> It *should be* painfully obvious to any student of computer graphics > technology > that the claim is false. > > Why? > [snip]
Unfortunately, you make one big assumption that is flawed because you failed to take into account the possibility that Valve isn't worried about modelling radiosity completely accurately. You'd probably be 100% correct if Valve was claiming to have fully accurate realtime radiosity support. However, they do not make this claim, and it seems to me that given that there are articles out there on doing inaccurate realtime radiosity, you're probably overreacting. For instance: http://www.gamedev.net/reference/programming/features/rtradiosity/ Amusingly enough, I found an article on ACM about doing realtime radiosity as well, but it basically consisted of "throw lots of hardware at the problem". -- Bob Aman http://www.rapidcanvas.com _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
