Well, look-a-there. Someone has the same insight as me.
Two people are wrong, nothing more, but happen.
Well, look-a-there. Someone has the same insight as me.
UE4 cave demo for comparison. Thr's some great indirect light in here.
I honestly think they are still undecided whether to keep trying to make the game be 60FPS (in which case they wouldn't have to have object motion blur). For this demo to never-ever drop a frame below 30, it would have be running at least at 40-45FPS average.
There's a much better show of this in the reveal trailer:There's definitely a disconnect IMHO between the neck muscles and the head, things are deforming better than they have in the past, but the muscle isn't stretching and squashing the way it should. I'm only expecting that though because the guy claims its moving anatomically correct.
Its definitely really good deformations, and an improvement over past generations, that doesn't make it anatomically correct though, so don't claim that.
You have to keep in mind that for a game to never drop a frame below 30, the 30FPS has to be it's absolute minimum framerate, no matter what load it's processing - so the average has to be higher.That seems rather high at this point in time.
I'm happy to be wrong, but I'd love to know HOW I am wrong. How is Monsters University a good example? And how is what you're saying, different from what I am saying?
The whole point of multiple textures maps is precisely to inform the lighting on how to behave when rendering an object.
Not sure what you mean. You said that Adventure games would look horrible with obmb. Then I mentioned that the uncharted games and ND games in the past have used obmb (they are tps adventure games, right?).the same level? yes, its not even close to the same level of blur as the order.
I would maintain that @ 60fps per object motionblur still look really fantastic. Better than without.I honestly think they are still undecided whether to keep trying to make the game be 60FPS (in which case they wouldn't have to have object motion blur). For this demo to never-ever drop a frame below 30, it would have be running at least at 40-45FPS average.
That seems rather high at this point in time.
UE4 cave demo for comparison. Thr's some great indirect light in here.
I'm... not exactly sure what you're getting at.
Baked GI is apparent in UC4.
Well, Monster's Uni is a very stylized movie, with a lot of hand made stuff made on top of a physically based renderer.
And most games don't actually use photo based specular or normal maps. Normal maps usually come from a height map or high res mesh made in zbrush or a similar tool, specular maps don't actually contain much info in most modern lighting models, usually just some swatches of colour for metals and low grey for everything else (some engines like unreal even use a metalness value to redirect the albedo values to specular in metals and avoid a specular map altogether). Then there's roughness/gloss, which doesn't have a "correct" value, it's going to be dependent on the specific surface and so it can be painted without much PBR knowledge, just an empirical sense of how smooth the surface is. Albedo can be whatever you want as long as it has neutral brightness (or in engines that don't deal with that, it should be black for metals).
It's not rocket science, and it's been in use on PS4 launch games like Shadowfall (or even on PS3, by the likes of tri-ace, koji pro, etc).
You know UE4 uses a static GI solution called Lightmass. Dynamic GI aka LPV is not activated by default (needs some hacks) and only work with sunlight (and the results are very primitive since LPV is only uses 3D textures instead of voxel based solutions). LPV doesn't even work with flashlights hence you can't get dynamic GI from it.
Here in Uncharted 4 we have a better version of the one used in TLOU and can have dynamic GI results using the flashlight in the cave.
We have no idea what the unlocked framerate is. Anythign is pure speculation. We likewise have no idea what the load differential between different actions and scenes are.
Seems to be working fine for this guy
I'm just thinking, it's something you'd add to a 60FPS game if you really have a headway, but it's not a necessity at that point. Although it could be added to help smooth out irregular framerate like in GoW3.I would maintain that @ 60fps per object motionblur still look really fantastic. Better than without.
Really?Well, look-a-there. Someone has the same insight as me.
Two people are wrong, nothing more, but happen.
I can't believe DF wrote this article. I mean come on :|
The graphics look the same and the only different thing is the lighting and Drake is not wet this time.
These pictures looks by miles better than anything I've ever seen in video games. Not to mention that the game still in Pre-Alpha and one year until we can see the final game.
Those are close ups on a "scene", gameplay it does not look as impressive. I will say that by E3 it will look much better though.
Can't help but feel that part of the reason people are not "blown away" by UC4 is because even though the graphics and technology on display are incredible it's very ...mundane.
People are not going to blown away by true physics for chest hair.
If it wasn't for the slow motion gif highlighting Nathan's hair being affected by the water fall I doubt more than a few would have noticed.
However, people were blown away by the time distortion effects in Quantum Break. They were more eye catching.
Also, the setting was very mundane. Some rock climbing and some fist and gun fights. Really nothing we haven't seen before.
Again, to use Quantum Break as an example, a collapsing bridge is more spectacular.
It doesn't matter how great the technology is if what is being displayed is too realistic.
I agree that you can't make a blanket statement that "Graphics usually do not improve much from the first showing to release" without showing some data. But you can certainly see patterns in how games change depending on the publisher or developer. Ubisoft, for example.Two people are wrong, nothing more, but happen.
the flashlight GI is dynamic.
Never any upgrades.
Well, some devs seem to be able to constantly improve untill release, some will have to downgrade.Two people are wrong, nothing more, but happen.
The Order...
I agree that you can't make a blanket statement that "Graphics usually do not improve much from the first showing to release" without showing some data. But you can certainly see patterns in how games change depending on the publisher or developer. Ubisoft, for example.
So what's Naughty Dog's track record on how their games change graphically from announcement to preview builds to release?
Yep, The Order will probably be the best looking console game when it is released.Is that in-game? Wow, that looks amazing.
Yeah well the order releases in two months. Uncharted is end of the year. If you think the graphics won't get better you are in for a surprise.
They really aren't wrong, at all.
I agree that you can't make a blanket statement that "Graphics usually do not improve much from the first showing to release" without showing some data. But you can certainly see patterns in how games change depending on the publisher or developer. Ubisoft, for example.
So what's Naughty Dog's track record on how their games change graphically from announcement to preview builds to release?
Well, some devs seem to be able to constantly improve untill release, some will have to downgrade.
Sometimes parts of a game get downgraded while,other parts or elements get upgraded (even Naughty Dog had to make sacrifices in some games).
I think Naughty Dog can be given the benefit of the doubt here. They (as well as other devs) were involved with creating the system that is the PS4.
If any dev team can pull something incredible off on this system, they are certainly one of the top three that i'd think of. (As this demo showed for me allready, personally)
The reveal looked almost like PS2 with washed out textures. Now demo vs retail: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-godofwariii-demo-vs-retail-blog-entry
Also demo Kratos had 20k polys with just textured toes while final one was 35K polys and his toes were 3D.
Also : http://www.examiner.com/article/uncharted-2-receives-graphics-upgrade
And this: http://n4g.com/news/861504/uncharted-3-drakes-deception-video-comparison#c-5921040
Nothing is lost even after launch. Best example Driveclub receiving weather effects now and looking phenomenal.
Referencing a PS3 game that dropped MSAA and started moving more things over to the SPU (all post processing among other things) as an example for graphics improvement is a bit disegenuous regarding the latest generation.
There wont be architectural advancements this time around to such a crazy degree as the PS3 saw.
ND said and explained that they are mimicking PS3 SPUs architecture when coding on PS4 since they are used to it and find it efficient.
More l look at UC4 more l think they are gunning for 60fps.
Graphics usually do not improve much from the first showing to release.
Referencing a PS3 game that dropped MSAA and started moving more things over to the SPU (all post processing among other things) as an example for graphics improvement is a bit disegenuous regarding the latest generation.
There wont be architectural advancements this time around to such a crazy degree as the PS3 saw.
I would imagine that means using a job based threading system.... and not having the CPU run the post processing so you can push prettier pixels.
Devs this time around know more about how to take advantage of what they have before them and the hardware helps this a lot. Games will look better over time, but you will rarely if ever see something like saving 40% GPU time by throwing stuff over to the SPUs like in the old days.
Lol this comparison shows up again, it was only a matter of time.Maybe this? Not sure how much BS it is though.
The Last of Us looked better in the final version than in the E3 2013 demo?
Uncharted 3 looked better in the final version that in the early 2011 demo?
It's all in-game, they are not using " cut scene " like they used to do on PS3.