CS2's Responsive Smoke with Godot 4 In 5 Minutes 

Yeah that sounds like a great idea!

I think when people say revolutionary, it's not really about the tech, but about the design of the mechanics. I personally never seen such an interesting implementation of smoke grenades in a game before, and we've had smoke grenades in games for over 20 years. Closest thing I've seen was Redeye's smoke grenade on Dirty Bomb, you could counter him by using explosives to disperse his smoke grenade, but the smoke would just disappear permanently after the explosion.

@@ThiagoJaqueta yea, but a lot of people including me thought they had to simulate the smoke to get this effect and were amazed it was performing well. Its pretty awesome that Godot allows this kind of flexibility with volumetric fogs. Also, correct me if i'm wrong, i dont think unity has such volumetric fog, even in hdrp.

For me in 2008 "god rays" effect in Crysis was "revolutionary DX10 feature" because I knew nothing about computer graphic. Knowledge of "computer graphic" is not something important, and people who overreact about it - they need touch grass.

@@ThiagoJaqueta a fellow db player? Nice to meet one in the wild

@@Morimea Boooo! This is fun hobby and career path, let people have their fun with it. Knowledge is always valuable.

I cover that quickly at the end of the video. The way Godot implements the volumes there isn't much performance impact for using volumes as voxels.

Which make sense considering how picky CS players are with their frame rates. Anything that hogs your pc to 30 fps (even 60 fps) is a big no no.

@@Pandaxtor only 60?

@@Thirty-Two CS players want thier game to run at +120 fps.

​@@Pandaxtor240+ is standard, a lot of CS players are moving to 240Hz monitors

oh its the linux music dude, hello

@@bosnianlain Hi :)

tbf, i think the way volumes were handled in source were limiting, so they had to upgrade the engine to fix it

@@inedholp1565 yes. godot had the volumetric fog available for crigz to use, whereas valve had to implement everything from the ground up

@@envisionformula4007 isnt valves csgo team still way bigger than godot's team

CS2 smokes look much better than shown here. I'd guess the performance was much better as well, Valve has a history of doing their best to make their games run on a potato. Not necessarily a fair comparison. As the first reply in this thread mentioned, Source 1 at this point is so old, trying to implement volumetric smokes would've been a mess. The smokes have not been what's taken them so long though, no one is "impressed with the tech" - we're surprised at the gameplay it offers. Valve basically built Source 2 from the ground up. They were trying to remove all legacy code to build a much better engine from the start. Godot has been around much longer than the first version of Source 2, it should be more feature rich. They've built engine features when they've needed them. CS2 had tons of basic game engine features missing that had to first be developed. Even with a good engine, building a game takes time. I believe over the years, they've only had a handful of developers working on the game. If you research how Valve operates, the employees are given more freedom is taking on tasks they want to. Valve has about 1.1k employees for ALL their games, web development, marketing, app development, Linux compatibility development, hardware engineering/design, engine development, customer support, etc.. But all that aside, Valve has only recently expressed interest in CS2. They've dabbled in it over the years, but with CS:GO only growing, the last thing they want to do is make changes that players don't like. The only reason they believe they can release CS2 is because it's almost identical to CS:GO in most ways. The major changes are expected to happen slowly after the game's release - rather change small things and see how the community reacts. Valorant certainly would've given them a wake-up call. It has more accessibility features and runs like a modern game in comparison. This has driven some of the more casual players to switch. Developing further in Source 1 would just take excessive amounts of development time for small features and bring bugs along with it. The original CS:GO codebase was developed by an 3rd-party as a port of CS:S to consoles. It is an absolute mess to work with. Most of the bugs and long-standing issues are due to the messy codebase or limitations of Source 1.

Guys stop taking this literally

Godot 4 was the MVP here, the FogVolume node does all the work!

Awesome to see you here :)

Great idea!

Brilliant idea. I tried to do something similar in Unity when I was working on a university project, but it was incredibly hard to do with how Unity handles submeshes that I gave up.

maybe what you want is fresnel shader: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-gruiNVU7x7Q.html its not hard to achieve an similiar effect in godot.

@@igorgiuseppe1862 It's cool effect for highlighting object but it does outline-like thing only on simple shapes like sphere. Testing it on more complex mesh and it looks just like shader for something like unit selection highlight for strategy games. What I am talking about could be achieved with secondary viewport that could render unshaded copy of mesh and then canvas shader could use SubViewport Image as texture and do some outline drawing on it to then render above user's screen. I have that idea in mind but it so messy, I'll have to make subviewport, special camera for it that just copies everything player sees but with another Cull Mask, I'll have to resize that viewport with window in separate script, and apart from that somehow create image editing shader which I have no idea about. It will be fun If Valve just used Inverse Hull Method and somehow made it visible through walls

@@majohime i dont know how games do it nowadays, but in the begining they indeed duplicate the geometry/render. it was an waste of resourcesm but got the effect done

That's not how the smokes work in CS2, you can shoot holes in them anywhere but it's most effective along the edges

@@eldafint yeah i think he means that

I do not think it would be so hard to implement. I think the easiest way is surely to scan the adjacent smoke cubes density and normalise the value (0-1) by interpolation. You can then multiply your normalised value to the effect size and duration. Could take some ressources scaning for the adjacent cube when their is a lot of bullets in the same frame. To mitigate that, you could store a matrix of values that got updated each time a smoke cube is spawned/removed, calculate everything in the matrix, and only apply the effect every now and then.

I'll take a look!

@@crigz thanks a lot 😁👌

Now this is getting interesting!

Depends on if you can give it an emissive property

I think you could use it for visualization, but for simulation you'd probably need to make a Compute Shader.

@GameDevJourney is a legend

It's no harder to sync over a network than any other game object.

​@@crigz unless u use dedicated server model and have to broadcast it to all players in real time

minus the lighting, multiplayer stability, more "wispy" smoke effect, smoke following players running through it, etc

Softbody, yes. Deflated tires, yes. Realistic muscles... Define realistic ? Of course UE5 is way more advanced that Godot in a lot of things (light, physics, reflections,...). You can do anything but it is hard to install/use/learn. It's very heavy (ressources/size) and hard to optimize. Godot is very light (ressources and size), easy to install/use/learn, and allows you to do very advanced things (like that smoke) very quickly. Everything work with node which allow a very fluid work flow. Those two engines are not even concurrent, they are too different. It's like saying that a forge is better that a barbecue because you cannot melt iron ingots in a BBQ. It may be true, but trying to cook a steak inside a forge is as stupid as forging in a BBQ.

@@pierrotA big words indeed - I understand your point but softbodies are not really that good in Godot. Try working with a softbody as a cloth, there is clipping through everywhere no matter what you do. It is sad but in those cases UE5 is better. I hope in the future someone will improve those godot physics. I swear I'd do it myself if I knew

@@sanyi9667 IMO, cloths in softbody are always a mess to make, on all engines... But once again, UE5 is way more advanced that Godot. I never saw anyone say otherwise. Once you master it, you can do amazing things. I was a VR dev, I know well that Godot is not as advanced. But Godot is very light and work instantly on all OS. It can be very good if you want to make a relatively small game without all the pain that UE5 will eventually cause you (oh you forget a coma and you save ? You have created an interface and you remove it without saving ? You sneeze a little too hard ? You fool... nothing will launch now. Good luck).

Until you see Unrecord.

@@SnakeEngine seen it, but that's the point, I get the audio visual experience from RU-vid, I don't even have to play the game. Therefore graphics don't matter.

graphics are still worth plenty

Hahaha damn sneaky Valve!

@Pogging Scout It's a joke...... I guess.

it must be a joke, but its not impossible to happen. godot is opensource so anyone can look at the source code, 4.0 was realased to close to CS:GO 2 so its unlikely that they had time to copy the code and implement in their own engine, but godot 4.0 took 3 years to be relased so its not like this feature was implemented in just a few days, anyone had access to the code in its beta phase and could fork it in their own direction before godot 4 relased. And finally even if valve did it, it wouldnt be anything ilegal or unethical, godot is MIT , anyone is allowed to fork its code and relase it under a different licence unlike licences like GPL.

wasnt possible in source 1 and they only started porting csgo to source 2 like 3 years ago

5 minutes ?? its minutes for you cause the godot team did all the work.

I don't think it's supposed to be realistic it is for gameplay

I noticed that my godot preview physics only works when I alt tab the window, so the code is correct but i dont know how to fix this problem with physics