Additive blend with lightsabres

[ChangKhan]

Originally posted by Flirbnic

The additive blend on the glow does not add to the light passing through it. The glow is not a physical part of the sabre. Only the white core is. Whether the white core is opaque or not is the debate. If the sabre casts a shadow, then you would see a shadow of only the core, NOT the glow.

 

Additive *means* additive. It means you add to the light behind it, you can't have it both ways. That's why the glow washes out in front of a bright light source.

 

I would doubt there is any "physical" part of a saber, it's a laser. Debating whether the core is solid and the glow isn't seems a bit dubious to say for certain. Obviously there's not such thing as a lightsaber, and light doesn't just *end* like it does in a saber, but you can suppose that perhaps the light is bent back on itself or bottled with some form of electromagnetic shell...

 

In any case, I guarantee you the only reason sabers cast shadows in the movies is because they needed something physical for the actors to fight with and that cast shadows and it would have been impossible in the 70's/80's to remove it and prohibitively expensive now to do so.

 

In our game, however, we do not need a physical model for the saber's blade, just the effect itself and, hence, no shadow. To try to create one artificially would be silly as it would require extra work and add useless polys to the scene - for no benefit whatsoever.

 

Rest assured, our sabers will look as good as any seen in the movies and they will not have shadows cast on them as in those erroneous screenshots.

[Darth Lunatic]

I read or heard somewhere that some scientists actually figured out how to stop light, or slow it down to a miniscule velocity using some gas.....could be wrong.

 

I personally am not worried that sabers won't cast shadows in the game. I think we're fortunate to have the saber looking the way they do. Just think if obi-wan had been released on PC...........

 

Shudder..i think the developers at Lucasarts were smoking anything and everything that could be smoked when they thought up that idea for the saber blur.

[Guest Obi]

<font color=cbcbff> Yes, to ChangKhan you listen. I agree that the only reason they try to justify lightsabers as having shadows is because it would be too costly in time and money to pointlessly remove them. Imagine being the poor ILM guy who gets to sit and airbrush them out of every frame. For such a small detail, even ILM would not go through the trouble.

[Guest Sifl]

I suppose that, if the sabers were to be just like th emovies, they should also not light up anything around them... no glow on the walls or floor, because they didn't have that (too expensive, I suppose)... but it would look better, I'd think. Just like (in my opinion) sabers look better when they don't get washed out when I'm outside and look better when they don't cast a shadow... but that's me.

 

I think the sabers in the game look great!

[Guest Obi]

<font color=cbcbff> Actually, Chang, I have a question for you, if you are still listening. I know you can't reveal much about the game itself, but I'm just curious. Obviously you are a gamer yourself and as lead gameplay programmer on the project you've interacted with us and are definitely listening to what goes on here at the forum, but my question is: Have you actually gone back and added or changed anything in Jedi Knight II because of ideas or scrutinizations that go on here in this forum? Or do you pretty much stick to your original guns?

[Guest Sifl]

Okay, having just watched the jabba's barge fight scene in RotJ, I noticed something odd. When the saber is moving quickly, it does get washed out by the sky and desert behind it in the shot. But when the saber is not moving, the glow sometimes clearly darkens the desert and sky behind it... I suppose this was done because you want to be able to see the color of the saber when it's still... it's like a close-up, you want to see the detail. I guess they figured when it's moving it doesn't need to have as much color. I guess they probably also made sure they never framed the saber completely against a bright background for any noticable amount of time. Which I guess is kinda what Rancor(?) was saying before- that one solution wouldn't always work in all cases because they don't have the benefit of post-production... interesting, anyway

[ChangKhan]

Originally posted by Obi

<font color=cbcbff> Actually, Chang, I have a question for you, if you are still listening. I know you can't reveal much about the game itself, but I'm just curious. Obviously you are a gamer yourself and as lead gameplay programmer on the project you've interacted with us and are definitely listening to what goes on here at the forum, but my question is: Have you actually gone back and added or changed anything in Jedi Knight II because of ideas or scrutinizations that go on here in this forum? Or do you pretty much stick to your original guns?

 

Often, any concerns brought up here have been thought of already by people here or at Activision or LucasArts, we are all definitely on the same wavelength as you all. So it's rare that something totally new on a messageboard is taken (though it has happened once or twice). Especially later in a project when the design is set in stone, for practical reasons (such as actually finishing the game and gettig it out when we said we would). What is more common is that a group of people on the messageboards will voice an opinion that someone here feels and we'll use that expression of popular sentiment to support an idea or proposal we'd like to see make it in the game... so keep up with your comments, suggestions, corrections, ideas, etc!

[Wacky_Baccy]

@ ChangKhan -

 

What about the recent comments about 'floating' and spinning pickups?? Or have you thought of that, too?

 

Please reply if you can

[Darth Evad]

Any object that can impale someone is going to cast a shadow. No other way is possible. It might not have to be very strong (in the case of, say, a glass tbe), but solid objects ALWAYS cast shadows.

I've worked with lasers that'll go through you in a few seconds.

Lasers, like the fictitious light sabre, emit photons (that's all they are. nothing solid, just photons).

Photons have no mass.

No mass == no shadow.

 

Look at the sun and then shine a flahlight across your view of the sun.

You still see the sun. The sun's light going into your eyes is not affected by the flashlights light shining perpendicular across your field of view.

 

In the middle of a bright sunny day, drive down the street and notice how people who have thier headlights on are much more noticeable.

It's called 'just noticeable difference'. How bright does the object behind the sabre have to be to notice it?

[ChangKhan]

Originally posted by Wacky_Baccy

@ ChangKhan -

 

What about the recent comments about 'floating' and spinning pickups?? Or have you thought of that, too?

 

Please reply if you can

 

And then there are those cases where we didn't read the post... I'm not familiar with this thread... unfortunately, we cannot read every post. I will say that, in SP, none of the pickups spin or float.

[Wacky_Baccy]

Originally posted by ChangKhan[RAVEN]

 

And then there are those cases where we didn't read the post... I'm not familiar with this thread... unfortunately, we cannot read every post. I will say that, in SP, none of the pickups spin or float.

 

Hehe... I though that one might catch you out a bit

 

The thread is here if you want to have a look

 

Glad to hear that none of the pickups spin or float in SP

[Lord_FinnSon]

I will say that, in SP, none of the pickups spin or float.

Good to hear! I wouldn't mind, if those guns and items floated in MP though, because you can be a little bit unrealistic there(besides you will notice them much easily from far way, if they are floating in the air, spinning around invisible axle like waiting for their retrievers), but in SP campaign little realism tweaks like this only help you to immerse into that fictional world.

[rolsen]

It's really great to hear that the community carries with it some power, even if that power is miniscule at best.

[Guest Obi]

<font color=cbcbff> Thanks for answering my question, Chang Khan. With all the speculation and nit-picking that goes on here, the question was really burning me.

[Ushgarak]

Darth Evad, you may have worked with lasers but that means very little to my statement.

 

'Implaing' someone is NOT just burning a hole through them.

 

'Impaling' someone is when someone is actually STUCK on your weapon- as Qui-Gon clearly was. He was actually supported by Maul's sabre when stabbed.

 

I am sure, Evad, you will agree that a laser CANNOT support you! Only a solid object can!

 

If sabres were not solid, Qui-GOn would have fallen messily through it when stabbed.

 

So I repeat: ANYTHING that can impale someone will cast a shadow. Lasers CANNOT impale.

 

Sabres ARE solid, they continually act like solid objects. And- and I cannot repeat this enough- they DO cast shadows in the movies.

 

I am sure Raven's sabres will look lovely, but if they do not cast shadows that is a discrepancy with the films.

 

 

EDIT: Sorry, Chang, just spotted your earlier comment about it being theoretically possible for a solid object to not cast a shadow. It wouldn't actually be a solid object in the example you give, but it would still have the same effect.

 

So granted, it is TECHNICALLY possible for sabres to impale someone and not cast shadows... but it seems a bit weird to use such an extended justification when you could ust have them as solid. As plenty of other things in the films suggest they are. Not least because they DO have shadows...

[Skyrunner]

Originally posted by Ushgarak

Darth Evad, you may have worked with lasers but that means very little to my statement.

 

'Implaing' someone is NOT just burning a hole through them.

 

'Impaling' someone is when someone is actually STUCK on your weapon- as Qui-Gon clearly was. He was actually supported by Maul's sabre when stabbed.

 

I am sure, Evad, you will agree that a laser CANNOT support you! Only a solid object can!

 

If sabres were not solid, Qui-GOn would have fallen messily through it when stabbed.

 

So I repeat: ANYTHING that can impale someone will cast a shadow. Lasers CANNOT impale.

 

Sabres ARE solid, they continually act like solid objects. And- and I cannot repeat this enough- they DO cast shadows in the movies.

 

I am sure Raven's sabres will look lovely, but if they do not cast shadows that is a discrepancy with the films.

 

 

You're forgetting something very important here. If the saber is solid as you say, it shouldn't be able to cut through anything. A lightsaber cuts through everything except for another lighsaber. Then, how can Maul's saber stab Qui-Gon and then have him there, stuck. The saber couldn't possibly support Qui-Gon. He would just fall and and get sliced into two pieces (uuh, gross!). The saber cuts through anything! He was not supported by the saber. He was sitting on his knees.

[Sturmgewehr]

The Lightsaber could not have supported Qui Gon. If it could have supported him, then it would have knocked him backwards instead of going through him. Unless you are going to say that lightsabers now come to a sharp point?

 

If a lightsaber could supprot Qui Gon, and it were a solid object, it wouldn't go through people, it would be like a basball bat.

 

To Raven, you guys are doing an excellent job, I believe the way you guys have done the lightsabers is perfect.

[Flirbnic]

Originally posted by ChangKhan[RAVEN]

 

Additive *means* additive. It means you add to the light behind it, you can't have it both ways. That's why the glow washes out in front of a bright light source.

 

I would doubt there is any "physical" part of a saber, it's a laser. Debating whether the core is solid and the glow isn't seems a bit dubious to say for certain. Obviously there's not such thing as a lightsaber, and light doesn't just *end* like it does in a saber, but you can suppose that perhaps the light is bent back on itself or bottled with some form of electromagnetic shell...

Lightsabres aren't lasers... A laser is invisible unless it's passing through smoke/dust/steam/etc. There's no possible way that a lightsabre could just be a laser. A lightsabre's blade is made of "energy". Some kind of plasma, perhaps contained within an electromagnetic force field or something to make it 'solid'... so that it stops moving when it hits another lightsabre. A beam of light doesn't stop moving when it hits another beam of light.

 

 

 

In any case, I guarantee you the only reason sabers cast shadows in the movies is because they needed something physical for the actors to fight with and that cast shadows and it would have been impossible in the 70's/80's to remove it and prohibitively expensive now to do so.

 

In our game, however, we do not need a physical model for the saber's blade, just the effect itself and, hence, no shadow. To try to create one artificially would be silly as it would require extra work and add useless polys to the scene - for no benefit whatsoever.

That may be correct, but as far as I know, there hasn't been any official word on whether lightsabres have shadows or not. You might as well not have any shadows. I don't think it matters.

[Sturmgewehr]

You made my point before I could, Skyrunner

[Ushgarak]

You know, that guarantee that the only reason sabres have shadows is because of the props is nonsense, because the shadows were

 

a. Improved for the special editions

b. Deliberately kept for the new films.

 

On the mother hand, it if is too much extra work to have the shadows in, that's fair enough. It's not as if it is that important. It would just be nice if they WERE there, is all.

 

 

Meanwhile, you cannot argue with the fact that the sabre a. DID support Qui-Gon and b. DID go through him. You cannot argue with that at all, it DID happen in the film. So trying to make out that I have created a disrepancy is odd.

 

Lightsabres burn very quickly through their targets. I thought that was rather obvious. Of course they are not sharp! And of course they are not like a baseball bat!

 

Qui-Gon was NOT sitting on his knees! Please at least do me the courtesy of checking your facts. As can be clearly seen, Qui-Gon does NOT all to his knees until AFTER the sabre is removed.

 

Meanwhile I absolutely agree that lightsabres are not lasers.

[Dirth Vedar]

Originally posted by Ushgarak

So I repeat: ANYTHING that can impale someone will cast a shadow. Lasers CANNOT impale.

 

Sabres ARE solid, they continually act like solid objects. And- and I cannot repeat this enough- they DO cast shadows in the movies.

 

I am sure Raven's sabres will look lovely, but if they do not cast shadows that is a discrepancy with the films.

 

 

EDIT: Sorry, Chang, just spotted your earlier comment about it being theoretically possible for a solid object to not cast a shadow. It wouldn't actually be a solid object in the example you give, but it would still have the same effect.

 

So granted, it is TECHNICALLY possible for sabres to impale someone and not cast shadows... but it seems a bit weird to use such an extended justification when you could ust have them as solid. As plenty of other things in the films suggest they are. Not least because they DO have shadows...

 

Well, perhaps it's worth mentioning that light sabers are a light source themselves. So even if it is a solid object, it doesn't necessarily have a shadow. Does the sun have a shadow? To have a shadow, you'll have to have an overwhelmingly bright light source that is block by your less bright light source, and you'll have a relatively dark shadow compare to the otherwise bright area illuminated by our non-saber light source. And that just gets complicated. But because the light saber does glow, I don't think it's appropriate for it to cast a shadow, just as if you were holding a florencent light, it wouldn't cast a shadow of itself either.

[Ushgarak]

Well, I agree that the fact it is a light source would make the shadows curious, but I think you will find it would only eliminate the shadow on very close objects. Doubly so as a sabres lighting capacity seems to be very weak.

 

Though I also agree that you would need a good light source for the shadows to show. As it so happens, just about every time you see a sbre shadow in the films, they are near a strong light source... but that's probably just a coincidence, because you can barely see ANY shadows at all, at other points.

[Flirbnic]

I'm pretty sure a lightsabre's blade is not solid... it is either plasma or just some form of luminant 'energy'. The reason it sometimes behaves like a solid object might be because of a force field that contains the energy.

 

Fire leaves a shadow. I held a candle flame in some sunlight, and the flame did leave a faint orange shadow on the wall. My guess is that the small black carbon particles created the shadow, and the light from the flame made it appear orange. The heat from the flame also distorts the light. Perhaps the intense heat in the core of a lightsabre might distort the light a bit, creating a shadow. (Though some people say a lightsabre isn't hot)

[SaberPro]

Originally posted by Flirbnic

I'm pretty sure a lightsabre's blade is not solid... it is either plasma or just some form of luminant 'energy'. The reason it sometimes behaves like a solid object might be because of a force field that contains the energy.

 

Fire leaves a shadow. I held a candle flame in some sunlight, and the flame did leave a faint orange shadow on the wall. My guess is that the small black carbon particles created the shadow, and the light from the flame made it appear orange. The heat from the flame also distorts the light. Perhaps the intense heat in the core of a lightsabre might distort the light a bit, creating a shadow. (Though some people say a lightsabre isn't hot)

 

Bottomline: Lightsaber is fictional

 

Lightsaber is not solid, but why would it collide and stuck with another lightsaber? That's why lightsaber might be something of a combination of Laser and Plasma...or something futuristic...

 

Remember, lightsaber can cut through anything like cutting tofu...

 

In our time, this device does not exist

In about 100 years, this device may exist...so will : or

[Flirbnic]

Originally posted by SaberPro

 

Bottomline: Lightsaber is fictional

 

Lightsaber is not solid, but why would it collide and stuck with another lightsaber? That's why lightsaber might be something of a combination of Laser and Plasma...or something futuristic...

 

Remember, lightsaber can cut through anything like cutting tofu...

 

In our time, this device does not exist

In about 100 years, this device may exist...so will : or

 

 

"A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away..."

 

Qui-Gon had a hard time cutting through the door in the beginning of The Phantom Menace.