide people who would want it a more DOS looking colors, as I personally prefer the original darker look.

[Interkarma]

For sure. At least the mod system gives us some latitude to cater for different tastes. Please ping me when you do this, I'm interested to see it in action.

[King of Worms]

Thanks for offer of help with shaders Interkarma. Ive made most of it work, the problem is with reflective wet-like surfaces, which I used at sewers.

Unfortunatelly my eye does not support more material tweaking atm, I must get better.. I needed a break anyway

[Interkarma]

You're most welcome mate. Get better and rest as much as you need to. If you need help later, you know where to find me.

[haloterm]

I'm using retro mode 640x400 with palettization in both DFU screenshots.

Could you share a screenshot of how palettization looks for you during night time?

For me, it is like this:



and I wonder if it is supposed to be THAT dark and mono-colored.

Without palettization, retro mode looks good.

[Sniffles]

-
and I wonder if it is supposed to be THAT dark and mono-colored.

Without palettization, retro mode looks good.

I recently made a similar thread with screenshots about this here. The new linear lighting has caused retro render modes (640x400 & 320x200) unpleasant for my eyes in mostly darker scenes, even without posterization/palettization. Interkarma explains in the post that it’s not intentional and they are likely to work out a fix in the future, for now I won't use any retro mode features.