Specularity maps, Motion blur and Physics

[Mistahtokyo]

Agree with Rhys about out the customizable shader chain MGE-style. After all, this is about being moddable, right?

Not to mention it'd be highly familiar for many of the users coming from MGE/MGE-XE.

[Tarius]

Specular maps are already implemented.

No, you have to store the specular information in the alpha channel of the colour texture, which is a pain for every modder because it just takes too much time. It would be way easier if one could simply apply a greyscale-texture with an ending like "_spec.dds" to the nif-object. Further, objects that use the alpha-channel for transparency could have both, transparency and specular maps this way.

This here. The ability to simply add in a texture with an ending like that is what should be done. However, It should be decoupled from the model file(and if you simply have to have it as part of the model file, have the option of allowing either the model file or the stand alone texture to take precedent)
Needing to include the paths in the model file itself in order for maps to work is a pain in the ass. Needing to include mapping info in some sort of texture file is also a pain.
Stand alone with something like _spec.dds is the way to go or we are looking at quite another few years before before MW benefits at all from this because everyone would need to go in and edit model or texture files directly. This says nothing of all the mods for modeling and textures that exist.
I am not against the ability to add specific info to model or texture files, just against it being the only way.

[SGMonkey]

Can't agree more myself. Although. It would be nice to have both methods implemented. The modding community would show you what is more popular.

[endorph]

I have a question in that context too.
How complicated can be an implementation of realistic physics for all non-statical objects in OpenMW? (For example, i want to throw a plate and it should properly collide with environment).
Does it require a huge refactoring, changing current physics engine, etc.?

[Tarius]

I have a question in that context too.
How complicated can be an implementation of realistic physics for all non-statical objects in OpenMW? (For example, i want to throw a plate and it should properly collide with environment).
Does it require a huge refactoring, changing current physics engine, etc.?

It would require specifying what the objects count as. A big enough job.

[SquireNed]

That also means that it's likely going to be done either through a mod or by modifying them all at runtime, which is either outside the scope of OpenMW or something for post-1.0

[BlueFootedBooby]

...

Peronally I quite like motion blur if it's subtle, these kind of effects help to remove the hard edges and sterility of decade old graphics, models and textures.
DOF I can't take but many like it, it's also good for those who make movies from games. However I quite like a slight distant blur which blends distant features into the sky somewhat, softening them by about 2 px.

ps, GODRAYS!!2!11!!!! my favourite in games like this.

The way I see it, new graphical features always go through a period where they're a new whiz-bang technology used as a marketing bulletpoint and made super obvious and over the top to that end. It takes time before they're just another tool in developers' toolbox.

When colored lighting was first introduced every freaking game had a red area or a kaleidoscopic disco level. It got to the point where lots of folks just wanted it to go away. Nowadays though every game with any kind of lighting supports colored lighting. It's used to subtly distinguish time of day, natural lighting vs artificial, and so on.

The same thing happened with HDR. Tons of games, including Oblivion, had bloom turned up so high it was like having cataracts. Lots also had the eye adaptation so slow and obvious that it was distracting. It was so obnoxious that I've talked to people who genuinely think that games have stopped using HDR. They don't understand that every AAA game--from Last of Us to Halo 4--still has it, it's just adjusted to make things actually look good.

My point is that I don't think it makes a lot of sense to say "motion blur and depth of field are awful." Both are the sort of effect where you don't consciously notice them when they're done right*. Blur can make animation look subtly smoother, and DOF can help direct your attention, eg during cinematics, or when there's a particular thing you need to be looking at.

That said, there should pretty much always be options to disable them.