• 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.

PS4 does movie level cgi visuals. eyeball gif fiesta.

InPlosion

Member
I'm not saying everything was CG, but you all can't be so easy going with all this trust given to sony.
They have pulled shady shenanigans in the past, with this sort of things.
Just be more cautious...
 

Dave_6

Member
Not even close from what I've seen.

racesimcentral-ProjectCARS-formulaGULF.jpg


Project Cars is sitting high and pretty on top of the racing game graphical dog pile.

Wow, I'm going to have to check this out when I get my PC built.

FWIW, yes I will be buying a PS4 day zero!
 

BadAss2961

Member
The fact that you have to look at 1080P footage of these videos to confirm if they are realtime or not should clue you in as to how impressive some of the tech was.

Killzone was most impressive as it was all 100% game play with stuff like physics and AI working. Watch Dogs was also impressive but not as much as KZ.

Deep Down was just absurd but there was no indication that it was actually game play with the physics and AI implemented. It looked like a cutscene/tech demo than an actual game. Still though I said wow at that. To me it's the same as the Agni demo, yea I am sure cutscene will look like that in the future but call me when a FF game looks like that when you are actually playing...

Infamous and Drive Club were also impressive. I really feel that Knack deserves some gifs as well, it looked really good too visually speaking just a different art style.
I think Deep Down is definitely achievable on PS4.

ibp2LYnmQJjEkC.gif


This part in particular looks like what we could expect from a good dev like Capcom when working with such small corridors.

The dragon fight is what we can expect from in-engine cutscenes. The camera wasn't believable for gameplay, and the animation was too good. But who knows, maybe a team like Naughty Dog or SSM could pull off animation like that.
 
Killzone looked good, especially the cityscape stuff, but not "CG" good.

Also, games will never achieve movie level CG literally, but I think its fair to say that many assets could be on par in some fields.. But namely, if its matching CG, its matching video game CG, not CG from actual movies.



I wont lie, I was hoping to see more visuals like this. Deep Down was the only one that made me question whether it was CG or In-Engine.

Why do people keep saying this? Its almost inevitable that someday games will look as good as current CGI does. Isn't CGI one of the best ways to predict what real-time rendering can look like (maybe several decades) in the future, when consumer-grade computing power would be more powerful than today's rendering farm? Or do we really think things will slow down enough that we'll never get there?
 

LastNac

Member
I think Deep Down is definitely achievable on PS4.

ibp2LYnmQJjEkC.gif


This part in particular looks like what we could expect from a good dev like Capcom when working with such small corridors.

The dragon fight is what we can expect from in-engine cutscenes. The camera wasn't believable for gameplay, and the animation was too good. But who knows, maybe a team like Naughty Dog or SSM could pull off animation like that.


Why not though, why does that have to be the case. We have had a lot of cinematic camera techniques in the last couple of years, why would a cinematic combat camera be so crazy?
 

Lord Error

Insane For Sony
Now see, that image doesn't even remotely look as good as DriveClub. It looks completely lifeless and a lot of those reflections look really poor.
Yeah, in videos, especially in-car view of Project Cars looks really sterile and nowhere near as appealing as DC, or at least what little they've shown of it. It's high quality sim, I have no doubt but it looks raw and sterile, as oppose to creamy smoothness that they have going on in this new game.
 

Liamario

Banned
Killzone was the only one I was sure was running in game. The rest have been tweaked or are running in-engine.

The biggest concern I have over everything was; are we just going to be playing the same stuff again with better graphics. Are we going to see more innovation and more risks.
 

nasos_333

Member
Watch the 1080p video of Deep Down. Actually looks more like in-game than pre-rendered.

It is probably in game

The funny part is that FF Agnes is already confirmed real time and looks as good

The simple conclusion is that no matter how unbelievable it looks, these graphics are for real and are what next gen is all about

And these are just Gears 1 comparing to later games like Gears 3 too

Plus i doubt they are even close to using the 8GB of PS4
 

Dilly

Banned
Not even close from what I've seen.

http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa194/FordGTGuy/racesimcentral-ProjectCARS-formulaGULF.jpg[IMG]

Project Cars is sitting high and pretty on top of the racing game graphical dog pile.[/QUOTE]

Uhm, that is not a screenshot?

This is one:
[QUOTE][IMG]http://www.virtualr.net/wp-content/gallery/3823/054.jpg
 

nasos_333

Member
Killzone was the only one I was sure was running in game. The rest have been tweaked or are running in-engine.

The biggest concern I have over everything was; are we just going to be playing the same stuff again with better graphics. Are we going to see more innovation and more risks.

Hopefully not

The "innovation" is what made Fable, FF13, Zelda SS seems so much less than before

Linear worlds, "real time" combat just to have the name, one button casualization

I want old, the oldest gameplay the better, the least innovation the more glad i will be

I wish we could just go back 10 years in gameplay (and keep only Dark Souls that is indeed something better, exactly because was based on old priciples)

Innovation in gaming is extremely overated, gaming should just be fun, it is not sciene where innovation is vital
 
Why do people keep saying this? Its almost inevitable that someday games will look as good as current CGI does. Isn't CGI one of the best ways to predict what real-time rendering can look like (maybe several decades) in the future, when consumer-grade computing power would be more powerful than today's rendering farm? Or do we really think things will slow down enough that we'll never get there?

Because movie level CG will move forward too. Look at The Hobbit and compare it to the LotR films. It's like night and day.

What you can do with millions of dollars and days of prerendering by hundreds of computers will always beat something that has to be rendered in real time by a single $500 box.
 

XiaNaphryz

LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
I am sorry but I don't buy that 'I am a developer I know it's not pre-rendered, just shut up' crap.

I work in a studio, and a big one, and there are people around me who think it's heavily tweaked in-game-engine (making it effectively 'fake' due to the amount of tweaking), and some who think the tweaks are just on the camera and some effects (the fire) - eventually making it a 'real' video. It's more a philosophical question (to what extent can you push the envelope when showcasing a game?), than a technical one to be honest.

At the end of the day, the debate stagnate when the 'more real' stuff will be public, the 'it's fake' guys will stick to their side of the story, saying the new footage looks nowhere as good as the original one, the 'it's real' side will claim victory cause it looks the same to them...

A bit boring, right?

I mentioned earlier about the possibility of it being pre-rendered using the game engine as the renderer to keep it looking like in-game real-time footage, and that this method has been used in games in the current generation for cutscenes.
 

Akzo

Neo Member
In the lead up to the PS2 launch there was a lot of press about how it was able to create "Toy Story" level visuals. I guess it did.
 

XiaNaphryz

LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
same zero chance that the ps4 would have a max of 2gb or 4gb ram?

seriously, why make statements like that when you know nothing about the console or the game?

The problem with the thread is people are taking one extreme or the other. There's enough evidence to show it's likely real-time, but again that doesn't necessarily mean parts of what we've seen couldn't have been pre-rendered through game engine.
 

Kagari

Crystal Bearer
It is hilarious to see gullible people have forgotten E3 2005-2006...

It's hilarious to see you didn't do your research. Most of the games shown for PS4 have been in development for nearly 2 years now, and there's plenty we haven't seen yet. This is the complete opposite of the PS3 situation.
 
Why do people keep posting all these gifs when only one of them shows actual gameplay and it didn't even look that great. Watchdogs was the best demo and that was running on a pc. Killzone looks like the same fucking game. How can anyone be excited to play what looks like the same exact style of game that we've been drowning in since last gen. I really don't get it. /rant
 

adixon

Member
Why do people keep posting all these gifs when only one of them shows actual gameplay and it didn't even look that great. Watchdogs was the best demo and that was running on a pc. Killzone looks like the same fucking game. How can anyone be excited to play what looks like the same exact style of game that we've been drowning in since last gen. I really don't get it. /rant

Yep, that's the main problem -- I think it's possible a lot of people (myself included) are disappointed by the prospect of what is basically just another killzone and another infamous being the big first party show pieces, and it's making it hard to get excited about eye candy. It doesn't have that "generational leap" feeling mostly because for me, there are game formulas which have gotten so stale I just skip them without thinking about it these days. And that definitely makes it harder to get excited over graphics in those games.

Deep Down looked completely amazing but it's hard to get excited about something which looks that much better than the first party offerings -- seems like there must be some smoke and mirrors going on.

Even if you just took the fairly incredible city vista from the killzone flyover shot and put in a game I want to play, I'd immediately be way more excited. So I guess in the abstract I am really excited about the ps4, I just haven't met the right game yet. (Here's to E3.)
 

evolution

Member
Why do people keep posting all these gifs when only one of them shows actual gameplay and it didn't even look that great. Watchdogs was the best demo and that was running on a pc. Killzone looks like the same fucking game. How can anyone be excited to play what looks like the same exact style of game that we've been drowning in since last gen. I really don't get it. /rant

Maybe because its a graphics thread. As for killzone, i noticed as soon as the guy opens the door in the airship that it was a massive improvement. I don't see how you couldn't' unless you've never played a ps3/360 game before. The resolution difference alone made it a big difference for me.
 

Tan

Member
Why do people keep posting all these gifs when only one of them shows actual gameplay and it didn't even look that great. Watchdogs was the best demo and that was running on a pc. Killzone looks like the same fucking game. How can anyone be excited to play what looks like the same exact style of game that we've been drowning in since last gen. I really don't get it. /rant

Because the graphical parts of Killzone are really exciting for the potential of the PS4. This whole conference was about the PS4 and its capabilities, I didn't watch it to get info about the games coming out and what interesting new gameplay concepts they were introducing. That's what e3 is for.
 

JordanN

Banned
We're getting pretty damn close to this, maybe even surpassed it in some aspects.

The main character has 400,000 polygons alone in addition to 60,000 hair strands. I'm not sure if anything at the PS4 event came close (especially with the hair).

Just as a comparison, this gen had characters averaging in the 10,000-30,000 polycount and the gen before that it was 2000 ~ 10,000 polygons.
 

BigTnaples

Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
The main character has 400,000 polygons alone in addition to 60,000 hair strands. I'm not sure if anything at the PS4 event came close (especially with the hair).


He's obviously talking about end result.


CGI will always have the edge in IQ, Poly count, animation, and ray tracing...

Realtime games will approximate it by using advanced lighting engines, tessellation, shaders, etc.


The end result looks comparable and that is impressive considering they are two completely different mediums and ways of doing things.
 

Krabardaf

Member
The main character has 400,000 polygons alone in addition to 60,000 hair strands. I'm not sure if anything at the PS4 event came close (especially with the hair).

Just as a comparison, this gen had characters averaging in the 10,000-30,000 polycount and the gen before that it was 2000 ~ 10,000 polygons.

Polycount at that point isn't what holds character realism back. Also tessellation will change everything.
 

StevieP

Banned
Why do people keep saying this? Its almost inevitable that someday games will look as good as current CGI does. Isn't CGI one of the best ways to predict what real-time rendering can look like (maybe several decades) in the future, when consumer-grade computing power would be more powerful than today's rendering farm? Or do we really think things will slow down enough that we'll never get there?

No. It takes a server farm composed of like 40,000 high powered servers like 3 hours to render a single frame of a modern day CG movie. There are 24 frames per second, if you don't know what I'm getting at.
 
No. It takes a server farm composed of like 40,000 high powered servers like 3 hours to render a single frame of a modern day CG movie. There are 24 frames per second, if you don't know what I'm getting at.

How long does it really take? I'm curious. It can't be 3 hours.
 

-SD-

Banned
Deep Down wins, hands and pants down. No contest.

Best real time visuals I've ever seen, and I've seen it all.
 

orioto

Good Art™
Yeah, dude, that looks great but did you see the actual gameplay of Knack? It didn't look that great at all. It could have been a PS3 game.

Except the ingame models are the same quality as in the intro... And you just saw compressed and small screens of it.. The number of bullshit i've heard on this board in the last two days is never seen before.
 
Top Bottom