First I apologize to the readers of this mailinglist for the unnecesary polution and exchange of words my initial post generated. I am in a way shocked that many ppl seems to take it very personally when I doubted the existence of real time radiosity in Source engine. This is my last post on the subject, and please all forgive me for the lack of technical data, HL coding related data, from this e-mail. I do agree that it should not belong on this list, which during last years provided me some cool reading. I am sorry that you all had to read this futile mail exchange.
As for you Bob, @@ Repeat after me, generalizations are bad! "generalizations are bad", "generalizations are bad", "generalizations are bad" I hope this meake you a bit more relaxed. Bob, when you will have accurate knowledge about what radiosity means, talk. Bob, when you will make an effort to carefully read what other ppl did post, talk. Bob , when you will understand radiosity, and Mr. Hobson was nice enough to explain a bit about radiosity in his post and why is impractical to say you have real-time, talk. Bob, after you will read Taggart's paper on HL2 shading model, and understand it, talk. Untill then , dont. Read it and maybe, just maybe, you will understand what place has radiosity in Source engine. It's in english , so you should understand it even better than me, which I cant even get english grammar and spelling. Bob, if you have any technical argument in the favor of the real time radiosity, or you can show me a single implementation of it which dont use 20 PIV CPUs or equivalent power to achieve a interactive frame rate, or at least any decent technical or matemathical argument, in the favor of real time radiosity, I will listen to you. Math does not lie, Bob. The fact that you choose to beleive that Santa Klaus exists because you was told so, by a game company or close relatives, do not make it more real. Why you was told so, I cannot tell. But I promise , Santa Klaus does not exist. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Aman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 7:13 PM Subject: Re: [hlcoders] re: false claim of real-time radiosity support in Source Engine > > gee, Bob, wasn't one of the first replys to my post made by some guy with 2 > > post later admited > > something like " I had no ideea that radisoity is such a complex problem? " > > Others where no > > more inteligent, im sorry to say this. Why even post a reply when you do not > > understand the very basic > > probelm in discuttion ? > > Just because he admitted ignorance of this particular domain of > knowledge doesn't make his point invalid. His point was "Who's to say > HL2 exposed 100% of the functionality of the Source Engine." Which is > undeniably true. > > And just because one person admitted some ignorance doesn't mean that > everyone else on the list is ignorant or that, even if they are, that > they shouldn't participate in discussion. Some of the most important > discoveries and inventions of our time were done by people who knew > only enough about the subject to be dangerous. > > Repeat after me, generalizations are bad! > > > Why are you annoyed ? Dont be , please, is harmfull to your health. > > Spelling and grammar for starters. > > -- > 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 > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
