• 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.

|OT|Next-gen Graphics Qualifications

VFXVeteran

Banned
All:

This thread is a pure TECHNICAL thread that allows members to discuss a game's graphics and how it meets the qualifications of considering it having next-gen visuals. It is NOT a thread of a subjective nature. Coming in here and trying to push saying, "this game has next-gen visuals because it looks pretty" isn't the thread you want to be in. Go to that particular game thread and discuss all you want. This thread is about seeing an industry movement towards a higher form of rendering that can't be done with the previous generation console hardware. This thread is about comparing how a game ranks with regard to pushing visual techniques to the next level.

I'm going to start by giving a link to my last work in the film industry. It was a test for Scoob published by WB. I created every single shader in this spot while the artists created the lights, characters, animation and lighting. I'm proud of this work because I used every single advanced shading technique to date. The renderer is using a path-tracing called Arnold (widely known by many studios). I'm showing this to establish a fixed "target" that game studios will continue (over the years) to try to achieve. This shot has no tricks. It's pure brute force path-tracing with shaders for any material you can think of (fabric, hair, gloss, diffuse, etc..).



Please forgive the low res quality. It's something I can't get a higher res version of.


Let's talk about some target criteria for next-gen graphics:

PBR - physically based rendering was the key technology last generation. While several games used it, the quality of every game wasn't the same. I can only name a few games that used really well done PBR shaders. It's pretty challenging to implement an uber shader that covers all materials and it's most definitely bandwidth consuming. This should be standard in most next-gen games and therefore shouldn't be considered a "next-gen" feature unless it's doing something different like some example footage later down this thread. In any case, these shaders aren't possible in games or any realtime hardware right now. They are using complete energy-conserving BRDFs and couple with path-tracing, it's just not feasible. But some games have come close.

The Order 1866



Resident Evil Remake:




Hair - Still a big mountain to climb in realtime. Even though many games throw a crap ton of polygons into a scene (i.e. UE5 or FS2020), hair is still a big problem. Not only is the fur rendering expensive but the shading is even more expensive. In my short, I used 4 BRDF specular lobes with the fur including a backscatter term used. The only game that I've seen start to pay attention to fur on this level is Black Myth.




Reflections - RT reflections aren't just mirror materials. In fact, very rarely do we see mirror surfaces everywhere. My shot actually does reflections for the costumes and is apart of the specular BRDF (GGX) with an anisotropic functionality. We'll most likely see RT reflections that are mirror or combined with some technique to blur them. That will approach CG, but still a few years off of the brute force approach. Some games have implemented all the RTX features but I'll post the first one out the gate.

Battlefield V




Lighting - this is a make it or break it feature in the rendering pipeline. You can't have good visuals without good lighting. And that covers a LOT of things: Global Illumination, Environment lighting, Area lights, shadows, self-occlusion, and ambient occlusion. The Scoob shot uses area lights, GI, environment lighting, etc.. this is what we should look for when judging whether a game is getting close to this to be considered next-gen quality. All the old lighting tricks are -- old. Save for a few techniques that are extremely well implemented (i.e. RDR2, FS2020 and UE5 demo), we are still seeing light probe GI, SSAO, and cube map environment lighting. We are specifically looking for a game that breaks this trend and moves towards CGI. FS2020 is one such game. It has the most accurate lighting I've ever seen in a game and that's just one of the things noted in this sim that's done above and beyond current gen:

FS2020




Metro: Exodus




Control




FX - special effects is so difficult for games these days. It's almost always that there isn't enough bandwidth to order transparency triangles. That gets to be a huge bottleneck on top of trying to use cutouts properly. It simply crushes the advantages of a deferred renderer because you try to avoid the triangle sorting but have no choice but to switch to forward rendering for transparencies. On top of just rendering the sprite cards, you've got actual physics systems to go with it. At Lockheed, I'm literally learning alot about physics and why it's so expensive getting the calculations precise when launching a rocket. Thats' a whole different branch of mathematics which simply bogs the CPU down alot. We've been studying CUDA to see if we can get some GPGPU compute going but 1) the graphics card has limited memory and 2) it still operates in 2D coordinates. That's strictly a limitation of the hardware that the industry has adopted over the years. What game is showing some incredible promise in regards to physics-based sprites? Black Myth, and Control comes to mind. I also remember the Nvidia FX plugin added to Batmobile awhile back.

Black Myth




Batman Arkham Knight

 
Last edited:

VFXVeteran

Banned
Control




Animation - it counts. Naughty Dog and Ubisoft are the leaders right now in animation. They work extremely hard to bring accurate mocap to a game. TLOU2 was incredible at it. The Assassin's Creed games are excellent at the movements of characters. We've already seen TLOU2/Hellblade 2's facial animation which takes it a step further:


TLOU2




Hellblade 2




Last but not least is UE5 demo; Incredible use of highly detailed geometry and textures:




Please consider what I mentioned as the conditions for participating in this thread. No insults, trolling, policing people's careers, flaming other platforms, etc.. in this thread. I am more than welcome to discuss any game that someone puts in this thread that thinks deserves the "next-gen" quality that we are all looking for. But it truly has to do something in the league of some of the games I mentioned here. I'm not saying that The Order and TLOU2 etc.. are next-gen games but they do something unique that requires at least a game doing something similar or better.

Mod of War Mod of War , DGrayson DGrayson , EviLore EviLore , Bill O'Rights Bill O'Rights - Please police this thread as best you can. I really don't want this thread to disappear/locked as it will be a great thread to discuss merits of upcoming games this generation.
 
Last edited:

VFXVeteran

Banned
Good thread, but why did you cry at the bottom of your final post? You've been consistently creating flame wars, acting like some sort of authority, and then ask the mods to police your things?

If you walk in the rain you're bound to get wet.

I did that because I know how people hijack my comments and my threads. It needs to be policed. Look at the ban list to see all the Sony gamers getting hit because of bad behavior. Just discuss. It's really not hard.
 

Bo_Hazem

Banned
TlouPart2 is nextgen already.

Big arm Guy was right.

Hopefully the mods close this thread
Good thread, but why did you cry at the bottom of your final post? You've been consistently creating flame wars, acting like some sort of authority, and then ask the mods to police your things?

If you walk in the rain you're bound to get wet.

Let him be, I have no interest in here as well, with all due respect to OP.
 
Really great thread and lots of effort. Bravo. Hopefully this becomes a great source of intelligent discussion.

If I may ask, would you still consider a game next gen if it employed several of the demanding techniques you listed at the same time instead of just using one of them cranked to 11? Even if all of those techniques weren't implemented any stronger than what we've seen? Wouldn't that be something that wasn't capable on last gen due to lack of horsepower?

Also, just so you know, I can't see your short for some reason. This is what I see,

"VIDEO UNAVAILABLE

This video contains content from WMG who has blocked it on copywrite grounds"
 

GymWolf

Member
Interesting topic but that "ubisoft great with animations" is some bullsh...argument that i can't get behind.

even if some of their games have acceptable\good animations, they are still behind other studios and light years behind ND.
 
Last edited:

VFXVeteran

Banned
Interesting topic but that "ubisoft great with animations" is some bullsh...argument that i can't get behind.

even if some of their game have good animations, they are still behind other studios and light years behind ND.

Assassin's Creed has some excellent mocap from a gameplay perspective. I mentioned it but I'm sure there are others. HZD has some excellent animation too. It's just me thinking of some games off the top of my head that come to mind.
 

CrysisFreak

Banned
My expectation for next-gen graphics is significantly more consistency.
Lots of current-gen games look awesome... sometimes.
The most consistent games right now I think are RDR2 and TLOU2.
There are games I love and that are beautiful like GOT and FH4 but they have these moments when I think to myself alright so that's where you can't keep up lmao.
 

VFXVeteran

Banned


He articulates why R&C is next gen and how these IO advancements could help in the PC space going forward.


We can consider R&C a next-gen looking game if we all agree that ANY ray-tracing no matter how ugly artistically the game may be is considered a feature of next-gen. I'm fine with that. But others should be fine with Control, Metro and BF5 being next-gen titles already on the PC. Is that fair?

Also the IO advancements so far are enhancing the game's scope and play. I'm more interested in how that translates to visuals (i.e. UE5 demo).
 
Last edited:

GreyHand23

Member
Damn. It got blocked. I figured.

Try this:


This link worked for me. Tbh I don't see us getting that level of fur look and physics in a game that's trying to do many other things as well anytime soon. I'm not super technical, but I imagine that fur and hair are somewhat similar in terms of render cost except that fur generally covers the entire body which would make the cost skyrocket. Ratchet's fur looks much better than the PS4 version, but isn't CGI level. I do think most people are having a much harder time being able to tell the difference though. It's a quite clear difference to my eye, but we have to consider what is good enough for the performance.
 

VFXVeteran

Banned
Really great thread and lots of effort. Bravo. Hopefully this becomes a great source of intelligent discussion.

If I may ask, would you still consider a game next gen if it employed several of the demanding techniques you listed at the same time instead of just using one of them cranked to 11? Even if all of those techniques weren't implemented any stronger than what we've seen? Wouldn't that be something that wasn't capable on last gen due to lack of horsepower?

Yep, I would. But that would be a LOT of bandwidth for a GPU. I'd be curious to see all of these implementations and what the scope of the game would be. Good question.
 

GreyHand23

Member
We can consider R&C a next-gen looking game if we all agree that ANY ray-tracing no matter how ugly artistically the game may be is considered a feature of next-gen. I'm fine with that. But others should be fine with Control, Metro and BF5 being next-gen titles already on the PC. Is that fair?

Here's the problem. Who is saying it's ugly artistically? The vast majority of people think it looks close to a Pixar movie. I'm not saying that, but when watching it I can see why people would think that. Also R&C doesn't just have ray tracing, it has other features that wouldn't be possible on the previous generation of consoles. The problem with trying to push PC games into specific generations is that there aren't really generations on PC. I would be ok with putting the games that you listed as next gen into that category if the majority of people comparing the console version to the PC version of the same game actually thought that it was enough of a leap graphically that it was in another generation.
 

GymWolf

Member
Assassin's Creed has some excellent mocap from a gameplay perspective. I mentioned it but I'm sure there are others. HZD has some excellent animation too. It's just me thinking of some games off the top of my head that come to mind.
i can help:

capcom with RE games or dmc games or fighting games or the dinos in mh
insomniac with all of their games
the guys who make batman, i hate free flow combat but those are some ultra fluid animations
squaresoft, ff15 and 7R are trash but the animation work during combat is excellent.
rockstar thanks to euphoria engine
guerrilla with dinobot and kz
the guys behind bayonetta
japan studio\ueda team
from with some of their games, mostly sekiro, BB and basically every creatures\boss in their games


and i'm forgetting at least another 5+ that offer less janky animations than ubisoft in their open worlds.

I mean, they are kinda famous for the janky combat in their games, just looks literally every topic about valhalla, you don't have to believe me...even a small studio (compared to them) like sucker punch produced far higher quality combat animations in tsushima.
 
Last edited:
Here's the problem. Who is saying it's ugly artistically? The vast majority of people think it looks close to a Pixar movie. I'm not saying that, but when watching it I can see why people would think that. Also R&C doesn't just have ray tracing, it has other features that wouldn't be possible on the previous generation of consoles. The problem with trying to push PC games into specific generations is that there aren't really generations on PC. I would be ok with putting the games that you listed as next gen into that category if the majority of people comparing the console version to the PC version of the same game actually thought that it was enough of a leap graphically that it was in another generation.
I don't think he's saying it looks ugly artistically. This is a technical thread and he is trying to separate the artistic aspect from that. So he's saying that, since R&C is an artistic looker, just like the one on PS4 was, it would need to have certain technical features for him personally to consider it next gen. So, if we accept that Ray Tracing to any extent is a next gen feature, then we can accept that any game that has it would qualify as next gen, regardless of how artistically great it looks.

Personally, I think we should separate console from PC here as PC has been "next gen" for quite some time now in terms of what kinds of cutting edge graphical techniques it's been able to implement over consoles, even if it didn't artistically look great.
 
Last edited:

VFXVeteran

Banned
Here's the problem. Who is saying it's ugly artistically?

I was actually talking about Metro and Control. I think they don't look very good artistically. Although pushing advanced tech with RT.

The vast majority of people think it looks close to a Pixar movie. I'm not saying that, but when watching it I can see why people would think that.

Wellll.. I really don't understand that one but I can see your point.

Also R&C doesn't just have ray tracing, it has other features that wouldn't be possible on the previous generation of consoles.

I'd argue what other features that we haven't seen before?

The problem with trying to push PC games into specific generations is that there aren't really generations on PC. I would be ok with putting the games that you listed as next gen into that category if the majority of people comparing the console version to the PC version of the same game actually thought that it was enough of a leap graphically that it was in another generation.

Understood. So you are saying that the PC is generation agnostic so therefore can implement features within a given console generation that won't be possible on future hardware and shouldn't be a basis for judging whether said game meets the next-gen criteria?

I mean I would like to think that hardware is hardware. I think the games themselves would speak towards pushing visuals higher. The PC will reach further, but it could still be used as a target for console games.


i can help:

capcom with RE games or dmc games or fighting games or the dinos in mh
insomniac with all of their games
the guys who make batman, i hate free flow combat but those are some ultra fluid animations
squaresoft, ff15 and 7R are trash but the animation work during combat is excellent.
rockstar thanks to euphoria engine
guerrilla with dinobot and kz 2-3
the guys behind bayonetta
from with some of their games, mostly sekiro, BB and basically every creatures\boss in their games


and i'm forgetting at least another 5+ that offer less janky animations than ubisoft in their open worlds.

I mean, they are kinda famous for the janky combat in their games, just looks literally every topic about valhalla, you don't have to believe me...even a small studio (compared to them) like sucker punch produced far higher quality combat animations in tsushima.

Good post. Thanks for that! (y)
 
Last edited:

GreyHand23

Member
I don't think he's saying it looks ugly artistically. This is a technical thread and he is trying to separate the artistic aspect from that. So he's saying that, since R&C is an artistic looker, just like the one on PS4 was, it would need to have certain technical features for him personally to consider it next gen. So, if we accept that Ray Tracing to any extent is a next gen feature, then we can accept that any game that has it would qualify as next gen.

Personally, I think we should separate console from PC here as PC has been "next gen" for quite some time now in terms of what kinds of cutting edge graphical techniques it's been able to implement over consoles, even if it didn't artistically look great.

If that's what he's saying then yes I could agree with that.
 

JTCx

Member
PBR is used in most games these days so that alone can't be a quality of next gen.
PBR is pretty much the standard from here on out and its been for awhile. Every dev studio i worked with and all my friends and colleagues in the industry are using PBR in some form. Just because its not new doesnt mean you can disqualify it because we can crank out even more materials than before.

Same thing with animation, nothing has really changed were all still using simple ik rigs but now it jus keeps getting better and better. As well as more blendshapes.
 
Last edited:

GymWolf

Member
Yo VFX don't get me wrong, ubisoft have some great animated games like the old ac, for honor, some combat animations in WD1 and the 2d rayman and i'm surely forgetting something, they are just discontinue with their output to be put on a pedastal with the king of animations (ND, but rockstar is there).
 

VFXVeteran

Banned
PBR is pretty much the standard from here on out and its been for awhile. Every dev studio i worked with and all my friends and colleagues in the industry are using PBR in some form. Just because its not new doesnt mean you can disqualify it because we can crank out even more materials than before.

Same thing with animation, nothing has really changed were all still using simple ik rigs but now it jus keeps getting better and better. As well as more blendshapes.

Absolutely agree. Some BRDFs don't have dual specular lobes or anisotropic highlighting which is a refinement in the GGX equation. I know some guys in the industry is trying to explore that for their future games.


Yo VFX don't get me wrong, ubisoft have some great animated games like the old ac, for honor, some combat animations in WD1 and the 2d rayman and i'm surely forgetting something, they are just discontinue with their output to be put on a pedastal with the king of animations (ND, but rockstar is there).

Damn I forgot RDR2!! Good call!
 

GymWolf

Member
Absolutely agree. Some BRDFs don't have dual specular lobes or anisotropic highlighting which is a refinement in the GGX equation. I know some guys in the industry is trying to explore that for their future games.




Damn I forgot RDR2!! Good call!
My dream is euphoria engine even in visual novel 2d hentai games and solitaire collection, because everything is better with a bit of euphoria, maybe in 10 years from now when someone is gonna develop something similar not exclusive for rockstar.
 
Last edited:
I'm too lazy to read the OP but out of the games I've played across PC / PS4 Pro / Xbox One X, there are only 2 games that I would categories as "next-gent":

Control - full on RTX with no bullshit that I don't think will even be possible on XSX/PS5 + superb destructibility of the environment.
Flight Simulator 2020 - lighting, materials quality, weather systems and simulation + scale of the world is just fucking insane.
 

Lethal01

Member
Yep, I would. But that would be a LOT of bandwidth for a GPU. I'd be curious to see all of these implementations and what the scope of the game would be. Good question.

Whether the game is appealing isn't a factor, but I'd say a game looking next gen is less about a single feature being present and more about how many next gens traits are combined and how the team actually builds the game around it.
 

GreyHand23

Member
Understood. So you are saying that the PC is generation agnostic so therefore can implement features within a given console generation that won't be possible on future hardware and shouldn't be a basis for judging whether said game meets the next-gen criteria?

I mean I would like to think that hardware is hardware. I think the games themselves would speak towards pushing visuals higher. The PC will reach further, but it could still be used as a target for console games.

Well we'd have to look at where the concept of next generation even comes from? I'd argue that it is largely dictated by consoles, because they are stuck on fixed hardware. Each new generation of console hardware lifts the baseline by a drastic amount and that results in graphical fidelity that wasn't possible before. The issue is like you said PCs aren't static. Next gen features don't have to wait on consoles. Consoles do control where money is spent however, so in some ways even though PC can march ahead with hardware, alot of the big teams with the expertise to actually fully utilize PC hardware aren't financially incentivized to do so until they can implement a similar vision on consoles. FS2020 is probably the first game that it made more sense to go all in for PC because while it is a game, it's supposed to be a pure simulator and can be used to train pilots in any number of scenarios. That's the financial hook for Microsoft.
 

VFXVeteran

Banned
I'm too lazy to read the OP but out of the games I've played across PC / PS4 Pro / Xbox One X, there are only 2 games that I would categories as "next-gent":

Control - full on RTX with no bullshit that I don't think will even be possible on XSX/PS5 + superb destructibility of the environment.
Flight Simulator 2020 - lighting, materials quality, weather systems and simulation + scale of the world is just fucking insane.

How about Black Myth and Metro Exodus? UE5 demo?
 

VFXVeteran

Banned
Whether the game is appealing isn't a factor, but I'd say a game looking next gen is less about a single feature being present and more about how many next gens traits are combined and how the team actually builds the game around it.

Yes I agree. The list of features I gave isn't to say that you need only one of them to make it in. On the contrary, they are just a list of things to look for going forward.. Good post!
 

Imtjnotu

Member
no game as of now has the particles and ray tracing(wether you think its good or not) going on at the same time as we do this game.

not really sure what your trying to get out of this thread at all.
 

GreyHand23

Member
Actually I'm struggling with Metro. From a lighting standpoint it looks next gen, but the geometry is actually quite low and the texture quality isn't particularly high either. Just looking at the game, it doesn't look next gen to me although the lighting looks quite nice. I think this goes back to a combination of features. Metro and BF5 could switch RTX on, but from a texture and geometry level they were still tethered by the consoles. FS2020 seemingly was built without having to worry about being able to scale down to Xbox One for example.
 

VFXVeteran

Banned
Well we'd have to look at where the concept of next generation even comes from? I'd argue that it is largely dictated by consoles, because they are stuck on fixed hardware. Each new generation of console hardware lifts the baseline by a drastic amount and that results in graphical fidelity that wasn't possible before. The issue is like you said PCs aren't static. Next gen features don't have to wait on consoles. Consoles do control where money is spent however, so in some ways even though PC can march ahead with hardware, alot of the big teams with the expertise to actually fully utilize PC hardware aren't financially incentivized to do so until they can implement a similar vision on consoles. FS2020 is probably the first game that it made more sense to go all in for PC because while it is a game, it's supposed to be a pure simulator and can be used to train pilots in any number of scenarios. That's the financial hook for Microsoft.

Excellent post man!

It might be hard to include the PC in when comparing against the consoles, but we all know it's going to happen. I'm mostly trying to grab some of these features that stand out that would definitely be considered as a basis for it.

For example, many Sony gamers think R&C is a next-gen title for 2 main reasons:

1) RT reflections

2) Several destructive props that scatter into multiple pieces of geometry.

From a console's perspective, yes, it would be considered next-gen because it simply can't be run on a PS4/Xbox. But mainly because of the ray-tracing and less so the destructive geometry. When I made the comment that I think it's current gen, I was taking into consideration that the PC was a piece of hardware used in these comparisons and since we've already seen RT this current gen and we can probably list several games that have a lot of destruction, it did nothing else graphically technical. The IO loading is of course amazing and I hope to see that in future games, but that only makes the experience better - not the graphics.

So I am willing to concede that R&C is a next-gen worthy title because of the RT but wouldn't that be too easy for admission?
 

sojuwarrior

Member
I know different genres and worlds, but if horizon FW's graphics is as good as the wukong game, I will be extremely impressed.
 

GreyHand23

Member

Control does have alot of particles and excellent ray tracing, but immediately as I go through the video what stands out to me is how sparse the environments are. I've never played the game so I don't know if it's always like that, but there doesn't seem to be alot of geometry in general and the geometry that is there isn't that high in quality.
 
Actually I'm struggling with Metro. From a lighting standpoint it looks next gen, but the geometry is actually quite low and the texture quality isn't particularly high either. Just looking at the game, it doesn't look next gen to me although the lighting looks quite nice.
Exactly how I feel. It's not the full package. That's why I left it out of my list.
 

VFXVeteran

Banned
Control does have alot of particles and excellent ray tracing, but immediately as I go through the video what stands out to me is how sparse the environments are. I've never played the game so I don't know if it's always like that, but there doesn't seem to be alot of geometry in general and the geometry that is there isn't that high in quality.

Yea, there is a lot going on and the RT will actually reflect, light, and cast shadows on it so it's definitely a candidate. The game is a drab artistically though, IMO.
 

JTCx

Member
We can consider R&C a next-gen looking game if we all agree that ANY ray-tracing no matter how ugly artistically the game may be is considered a feature of next-gen. I'm fine with that. But others should be fine with Control, Metro and BF5 being next-gen titles already on the PC. Is that fair?

Also the IO advancements so far are enhancing the game's scope and play. I'm more interested in how that translates to visuals (i.e. UE5 demo).
For Metro id be incline to agree only if it has improved animations in general. Control? Fuck no thats an ugly ass game. Im not even gonna talk about BF5.

Theres so much more in R&C happening than just having RT slapped on. Its straight up disingenuous to think so.
 

VFXVeteran

Banned
control doesnt have anywhere near as much chaos and particles going on. control does look amazing but as of now RC is the only one.

Yes it does. And there are other games too.. hell, the new Marvel Avengers game has a shit ton of destruction.

To add, the objects in R&C that are destroyed are freed from memory like in 1 second if not more. Control keeps a lot of that in memory and it's also doing the entire ray-tracing algorithm on the destructed pieces. R&C does not have the pieces that are broken also reflect or cast shadows.
 

VFXVeteran

Banned
For Metro id be incline to agree only if it has improved animations in general. Control? Fuck no thats an ugly ass game. Im not even gonna talk about BF5.

The term "ugly" shouldn't be in this thread. We aren't talking about how good something looks but how well it implements technology. I made that very clear in the first post.
 
Control does have alot of particles and excellent ray tracing, but immediately as I go through the video what stands out to me is how sparse the environments are. I've never played the game so I don't know if it's always like that, but there doesn't seem to be alot of geometry in general and the geometry that is there isn't that high in quality.
control doesnt have anywhere near as much chaos and particles going on. control does look amazing but as of now RC is the only one.
Have you played the game?

 
Top Bottom