There is no alternative, to achieve sense-making without the scripting that you’re suggesting. For whatever reason, you’re not coming at this problem as an artist. It’s like you’re trying to use Unity as if it was some kind of nerd-centric engine like the alternatives are. That kind of thinking is very backwards and un-Unitylike to me.
(To clarify, by nerd-centric, I mean something that is geared to people who like computers, instead of people who like making things for which one needs to use computers as a tool. Some people really love working for the computer. I don’t understand this. The computer is there to help me make stuff, not vice versa.)
I just woke up. Frequently, when I do so, I have some kind of epiphany. Yesterday, when I woke up, I thought about how in that movie Primer, you could use the time machine as an aging device, so that if you were a little kid, and wanted to be the boyfriend/girlfriend of an adult, you could jump into the box for several years, and come out at the point in time you went in, only you’d be older.
Anyway, as I woke up today, I had the thought, “the overbrightness slider isn’t going to clamp brightness, unless you’re only using ambient or emissive light.” So you know what? I go back on that and don’t think it’s such a useful idea anymore. My new idea is that it should just be explicitly stated in the shader name how overbright the lighting calculation is. No performance hit for that, and the results are clear.
Now, Ambient light is still wrong, and doesn’t match Emission, in particular, so I still vote that they undo the decision to drop it down to half.
