Support NeoGAF

[Majanew]

I'm just glad to hear that the company rumored to be doing the next-gen Xbox's GPU, makes it sound like the system will be pretty beast.

THQ claiming that Microsoft's (and Sony's) next consoles would not be about graphics and power had me worried.

Even if the games can't technically hit Avatar level, they should look fantastic.

 

[StevieP]

Still i can also see devs actually getting games to render at 720p 30fps .

Fixed.

There are definetly bullshots for games that were done in engine that look on par or above toystory.

... It took Pixar's entire render farm to re-render Toy Story in realtime at 1080p for its blu-ray release. That should tell you all you need to know in regards to what kind of hardware it takes things to make things look as good as a 15 year old movie in realtime.

 

[SneakyStephan]

That doesn't matter when Cryengine 3 and Samaritan have overtaken Toy Story in terms of lighting and shadowing which proves that in some ways next gen console games will look better.

Just found an article from 2009 stating that pixar (at that time) , with their massive render farmworking together, was able to re render toy story 1 at 1/24th of a second per frame.

If you still believe it can be done real time on a pc then I don't know what to say.
Unless you think that in two years your pc became faster than a multi million dollar room filling render farm.

 

[KageMaru]

It's also using 1 of three cores on the 360, is uncomplete technology, and is running "weak 6 year old hardware".

Joke right?

 

[sTeLioSco]

I'm just glad to hear that the company rumored to be doing the next-gen Xbox's GPU, makes it sound like the system will be pretty beast.

THQ claiming that Microsoft's (and Sony's) next consoles would not be about graphics and power had me worried.

Even if the games can't technically hit Avatar level, they should look fantastic.

a,b is in game(not prerendered but the screens here are a bit lowres)
c,d is prerendered video from the ps2 games.

taking into account that the resolution of games in next-gen consoles will stay in the 720/1080p category,even a current graphic card architecture with some customizations will be a massive improvement from current consoles...

i guess in around 10 years if processing power keeps advaning the same way,games will be in a "good" possition grafically.
better lighting(even crysis mods are more than great),tesselate surfaces,better iq and the only problem will be the gameplay

 

[Corky]

Aesthetically pleasing is not the same thing as technical complexity. You may prefer the way Killzone 2 looks in comparison to the target render, but that doesn't mean they are technically close in any way. Killzone 2's characters clock in at about 15k polys each, while the gun in the target render is probably in the 500k poly range. That alone should tell you how far off Killzone 2 was from the target render.

Don't waste your breath, people are stilling going to link pics of games like ratchet/uncharted and act like it's the same thing/better than toy story with regards to IQ.

 

[Mr_Brit]

Just found an article from 2009 stating that pixar (at that time) , with their massive render farmworking together, was able to re render toy story 1 at 1/24th of a second per frame.

If you still believe it can be done real time on a pc then I don't know what to say.
Unless you think that in two years your pc became faster than a multi million dollar room filling render farm.

Why are you selectively reading my posts? I was only talking about lighting, of course Toy Story still looks better, I never claimed it didn't, I only said that the lighting displayed in the UE and CE demos looked better not that they looked better as a whole.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

Don't waste your breath, people are stilling going to link pics of games like ratchet/uncharted and act like it's the same thing/better than toy story with regards to IQ.

But people are also saying it does not have to be technically the same .
Just fake it or used tricks to get it as close as you can most people won't care .

 

[XANDER CAGE]

a,b is in game(not prerendered but the screens here are a bit lowres)
c,d is prerendered video from the ps2 games.

taking into account that the resolution of games in next-gen consoles will stay in the 720/1080p category,even a current graphic card architecture with some customizations will be a massive improvement from current consoles...

i guess in around 10 years if processing power keeps advaning the same way,games will be in a "good" possition grafically.
better lighting(even crysis mods are more than great),tesselate surfaces,better iq and the only problem will be the gameplay

Are you seriously comparing God of War's CG to Pixar?

 

[SapientWolf]

Just found an article from 2009 stating that pixar (at that time) , with their massive render farmworking together, was able to re render toy story 1 at 1/24th of a second per frame.

If you still believe it can be done real time on a pc then I don't know what to say.
Unless you think that in two years your pc became faster than a multi million dollar room filling render farm.

Toy Story uses micro polygons. It's an apples and oranges comparison, from a rendering perspective.

 

[herzogzwei1989]

Aesthetically pleasing is not the same thing as technical complexity. You may prefer the way Killzone 2 looks in comparison to the target render, but that doesn't mean they are technically close in any way. Killzone 2's characters clock in at about 15k polys each, while the gun in the target render is probably in the 500k poly range. That alone should tell you how far off Killzone 2 was from the target render.

Agreed, those sort of things indeed make Killzone 2 target render far superior to the actual game technically.

 

[Foliorum Viridum]

It always amazing me how delusional people can be about graphics. Especially when it comes to consoles.

 

[TUROK]

Are you seriously comparing God of War's CG to Pixar?

Eh, he's comparing last gen CG to today's real-time. The screens are compressed to hell and back, but it shows that rasterization will always be privy to some neat tricks to bridge the gap between real-time and pre-rendered content.

 

[SneakyStephan]

Why are you selectively reading my posts? I was only talking about lighting, of course Toy Story still looks better, I never claimed it didn't, I only said that the lighting displayed in the UE and CE demos looked better not that they looked better as a whole.

How is it any better?
Flashier and overexaggerated, but it's still simple lighting.


If you had said frostbite 2 which mimics radiosity really well then I'd have said sure (but still by cheating to approximate what cgi engines like renderman brute force to get much better results)

 

[XANDER CAGE]

Eh, he's comparing last gen CG to today's real-time. The screens are compressed to hell and back, but it shows that rasterization will always be privy to some neat tricks to bridge the gap between real-time and pre-rendered content.

Right, but it's last gen CG from a studio that doesn't have the same amount of time, money, or expertise that a studio making actual CG films would. It's a much lower bar to surpass.

 

[SneakyStephan]

Right, but it's last gen CG from a studio that doesn't have the same amount of time, money, or expertise that a studio making actual CG films would. It's a much lower bar to surpass.

This has to be counted as current gen cg too by his logic : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFC_ybcg8NY

 

[XANDER CAGE]

This has to be counted as current gen cg too by his logic : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFC_ybcg8NY

CHECK OUT THOSE PHYSICS

 

[TUROK]

Right, but it's last gen CG from a studio that doesn't have the same amount of time, money, or expertise that a studio making actual CG films would. It's a much lower bar to surpass.

That's fine, but he didn't even bring up Toy Story, or any other CG movies for that matter. He responded to a quote which stated that the person was worried that this upcoming generation of consoles would not present a big leap in graphics.

Pixar does not come into play in his post at all.

 

[mckmas8808]

Samaritan will not be possible on any console released within the next 3 years, and not in a game-environment in the next half decade.

How do you know this?

 

[Emitan]

How do you know this?

Because it was running on 3 GTX 580s.

 

[TUROK]

Because it was running on 3 GTX 580s.

At what resolution? What sort of AA were they using? How about LOD, what kind of LOD system did they have in place?

 

[Majanew]

Because it was running on 3 GTX 580s.

Epic claims it can run on one.

 

[sTeLioSco]

Are you seriously comparing God of War's CG to Pixar?

no.

 

[SomeDude]

Even the top of the line gaming pc's today are nowhere near avatar.


I havn't been following next xbox news, have they got a time frame when it might be released?

 

[[Nintex]]

Even the top of the line gaming pc's today are nowhere near avatar.


I havn't been following next xbox news, have they got a time frame when it might be released?

Microsft: No comment
Analysts: 2012
Other Analysts: 2014
Gamestop: 2015
Developers: 2013
Peter Moore & Robbie Bach(2007'ish): 2011
Rumors: 2012
Speculation: 2018

 

[BurntPork]

Why do we talk only about the "lies" from Sony und Microsoft?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEF9Utdu-L0

The Artstyle was very bad, but polygoncount, texturequality,bump-mapping, shadowquality, lightning or clothphysics was alot better than what we got with WW, TP or SS.

And the GCN/Wii was using a ATI GPU...

The difference is that that was an actual tech demo and not just a target render. It's not ridiculous like the stuff stated here. There's another demo that you could have have used to prove your point better.

And what does the GPU have to do with anything?

 

[mckmas8808]

Because it was running on 3 GTX 580s.

And Epic (the company that made that) stated that it can run on 1 GTX 580, so what's the problem?

 

[GuiltySpank]

not too far away and both are realtime ingame.

Give us a break, seriosly.

 

[EatChildren]

This Toy Story Vs. My Favourite Videogame debate is ridiculous.

 

[SneakyStephan]

At what resolution? What sort of AA were they using? How about LOD, what kind of LOD system did they have in place?

Well it was a tiny tech demo scale scene, not much to LOD down there :\

 

[TUROK]

Well it was a tiny tech demo scale scene, not much to LOD down there :\

You missed the point. The tech demo was exactly that: a tech demo. It was not treated as a level for a real-time video game. It was unoptimized in that sense.

 

[Shikoro]

OK, I'll just say this. I don't think anyone is saying that next-gen machines are going to pump out Avatar's graphics from a technical point of view. What I mean by this is that the polygon count, texture resolution, shadows quality, image quality, lighting and the like won't be anywhere close, but that developers will find ways to make the games look like Avatar.

Anyone ever heard of graphene and molybdenite? Yeah, that could change everything.
Also voxels...

 

[SneakyStephan]

You missed the point. The tech demo was exactly that: a tech demo. It was not treated as a level for a real-time video game. It was unoptimized in that sense.

That's also what makes it look so good, setting everything to 11.

You seem to suggest that it being a tech demo and 'unoptimised' somehow makes it run even worse.
And tech demo scale also suggests making a game with graphics like that would take significantly more power than 3x gtx580, because you are no longer just drawing a tiny scene where the only things in the memory and being calculated are what you can see.

I'm sure that if you would freeroam the camera to the side or back of the buildings that you'd be staring into empty space , can't get much more controlled and 'optimised than' that.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

That's also what makes it look so good, setting everything to 11.

You seem to suggest that it being a tech demo and 'unoptimised' somehow makes it run even worse.
And tech demo scale also suggests making a game with graphics like that would take significantly more power than 3x gtx580, because you are no longer just drawing a tiny scene where the only things in the memory and being calculated are what you can see.

I'm sure that if you would freeroam the camera to the side or back of the buildings that you'd be staring into empty space , can't get much more controlled and 'optimised than' that.

Not really , they said they could get it down to 1 GTX 580 when it's optimised .
Plus if the demo is render at anything over 1080p it makes no sense to do that for consoles .
Depending on next gen specs or when they come out i think we could get rather close to that tech demo with a few cuts backs .

 

[Theonik]

And Epic (the company that made that) stated that it can run on 1 GTX 580, so what's the problem?

On 1 GTX 580 but with optimisation, meaning that some of the features may be cut or changed with less demanding, but almost visually identical techniques. But also don't forget that this is a tech demo, not a game. Samaritan would probably not be feasible in-game with a single 580 without disabling some of its features and noticeably worse IQ. Hell given a tech demo is as controlled and optimised you can get with real time visuals i'd say 3 580s wouldn't be enough. Not to mention that I kinda doubt console GPUs in the next 3 years will be as powerful as a GTX 580 while remaining in cost wattage and heat restrictions a console would have.
Edit: Though I'd love to be proven wrong.

 

[TUROK]

That's also what makes it look so good, setting everything to 11.

You seem to suggest that it being a tech demo and 'unoptimised' somehow makes it run even worse.
And tech demo scale also suggests making a game with graphics like that would take significantly more power than 3x gtx580, because you are no longer just drawing a tiny scene where the only things in the memory and being calculated are what you can see.

I'm sure that if you would freeroam the camera to the side or back of the buildings that you'd be staring into empty space , can't get much more controlled and 'optimised than' that.

I'm pretty sure the new additions to the engine like subsurface scattering, bokeh DoF, and more accurate shadow penumbras have more to do with it than "setting everything to 11."

Ehh... That's where LOD, mip-mapping, and streaming come into play. Also, the scene in the tech demo is definitely not "tiny". Just because the background is being blurred by the DoF employed doesn't mean it's a small scene.

You actually can get more "controlled and optimized than that." Not rendering polygons the player is not meant to see is only scratching the surface of optimizing something for real-time framerates.

 

[KageMaru]

This Toy Story Vs. My Favourite PS3 Videogame debate is ridiculous.

Fixed that for you, and I agree =p

OK, I'll just say this. I don't think anyone is saying that next-gen machines are going to pump out Avatar's graphics from a technical point of view. What I mean by this is that the polygon count, texture resolution, shadows quality, image quality, lighting and the like won't be anywhere close, but that developers will find ways to make the games look like Avatar.

No, no they won't.

Even IF it were possible, and it's not, budgets alone would prevent it from happening.

 

[mckmas8808]

On 1 GTX 580 but with optimisation, meaning that some of the features may be cut or changed with less demanding, but almost visually identical techniques. But also don't forget that this is a tech demo, not a game. Samaritan would probably not be feasible in-game with a single 580 without disabling some of its features and noticeably worse IQ. Hell given a tech demo is as controlled and optimised you can get with real time visuals i'd say 3 580s wouldn't be enough. Not to mention that I kinda doubt console GPUs in the next 3 years will be as powerful as a GTX 580 while remaining in cost wattage and heat restrictions a console would have.
Edit: Though I'd love to be proven wrong.

Who expects the animation to be exactly like that? Nobody hopefully. I think most people expect the city environments, the lighting, the in-game cinematic clips to look like that.

At least that's what I mean when I say the Samaritan demo will be done on next gen systems.

 

[Diatribe1974]

Is it possible?

Sure.

And those games will cost 100+ million to make for a 2 hour gaming experience.

No thanks.

Give me THIS generation's graphics with an 8/16 bit updated look (re: Bionic Commando: Rearmed, ect) and I'll be a happy, happy gamer.

Oh yeah, more 2D platformers and isometric RPGs would be pretty slick as well. Bet those development budgets will be nice and slim as well!

 

[MrBig]

... in screenshots. Then as soon as you start walking around the scene and realise that there's no collision-detection on anything, so all the leaves clip through each other. And then you run into a character and initiate dialogue only to find that they have the emotional range of Kermit the frog. And then you move a step to the left and the illusion of depth created by the normal-map on the wall next to you is destroyed.

The uninformed posts in this thread are terrifying. It's like half the people here were asleep during each new console release.
Dynamic foliage has been in this gen of consoles for years.
Parallax algorithms and tessellation are starting to come into wide use and make reliance on normals for major things obsolete.
AI is limited by the either the CPU or GPU, and by how far the developer wants to devote to it, but that really has nothing to do with hardware beyond that.



There may be a few AAA games that have the range of avatar, but the complexity, cost, and man power of actually producing anything like it will make it a bar that can only be met by some developers. Otherwise the normal adaptation of technology to expand the abilities of devs will continue.

 

[Plywood]

AMD: Next Xbox Graphics Will Look Like AVATAR

Never, not no. As in no the hardware will not even be capable of reaching Avatar quality.

 

[Cartman86]

Make the games look like Avatar in-game with actual gameplay (and not real-time cutscenes) then okay. Cutscenes use higher res models, only let you see very specific angles, allow for more effects etc.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Never, not no. As in no the hardware will not even be capable of reaching Avatar quality.

I dont believe we're close, but saying never is a little bit close minded. I mean just look at the advancement in real time 3d graphics in the last 15 years.

 

[DonMigs85]

At the very least I think we'll have better looking realtime models than the dinos in Jurassic Park. Shaders baby!

 

[DCharlie]

Dehyped : Next Xbox and PS4 to be able to render Epic's latest engine at a steady frame rate at 1080p in 3D

 

[Furianshi]

Technology company AMD, who supplied the graphics hardware for the Xbox 360, claims that the next Xbox will be capable of the level of graphical detail seen in James Cameron's movie Avatar.

I think the Examiner article is taking an already possibly-out-of-context quote out of context even more. If you look at the original article on oxmonline.com, it's hard to tell whether he's talking about Xbox 720, next-gen in general, or maybe even just the tech that AMD are currently working on:

And Avatar-esque graphical realism? “We’re pretty darn close,” Robison says. He wouldn’t comment on whether or not AMD is already working on the next Xbox console, but says that gamers have a lot to be excited about.

Link

I think, while Avatar graphics may be possible, development tools, talent and budgets will determine whether it will actually happen, as opposed to how good the hardware is.

 

[Lord_Byron28]

I think the Examiner article is taking an already possibly-out-of-context quote out of context even more. If you look at the original article on oxmonline.com, it's hard to tell whether he's talking about Xbox 720, next-gen in general, or maybe even just the tech that AMD are currently working on:

Link

I think, while Avatar graphics may be possible, development tools, talent and budgets will determine whether it will actually happen, as opposed to how good the hardware is.

Journalism at its finest here. Although it's too late to try and save this thread. I year from now when Xbox 720 is revealed GAFers are going to make snide remarks about it not looking like Avatar.

 

[mentalfloss]

AVATAR? Is that all u got, brah?

Honestly though - who really gives a shit about this when it is undoubtedly just going translate into $599 and RROD.

 

[Monocle]

Why do companies assassinate their credibility with dumb hyperbolic statements like this? Lying too big undermines the point of lying in the first place: to deceive people.

I'd be thrilled if AMD weren't exaggerating, obviously, but what are the chances? There's only so many times you can slap my ass and say I'm in a horse race before I'll tell you to bugger off.

 

[iamshadowlark]

Lol man what a thread this has become. Anyway the one good thing i can take from this hyperbole is that Microsoft is looking to push the envelop and sony will likely follow. The last thing we need is two more wiis.