Enable Parallax Quality for improved texture rendering

[CHANCEPHOENIX]

For more fun and power demanding stuff you can change the render type:
GBufferType="0"
to
GBufferType="1"

Should make shadows follow according to the offset in texture.

It was a while since I tested it, but it should work.

I just tried , but i cant see any improvements .....well at least not as evident as the pom effect.
maybe i should take a closer look at the shadows on other levels.
If anyone notice a difference please give a link to a before and after pic.

[Godamit]

Does anybody have any solutions for me? I've double-checked my 2 files, and the lines are as they should be (from this topic), yet when I start playing, my performance is in fact slightly decreased and I get those odd graphical glitches...

[Al3xand3r]

More graphical effects = performance decrease, who said this increases it? It's disabled by default for a reason...

[mansarde]

More graphical effects do not necessarily have to cause a performance decrease.
And if they do, then the performance decreade does not necessarily have to be significant.
Then the reason for having it disabled by default does not necessarily mean they did that because of performance reasons. Another possibility is that they just included it for fun but didn't focus on its proper implementation (since it was just added for fun and nothing "mission critical").

[sgi]

For more fun and power demanding stuff you can change the render type:
GBufferType="0"
to
GBufferType="1"

Should make shadows follow according to the offset in texture.

It was a while since I tested it, but it should work.

You forgot that you've got this line commented
//gl_FragData[2].xyz += vScreenNormal * fHeight * $VirtualPositionAddScale;

[Al3xand3r]

More graphical effects do not necessarily have to cause a performance decrease.
And if they do, then the performance decreade does not necessarily have to be significant.
Then the reason for having it disabled by default does not necessarily mean they did that because of performance reasons. Another possibility is that they just included it for fun but didn't focus on its proper implementation (since it was just added for fun and nothing "mission critical").

Oh look, people trying to look smart by being anal on the internet! I was talking in general, the more you ask a system to do the worse it will perform, whether it's noticable depending on the game, the engine and the system it's run on, or not. And yes, I was obviously talking about this particular effect in this particular game when I said they have it disabled for a reason, and that reason is it doesn't perform well, and causes said glitches for many. Why it does that is obviously up to the imeplementation Frictional have done, not magic fairies. If they thought it worked good enough then they likely would have enabled it, whether they did it just for fun or not. Clearly they didn't think it's up to the standard of the rest aspects if they disabled it, at least not yet. But I responded in the first place because he seemed to expect better performance than before when doing this, which he had no reason to.

[mansarde]

Why do you assume I want to look smart? I'm sorry if you took my post as an insult, that was not my intention.
I was just trying to say that to draw simple conclusions is not always the truth.
Thinking I misunderstood you, or at least not having the same opinion is really no reason to start insulting people.

[Zanderat]

For more fun and power demanding stuff you can change the render type:
GBufferType="0"
to
GBufferType="1"

Should make shadows follow according to the offset in texture.

It was a while since I tested it, but it should work.

You forgot that you've got this line commented
//gl_FragData[2].xyz += vScreenNormal * fHeight * $VirtualPositionAddScale;

Should it be uncommented?

[Thomas]

You forgot that you've got this line commented
//gl_FragData[2].xyz += vScreenNormal * fHeight * $VirtualPositionAddScale;

Oh, yeah, need to uncomment that one! As I said, long time since I tested (2 years or so ago at least I think)

[sgi]

I've tried, but results aren't convincing. I think this calculations just don't worth it. Shadow is distorted, but not quite right. But for all who want to see it for himself here are the steps:
1. Change GBufferType="0" to GBufferType="1" in main_settings.cfg
2. Change line in deferred_gbuffer_solid_frag.glsl
//gl_FragData[2].xyz += vScreenNormal * fHeight * $VirtualPositionAddScale;
to
gl_FragData[2].xyz += vScreenNormal * fHeight * 0.2f;
($VirtualPositionAddScale seems to be too small to notice the effect)
3. Add line
float fHeight = texture2D(aHeightMap, vTexCoord).w;
just after line "vec2 vTexCoord = vHeightMapPos.xy;" (152 line in deferred_gbuffer_solid_frag.glsl)
This variable is undefined by default when relief parallax shader branch is used.