• 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.

Graphical Fidelity I Expect This Gen

To be fair, he looks way better in cutscenes than gameplay.

d14b77a08180f0a94a7086cc71ac52bcad1db46a.gif
8d49c33f12f4a5c0d3d380148c71f6f68096586c.gif


Yeah, he looks emo and inexperienced, but the character model itself is detailed and even looks better than RE2 model technically.

f20beff2cf4dfc50b260e1d16eff67e2d64d39afr1-268-270_00.gif


The problem with modern games is that they put all the GPU resources towards rendering higher detailed environments and completely skimp on the main fucking character rendering. It's something we saw in TLOU2 as well. This is what Joel and Ellie look like during cutscenes. Their gameplay model look last gen in comparison.
0045ad5d39e85e2fbb23ab2c30d1fd6b9f2d3c3e.gif
2655a0276318cd3d9d6483c42bda9ba5766e2363.gif


lYxDj50.jpg
NqkT8Py.jpg


Everyone needs to do what GG did with HFW and use hero lighting along with higher fidelity character models.


713jQCv.jpg
DF, specifically Alex (who else huh) seemed to be really bothered by the hero lighting, I personally think it was a great addition visually.
 

Hunnybun

Member
Have to say, I thought RE4 was weirdly beautiful when I tried the demo. Uneven perhaps, but the better parts look just lovely.

Actually Village was like that too, tbf. Not next gen, but not exactly last gen either.
 
Last edited:

H . R . 2

Member
speaking of Capcom and RE, I was watching RE:Vendetta (2017) the other day and took a few screenshots of the movie to show you something in line with
the earlier discussion about CG-tier visuals: that, again, it all depends on what your CG benchmark is.

for instance If we choose Resident Evil CG films as the benchmark, then I believe many current-gen titles have already far suprpassed this level of visual fidelity

3BHboTK.png


YiWWK0l.png


I am sure there are people on the forum who might still find this level of visuals perfectly acceptable and even impressive.
So I think as long as there are different standards for graphics, there will never be a consensus on photorealism and next-gen visuals,
because people don't share the same criteria, nor can they ever be entirely objective about such things even when shown proof of their low standards

Also, I believe, whether it's a game or a CG film, the level of visual fidelity comes down to how talented and determined the studio is

for example, look at the gemotry and reflection qulaity in this shot of the movie:

Sjk4ZdU.png


or the lack of AO/shadow in this one obviously important shot

P63lIGW.png


all of which, I believe, makes something like The Matrix Demo all the more impressive, even with its shortcomings
because as you can see, even in a fully-rendered CG film there are artefacts and low-quality assets.
therefore, complaints such as the one about the occasional low quality of gemotry in the Matrix Demo can only be chalked up to a lack of understading of how important a role talent, budget, and time play in game development
anyway
I am grateful for this discussion and this forum because it tries to maintain and even raise the standards by informing gamers about the latest developments
so that we can have a mutual understanding of visual fidelity, if not a complete agreement
 
Last edited:

CGNoire

Member
Has anyone in this thread played the new Dead Space? I think it looks great but I'm a bit perturbed by the low internal resolution in performance mode. Anyone able to reassure me?

I'm not THAT demanding - Horizon at 1800p checkerboard looks fantastic to me. From where I sit I generally can't tell 1440p and 4k apart.
Does it even have the voxel dynamic fluid simulation of smoke like they showcased?

At 3:30



Or was that complete marketing BS?
 
Last edited:
To be fair, he looks way better in cutscenes than gameplay.

d14b77a08180f0a94a7086cc71ac52bcad1db46a.gif
8d49c33f12f4a5c0d3d380148c71f6f68096586c.gif


Yeah, he looks emo and inexperienced, but the character model itself is detailed and even looks better than RE2 model technically.

f20beff2cf4dfc50b260e1d16eff67e2d64d39afr1-268-270_00.gif


The problem with modern games is that they put all the GPU resources towards rendering higher detailed environments and completely skimp on the main fucking character rendering. It's something we saw in TLOU2 as well. This is what Joel and Ellie look like during cutscenes. Their gameplay model look last gen in comparison.
0045ad5d39e85e2fbb23ab2c30d1fd6b9f2d3c3e.gif
2655a0276318cd3d9d6483c42bda9ba5766e2363.gif


lYxDj50.jpg
NqkT8Py.jpg


Everyone needs to do what GG did with HFW and use hero lighting along with higher fidelity character models.


713jQCv.jpg
With only 1.84 TFLOPS, a compromise had to be made in TLOU II. The environments are seen more than the characters face during gameplay, but I agree with PS5 there is no excuse…
 
Last edited:

CGNoire

Member
To be fair, he looks way better in cutscenes than gameplay.

d14b77a08180f0a94a7086cc71ac52bcad1db46a.gif
8d49c33f12f4a5c0d3d380148c71f6f68096586c.gif


Yeah, he looks emo and inexperienced, but the character model itself is detailed and even looks better than RE2 model technically.

f20beff2cf4dfc50b260e1d16eff67e2d64d39afr1-268-270_00.gif


The problem with modern games is that they put all the GPU resources towards rendering higher detailed environments and completely skimp on the main fucking character rendering. It's something we saw in TLOU2 as well. This is what Joel and Ellie look like during cutscenes. Their gameplay model look last gen in comparison.
0045ad5d39e85e2fbb23ab2c30d1fd6b9f2d3c3e.gif
2655a0276318cd3d9d6483c42bda9ba5766e2363.gif


lYxDj50.jpg
NqkT8Py.jpg


Everyone needs to do what GG did with HFW and use hero lighting along with higher fidelity character models.


713jQCv.jpg
Yep. Shaders without some directional lighting look like shit.
 
To be fair, he looks way better in cutscenes than gameplay.

d14b77a08180f0a94a7086cc71ac52bcad1db46a.gif
8d49c33f12f4a5c0d3d380148c71f6f68096586c.gif


Yeah, he looks emo and inexperienced, but the character model itself is detailed and even looks better than RE2 model technically.

f20beff2cf4dfc50b260e1d16eff67e2d64d39afr1-268-270_00.gif


The problem with modern games is that they put all the GPU resources towards rendering higher detailed environments and completely skimp on the main fucking character rendering. It's something we saw in TLOU2 as well. This is what Joel and Ellie look like during cutscenes. Their gameplay model look last gen in comparison.
0045ad5d39e85e2fbb23ab2c30d1fd6b9f2d3c3e.gif
2655a0276318cd3d9d6483c42bda9ba5766e2363.gif


lYxDj50.jpg
NqkT8Py.jpg


Everyone needs to do what GG did with HFW and use hero lighting along with higher fidelity character models.


713jQCv.jpg
Aloys character model looks nearly CGI…one of the best gameplay models in history…
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
With only 1.84 TFLOPS, a compromise had to be made in TLOU II. The environments are seen more than the characters face during gameplay, but I agree with PS5 there is no excuse…
Yeah, but look at HFW. She looks that good on a 1.84 tflops PS4 even without hero lighting. They were able to get more out of the PS4 by reducing the resolution to 900p.

Hell, we've seen TLOU2 running those amazing character models on the PS4 Pro at 1440p 30 fps.

These are all gameplay shots i posted on the last page.

TLOU2_Screen_PS4Pro_E32018_00004_1528773866-1.jpg

the_last_of_us_part_2-5.jpg


the_last_of_us_part_2-3.jpg


ND can do it on a last gen mid gen machine. ND did do it. We see that RE6 on the PS360 had better quality character models. For whatever reason, devs have simply given up on making high quality character models available during gameplay. HFW came out last year and no one has bothered implementing hero lighting during gameplay. GOW came and went with a whimper. Literally no one talks about that game even though it sold 12 million in 3 months. We have had so many single player games release in the last six months. Dead Space, Hogwarts, Gotham Knights, Callisto, Forspoken and no one used hero lighting. Only Callisto had a high quality character model but again, no hero lighting so it didnt get to shine like Aloy does during gameplay.

Timestamped: Notice how they use hero lighting on her under the truck.
 

Neilg

Member
therefore, complaints such as the one about the occasional low quality of gemotry in the Matrix Demo can only be chalked up to a lack of understading of how important a role talent, budget, and time play in game development
anyway
I am grateful for this discussion and this forum because it tries to maintain and even raise the standards by informing gamers about the latest developments
so that we can have a mutual understanding of visual fidelity, if not a complete agreement

Most of the posts i've made in this thread have tried to stress this point.
in this day and age, needing 300+ artists at the top of their game to make a AAA title, the way a game looks is all down to creative decision-making, staffing and budget - endless compromises. There's no such thing as one game that looks best now. one has better hair, one has better shaders - but only at night, one has better geometry - but only in this sequence, etc. it's endless.

Hero lighting is a great addition to modern games, but the manpower required to pull it off consistently! nothing these days is done by one guy coming up with a clever bit of maths.
 
Last edited:

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
That’s because these dudes are looking at it very technically and not necessarily artistically.
I agree that the hero lighting adds a lot to the look of the main character.
Yep. Whats weird is that they have no problem with hero lighting during cutscenes. Every movie uses hero lighting and those who dont spend all day waiting for the best lighting conditions to shoot their actors. No one cares if it looks realistic or not. Let me see what i fucking paid for.

Hogwarts does hero lighting during dialogue trees. Looks great then they switch to gameplay and you cant even see the dudes face because their lighting system isnt good enough to light faces during daytime.
 

Neilg

Member
their lighting system isnt good enough to light faces during daytime.

lol
it's because you're in control of the camera now.

read the section in this about continuity - https://chrisbrejon.com/cg-cinematography/chapter-6-lighting-principles/
in fact, everyone in this thread should read as much of that website as possible. it's the BIBLE on how to make things look good in computer graphics - real time or otherwise. It's a really good read, very well researched and written.
It goes into great detail about the decisions that you need to make to have something look good - and you'll notice many of those decisions solved by movies and in cut scenes pose significant challenges to pull off in an interactive videogame.

Cut scene direction in video games is following the modern movie process where continuity doesn't matter if it guides the eye well enough - every camera cut is an opportunity to re-light to make it look as good and as dramatic as possible.
But what do you do when that control is given back to the player? Horizon is the first game to really attempt this, keeping a rig of lights that spin with the character and change intensity depending on what you do with the right stick. it's really outrageously complicated and choreographed to have different behavior depending on which environment you're in too.
They made cut scenes look better, but instead of people saying how cut scenes get an upgrade, they're saying gameplay gets a downgrade. now they have a new problem to solve.
 
Last edited:

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
lol
it's because you're in control of the camera now.

read the section in this about continuity - https://chrisbrejon.com/cg-cinematography/chapter-6-lighting-principles/
in fact, everyone in this thread should read as much of that website as possible. it's the BIBLE on how to make things look good in computer graphics - real time or otherwise. It's a really good read, very well researched and written.
It also goes into great detail about the decisions that you need to make to make something look good - and you'll notice many of those decisions solved by movies and in cut scenes pose significant challenges to pull off in an interactive videogame.
Making a game is a challenge. I dont really care. it's been done in other games as I showed above. Especially now with next gen consoles giving devs way more power than they had last gen. There is really no excuse. Sony studios all work together and share tech. Pick up the phone and call GG to ask them how they did it. This is literally the first thing they taught me at work. You're not always inventing stuff in engineering. The problem has likely been solved by someone. Just pick up the phone and call the experts. No shame in asking.
 

Neilg

Member
There is really no excuse. Sony studios all work together and share tech. Pick up the phone and call GG to ask them how they did it.
lol by one game so far to date, which came out in 2022. and you're complaining about a game that started development in 2018.

The point i'm making is there is NO tech solution to this. its just manpower. just a fucking shitload of manpower by really talented artists. GG took a real big leap in investing in the process and they've proven it's possible.
Other people will start doing it.
Complaining that a game that went into development 4 years before this one came out doesn't have the feature they pioneered? eh, yeah I think you're being unrealistic. Only now can anyone pick up the phone - you'll see the results in 2-3 years at best.

E: and that's IF development is going smoothly. If manpower is stretched in a final push, this would get cut in favor of finishing the game. You'll be lucky if it gets patched back in a year after release.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, but look at HFW. She looks that good on a 1.84 tflops PS4 even without hero lighting. They were able to get more out of the PS4 by reducing the resolution to 900p.

Hell, we've seen TLOU2 running those amazing character models on the PS4 Pro at 1440p 30 fps.

These are all gameplay shots i posted on the last page.

TLOU2_Screen_PS4Pro_E32018_00004_1528773866-1.jpg

the_last_of_us_part_2-5.jpg


the_last_of_us_part_2-3.jpg


ND can do it on a last gen mid gen machine. ND did do it. We see that RE6 on the PS360 had better quality character models. For whatever reason, devs have simply given up on making high quality character models available during gameplay. HFW came out last year and no one has bothered implementing hero lighting during gameplay. GOW came and went with a whimper. Literally no one talks about that game even though it sold 12 million in 3 months. We have had so many single player games release in the last six months. Dead Space, Hogwarts, Gotham Knights, Callisto, Forspoken and no one used hero lighting. Only Callisto had a high quality character model but again, no hero lighting so it didnt get to shine like Aloy does during gameplay.

Timestamped: Notice how they use hero lighting on her under the truck.

The thing is that overall, TLOU II looks better than HFW on PS4 IMO…motion matching animations, nor any of the other physics system were factored in by you? Aloys model is also downgraded on PS4 but I still think it’s impressive..
 
Last edited:

CamHostage

Member
The point i'm making is there is NO tech solution to this. its just manpower. just a fucking shitload of manpower by really talented artists. GG took a real big leap in investing in the process and they've proven it's possible.

It's also still buggy, right? (I don't have the game, not sure if this was cleared up early.)



It's mixing systems designed to approximate "realism" (direction and intensity/color value/ToD of a global sunsource, dappling gobo of trees above, shade and shadow balance against environment brightness) with a separate secondary lighting rig for only one character, designed to pop them out of that reality for easier player visibility and appeal, by whatever means are necessary to achieve a "cinematic" look. She's got an invisible keylight and fill bounce that just follows her around as if a god above chose to light her and only her. And it's cool, and in this game it worked (and probably will carry on,) but it's not tech so much as it is technique, and it works well in this open world with these lighting effects but already there's a divide of those who like it and those who are bumped by it breaking the sense of reality that the game otherwise strives to maintain.
 
Last edited:

Neilg

Member
) but it's not tech so much as it is technique, and it works well in this open world with these lighting effects but already there's a divide of those who like it and those who are bumped by it breaking the sense of reality that the game otherwise strives to maintain.

You're entirely right, yeah - it's possible to break it, some people don't like how it isn't consistent with the environment. It's a very complex balance and by it's very nature there will never be a perfect tech solution to it.

I'd not say it's aim is approximating realism though - look at the Hugo example in the link I posted above. Per shot hero lighting makes that movie look fantastic, and it's no way realistic. The only way games can look that good is by taking camera control away from the player.

People get mad about tight over the shoulder camera games (the order, gow18) yet in the same breath praise how good they look without realizing how tightly those things are linked.
 
Last edited:

CamHostage

Member
BTW, for those still unclear on what "hero lighting" is, it's not a tech, it's a technique (though there is tech to it). Hero lighting (or really subject lighting) is when you customize the lighting rig for the subject of the shot/scene.

In film, pretty much every shot of a major movie (where possible) is lit individually for the person or people on camera. Maybe Tom Holland looks best with traditional Rembrandt lighting so long as not too much side-light hits his ears and makes him look elfish; maybe Zendaya needs a hair kicker and extra bronze bounceboard to pick up her skintone; maybe Willem Dafoe needs a low-angle light to help him seem ghoulish. You can move those lights around as needed, turn them on and off for every shot-reverse-shot, and even barndoor them down so that multiple types of lights are hitting each subject in the same shot (provided they stay in their space and you can hide the spillover.)

Games, however, are interactive. So, you've got a problem; the character moves when and where the player wants them to move, and they can and will be led into "bad lighting" situations easily. (Realistically, the accuracy of lighting across a scene didn't matter until modern times because there were barely any true lighting sources in a scene, but even in the rudimentary days of N64 I remember a pit in Star Wars SOTE where Rendar jumps into a pit and it's out of the lighting grid so both the character and level geometry was dark, and I remember thinking, "Well, this is realistic... but I can't play the frickin' game in pitch-black darkness!" The old way to combat this would be to paint a variety of nice "lighting" textures onto the character model and turn on the ones that look best depending on the location or other factors. (You can see this in old PS2 games when for example you go under like a bridge, and if you run fast and then stop right on the edge of daylight, you can actually see the "shadow" fade in and move across your body at what would have been your pace of forward movement.) Horizon: Forbidden West is taking a rather new approach by having invisible lightsources follow your character and light her from angles independent from the global illumination and other light effects. (Probably those other lights also factor in, but Aloy has a floating key and fill wherever the designers think will make her look good, no matter whatever else is lighting the scene. Hopefully your eyes don't catch that it makes no sense for light to always be above her kicking her hair even in a dingy enclosed space, and hopefully it looks so cool (and helps you maintain visibility of the character in the complex environments) that you just don't care whether it looks right or not.

umyrqorxw5781.jpg


BTW, the concept of "hero lighting" is not new to games, in terms of cutscenes. FMV of course could light like film and so heroes could get their own special lighting, but even in realtime cutscenes, lighting could be adjusted per character so long as the player never has control of the camera to see the lighting change. Check out this Boundary Break of Spider-Man, for example; the scene has a general lighting scheme, but then each character/subject gets their own lighting setup for each shot. (You can even see in one shot that Doc Oc and Peter have multiple different lighting setups on them depending on if they're in close-up, wide shot, or being scene from behind.)

 

CamHostage

Member
People get mad about tight over the shoulder camera games (the order, gow18) yet in the same breath praise how good they look without realizing how tightly those things are linked.

It's always interesting to me when some gamers rage against motion blur or whatever effect is added to approximate a cinematic look at the expense of pure clarity of the clean videogame image, because... I mean, eyeballs and human brains like stuff certain ways.

Like, Gears of War, good looking game, nice bulky characters and cool ruined architecture, but the game goes from good-looking to great in the roadie run. The camera jumps in up close, the viewpoint wobbles as if it's handheld, the depth of field compresses and the periphery blurs... same assets and lighting, but all the effects and shot choices add up to much more dynamic framing. Cinema meets interactivity, and it can be quite a match.

bQ1Kk1W.jpg


Yeah, games have something of their own visual languages, and effects can be overdone, and for sure some games work unvarnished because you can see everything you need to contend with, but all that considered, it's hard to think of a 3D game that's pure videogamey, no visual cues/tricks, that "looks better" than a filmic equivalent.)
 
Last edited:

alloush

Member
To be fair, he looks way better in cutscenes than gameplay.

d14b77a08180f0a94a7086cc71ac52bcad1db46a.gif
8d49c33f12f4a5c0d3d380148c71f6f68096586c.gif


Yeah, he looks emo and inexperienced, but the character model itself is detailed and even looks better than RE2 model technically.

f20beff2cf4dfc50b260e1d16eff67e2d64d39afr1-268-270_00.gif


The problem with modern games is that they put all the GPU resources towards rendering higher detailed environments and completely skimp on the main fucking character rendering. It's something we saw in TLOU2 as well. This is what Joel and Ellie look like during cutscenes. Their gameplay model look last gen in comparison.
0045ad5d39e85e2fbb23ab2c30d1fd6b9f2d3c3e.gif
2655a0276318cd3d9d6483c42bda9ba5766e2363.gif


lYxDj50.jpg
NqkT8Py.jpg


Everyone needs to do what GG did with HFW and use hero lighting along with higher fidelity character models.


713jQCv.jpg
I haven’t player HFW yet, I just fired it up once to see how it looked like then turned it off as I am still playing Zero Dawn. But from my brief time with it I thought hero lighting was a bit much, made it look cartoony a bit. But then again I barely played the game, so will keep an eye out on this technique, see if it does make the character shine out or make it look a bit cartoony like I initially thought.
 
Last edited:

alloush

Member
It's also still buggy, right? (I don't have the game, not sure if this was cleared up early.)



It's mixing systems designed to approximate "realism" (direction and intensity/color value/ToD of a global sunsource, dappling gobo of trees above, shade and shadow balance against environment brightness) with a separate secondary lighting rig for only one character, designed to pop them out of that reality for easier player visibility and appeal, by whatever means are necessary to achieve a "cinematic" look. She's got an invisible keylight and fill bounce that just follows her around as if a god above chose to light her and only her. And it's cool, and in this game it worked (and probably will carry on,) but it's not tech so much as it is technique, and it works well in this open world with these lighting effects but already there's a divide of those who like it and those who are bumped by it breaking the sense of reality that the game otherwise strives to maintain.

So I was right to call it a technique above and not a tech, huh?:messenger_sunglasses:

But in all seriousness I just replied to Slimy above and told him how for me hero lighting at first glance did not sit quite right with me. To me it broke this realism and immersion, but tbf to the game I barely played it but I have also seen enough of it in videos to say "yeah, it aint for me". I still need to check it out myself on my tv when I play it though, I am not just gonna judge it by YouTube videos or by my brief time with it.
 
Last edited:

H . R . 2

Member
Making a game is a challenge. I dont really care. it's been done in other games as I showed above. Especially now with next gen consoles giving devs way more power than they had last gen. There is really no excuse. Sony studios all work together and share tech. Pick up the phone and call GG to ask them how they did it. This is literally the first thing they taught me at work. You're not always inventing stuff in engineering. The problem has likely been solved by someone. Just pick up the phone and call the experts. No shame in asking.
I think the beauty of HFW goes beyond hero lighting. the textures, the shaders, AO, its choice of realistic models,
shadows, the hair physics, the geometry on characters' clothing items all working in harmony to make
not only Aloy but also every other character as beautiful as possible.
Hero lighting just brings out these features and helps them pop.
I think without GG's expertise and attention to detail, hero lighting would never have been as effective as it is in the game.
nor would a poorly desinged character look significantly better with mere hero lighting

nice read thank you
 
Last edited:

RaduN

Member
The thing is that overall, TLOU II looks better than HFW on PS4 IMO…motion matching animations, nor any of the other physics system were factored in by you? Aloys model is also downgraded on PS4 but I still think it’s impressive..
You are comparing a corridor shooter with an open world.
 
Most of the posts i've made in this thread have tried to stress this point.
in this day and age, needing 300+ artists at the top of their game to make a AAA title, the way a game looks is all down to creative decision-making, staffing and budget - endless compromises. There's no such thing as one game that looks best now. one has better hair, one has better shaders - but only at night, one has better geometry - but only in this sequence, etc. it's endless.

Hero lighting is a great addition to modern games, but the manpower required to pull it off consistently! nothing these days is done by one guy coming up with a clever bit of maths.
Back in the nineties when they were literally inventing all this stuff you had computer wizards developing games.
 

CGNoire

Member
BTW, for those still unclear on what "hero lighting" is, it's not a tech, it's a technique (though there is tech to it). Hero lighting (or really subject lighting) is when you customize the lighting rig for the subject of the shot/scene.

In film, pretty much every shot of a major movie (where possible) is lit individually for the person or people on camera. Maybe Tom Holland looks best with traditional Rembrandt lighting so long as not too much side-light hits his ears and makes him look elfish; maybe Zendaya needs a hair kicker and extra bronze bounceboard to pick up her skintone; maybe Willem Dafoe needs a low-angle light to help him seem ghoulish. You can move those lights around as needed, turn them on and off for every shot-reverse-shot, and even barndoor them down so that multiple types of lights are hitting each subject in the same shot (provided they stay in their space and you can hide the spillover.)

Games, however, are interactive. So, you've got a problem; the character moves when and where the player wants them to move, and they can and will be led into "bad lighting" situations easily. (Realistically, the accuracy of lighting across a scene didn't matter until modern times because there were barely any true lighting sources in a scene, but even in the rudimentary days of N64 I remember a pit in Star Wars SOTE where Rendar jumps into a pit and it's out of the lighting grid so both the character and level geometry was dark, and I remember thinking, "Well, this is realistic... but I can't play the frickin' game in pitch-black darkness!" The old way to combat this would be to paint a variety of nice "lighting" textures onto the character model and turn on the ones that look best depending on the location or other factors. (You can see this in old PS2 games when for example you go under like a bridge, and if you run fast and then stop right on the edge of daylight, you can actually see the "shadow" fade in and move across your body at what would have been your pace of forward movement.) Horizon: Forbidden West is taking a rather new approach by having invisible lightsources follow your character and light her from angles independent from the global illumination and other light effects. (Probably those other lights also factor in, but Aloy has a floating key and fill wherever the designers think will make her look good, no matter whatever else is lighting the scene. Hopefully your eyes don't catch that it makes no sense for light to always be above her kicking her hair even in a dingy enclosed space, and hopefully it looks so cool (and helps you maintain visibility of the character in the complex environments) that you just don't care whether it looks right or not.

umyrqorxw5781.jpg


BTW, the concept of "hero lighting" is not new to games, in terms of cutscenes. FMV of course could light like film and so heroes could get their own special lighting, but even in realtime cutscenes, lighting could be adjusted per character so long as the player never has control of the camera to see the lighting change. Check out this Boundary Break of Spider-Man, for example; the scene has a general lighting scheme, but then each character/subject gets their own lighting setup for each shot. (You can even see in one shot that Doc Oc and Peter have multiple different lighting setups on them depending on if they're in close-up, wide shot, or being scene from behind.)


One way we wouldnt need contrived lighting like this as often as we do is if we had directional lighting that casted over longer distances. Just looking at your example npcs who are still lit bye only ambient lights and a low rez set of gi probes making all there shader detail nonvoid. We needed that high fidelity RTGI yesterday.
 

CGNoire

Member
It's always interesting to me when some gamers rage against motion blur or whatever effect is added to approximate a cinematic look at the expense of pure clarity of the clean videogame image, because... I mean, eyeballs and human brains like stuff certain ways.

Like, Gears of War, good looking game, nice bulky characters and cool ruined architecture, but the game goes from good-looking to great in the roadie run. The camera jumps in up close, the viewpoint wobbles as if it's handheld, the depth of field compresses and the periphery blurs... same assets and lighting, but all the effects and shot choices add up to much more dynamic framing. Cinema meets interactivity, and it can be quite a match.

bQ1Kk1W.jpg


Yeah, games have something of their own visual languages, and effects can be overdone, and for sure some games work unvarnished because you can see everything you need to contend with, but all that considered, it's hard to think of a 3D game that's pure videogamey, no visual cues/tricks, that "looks better" than a filmic equivalent.)
God why the fuck did epic Gut all the color they used in all the ads for Gears?
We got the game and it was practicly Black&White.
 
Last edited:

CGNoire

Member
So I was right to call it a technique above and not a tech, huh?:messenger_sunglasses:

But in all seriousness I just replied to Slimy above and told him how for me hero lighting at first glance did not sit quite right with me. To me it broke this realism and immersion, but tbf to the game I barely played it but I have also seen enough of it in videos to say "yeah, it aint for me". I still need to check it out myself on my tv when I play it though, I am not just gonna judge it by YouTube videos or by my brief time with it.
Shit needs to "slowly" fade in not turn on and off like im seeing.
 

CGNoire

Member
I think the beauty of HFW goes beyond hero lighting. the textures, the shaders, AO, its choice of realistic models,
shadows, the hair physics, the geometry on characters' clothing items all working in harmony to make
not only Aloy but also every other character as beautiful as possible.
Hero lighting just brings out these features and helps them pop.
I think without GG's expertise and attention to detail, hero lighting would never be as effective as it is in the game.
nor would a poorly desinged character look significantly better with mere hero lighting


nice read thank you
I think a better solution for indoor areas like pubs etc is to have the 3 point lighting situated in specific points where you character passes through like the door way or right in front of the bartender they could even have it effect the npcs as well.
 
We are talking Aloy tlou remake which is ps5 only and is built on the tlou2 engine. It should’ve had the pre downgraded character models, GI and motion matching.

It's a quick cash-in to capitalize on the popularity of the show.

Importing in the un-authored high poly zBrush/Maya models would tank performance, even on a PS5; when the TLOUII engine is still built for PS4 and therefore has not been optimized for micro-polygon rendering.

If you're expecting, un-authored, high polygon, nanite-level geometry in a PS3 game remake, made on a PS4 engine, then it's your own expectations that's the problem.
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
It's a quick cash-in to capitalize on the popularity of the show.

Importing in the un-authored high poly zBrush/Maya models would tank performance, even on a PS5; when the TLOUII engine is still built for PS4 and therefore has not been optimized for micro-polygon rendering.

If you're expecting, un-authored, high polygon, nanite-level geometry in a PS3 game remake, made on a PS4 engine, then it's your own expectations that's the problem.
Where did i say that? I literally posted screenshots of what i expect. Horizon quality character models or shit they had already working in 2018 on the ps4 pro. If ps4 pro can run it on the tlou2 engine, ps5 couldve run it easily.
 
Where did i say that? I literally posted screenshots of what i expect. Horizon quality character models or shit they had already working in 2018 on the ps4 pro. If ps4 pro can run it on the tlou2 engine, ps5 couldve run it easily.

Sure, but again, this was a cheap, quick and dirty cash-grab effort. They weren't trying to put any significant time into the development of this remake. It likely had a much smaller team than TLOUII on PS4 and the Pro.
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
I think the beauty of HFW goes beyond hero lighting. the textures, the shaders, AO, its choice of realistic models,
shadows, the hair physics, the geometry on characters' clothing items all working in harmony to make
not only Aloy but also every other character as beautiful as possible.
Hero lighting just brings out these features and helps them pop.
I think without GG's expertise and attention to detail, hero lighting would never have been as effective as it is in the game.
nor would a poorly desinged character look significantly better with mere hero lighting


nice read thank you
Right. Thats why HFW is the best looking game out there despite being a cross gen game. GG are wizards.

I was just comparing the character models to that hilariously dopey looking Leon ingame character model and those awful TLOU character models. Hero lighting wouldve made them look nicer but yes, they really need to use way higher quality models as well. Whats funny is that ND speficically said they are using cutscene quality character models in the remake. yeah, right, maybe in photo mode when you zoom all the way in and it uses the highest LOD. In typical gameplay, its obvious that it looks nothing like the cutscenes.
 
Top Bottom