I thought they were *targeting* 60fps?
They are, but the trailer (on Gamersyde) already runs at 60 fps.
I thought they were *targeting* 60fps?
Reposting what I aid from the other thread:
I'm ignorant when it comes to computer specs and hardware, but is it more important to have greater amounts of ram than it is important to have a more powerful graphics card? I am trying to understand how a mediocre graphics card can be sufficient if the amount of ram on a console is increased considerably.
This shit confuses me.
And holy shit if that's real time as according to Interference.
Won what? Please tell all of us.
GPGPU and funny changes to the cache and side buses in the APU. Not so crazy when you remember this was also running in real time:
Cerny did say to lookout for year 2-3 when they really dug into the APU optimizations he requested. Not bad for some garbage PC parts thrown in a console case, eh?
Man, that's insane. Naughty Dog and Connie Yu are geniuses.
They've indicated that they're trying to make the transitions seamless and to get the difference between gameplay and cutscenes negligible. I haven't seen anything saying that they were flat out done with pre-rendered stuff.
Beginning with Uncharted 4, all Naughty Dog games will feature completely in engine, real time, 3D cutscenes (if they even stay cutscenes anymore), a huge performance departure from what they used to ship.
"Each hair on his upper lip has been individually programmed to move dynamically, according to both Sully's movement and the effects of the world around him. If you swipe up on the track pad, all the hairs will move upward-"The true test is seeing Sully's mustache in-engine in realtime.
I bet this game gets 10/10's The Last of Us style if it actually has platforming, a better story than Uncharted 2, improved melee over Uncharted 3, MP that's a mix of the best of UC2 and UC3, and gun play similar to Uncharted 2 with more weaponry.
Get on it ND!
Source 5 doesn't mean shit. We already know it's in-engine. The question was whether it was pre-rendered or real time.
One thing to note is that iirc, ND have always used the SAME model for cinematics and real time gameplay for all their games last gen. The lighting and aliasing were the two prime aspects that were improved for the cutscenes.
Reposting what I aid from the other thread:
I'm ignorant when it comes to computer specs and hardware, but is it more important to have greater amounts of ram than it is important to have a more powerful graphics card? I am trying to understand how a mediocre graphics card can be sufficient if the amount of ram on a console is increased considerably.
This shit confuses me.
And holy shit if that's real time as according to Interference.
Well, it depends on the validity of the Beyond3D source.
The Eurogamer analysis does back it up, but I'd like to see some uncompressed 1080p/60fps video.
Please never compare a Ubisoft game to Naughty Dog ever again. Naughty Dog has always delivered, while Ubisoft always lies and bullshots their way into the hype train.
Man, that's insane. Naughty Dog and Connie Yu are geniuses.
Never doubt the naughty gods.
"Each hair on his upper lip has been individually programmed to move dynamically, according to both Sully's movement and the effects of the world around him. If you swipe up on the track pad, all the hairs will move upward-"
*crowd goes apeshit*
Day one.
I want to believe but I don't believe it...
Has a game looked that good in-game ever on PC?
When?That's not entirely true. I remember Uncharted 3 debuted with 60fps footage. But then Sony went on their 3D rampage and we all know how that turned out.
?
"More detailed high-resolution character models will be the standard throughout The Last of Us Remastered, with developers using renders previously used only in cutscenes for the game's PlayStation 3 version, creative director Neil Druckmann told Edge."
http://www.polygon.com/2014/5/9/569...4-cutscene-character-models-higher-resolution
Speaking of this, where was Quantic Dream at E3? Still too soon after BeyondTS to show anything? It'll be between them and Naughty Dog to see who pushes the PS4 the hardest in terms of photorealism I reckon.
The Eurogamer analysis does back it up. I'd like to see some uncompressed 1080p/60fps video, but I'm not prepared to doubt Corrine Yu's word.
Reposting what I aid from the other thread:
I'm ignorant when it comes to computer specs and hardware, but is it more important to have greater amounts of ram than it is important to have a more powerful graphics card? I am trying to understand how a mediocre graphics card can be sufficient if the amount of ram on a console is increased considerably.
This shit confuses me.
And holy shit if that's real time as according to Interference.
That's not entirely true. I remember Uncharted 3 debuted with 60fps footage. But then Sony went on their 3D rampage and we all know how that turned out.
OP has the gamersyde video that you can stream or download. Recommend using the torrent.
What have other devs been doing? Are Naughty Dog really this far ahead of everyone else?
Only the first parties will bring their A game. But we've already seen how talented Naughty Dog are. They've consistently produced the best looking games on their respective consoles.What have other devs been doing? Are Naughty Dog really this far ahead of everyone else?
Underpowered consoles redeemed.Cerny worked with AMD on certain APU optimizations that he really wanted. It was buried somewhere in his technical presentation on how the PS4 came to be. I don't believe MS did the same. First wave of games didn't/won't take advantage of these PS4 specific features, but Uncharted 4 hints at what the console can really do.