Yeah, why would a middleware company ever invest into technology, the damn heathens.
-
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 Reveals Samaritan Processing Requirements: 10x 360 at 1080p, (4.4x 360 at 720p)
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
Yeah, why would a middleware company ever invest into technology, the damn heathens.
More like:
Investing into design/storytelling/story/gameplay = Partial Win
Investing into design/storytelling/story/gameplay and Gfx = Win
More powerful tool means greater flexibility for the artists to render their visions with lesser inhibitions compared to this gen.
I think we'll get stuff that is more impressive than Samaritan on similar and even lower end hardware, at 1080p30p.
Oh as a note, Samaritan's camera angles ARE hiding issues with the demo, the displacement maps that they use for tesselation on the character suffered from seam issues as happens with textures. So they hid the seams by having all the texture seams face away from the camera.
I don't think it's an insurmountable problem but it was there.
Oh as a note, Samaritan's camera angles ARE hiding issues with the demo, the displacement maps that they use for tesselation on the character suffered from seam issues as happens with textures. So they hid the seams by having all the texture seams face away from the camera.
I don't think it's an insurmountable problem but it was there.
Scapegoat
Member
The Uncanny Valley refers to computer representations of humans, not objects. More specifically it centres on how faces are perceived as we have hundreds of thousands years of evolution built around recognizing and interpreting each other's facial cues.
What looked off about the blowtorch to you? The only thing I recall looking off about it was the aliasing present during the initial shot of him using it.
For the people saying they can't see a difference between the demo and other games I would ask that you actually watch some footage from a current gen game and compare it directly. Drake looks great in Uncharted 3 but he is no where near what we see in Samaritan; the detail in his beard, his hair, his clothes.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Gears 3 says hi.
This is a tech demo for an engine. All of the stuff you mentioned is absolutely irrelevant when it comes to markting an engine.
You're doing it wrong.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
You can't just hire 40 people to work on the story to produce a Citizen Kane level narrative, nor can design middle-ware to improve a story. Likewise, you cannot just throw infinite money at a project and expect the best game ever. High budgets allow you to take your time and hire the right people for the job, but there comes a certain point where hiring more people won't make your gameplay better, and might actually make your project worse or take longer because you have too many competing visions and have to take time to familiarize every new team-member with the project.
Investing large sums into graphical technology does not "take away" from the other aspects of your project. Given how many games are on the market that do not have super-budgets for graphics, but are still massive stinkers (with terrible stories) anyway, I think this should be quite obvious. There are no shortage of examples of good stories in games coming from both high and low budget projects.
One aspect, that I haven't seen people touch on, is that the Samaritan demo focused on the aspect of graphical rendering that are probably the most costlier in terms of computational expenditure, so from that tech demo one cannot really know how exactly will the graphics look in next gen platforms, since most games opt for limiting those graphical aspects that the Samaritan demo was displaying. The Lighting in the demo was fantastic, tons of light sources within the scene, some really high quality lighting, casting a bunch of dynamic shadows, tons of shader power spent on the reflections of the textures because of the rain, fantastic looking rain,
most of modern games do not utilize those graphical technique, and opt for distinct environments, that have a less computational expenditure, so that they can focus more on power on graphical assets.
most of modern games do not utilize those graphical technique, and opt for distinct environments, that have a less computational expenditure, so that they can focus more on power on graphical assets.
bgassassin
Member
Let them kid themselves. It will make the meltdowns more enjoyable.
B-b-but specialguy said "real" next-gen is gonna be beefy!
perfectnight
Banned
Is this really that different from now though?
I mean, we have what, 3-4 games that look notably good visually in the first half of this year?
What I mean is, it's great to have hardware and processing up the wazoo to run graphics as good as that, but most developers are lazy and won't push things to that level most of the time. Some games don't require that level of attention to detail
Probably come this new generation we might not see such a graphical difference between early titles, and late titles, as we did in this generation, because most of the technological improvements are not as drastic as they were this generation, and also developers now are working with higher quality assets, that current consoles aren't capable of being used.
James Sawyer Ford
Member
Samaritan looks good obviously, but it doesn't really blow my mind like I think next-gen should, especially accounting for how long this generation has lasted.
The quality of assets on display doesn't look like a huge step up from what's currently on display with Uncharted's cutscenes (character model wise), although there's a lot of nice subtle effects and touches going on. This generation popularized shaders and that made a huge difference in the look of games from the previous gen, but the Samaritan demo just kind of looks like a more highly polished version of what we're currently getting.
Hopefully whenever they unveil UE4, it will bring a bunch of bells and whistles that simply aren't on display with current-gen graphics and make me step back and say, "yep, this is definitely a new-gen"
The quality of assets on display doesn't look like a huge step up from what's currently on display with Uncharted's cutscenes (character model wise), although there's a lot of nice subtle effects and touches going on. This generation popularized shaders and that made a huge difference in the look of games from the previous gen, but the Samaritan demo just kind of looks like a more highly polished version of what we're currently getting.
Hopefully whenever they unveil UE4, it will bring a bunch of bells and whistles that simply aren't on display with current-gen graphics and make me step back and say, "yep, this is definitely a new-gen"
are people really having trouble seeing how much better Samaritan is? I mean, fuck, dynamic tessellation alone will change the way worlds look. the dude TRANSFORMED in REAL TIME. Not to mention all the crazy reflection/refraction and post lighting stuff going on. And I'm sure the animations are only going to have more possibilities as well. Remember UE3 with the Gears 1 models.. stuff looks better than that now, too. I don't think we'll be disappointed.
Says who? Maybe one or two devs and maybe regarding texture res or the poly counts on model, but I still don't understand where do people get this notion from? Especially considering consoles are holding back the PC, why don't we see those higher quality assets on their PC version?
Since when do devs make more work for themselves when they know they won't use it? Somebody is going to have to break it down for me, I'm seriously confused.
Because PC can't run those either. They are on a CGI level. And it's pretty much standard practice these days. Almost all developers do it. It's how they create normal maps.
Discounting the importance of technology while also throwing "design/storytelling/story/gameplay" into the same bucket. That's... adorable.
bgassassin
Member
Blast processing and Mode 7
Blast processing is a lie!
bgassassin
Member
Oh, so that's what people are talking about. Isn't that pretty much irrelevant to the discussion. If devs can already display them and use them is it that beneficial to be able to run the original model? Also I didn't think it was used all that extensively, just some models and some geometry. Who knows what new techniques may pop up and what more powerful consoles can do with them, but I understand what he was saying now.
Graphical assets for modern video games, are usually done with super high polygon counts, so that then thru the usage of normal mapping you can derive an approximation of what that model looks like without having to spend a boatload of polygons, the precision of this approximation is based on the polygonal count of the model, and also the resolution of the normal map, so with that in mind, next generation you'll have an increase in the number of polygons you can render, and also an increase in the quality of normal maps because of the increase in RAM, so you can get a better approximation of the base model, also some new technologies will be used to increase the fidelity of the models such as http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=461666, subsurface scattering.
bgassassin
Member
You're not the only one. I noticed that late last year.
les papillons sexuels
Banned
it depends where we're at in a generation.
i don't think enough credit is given to consoles in that a lot of optimization occurs because of console hardware. If we look at gears of war or mass effect vs the subsequent releases, it'd be hard to argue that advancements havn't been made. So to see the samaritan demo and not expect performance gains from software optimization in 4 or 5 years times is also absurd.
This might be a personal side, but i also think the demo is pretty bad at the art and presentation of its assets. I think a lot of the more noticable improvements are lost in the dark lighting, and high contrast nature of the scenes.
For example, we get pretty much no texture difuse because of how the scenes are lit, and because of the wet and local colour of the lights. The steam and smoke get lost in the night scene easily. The scene itself looks really small, so we don't really get a sense of scale. A lof of the animation is really stiff. It lacks a lot of effects that we see in a game, camera movement, explosions, particle effects, magic effects, a hud, etc. All these things get piled on and make scenes look more complex.
Absolute Bastard
Member
I'd say it's Nvidia Tflops. The samaritan demo that needed three GTX 580s ran at 2560x1600 resolution, about double the pixels of 1920x1080. Three 580s has little about 5 Tflops theoretical so 2.5 Tflops for 1080p matches.
AdventureRacing
Member
The reason not all games look that good has nothing to do with laziness.
eso76
Member
going for 720p and bumping IQ significantly would be the best solution actually.
At this point, i think IQ is more important factor than resolution.
I actually always thought devs and hardware manufacturers should have tried to achieve a perfect SD IQ *BEFORE* jumping to HD.
Just make up your mind so i can decide whether to upgrade to full hd plasma or keep my 720p rptv
At this point, i think IQ is more important factor than resolution.
I actually always thought devs and hardware manufacturers should have tried to achieve a perfect SD IQ *BEFORE* jumping to HD.
Just make up your mind so i can decide whether to upgrade to full hd plasma or keep my 720p rptv
I'm not too worried about not getting 1080p games on next gen consoles. 720p looks really good if the source image is good quality. Just watched Walle on 720p stream and the image looks 100x better than current games at 1080p
That is what i see too, 720p movies look infintly better than any game in any resolution
So, makes sense to always go for 720p and 30fps and try to improve the actual graphics / rendering
I think the 720p/30fps will be the standard next gen, with the difference that will be true 720p and steady 30fps
Also i suppose some games could afford rendering a bit higher and downsampling, to get extra smooth image, like Witcher 2 does with Uber sampling
Epic has been doing this for a lot longer than the last console cycle.They make new, shiny shit and they want you to want it.
walking fiend
Member
I like how the OP has forgotten to put 30fps in the thread title...
Anyone who expects these consoles to have 2.5 TFLOPS GPUs or that there will actually be games looking like Samaritan on them needs a reality check. It would be barely possible if MS or Sony would go for a powerhouse again, but it's just impossible they do that in these market conditions. The 5x figure would be way more realistic. The Wii U is supposed to be getting near that figure already (at least in raw FLOPS). Furthermore, having a game actually look like Samaritan is not a given even if the power is there.
Lately it seems Epic is campaigning for more power in the next consoles. My speculation is that what they heard about the 720 wasn't what they liked...
Lately it seems Epic is campaigning for more power in the next consoles. My speculation is that what they heard about the 720 wasn't what they liked...
AFAIK they showed the demo to the press with free camera control.
If WiiU can do it in 720p this year, i am certain the next xbox that will come later and probably be much stronger will do it in 1080p
Actually Epic empahsized that this can be in a game, i am sure they have that in mind for next gen games
Plus in 720p and 1Tflop is not even that demanding, comparing even to current PC tech, which of course will be further enchanced until xbox release
Also maybe, since Epic is working close with MS now, they tease us with how the next xbox 720 exclusives will look like, than trying to push for better hardware, chances are that 720 will be stronger than WiiU, so they already have the hardware required
herzogzwei1989
Banned
Could be.
The same can be said about DVD.
Makes perfect sense. Image quality is much more important than raw resolution. We entered HD this gen and it cost quite an amount of visual fidelity (imagine what games would look like these days if the current consoles would only run at SD resolutions).
I think the 720p/30fps will be the standard next gen, with the difference that will be true 720p and steady 30fps
At least for the first years. After that we will see sub-30 fps games for sure. That's just the price to pay for evolution in graphics quality with same old tech.
I blame it on all the lens flares.
The face changing looked the best,but is not far from pc Mass Effect.Still is enough and is just an early tech demo.
Opus Angelorum
Member
What is encouraging is Epic pushed Microsoft to put more RAM in the Xbox 360, and hopefully the same will happen here.
If Microsoft listen to Epic and aim high for a base specification, then the final system could be more powerful than has been suggested.
If Microsoft listen to Epic and aim high for a base specification, then the final system could be more powerful than has been suggested.
He's always been like that in his presentations.
The accidental Crysis 2 image was funny.
I think it's you that needs a reality check. Basically every console generation of the past fifteen years has seen at least a tenfold increase in performance over the last. Expecting the same kind of jump after a generation that lasted longer than any before is not some kind of voodoo but just common sense. The same can be said about the market. What's wrong with the market? Nothing. People talk about recession, yet all the tech companies in the US make higher profits than ever before. Microsoft manages to sell more Xbox 360 in the US than ever before without cutting the price in three years and people pretend like the market is in some kind of trouble. Yes, Nintendo is in trouble with the Wii because it's not a HD console and consumers moved on. But 3DS seems to do great despite people running after smartphones and tablets. It only needed the right price, Nintendo tried to sell overpriced hardware to cash in on the 3D hype and it didn't work out. That's it. December NPD numbers weren't great, but overall the last quarter was still the best ever for the industry. Those revenues just moved to November. And why should January sales be any good with the total lack of interesting new releases? And let's not forget digital sales which aren't part of NPD numbers.
Releasing the most powerful console possible at the launch with the given budget is about the only thing they can do. Because evolution sells and evolution keeps you competitive. It's one of the things you learn in your first week if you're studying economics. Apple shows again and again that people are willing to pay incredible amounts of money for products that will be old after a year.
Sales of PS3 and Xbox 360 will slow down this year if they don't adjust prices. But that's not because of recessions or a shift towards social gaming or mobile gaming, it's because of old tech being sold for too much.
hopefully they can talk them into putting 1.21 gigawatts of ram.