mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
The Unreal Engine is supposed to be designed to create maps like this "quickly" and alot easier than ever before.
-
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.
Epic’s stunning new Unreal demos show off high-end ray tracing and photorealism
- Thread starter GoldenEye98
- Start date
The Unreal Engine is supposed to be designed to create maps like this "quickly" and alot easier than ever before.
SurprisedPikachu
Member
I love the Unreal Engine, but I hate Epic for what they're doing with the Epic Games Store. It's mostly Tim Sweeney that I hate the most, I'm sure a fair portion of the people who work at Epic are really great people. He's clearly just fucking delusional and hell bent on destroying Steam for some reason.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Steam can't be destroyed if Valve gets a little smarter and tries a little harder to compete.
ResilientBanana
Member
To be fair the Epic game store is full of games I would want to play as opposed to random garbage.
SurprisedPikachu
Member
I think that is the importance of Steam though. Choice and not heavily curated. It's lightly curated. I agree that Steam needs to work on their filtering and maybe higher an engineer to fix their suggestion algorithms so you'll see less of a certain developer/publisher if you dislike enough of their games, or expand their default tags so you can have the granularity needed to define the specific types of games you don't want to play. Like "I like jRPG, but I don't like erotic jRPG visual novels".
That's the beauty of capitalism though. You have CHOICE and I choose to ignore a lot of games, but that doesn't mean others won't.
KlickKlack
Banned
looks like xbox scarletts HARDWARE RAYTRACING demo.
are there any software raytracing demos from sony nextgen ps5 to compare ?
VAL0R
Banned
I'm with the guys who don't give a flip what these "in engine" tech reels look like. They are always light years beyond real gameplay visuals. So if I won't be playing anything that looks remotely that good for roughly a decade I'll pass, because at that point they are essentially just poor CG short films.
Last edited:
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
What engine videos are you talking about? Epic made the Samaritan engine demo and then Batman Arkham Knight ended up looking as good as it.
IbizaPocholo
NeoGAFs Kent Brockman
baphomet
Member
There is no Xbox ray tracing demo.
Paradicia
Member
I think he's alluding to the Halo Infinite trailer. No confirmed ray tracing in the video though.
IbizaPocholo
NeoGAFs Kent Brockman
Aintitcool
Banned
Only games that look like tech demos are the uncharted series.
This is what their demo UE4 demo from 2013 looked like.
And you can watch it here.
Do you think any Xbox One X and PS4 games have this quality now that you can think of? Any games over the last 5 years?
FFVII Remake (running on UE4) looks pretty close to this
Last edited by a moderator:
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Epic is an AMAZING company! Man, this tech is crazy good! People don't realize all those Fortnite profits are going into research for things that we'll be witnessing in TV shows and movies 3 and 4 years from now.
Shifty
Member
Yeah, I've had similar thoughts around the idea of Unreal = Good, Epic = Bad for a while now.
I spent a good couple of years working professionally in that engine, and it's real powerful, but my experience dealing with their dev support and following the tracker for Unreal-side bugs that were blocking our projects did a real number on my respect for Tim and co before the EGS even came onto the scene.
They're money hungry and spreading their resources way too thin to properly serve their customers- a pattern you may recognize from their foray into digital distribution.
Their tech is pretty amazing, but I dunno that I'd say the same for the company itself. Even ignoring the whole Epic Store debacle entirely, they kind of suck when it comes to supporting their franchises and products.
All their other IPs have been sacrificed at the Fortnite altar, and good luck getting your game into a shippable state without a fight if you're making it in UE4. They care way more about making deals for new big-ticket tech integrations than they do about fixing their own bugs or supporting any studio that doesn't have big bags of profit to share with them.
Ain't nothing quite like being told to "we have no fix or workaround for you, make it a great day!" by a mindless customer support robot when you're weeks away from ship date.
Last edited:
Spukc
always chasing the next thrill
about zero
Aintitcool
Banned
Unity can produce similar results and it is made by a much less experienced team with a lot less budget. Epic is a good company and their engine is no doubt very good. But they are in a niche market with not much competition.
Even a new open source MIT engine is gathering favor by indie devs.
Even a new open source MIT engine is gathering favor by indie devs.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
So then, what's the point of next gen?
Spukc
always chasing the next thrill
slightly better looking photo realistic games.
but with the push to 4k the step is even smaller
Shifty
Member
Zero, these demos are all recorded on the tippiest-top-of-the-line PC hardware with their settings cranked to max.
Cutscenes will probably look very pretty though.
More shiny, but not that much more shiny.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Then that's not going to be good enough. But I have every reason to believe next-gen will look like those videos in the OP, so I'm excited for next-gen systems.
Aintitcool
Banned
Next gen is a CPU upgrade more than GPU. The gameplay will be different. Also the SSD's memory reading will also change game design. It's not a PS3->Ps4 graphics mostly update. the CELL cpu can finally be beat. Old practices of making games are changing. If you change that, you change the look and feel and stuff you can expect.
Last edited:
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
But the GPU jump "supposedly" is also going to be huge too (if you don't include the PS4 Pro or Xbox One X).
Aintitcool
Banned
Yeah but improvements in special effects and the gimped ray tracing we are getting from the boosted GPU, will not do things the current GPU on PS4 can't do. Just that it can't do it as fast. I agree with the other poster, games will look very similar to the top end AAA of today, but will play in different ways that not even PC's are able to do because they have to be compatible with lots of specs.
For example. Ray tracing shadows? We can create the same effect today with really well programed dynamic shadows.
Ray tracing reflections to impact gameplay? That is different. In a multiplayer match if you can look at a window and see an enemy reflection in your background that is a hardware made expensive graphical effect. That can change the way you play online.
So suddenly next gen has multiplayer maps with real mirrors. But is this impossible to do on current PS4? No there are tricks for faking realtime reflections but since the hardware is there, a developer can now consider it, without having to base years dedicated to programming the tricks.
In theory the same gameplay effects can also be created on PS3.
Last edited:
manfestival
Member
This ray tracing feels like the push for another gimmick but is probably the only one that can be implemented overall vs things like 3D and other things of the past.
I do kinda want it to go away but we will see. VR has stuck around and seems to have JUST enough support that it hasn't died yet.
I do kinda want it to go away but we will see. VR has stuck around and seems to have JUST enough support that it hasn't died yet.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
This is a good video showing "why" games will look like that Rebirth video next gen. Most people on NeoGaf don't believe it'll happen, because they don't understand "why" it can be achieved.
IbizaPocholo
NeoGAFs Kent Brockman
Herr Edgy
Member
Some games, definitely. Most? Not at all. The problem with photogrammetry and scanned textures is that it's not that easy to just bring whatever you need into your game. In the end, aside from base engine features like lighting, asset creation comes down to the developers. You can make games look super crap in UE4, even with ray tracing enabled, or super great with ray tracing disabled. That rebirth demo doesn't even use ray tracing, it's all about art direction and photogrammetry. Now make a full game using that technique...
You hate someone for introducing some competition? Steam has had a near monopoly for decades.
SurprisedPikachu
Member
It's not a competition when you have to bribe people to come to your platform for an exclusive period of time. Otherwise I wouldn't have cared.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
That's part of the competition. This whole video games stuff is a business first, entertainment second.
Zannegan
Member
It may just be business, but it's not really "competition" in the sense that people use it.
The theory goes that two companies in competition will constantly improve because they have incentives to be better than their rivals: more customers and more business. Both stores up their game, and valuable features and software are added to the arena. The bringer of the most value (as judged by consumers) gets the most business. Everybody wins.
Here, though, we have pretty much the opposite case. One company is using cash earned in another arena (not even through direct competition), not to add features or fund new games for its own store, but to subtract value from its competitor. It has clear benefits for Epic and removes risk for the developers (at the cost of a potentially lower sales ceiling), but it's a negative value add for consumers, the audience they're supposed to be competing/improving to please.
Epic trying to spend its way to market dominance has given us all the negatives of competition--exclusivity included--with none of the positives.
-my two cents
Last edited:
Thabass
Member
Right. With all the assets, gameplay and features, that will add a chunk of space to nail down while trying to keep it at consistent framerate and fun for everyone.
We'll get there and this is a step in a good direction. The amount of realism that photogrammetry brings in probably uses a lot of memory and GPU power to make happen. It probably won't be really achievable until new sets of cards come out in a couple of years.
However, I am speculating on that.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
You make a good point, but I think you are missing the fact that right now Epic's "main" customer is the developers. They need as many devs on their platform as possible and less devs on Steam's platform. They need to eat into Steam's dev base as fast as possible. Then once they get a decent foothold there (probably sometime late next year) we the gamers will be their main customers as they add more functionality.
I bet Epic is making a 5-year play at this. They must believe that by 2023 most gamers will forget about this period and treat Epic and Steam as equals. They are absoutetly betting that we'll forgive them as soon as they start giving gamers better deals and more free games than Steam ever has. Because at some point they will stop buying exclusive deals for devs and move that money over to "buying" us.
Herr Edgy
Member
It's not so much about the hardware power that scanned assets need; assets can always be tweaked by an artist to fit requirements, as it is about the process of scanning not being very accessible on a large scale.
Contrary to popular belief, making games is hard and a change in asset pipeline might have implications that some devs simply can't handle from a knowledge, budget or logistics standpoint.
Photogrammetry isn't new and has been used in games before, such as Star Wars Battlefront, plenty of other Triple A games that scan in their characters from real life people and other photorealistic games.
Just because photogrammetry 'exists' doesn't mean that a primary workflow involving it on a large scale is easily achievable or even worth considering for many. Of course, the direction we are going in makes this more and more feasible, but what I'm trying to say is that there are factors involved that go beyond mere hardware resources. Workflow is everything, as it directly translates to budget. The three artists responsible for 'Rebirth' went to Iceland and scanned the environment for a month. Then they had to perform some asset cleanup by using Houdini, which is a tool for introducing proceduralism. It's a tech art tool, not a common 3D art tool (even though that could be used for manual cleanup, too; probably more costly though).
Then there's the matter of art style; will your scanned 3D environment assets fit the quality of the characters? Even if you scan characters, the rigging and animation pipeline has to be somewhat compatible to produce realistic results that bridge the gap of the uncanny valley.
Can a studio not used to this kind of workflow just 'start doing it'? It's possible, but if it's feasible comes down to the specific situation of the devs.
I'm confident we will see some games approaching this kind of fidelity next gen. They will still be the minority, though.
Last edited:
IbizaPocholo
NeoGAFs Kent Brockman
IbizaPocholo
NeoGAFs Kent Brockman
IbizaPocholo
NeoGAFs Kent Brockman
I don't know if this is using the ue.
TheSHEEEP
Member
Meh. Photorealism.
I don't get the point (outside of simulations). If I want photorealism, I go outside and have a walk in a beautiful forest. Can't get more realistic than that.
Games offer the possibility to do something that isn't realistic, something truly creative, something that makes a player's imagination go wild, so why no go for that instead of trying to imitate reality?
But maybe I just drowned my inner graphics whore when I was a kid, cause I was never really into that.
I don't get the point (outside of simulations). If I want photorealism, I go outside and have a walk in a beautiful forest. Can't get more realistic than that.
Games offer the possibility to do something that isn't realistic, something truly creative, something that makes a player's imagination go wild, so why no go for that instead of trying to imitate reality?
But maybe I just drowned my inner graphics whore when I was a kid, cause I was never really into that.
Last edited:
Herr Edgy
Member
One thing has to be said, that with with photorealism you can still bring things to life that don't exist. Think of mechs for example, or heck, even Lord of the Rings. It's as photoreal as it gets, yet it carries a lot of power and meaning. I'd argue photorealism isn't the problem, but the usage of it is.
I feel like games have grown to be products rather than a hybrid of art and product. There is so much flashiness, shininess, bombast found in games that don't really serve any meaning beyond their existence itself, and the trend of achieving photorealism in games for people who aren't graphics programmer feels misdirected to me. Games are inherently visual, but the focus on realism over presentation baffles me.
All of my favorite games didn't necessarily have realistic/"good" graphics or were even stylized ones (Super Mario Sunshine, Wind Waker, Xenoblade Chronicles, The Last Story, Dota 2, Nioh), yet the mood and atmosphere they displayed, the cut scenes and choreographies they had, the music used to portray feelings, the complex and unique gameplay, those were top notch in one regard or another.
Nowadays we get games that have close to photoreal graphics, yet most 'cut scenes' consist of people standing around, bobbing their heads while talking to each other, and dialogue consists of voice lines that get automatically triggered upon reaching specific points and doesn't disrupt the flow at all - sadly making them one-dimensional in the process.
Solarstrike
Member
Unreal Engine 4.23 w/Speedtree + Substance
Last edited:
andreutas
Neo Member
This
Whitecrow
Member
Immersion. Believing what you are seing. Relating to the world and characters. Be part of them.
In real life you only live one. In art, you can live many.
TheSHEEEP
Member
But that's my point.
You don't need photorealistic graphics for that.
You know it is a game, just as you know that a movie is a movie (where you don't need photorealism either, see animated movies, cartoons, etc.).
No amount of photorealism will ever convince you that anything on the screen is real (except if you were put in some kind of Matrix situation where you don't know that you are playing, but that's a borderline philosophical discussion).
Quite the opposite actually, as proven by the uncanny valley.
You can get totally immersed in Tetris, or something like ADOM/ToME - none of which resemble reality at all.
Gameplay is what makes games immersive. The graphics "just" (that's hard enough to achieve in any graphics style) have to be consistent to not break immersion.
Nobody says anything against higher details, higher poly models, etc. Go for it, if you have the budget.
My point was that specifically photorealism is something that just doesn't give you anything beyond "wow, look what's technically possible!".
jackets with pockets
Banned
It's now been a year since that stunning teaser and it's GDC time, albeit virtually this time. I wonder if we're going to be treated with more Troll soon. Perhaps next week, even?
More Troll could also come with NVIDIA's Ampere announcement, whenever that happens...