Support NeoGAF

[VFX_Veteran]

I not expecting 60fps but a year is a huge amount of time for them to add stuff which also depending on how the do there development .
They don't have to redo there assets to get better lighting , AA ( this they already got cover) , physics , particles , animation ,motion blur etc etc which all effect how a game looks.

That is incorrect. You can't just add physics without changing the dynamics of the game. AI has to react, etc.. same with particles being added and animation. Changing materials is a big deal as well.

 

[delta25]

It's ok for people to think the game looks amazing, but when someone thinks it doesn't for them to get bashed?? You are right..

No, its not ok when the vast majority of naysayers all come from the PC side of things. The general pessimism towards this games visuals reeks of insecurities.

 

[JordanN]

Dead on. Game certainly looks nice, but I was hoping to be blown away and I wasn't. We're still waiting for that game that's going to surprise us on these new consoles (personally I had very high hopes it would be this game), which will probably happen eventually, but UC4 isn't going to be the game that does it.

It's amusing how defensive and butt-hurt people become when you level any sort of mild criticism at a ND game. Yep, I get it -- Uncharted 2 and Last Of Us are masterpieces -- doesn't mean everything this studio does is god-tier and above criticism on any level.

Serious question but what exactly are you looking for on next gen consoles that you want to blow you away?

If you want a resolution increase, it's there (720p to 1080p). Drake's character model clearly looks better than any last gen character and even animates far better than anything else right now too. Environments are far more detailed and cutting edge. Lighting has gotten better and so have the textures too (PBR based).

I'm not forcing you to be impressed by Uncharted 4. I was kinda like that too (before I saw the ending and the high bit rate Gamersyde video). But if you don't have a point of reference, I'm not sure if you will ever be impressed.

 

[nelsonroyale]

I think you misjudge me. I created a thread about AC:Unity because it is unanimously considered the best looking game this gen. It's not some fan service to Ubisoft. I also praise other games' graphics, Crysis 3, KZ:SF, Ryse, FC4, and some others to name a few. Just because my AC:Unity thread got so many responses doesn't mean I'm riding AC:U. I recognize beauty and I speak about it.

Oh come on. Reflect. Read your own posts. Many people disputed your claims in that thread and you responded in highly combative manner, indicitive of someone who has a high passion for their subject matter. That is fine. Don't deny it though. Personally, I think Unity is perhaps the overall best looking game at the moment (great material shaders, realistic scale), but it takes a hammering for all the stuff it does pretty mediocarly. Unimpressive IQ even on PC, unimpressive performance, low detail NPCs (there are a ton of them which is impressive), terrible LoD and pop in. These are technical weaknesses which are pretty glaring in the game. You only ride the positives. That is a textbook case of bias. You have a preference and constantly reinforce it by overweighting strengths and undervaluing weaknesses. I am doing the same to a degree with U4, but not to the degree you have done with Unity.

 

[Ishan]

Yeah it's by far the most realistic depiction of Drake yet, my only wish is that they had used facial capture instead. Drake's brother may show plenty of subtle facial gestures/animation but the drawback of having it manually keyed in/computer generated is that all those subtleties animate at an awkward uh....what's the word for it. Cadence? Tons of details mean squat if they're morphing/transitioning into one another unnaturally. And to me that is what's happening here.

Huh first person I've seen having issue with Nds facial animation ... I personally prefer them by miles over any other game and think they look the most natural/realistic . I think almost everyone else agrees with me on this .

 

[Nafai1123]

VFX_Veteran you have more posts in this thread than almost anybody and every single one of them seems to be obsessively focused on downplaying peoples excitement for the game.

When someone says "omg this is the best looking game I've ever seen." That is excitement. Maybe it's the IQ, maybe it's the gameplay, maybe it's a combination of a multitude of factors. They aren't wrong to have that opinion and they aren't downplaying the things that other games do because they have that opinion.

When you say "well, actually, it's not the best because it's not doing x, y, and z that these other games do." you are just being a pretentious, controversial know-it-all. You aren't wrong, but that doesn't make you right. Nobody cares, move on.

 

[Saberus]

Seems like plenty of projection going on here. To me it looks like you have an emotional investment in platform that you don't believe that's worth the investment and spend a good deal time trying to downplay the much more popular alternative. Convincing yourself that a console exclusive which is widely regarded on GAF in the past for its tech can't compare to your more expensive preferred platform. Because if it does, then what was the whole point, right?

The salt is definitely real.

I got that guy on ignore now.. its like he's on a personal quest to tell us.. no your all wrong.. it looks meh..

 

[serversurfer]

Lastly, with the lackluster performance problems and downgraded graphics of this gen on both consoles with the games that have released so far, I expected that people waiting on ND to release UC4 footage would latch on tight and use UC4 as their final hope justifying their console purchase by raising it high above anything else (even if it's on par). I'm happy to report that I was dead on about that assumption.

So, you proved consoles suck by predicting Uncharted would be really good?

mindblown.gif

 

[VFX_Veteran]

Seems like plenty of projection going on here. To me it looks like you have an emotional investment in platform that you don't believe that's worth the investment and spend a good deal time trying to downplay the much more popular alternative. Convincing yourself that a console exclusive which is widely regarded on GAF in the past for its tech can't compare to your more expensive preferred platform. Because if it does, then what was the whole point, right?

The salt is definitely real.

Very nice way to re-project my projection.

 

[shacklesmcgee]

That is incorrect. You can't just add physics without changing the dynamics of the game. AI has to react, etc.. same with particles being added and animation. Changing materials is a big deal as well.

You don't even know what your talking about

 

[gundamkyoukai]

I think you misjudge me. I created a thread about AC:Unity because it is unanimously considered the best looking game this gen. It's not some fan service to Ubisoft. I also praise other games' graphics, Crysis 3, KZ:SF, Ryse, FC4, and some others to name a few. Just because my AC:Unity thread got so many responses doesn't mean I'm riding AC:U. I recognize beauty and I speak about it.

ACU is not considered the best looking game this gen unanimously especially if we talking about consoles .
ACU does nothing new tech wise and i won't even call the best looking PC game that is for star citizen.
But still i see you trying downplay UC4 when people trying to talk about it .

That is incorrect. You can't just add physics without changing the dynamics of the game. AI has to react, etc.. same with particles being added and animation. Changing materials is a big deal as well.

No i am not wrong you can add more animation\ make it better anytime during development .
The same for particles you can change the amount , the look , how the behave anything during development also .

 

[Vire]

Not that I expected anything different from a graphics thread, but holy shit these past two pages are TERRIBLE.

Might be time to shut it down soon.

 

[Psychological Intellect]

Holy shit looking at these graphics makes me wonder what a new Ratchet and clank game would liok like.

Tools of Destruction blew me the fuck away when it came out.

 

[Vire]

Holy shit looking at these graphics makes me wonder what a new Ratchet and clank game would liok like.

Tools of Destruction blew me the fuck away when it came out.

I imagine it would look something like Sunset Overdrive in terms of fidelity considering Insomniac just made that.

Although they seem to be off the 60 FPS love train these days.

 

[Ape]

This game solidifies my purchase of the ps4 next year. This is hands down my favorite franchise on Sony's console and the game looks great! Everyone is freaking out because now the top games graphically are going to be really close. Last gen it wasn't really like that early in the gen.

 

[SaberEdge]

....Really? For me it's not even close, the UC4 shot looks vastly superior. That woman's face has no detail at all. Just looks like a smooth, blurry surface.

Don't be silly. Vastly superior? That's just hyperbole. The lighting conditions are completely different. It's similar to how the lighting is flatter in the new Uncharted 4 gameplay video compared to the E3 trailer. Not to mention that Elise is a young woman with clear, smooth skin, not some older dude with lots of wrinkles.

 

[Razgriz-Specter]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B4TDTSeCcAAatNk.jpg

This can't be how Drake looked in UC3. I don't remember those big anime eyes. New Drake looks fantastic, though.

It just wasn't noticeable until you visually compare it to Uncharted 4's.

He is always being tweaked though, remember this

 

[Ishan]

That is incorrect. You can't just add physics without changing the dynamics of the game. AI has to react, etc.. same with particles being added and animation. Changing materials is a big deal as well.

Err this is quite misguided unless game dev is very different from any other type of simulation dev and I highly doubt it is . Yes you can . Most programs are pretty modular . Unless you're hard coding everything and tweaking constantly for every gain making pretty specific assumptions on code and level design super early on . So unless you're a game dev (specifically in the programming dept) I'm going to disagree and call you out on it . And in fact I would hope you atleast have some programming experience to make such a blanket statement .

Not that I expected anything different from a graphics thread, but holy shit these past two pages are TERRIBLE.

Might be time to shut it down soon.

Lol well it wasn't supposed to be a new gameplay only topic god made but it seems to have gone off the first
Page now

 

[adelante]

Huh first person I've seen having issue with Nds facial animation ... I personally prefer them by miles over any other game and think they look the most natural/realistic . I think almost everyone else agrees with me on this .

That's probably because you're used to it. ND's methods are by no means, bad; the expressive range of emotions on Drake looks great but the ones in say, Infamous SS and Crysis 3 just seem far more natural to me. Maybe I tend to look out for subtleties like this, so differences in facial animations due to different setups/data stand out to me.

 

[VFX_Veteran]

. Unimpressive IQ even on PC,

IQ? Isn't that defining the entire game? What does that mean?

unimpressive performance,

On PC? No.

low detail NPCs (there are a ton of them which is impressive),

NPCs can't possibly be as impressive looking as Arno. There are thousands of them. So no, I don't expect that. Just like you shouldn't expect a rock to look as good as Nate.

terrible LoD and pop in.

I said many times this is broken. Period. Never once took up for this crap.

These are technical weaknesses which are pretty glaring in the game.

Only one of those is a technical weakness. The game is too much for the consoles to handle IMO. There are other games too that the console can't handle too.

You only ride the positives. That is a textbook case of bias.

I am concentrating on the positives because they are things never before seen in a game. Hence the reason for the thread.

I am doing the same to a degree with U4, but not to the degree you have done with Unity.

To a large degree. At least I admitted to being biased towards the game because of it's graphics. Are you ready to admit you are biased because it's ND's game?

 

[VFX_Veteran]

You don't even know what your talking about

 

[Ishan]

Don't be silly. Vastly superior? That's just hyperbole. The lighting conditions are completely different. It's similar to how the lighting is flatter in the new Uncharted 4 gameplay video compared to the E3 trailer. Not to mention that Elise is a young woman with clear, smooth skin, not some older dude with lots of wrinkles.

Real young ppl don't necessarily have wrinkles but they aren't made of porcelain either ...

 

[Golgo 13]

Not that I expected anything different from a graphics thread, but holy shit these past two pages are TERRIBLE.

Might be time to shut it down soon.

Yep, as a newer member of GAF I'm astounded by how shameful many of the posters have behaved in this thread, and hell, even worse -- gotten away with it so freely.


I'll be showing myself out now.

 

[VFX_Veteran]

No i am not wrong you can add more animation\ make it better anytime during development .
The same for particles you can change the amount , the look , how the behave anything during development also .

Not if they weren't there in the first place.

 

[IMACOMPUTA]

You really sound extremely biased towards UC4. The game looks good for sure. But you are acting like the game has just leaped above every game this gen.. including the PC. It's just sounds very much like you are riding the ND bandwagon.

The subtle details in that demo are very nice and extremely thoughtful.. typical of the talented team at ND. But that doesn't make the game superior to every other game out there. The textures are typical, the ocean texture could definitely take from AC:Black Flag's water, the smoke could definitely use more work, lighting is basic and not as photoreal accurate as AC:Unity, explosions could get some work too. It would be nice to have dynamic time of day.. that's not there.. and the scope is still linear (you can't possible walk to those mountains you see in the background). There are several games that do this better from a subjective point of view..and clearly other games that do more with the hardware from an objective point of view.

Lastly, with the lackluster performance problems and downgraded graphics of this gen on both consoles with the games that have released so far, I expected that people waiting on ND to release UC4 footage would latch on tight and use UC4 as their final hope justifying their console purchase by raising it high above anything else (even if it's on par). I'm happy to report that I was dead on about that assumption.

You can't even fly planes in Driveclub (you can in GTA!) -- therefore, GTAV has better graphics.

 

[benny_a]

No, its not ok when the vast majority of naysayers all come from the PC side of things. The general pessimism towards this games visuals reeks of insecurities.

I would think it's hilarious if it wasn't so pathetic. VFX_Veteran has had so many meltdowns over the last months about Uncharted it's incredible.

 

[Vroadstar]

Not that I expected anything different from a graphics thread, but holy shit these past two pages are TERRIBLE.

Might be time to shut it down soon.

I have to agree with you, and it's being hijacked by a gaffer who kept downplaying the game and trying his hardest to shit on people's excitement. Where are the mods?

 

[daxter01]

Guys you cant even make case that Uncharted 4 looks better than Tomb Raider DE

 

[-griffy-]

IQ? Isn't that defining the entire game? What does that mean?

IQ is a common term when enthusiasts talk about video game graphics, and it stands for Image Quality. It refers to, aptly, the quality of the image. That is to say it has nothing to do with the assets, the art, the amount of polygons, etc, but how all of that visual information is presented. Resolution, aliasing, and texture filtering would probably be the top factors when judging image quality.

 

[Ishan]

Not if they weren't there in the first place.

Dude seriously the more I read your posts it either seems you have no clue how programming works (most systems on such large scales are meant to extendable including engines as they are often reused for future iterations . Case and point uc and uc2 same engine )

Or you have some vague knowledge and just want to quote things from a very specific scenario (yes maybe adding a interstellar level black hole simulation to a uc game will be harder as it has nothing similar to it in it's physics engine) to prove your point and be argumentative .

Frankly your point I somewhat agreed on but your post point replies are all over the place

 

[VFX_Veteran]

Err this is quite misguided unless game dev is very different from any other type of simulation dev and I highly doubt it is . Yes you can . Most programs are pretty modular . Unless you're hard coding everything and tweaking constantly for every gain making pretty specific assumptions on code and level design super early on . So unless you're a game dev (specifically in the programming dept) I'm going to disagree and call you out on it . And in fact I would hope you atleast have some programming experience to make such a blanket statement .

Let's discuss in detail then.

Say I have implemented a Phong shader on all assets. Each with appropriate settings (i.e. roughness, specular weight, falloff, etc..). Then I decide to change the pipeline to include a physically-based shader like the Generalized Trowbridge-Reitz specular model (GGX or GTR) with a Oren Nayar diffuse model. Clearly I need to go back and redo all my materials to adjust for the obvious difference in parameters..

Tell me how you can change the assets without having to individually tweak them and they still hold up under the same lighting conditions. Because I'd love to save our studio some time when they change materials.

 

[shacklesmcgee]

Dude seriously the more I read your posts it either seems you have no clue how programming works (most systems on such large scales are meant to extendable including engines as they are often reused for future iterations . Case and point uc and uc2 same engine )

Or you have some vague knowledge and just want to quote things from a very specific scenario (yes maybe adding a interstellar level black hole simulation to a uc game will be harder as it has nothing similar to it in it's physics engine) to prove your point and be argumentative .

It really is quite embarassing. You can't add particles or animations to a game? Changing materials is hard? Smfh...

 

[Nafai1123]

I would just like to point out that this was VFX_Veteran's FIRST post in this thread. Big surprise that it downplays the visuals and makes the comparison to AC: Unity.

So much for this beating AC:Unity in the graphics department. Still, the gameplay looks much improved than the previous UC games.. and I love the foliage look. Game suffers from a lot of framerate hitches.. I seriously doubt this will be 60fps locked.

Well done on shitting up the thread. But hey, at least you praised the gameplay!

 

[Raitosaito]

I would just like to point out that this was VFX_Veteran's FIRST post in this thread. Big surprise that it downplays the visuals and makes the comparison to AC: Unity.



Well done on shitting up the thread. But hey, at least you praised the gameplay!

Unity is the first thing he brings up in every thread.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

People can downplay the game all they want, but using Unity as a comparison? That game is broken, by all accounts. It could be doing a million things, but if it's not doing them well then it's wholly irrelevent.

 

[Ishan]

Let's discuss in detail then.

Say I have implemented a Phong shader on all assets. Each with appropriate settings (i.e. roughness, specular weight, falloff, etc..). Then I decide to change the pipeline to include a physically-based shader like the Generalized Trowbridge-Reitz specular model (GGX or GTR) with a Oren Nayar diffuse model. Clearly I need to go back and redo all my materials to adjust for the obvious difference in parameters..

Tell me how you can change the assets without having to individually tweak them and they still hold up under the same lighting conditions. Because I'd love to save our studio some time when they change materials.

Wtf ... Your counter argument is you can not add extra physics cause your changing the shader model ? .

One no when you add physics from what the post you quoted was not that you're chafing your shader model from something last gen used to some of the physically based rendering this gen . It's adding to the physics component which is then reflected in your shader ... Jesus ...

 

[VFX_Veteran]

IQ is a common term when enthusiasts talk about video game graphics, and it stands for Image Quality. It refers to, aptly, the quality of the image. That is to say it has nothing to do with the assets, the art, the amount of polygons, etc, but how all of that visual information is presented. Resolution, aliasing, and texture filtering would probably be the top factors when judging image quality.

Thanks for that very informative lesson on what IQ means. So now tell me, how is the IQ bad in AC:Unity on a PC when a gamer has complete control of resolution, aliasing, and texture filtering?

Here is a screenshot I made running AC:Unity:

What is wrong with that IQ? Its' running at 1440p @ 40fps. I see no aliasing, very good high quality anisotropic filtering and the resolution is much higher than 1080p.

 

[nelsonroyale]

IQ? Isn't that defining the entire game? What does that mean?



On PC? No.



NPCs can't possibly be as impressive looking as Arno. There are thousands of them. So no, I don't expect that. Just like you shouldn't expect a rock to look as good as Nate.



I said many times this is broken. Period. Never once took up for this crap.



Only one of those is a technical weakness. The game is too much for the consoles to handle IMO. There are other games too that the console can't handle too.



I am concentrating on the positives because they are things never before seen in a game. Hence the reason for the thread.



To a large degree. At least I admitted to being biased towards the game because of it's graphics. Are you ready to admit you are biased because it's ND's game?

Its lost on you. You use relativist arguments (i.e. what do you mean by PC? There are numerous people who have reported issues with the PC version) and keep shifting the goal posts. Do you have proof for instance that the poor pop-in and LoD is broken (whatever that means) and not a technical limitation? Anyway this isn't fruitful. You constantly claim a consensus for your own personal biases. Let's drop it.

Cheers.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

What's wrong with OP and that thread title?

Mods need to change it, this thread is about Assassins Creed!

 

[gundamkyoukai]

Not if they weren't there in the first place.

You are not making any sense .
ND has there animation system you add ,change etc how it look anytime during development .
All big AAA games has some sort of particles system , UC games there is stuff like sand , snow etc etc.
Why do think UC4 would be any different ?
I expect there going to have a level where it going to raining .

 

[-griffy-]

Thanks for that very informative lesson on what IQ means. So now tell me, how is the IQ bad in AC:Unity on a PC when a gamer has complete control of resolution, aliasing, and texture filtering?

Here is a screenshot I made running AC:Unity:

What is wrong with that IQ? Its' running at 1440p @ 40fps. I see no aliasing, very good high quality anisotropic filtering and the resolution is much higher than 1080p.

There's little wrong with the IQ in the PC version of Unity when you run it on a powerful machine at max settings. I wasn't the one who said there was something wrong with it. I was simply explaining what the term meant since you surprisingly didn't seem to know.

 

[JordanN]

Let's discuss in detail then.

Say I have implemented a Phong shader on all assets. Each with appropriate settings (i.e. roughness, specular weight, falloff, etc..). Then I decide to change the pipeline to include a physically-based shader like the Generalized Trowbridge-Reitz specular model (GGX or GTR) with a Oren Nayar diffuse model. Clearly I need to go back and redo all my materials to adjust for the obvious difference in parameters..

Tell me how you can change the assets without having to individually tweak them and they still hold up under the same lighting conditions. Because I'd love to save our studio some time when they change materials.

Edit: Having seen two Naughty Dog artists talk about it first hand, I believe the game is already Physically based. Therefore, they can change the materials anytime they want.
A reference to your claim it would be a lot of work.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

Thanks for that very informative lesson on what IQ means. So now tell me, how is the IQ bad in AC:Unity on a PC when a gamer has complete control of resolution, aliasing, and texture filtering?

Here is a screenshot I made running AC:Unity:

What is wrong with that IQ? Its' running at 1440p @ 40fps. I see no aliasing, very good high quality anisotropic filtering and the resolution is much higher than 1080p.

What is up with the textures on that roof and did the textures just fail to load on the spire in on the right?

Also, there's a lot of fog for it being such a nice day.

Edit: Hell, even on the roof its self, the panal just below the spire in question, what is going on there? There's also a similar texture load issue on the left hand houses.

 

[Vroadstar]

Thanks for that very informative lesson on what IQ means. So now tell me, how is the IQ bad in AC:Unity on a PC when a gamer has complete control of resolution, aliasing, and texture filtering?

Here is a screenshot I made running AC:Unity:

What is wrong with that IQ? Its' running at 1440p @ 40fps. I see no aliasing, very good high quality anisotropic filtering and the resolution is much higher than 1080p.

Am I in a wrong thread? WTF, give it a rest already nobody here cares about AC: Unity. If you really feel strongly about this create a comparison thread or something, just don't shove it in our faces how awesome FOR YOU AC:U is. You are really thick....

 

[VFX_Veteran]

Wtf ... Your counter argument is you can not add extra physics cause your changing the shader model ? .

One no when you add physics from what the post you quoted was not that you're chafing your shader model from something last gen used to some of the physically based rendering this gen . It's adding to the physics component which is then reflected in your shader ... Jesus ...

You are moving the goal posts now. You are the one that highlighted my "changing materials" comment.

Oh well, here you go: how do you add physics (by tagging geometry) without changing AI code or animation to react to it? To be more specific, say I blew up a tree and currently my NPC that's near the tree plays an animation of him falling and dying. But now I want to break up the tree into fragments and have the pieces hit the NPC and have the NPC react to that. What do I need to change specifically?

 

[VFX_Veteran]

PBR is PBR.

The same rules apply under any lighting model.

Come again? I'm talking about going from a non-PBR model to a PBR model.

 

[Xerxitron]

I made a list draft of what I liked and didn't like. The latter was too long so I'll just say the visuals are excellent as expected and the gameplay is Uncharted. Which is why I will rent it.

 

[VFX_Veteran]

Am I in a wrong thread? WTF, give it a rest already nobody here cares about AC: Unity. If you really feel strongly about this create a comparison thread or something, just don't shove it in our faces how awesome FOR YOU AC:U is. You are really thick....

That is a good idea. I will..

 

[v1lla21]

Lol he posted a picture of a PC game.

 

[Nizz]

Have ND come out and said anything definitive about the framerate besides that it's running at 30fps in this demo? Will it still be 60fps?