I know a lot of movie cgi is rendered at 60fps then cut down to 24fps.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Next-gen consoles have reached CGI rendering in real time ?
- Thread starter Toxa
- Start date
I know a lot of movie cgi is rendered at 60fps then cut down to 24fps.
eddfromtheriver
Banned
Well Ryse is incredible too and is out right now.
Some of those character models look straight out of the first Shrek movie.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
Movie theaters aren't setup for 60 fps playback.
In what sense? It looks fine for what it is, but I wouldn't mistake it for high end CG.
Davy Jones is almost 10 years ago at this point. Saying a single high end PC can come close to something like that in real time is ludicrious.
And the GPUs you're referring to? They're also used in renderfarms. In ILM's setup, they have several thousand CPUs and several hundred GPUs for jobs that can take advantage of it (usually simulations done in CUDA).
Here's a quick bit on Rango which was done just a few years ago:
Vital statistics
Total shots in film: 1,547
Total shots featuring Rango: 1,068
Total animation shots: 1,528
Animation man-hours: 79,724
Rate of animation: Two weeks for five seconds
Longest shot: 1,505 frames
Shots per night: 350 at peak
Render time: 120 million hours (13,670 years)
Render farm: Total processors 5,500, plus approx 3,000 high-end desktop systems used as needed (generally at night). Rango was one of up to eight large shows going through the facility over the course of its production.
Average time per shot: 12 hours to complete and render all the elements in one frame
Storage: 371TB during peak production, although the entire show was never online at one time
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqJdbgsVTdg
shinobi602
Member
By the end of this generation they'll be really damn close.
ethomaz
Banned
The U4 scene is realtime in 60fps.
CGIs in games are rendered in the fps of the game... 30fps most cases but there are cases with 24fps or 60fps.
So you think games have reached CGI levels.
I don't agree...but if you're that impressed.
AC Unity CG: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzCEdSKMkdU
That's part of my point. PS4 and Xbox One graphics are about approaching the point of Shrek 1, or Final Fantasy X's FMVs. That was 2001.
That's part of my point. PS4 and Xbox One graphics are about approaching the point of Shrek 1, or Final Fantasy X's FMVs. That was 2001.
NO.
I didn't see anywhere the word "in-game" attached to that teaser, all i hear is "in-engine" or "real time- in engine", never "in-game" or "real-time" WITHOUT the "in-engine" word attached to it, so it's obviously does not represents gameplay graphics.
dragonbane
Member
Some other guy supposedly working on CG over at Beyond3D couldn't believe it was real time, because it looked so clean to him (to a degree that normally requires supersampling). Just wondering how you felt about it.
LicenceToK1ll
Member
Some things look on par or better, other things are not even close (cloth, hair physics) compared to old CGi.
Edwards_Omatic
Member
The nostalgia from that Tekken Intro. Hit me like a tonne of bricks.
Anyway, the polygon count isn't as high as older CG, but lighting and texturing has gone above and beyond for sure.
Anyway, the polygon count isn't as high as older CG, but lighting and texturing has gone above and beyond for sure.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
Hard to top the real-time tests I was seeing at ILM before I left there. One of the models being shown fooled someone who was working there for over a decade into thinking it was actual footage.
Yes and they looked marvelous, especially U2 at the time, but they didn't look light years ahead of the competition like UC4's teaser, that's the main reason why i call bullshit on that one.
There is no way a game can trump all the best looking games like that and maintain 60 FPS, it's unreal and i wont believe it until we see gameplay or i hear ND promises this is in-game graphics and this is how gameplay will look 1 to 1, not all their "in-engine real time" bullshit.
Wishmaster92
Member
Sorry, i just find it amazing how Uncharted 4 looks considering it's 60 frames per second and how rango or even maleficent (guessing it took about 12 hours for each frame as well) rendered on a couple hundred computers look. I know there's no comparison yet, but i am still amazed the way drake's face animates and looks. I wonder how much better Drake would've looked if ND went with 30fps.
qualitydisc
Member
I've heard this claim repeated every generation since the PS2. Console graphics improve a step and so does CGI....
houroftower
Member
Bear in mind there were no enemies at all moving around in that video, no bullets or explosions to calculate (ie) not a typical Uncharted in-game scenario. So it's kind of pointless for ND to say 'oh this is fully rendered on a PS4'. It's a cutscene. I don't recall looking at Drake's facial detail much when I was shooting about 10,000 enemies on the PS3 games.
dragonbane
Member
Dumping this here again for the Sorcerer doubters:
2010 (Heavy Rain - Game on PS3)
2011 (Kara - Tech Demo on PS3)
2013 (Beyond - Game on PS3)
2013 (Old Man - Tech Demo on PS4)
2013 (The Dark Sorcerer - Tech Demo on PS4)
Cage said Dark Sorcerer is "well below the visual quality we want to achieve on our next game and is the minimum standard you should expect from next gen".
Dark Sorcerer was created with their Beyond engine and pipeline, not their actual PS4 engine. He will be proven correct it looks like or already was with Uncharted 4.
Evolution of Quantic Dream's technology since 2006:
2006 (The Casting - Tech Demo on PS3)
2010 (Heavy Rain - Game on PS3)
2011 (Kara - Tech Demo on PS3)
2013 (Beyond - Game on PS3)
2013 (Old Man - Tech Demo on PS4)
2013 (The Dark Sorcerer - Tech Demo on PS4)
2015/2016 (???)
Click to enlarge. No bullshots. All direct feed and real time.
Cage said Dark Sorcerer is "well below the visual quality we want to achieve on our next game and is the minimum standard you should expect from next gen".
Dark Sorcerer was created with their Beyond engine and pipeline, not their actual PS4 engine. He will be proven correct it looks like or already was with Uncharted 4.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
What does that have to do with anything? No PC game looks as good as Uncharted 4.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Nobody has suggested that it's gameplay. The point is that a single PS4 is rendering this in real time, which is damn impressive. Gameplay shouldn't look much worse.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=743719
Anyway, yes, I think PS4 has easily surpassed CGI on the PS2 era generation.
Of course it will always be behind current CGI, though, duh.
Also, I think optimization is going to account for smaller gains over the course of this generation compared to previous ones. In previous console generations developers dealt with extremely exotic hardware that had to be slowly learned. PS4 and Xbox One's x86 architecture will probably take a lot less time to learn, and thus I don't think you're going to see that massive difference between a 2015 PS4 game and a 2019 PS4 game.
Well in that case, we passed the point of PS1-era CG a while ago. There are PS2 games that in real time look better than a lot of PS1-era CG. We're approaching the level of the CG you saw in games like Final Fantasy X and REmake.
Well in that case, we passed the point of PS1-era CG a while ago. There are PS2 games that in real time look better than a lot of PS1-era CG. We're approaching the level of the CG you saw in games like Final Fantasy X and REmake.
Wishmaster92
Member
2013 (Old Man - Tech Demo on PS4)
Excellent subsurface-scattering here, and this was only running on the beyond engine. It's amazing what the technique can do
I don't know what tricks they are using, maybe the gap will be noticeable once you will have to render a gameplay scene with shooting and big set pieces compared to dedicating all PS4's power to the model in a cut scene.
Maybe it will come close at some very scripted QTE scenes when the developer has full control, but real time in gameplay most of the time you wont see such fidelity.
Besides he asked if this is confirmed in-game which suggest this is how gameplay looks to which i reply with a NO.
you haven't seen uncharted 4.
what you have seen is a pixel precise non-interactive cutscene with every polygon arranged and every shadow baked purely to achieve the effect of keeping a fanbase from wandering astray for another 18 months.
You gave me small heart attack with that typo.
On topic. It is a bit premature to say they (at least one of them) did, sure the older CGI intros are nowhere near as detailed as the Uncharted 4 teaser, but newer CG's, like those that are made for Blizzard's games for example leave U4 in thick dust.
LittleJohnny
Banned
Yep, the 3rd should've been a Ryse gif, it actually looks misplaced.
This on the other hand is much more fitting than UFC.
Rendering a single character CU with nice SSS and GI in real-time is one thing, rendering a whole battlefield with hundreds of fighters, fluidsim pfx and a post-pro look that rivals offline compositing is another.
Real-time can come close to "CG quality" in smaller scenes, but CG render farms flex their muscle with incredible character count, polygon complexity, quantity & quality of pfx.
That AC Unity CG trailer is a prime example.
On top of the higher fidelilty of the content, it also has higher fidelity in image quality that you might approach if you render in 7680x4320 and then ds to 1080p but that would turn real-time into a <5fps slideshow in most cases.
This debate is a bit similar to Consoles vs. PC. Real-time 3d graphics will always need to work inside a certain performance (ms budget) / power envelope while offline rendering can just throw hardware at the scene with no regards to ms budgets. "CG quality" is also a term that needs to be tied with the time period it was made in, as the power of rendering farms and the tools changed dramatically over the last 20 years.
Real-time can come close to "CG quality" in smaller scenes, but CG render farms flex their muscle with incredible character count, polygon complexity, quantity & quality of pfx.
That AC Unity CG trailer is a prime example.
On top of the higher fidelilty of the content, it also has higher fidelity in image quality that you might approach if you render in 7680x4320 and then ds to 1080p but that would turn real-time into a <5fps slideshow in most cases.
This debate is a bit similar to Consoles vs. PC. Real-time 3d graphics will always need to work inside a certain performance (ms budget) / power envelope while offline rendering can just throw hardware at the scene with no regards to ms budgets. "CG quality" is also a term that needs to be tied with the time period it was made in, as the power of rendering farms and the tools changed dramatically over the last 20 years.
Graphics Horse
Member
Waddaya mean 'at last'? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxVdUVgqO3A
Zoloft Sonic
Member
Hasn't happened yet, won't happen for ~10 years I would guess.
Character models will be the first thing to get near that threshold. Resource wise, they make sense to spend the most on. I'd guess we'll be approaching stylized photorealism, at least for characters, by the end of this gen.
Too many other hurdles in the intervening time though. Simple pixel counts and AA being big ones already mentioned.
Making environments seamless and computationally sane will be the bigger challenge. Even megabudget films struggle to get the necessary particle counts, shaders, and lighting complexity to make CGI environments believable.
"Rango" is a fantastic example of pushed environmental detail; and a good sign how far there is to go. We're not close.
Character models will be the first thing to get near that threshold. Resource wise, they make sense to spend the most on. I'd guess we'll be approaching stylized photorealism, at least for characters, by the end of this gen.
Too many other hurdles in the intervening time though. Simple pixel counts and AA being big ones already mentioned.
Making environments seamless and computationally sane will be the bigger challenge. Even megabudget films struggle to get the necessary particle counts, shaders, and lighting complexity to make CGI environments believable.
"Rango" is a fantastic example of pushed environmental detail; and a good sign how far there is to go. We're not close.
rokkerkory
Member
PS2 level of CGI? Maybe
theofficefan99
Junior Member
Not even close. They're really impressive, don't get me wrong, but compare that stuff to Blizzard's, Blur's, and Visual Works' CGI, and it's not even comparable.
Cizeta-Moroder
Banned
Why yes, all that sure is computer-generated imagery. Not sure what there is to reach.
Definitely not for that Order gif. High speed movement paired with very low framerates just looks nauseating.
The Uncharted gif looks amazing. I think the animation is even more impressive than the graphics though. It'll be the day when we get anything resembling that without motion capture. In any case it's a given the gameplay will look nothing like it. You can do an enormous amount of precalculation to put out image quality in scripted sequences that simply isn't possible in unscripted sequences. It's certainly an accomplishment, but I think somewhat misleading since people will likely equate real time rendering with 'this is what gameplay can look like" which is not accurate.
The Uncharted gif looks amazing. I think the animation is even more impressive than the graphics though. It'll be the day when we get anything resembling that without motion capture. In any case it's a given the gameplay will look nothing like it. You can do an enormous amount of precalculation to put out image quality in scripted sequences that simply isn't possible in unscripted sequences. It's certainly an accomplishment, but I think somewhat misleading since people will likely equate real time rendering with 'this is what gameplay can look like" which is not accurate.
SpookyFries
Member
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
We have reached the level of pre-rendered game intro graphics from 10-ish years ago, sure.
Similar threads
- Poll