Support NeoGAF

[Go_Ly_Dow]

The good thing about all this is, it's setting our expectation on an open world current gen game on these platforms.

No more bullshit UE5 talk and the power of IO and all that other shite. Here's the reality and its quite positive in some aspects. The IO is allowing instant switching between characters and the graphics are a bit of a step up over the ps4 Pro.

I expect they will get 1440p with drops to 900p etc at 60fps and it will look great. No 30fps near this oled though. Bleugh

Agreed, UE5 is mostly an engine for PS6 and maybe PS5 Pro.

I don't think there's any chance these consoles will run lumen + nanite, + 1440-2160p + 60fps modes for bid budget games. Towards the tail end of this gen we'll probably get some projects that will begin to tap into it, but expect big compromises in some form of another on base PS5.

 

[SlimySnake]

I don’t think that looks much better at all and it’s running sub 60 on a PC that costs over two thousand and five hundred €, probably kissing three thousand.

matrix runs on a $500 ps5 and looks a generation ahead of spiderman. I am just baffled by some of you guys.

 

[DeepEnigma]

matrix runs on a $500 ps5 and looks a generation ahead of spiderman. I am just baffled by some of you guys.

And it's not a game. Baffling, indeed.

 

[Thirty7ven]

matrix runs on a $500 ps5 and looks a generation ahead of spiderman. I am just baffled by some of you guys.

I don’t think it looks a generation ahead, it’s a tech demo, runs sub 30fps.

 

[Spyxos]

No way anybody is taking you seriously saying that. The presentation wasn't great, but there is nothing wrong with those graphics.

Then you should know Insomiac has already optimized their games to run on ps5 at 60 fps, with Raytracing and dynamic 4k. Speculating anything less is akin to spreading FUD.

why not 4k 120 fps?

 

[SlimySnake]

I don’t think it looks a generation ahead, it’s a tech demo, runs sub 30fps.

That's a really weird thing to say when everyone here is comparing Spiderman 2 to the Matrix using Matrix as the gold standard for next gen visuals.

Go ahead and create a thread saying Spiderman looks almost as good as the Matrix and you're gonna be laughed out of this forum.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

matrix runs on a $500 ps5 and looks a generation ahead of spiderman. I am just baffled by some of you guys.

No it doesn’t

It looks blurry and runs at a very jarring Framerate

It has a little more detail and better lods. That’s it

 

[mckmas8808]

Why is the matrix demo put on a pedestal?

There may be slightly more detail and better LOD transitions at the expense of a much muddier looking image and worse Framerate

Spider-Man looks better than this

Because it's one of the best looking playable things we humans have ever played.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Because it's one of the best looking playable things we humans have ever played.

Not really. Horizon looks better

Matrix demo was pretty unimpressive. It’s just a drab city with nothing interesting going on

 

[DeepEnigma]

Because it's one of the best looking playable things we humans have ever played.

"Played"

 

[Thirty7ven]

That's a really weird thing to say when everyone here is comparing Spiderman 2 to the Matrix using Matrix as the gold standard for next gen visuals.

Go ahead and create a thread saying Spiderman looks almost as good as the Matrix and you're gonna be laughed out of this forum.

It looks a bit better, but it goes for a more photorealistic look so that also helps.

Don’t need to create a thread, we are discussing it now.

 

[SeraphJan]

Don't you guys think your standard of graphic is getting way too high?

 

[SlimySnake]

No it doesn’t

It looks blurry and runs at a very jarring Framerate

It has a little more detail and better lods. That’s it

Not really. Horizon looks better

Matrix demo was pretty unimpressive. It’s just a drab city with nothing interesting going on

Go ahead. Create the thread. Make your point. Stand your ground and tell gaf you think it doesnt look next gen, is umimpressive or as good as spiderman 2.

The fact is you wont. You know thats an insane point to make and no one who isnt completely blind would agree with you.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Don't you guys think your standard of graphic is getting way too high?

Some don't even know what they want.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Go ahead. Create the thread. Make your point. Stand your ground and tell gaf you think it doesnt look next gen, is umimpressive or as good as spiderman 2.

The fact is you wont. You know thats an insane point to make and no one who isnt completely blind would agree with you.

Why do I need to make a thread for that?

I never said it doesn’t look next gen. I think sm2, horizon, and matrix demo look next gen

Matrix demo is not something I’d want to play. The clarity is poor and it judders constantly. SM2 is smooth and clear and doesn’t sacrifice much detail in the city to get there

 

[Thirty7ven]

Go ahead. Create the thread. Make your point. Stand your ground and tell gaf you think it doesnt look next gen, is umimpressive or as good as spiderman 2.

The fact is you wont. You know thats an insane point to make and no one who isnt completely blind would agree with you.

Which games released or announced coming this year look “next gen” to you?

 

[SlimySnake]

Why do I need to make a thread for that?

I never said it doesn’t look next gen. I think sm2, horizon, and matrix demo look next gen

Matrix demo is not something I’d want to play. The clarity is poor and it judders constantly. SM2 is smooth and clear and doesn’t sacrifice much detail in the city to get there

Then say that I think Matrix and SM2 both look the same and see how that goes.

The point is that they dont and you know the vast majority of people will find that statement utterly ridiculous.

Which games released or announced coming this year look “next gen” to you?

none.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

The point is that they dont and you know the vast majority of people will find that statement utterly ridiculous.

It’s not ridiculous, people like you just overhype an engine simply because it was marketed as next gen

The only impressive thing about it is the seamless lods. The fidelity and detail doesn’t look much better at all

Just walk around the matrix demo and your mind starts thinking that it’s just GTA or something. It’s visually uninteresting

 

[Thirty7ven]

none.

Well that explains it.

 

[Crispy Gamer]

That Matrix demo looked amazing standing still but it was a blur fest once you moved I never said anything because I thought everyone felt it was the holy grail plus it was just a technical demo if they were to make a full game wouldn't the image get downgraded? Cut backs are inevitable in AAA development HFW and Last of Us 2 has shown me that. Lords of the Fallen is running on UE5 and looks nothing like the Matrix demo it's on par/slightly better looking than Demons Souls.

 

[Hawking Radiation]

No way anybody is taking you seriously saying that. The presentation wasn't great, but there is nothing wrong with those graphics.

Then you should know Insomiac has already optimized their games to run on ps5 at 60 fps, with Raytracing and dynamic 4k. Speculating anything less is akin to spreading FUD.

That's ok. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. The graphics look nowhere near the level of one of their own games Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart which looks miles better. Neither does it look anything like the Spiderman 2 reveal trailer.

And there's nothing about it that screams 'Next Gen'. If you told me (just based off looking at the PS Showcase trailer) that this was just a visual upgrade of Miles Morales and running on PS4 Pro I'd believe you.

Now I'm a huge PS fan and the Showcase was a huge let down and I thought with them closing out with a PS Studios game that it was going to WOW everyone. I'm hugely disappointed by what was shown.
Granted the Devs did say its an old build but then again there wasn't a disclaimer in the video. Also we know that sometimes games get upgrades or downgrades when it comes to the final retail release so I do take some comfort in the fact that (knowing now that it's an old build) that the game will get a visual increase closer to release. How big of a jump in visual fidelity is anyone's guess.

 

[Gamer79]

SlimySnake 1296p - 1872p 30fps as you wanted

If it runs like that I will pass. No excuse for it

 

[CamHostage]

Yes, whatever differences people noted between Uncharted 3 and Uncharted 4 were purely subjective bro

The differences between the technology of Uncharted 3 to 4 can be clear traced and identified; also can be identified are the carried-over aspects of the reused engine from Uncharted 1-3 and The Last of Us (probably even some Jak code is in the Naughty Dog Engine Jenga tower.)

Same as differences between the technology of Spider-Man 1 to 2 can be traced and identified (reference the Digital Foundry we're on this thread to talk about, which points out several tech additions that SM2 has over even the previous remastered SM PS5 releases, subtle or rough as they may be in comparison to expectations) and of course also can be identified are the carried-over aspects of the previous Spider-Mans and other games of this and the past generation.

If "next-gen" is simply defined by whether you feel it's next-gen or not, then that's a very loose and per-person definition. If it's about platform exclusivity, you don't agree that SM2 qualifies as "next-gen" so that doesn't work either. If it's a matter of the engine being totally rewritten, many of the games held up as "next-gen" (Uncharted 4, Ryse, RDR2) are built on previous engines; every once in a while you get a massive rebuild like Decima, but it's not that uncommon... UE5 is the "next-gen" tech we're all pointing to as the future, yet it is an overhaul of UE4 and is scalable down to mobile with even fallbacks from the outstanding features of Nanite and Lumen. And if "next-gen" comes from its technological advancements, you can advance technology without changing the hardware, and you can bold advanced technology on top of existing tech to make use of the new hardware. (Is R&C: Rift Apart next-gen? It's doing things fairly unimaginable on PS4, but it's doing it with many of the same general technology systems used to make Spider-Man 1 on PS4 and Spider-Man 2 on PS5.)

You're LOLfacing at me as I describe your definition of "next-gen" as subjective, but even your example goes along with what JaksGhost said that this discussion is "a bunch of Gaffer are still arguing about what next-gen means to them without clearly and concisely SAYING what that exactly is," rather than providing an agreed-upon definition with tangible examples for the conversation points, or reasons why next-gen tangible examples given in the product we're talking about 'don't count'.

If people don't agree that extensive RT use and fast-traversal and water deformation in Spider-Man 2 still doesn't add up to expectations, okay, but that's what this game is adding. It's doing next-gen stuff. It's also doing a lot of old-ways stuff. Same as a wide majority of games we've all enjoyed as "next-gen" entertainment on new boxes throughout the years.

 

[adamsapple]

If it runs like that I will pass. No excuse for it

Of course it's very likely going to have a 60 FPS mode but naturally it'll be without the RT reflections on buildings and water. They did a "lite" RT version for the first 2 games as well, that could also be a possibility.

 

[SlimySnake]

Well that explains it.

Nah the only thing that explains is lazy devs who are content with making last gen games while charging $70 for them.

If you think the 8x increase in GPU power between the PS4 and PS5 gens amounts to just ray traced reflections then you have been let down by the same devs you are defending.

The industry is in shambles and instead of calling them out for their falling standards, you are getting upset at people pointing out the obvious. I would be ok if you just stayed silent and let us call out the industry but you feel compelled to stick up for these people and these underwhelming next gen showcases. Literally arguing against your own interests. For what? What do you stand to gain from this? Sony doesnt pay astroturfers so why are we even arguing about this?

Anyone with a good set of eyes will look at this demo and say it looks virtually identical to spiderman 1, plays virtually identical to spiderman 1, doesnt look as good as the matrix, and has a clear downgrade from the first teaser. So why are we even fighting over this?

It’s not ridiculous, people like you just overhype an engine simply because it was marketed as next gen

The only impressive thing about it is the seamless lods. The fidelity and detail doesn’t look much better at all

Just walk around the matrix demo and your mind starts thinking that it’s just GTA or something. It’s visually uninteresting

Nope. Go and check out the matrix thread. Universal praise from everyone who tried it. The fact that you wont create a thread to voice your opinion to the entirety of gaf tells me you dont actually believe it.

This is the post where people actually start playing the demo and it is almost universal praise. Far cry from the reception spiderman 2 has received.

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/the-matrix-awakens-an-unreal-engine-5-experience-is-up-for-ps5-and-xbox-x-s.1625471/page-3#post-265201016

 

[Hawking Radiation]

That Matrix demo looked amazing standing still but it was a blur fest once you moved I never said anything because I thought everyone felt it was the holy grail plus it was just a technical demo if they were to make a full game wouldn't the image get downgraded? Cut backs are inevitable in AAA development HFW and Last of Us 2 has shown me that. Lords of the Fallen is running on UE5 and looks nothing like the Matrix demo it's on par/slightly better looking than Demons Souls.

Lord of the Fallen was created in 2020 with a team of 75 people. I doubt it even has a AAA budget behind it.

That studio and game should be in no way an indication of what these next gen consoles can achieve.

Anything by the big AAA studios like Naughty Dog, The Coalition, Playground Games, Sony Santa Monica should be put up there as the benchmark for what next gen games will look like. No disrespect but a team of 75 slapped together in 2020 to create an RPG is not going to be pushing the boundries of visual tech with class leading production values in the AAA space.

 

[diffusionx]

Nope. Go and check out the matrix thread. Universal praise from everyone who tried it. The fact that you wont create a thread to voice your opinion to the entirety of gaf tells me you dont actually believe it.

This is the post where people actually start playing the demo and it is almost universal praise. Far cry from the reception spiderman 2 has received.

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/the-matrix-awakens-an-unreal-engine-5-experience-is-up-for-ps5-and-xbox-x-s.1625471/page-3#post-265201016

Matrix demo is neat as a tech demo but it runs like shit and is boring after about 15-30 minutes. Now if there is some game that actually runs well and has stuff to do using that tech I'm all for it but that does not exist as of yet. Meanwhile Spiderman 2 is an actual game that will be out and should be good if the original is anything to go on.

 

[Crispy Gamer]

Lord of the Fallen was created in 2020 with a team of 75 people. I doubt it even has a AAA budget behind it.

That studio and game should be in no way an indication of what these next gen consoles can achieve.

Anything by the big AAA studios like Naughty Dog, The Coalition, Playground Games, Sony Santa Monica should be put up there as the benchmark for what next gen games will look like. No disrespect but a team of 75 slapped together in 2020 to create an RPG is not going to be pushing the boundries of visual tech and with class leading production values in the AAA space.

That's true but Bluepoint games is also a team of over 70 people plus the games are similar it felt like an apt comparison just looking at the graphics but you're right the budget matters not just the engine

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Nope. Go and check out the matrix thread. Universal praise from everyone who tried it. The fact that you wont create a thread to voice your opinion to the entirety of gaf tells me you dont actually believe it.

This is the post where people actually start playing the demo and it is almost universal praise. Far cry from the reception spiderman 2 has received.

It’s a tech demo

Not a game

It’s worthy of some level of praise. I’m not saying it’s something people should not be impressed with. I just think it’s massively overrated for what it is

You’re the one saying SM2 is a last gen unimpressive game when it’s not. It looks absolutely fine and swinging around a sluggish muddied image of a drab NYC like in the matrix demo would be a downgrade from what we have

 

[TheTony316]

matrix runs on a $500 ps5 and looks a generation ahead of spiderman. I am just baffled by some of you guys.

Nah, the lighting is really impressive but it doesn't look a gen ahead. And Matrix isn't even a game.

 

[Hawking Radiation]

That's true but Bluepoint games is also a team of over 70 people plus the games are similar it felt like an apt comparison just looking at the graphics but you're right the budget matters not just the engine

Ah fair enough. Bluepoint did a fantastic job with that remake.

 

[mckmas8808]

Matrix demo is neat as a tech demo but it runs like shit and is boring after about 15-30 minutes. Now if there is some game that actually runs well and has stuff to do using that tech I'm all for it but that does not exist as of yet. Meanwhile Spiderman 2 is an actual game that will be out and should be good if the original is anything to go on.

Because it's a tech demo! And it was built on an "in-progress" Graphics engine.

 

[diffusionx]

Because it's a tech demo! And it was built on an "in-progress" Graphics engine.

Right so why are we comparing a game that is going to be held to some sort of standards to a tech demo again? This is just the dumbest point of argument I’ve seen in a long time. I have no desire to criticize a tech demo (even for its technical issues) but it’s just not on the same basis as an actual game at all and has no business being compared to one.

 

[mckmas8808]

Right so why are we comparing a game that is going to be held to some sort of standards to a tech demo again? This is just the dumbest point of argument I’ve seen in a long time. I have no desire to criticize a tech demo (even for its technical issues) but it’s just not on the same basis as an actual game at all and has no business being compared to one.

Because with enough time and resources games will\should be on the level of that tech demo at some point. That's the point of them making a tech demo. It represents what can be done in a game on these systems and more.

 

[Falc67]

That's a really weird thing to say when everyone here is comparing Spiderman 2 to the Matrix using Matrix as the gold standard for next gen visuals.

Go ahead and create a thread saying Spiderman looks almost as good as the Matrix and you're gonna be laughed out of this forum.

I personally think the original 2021 spider-man 2 reveal trailer looks better than the Matrix PS5 demo (only one I’ve played).

I loaded it yesterday. Yes it looks great, but the iq/aliasing is bad and image quite soft. HFW npc’s are better..

Now this below….. if the Matrix looked like this on my console. Then we’re talking.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Because with enough time and resources games will\should be on the level of that tech demo at some point. That's the point of them making a tech demo. It represents what can be done in a game on these systems and more.

All the time and resources in the world won’t turn a 20fps tech demo with Vaseline clarity into a 60 fps crisp title with ray tracing and character/enemy interactivity

 

[01011001]

Because with enough time and resources games will\should be on the level of that tech demo at some point. That's the point of them making a tech demo. It represents what can be done in a game on these systems and more.

I sure hope no game will be on the shitty level of that demo

I like to actually see something while moving my camera, and I'm also fond of not having reconstruction shimmer in literally every square millimetre of the screen

 

[OCASM]

Would you, the player, be able to properly control at these speeds? Is Spider-Man a 1st person game? Should developers consider that players might get sick from such an ultimately useless and uncomfortable application?

I love it when people ask for 1:1 replication of demo features that don't make sense in actual games.

I'm gonna take that as a no.

Isn't Insomniac touting changing from Peter to Miles instantaneously? A quick flyoff like in that demo would be a cool transition.

Why is the matrix demo put on a pedestal?

There may be slightly more detail and better LOD transitions at the expense of a much muddier looking image and worse Framerate

Spider-Man looks better than this

In less than a week we've gone from "games that look like the Matrix demo are impossible on PS5" to "SM2 looks better than the Matrix demo."

All the time and resources in the world won’t turn a 20fps tech demo with Vaseline clarity into a 60 fps crisp title with ray tracing and character/enemy interactivity

How expensive are those gameplay systems? They ran on a PS4's jaguar cores.

The differences between the technology of Uncharted 3 to 4 can be clear traced and identified; also can be identified are the carried-over aspects of the reused engine from Uncharted 1-3 and The Last of Us (probably even some Jak code is in the Naughty Dog Engine Jenga tower.)

Same as differences between the technology of Spider-Man 1 to 2 can be traced and identified (reference the Digital Foundry we're on this thread to talk about, which points out several tech additions that SM2 has over even the previous remastered SM PS5 releases, subtle or rough as they may be in comparison to expectations) and of course also can be identified are the carried-over aspects of the previous Spider-Mans and other games of this and the past generation.

If "next-gen" is simply defined by whether you feel it's next-gen or not, then that's a very loose and per-person definition. If it's about platform exclusivity, you don't agree that SM2 qualifies as "next-gen" so that doesn't work either. If it's a matter of the engine being totally rewritten, many of the games held up as "next-gen" (Uncharted 4, Ryse, RDR2) are built on previous engines; every once in a while you get a massive rebuild like Decima, but it's not that uncommon... UE5 is the "next-gen" tech we're all pointing to as the future, yet it is an overhaul of UE4 and is scalable down to mobile with even fallbacks from the outstanding features of Nanite and Lumen. And if "next-gen" comes from its technological advancements, you can advance technology without changing the hardware, and you can bold advanced technology on top of existing tech to make use of the new hardware. (Is R&C: Rift Apart next-gen? It's doing things fairly unimaginable on PS4, but it's doing it with many of the same general technology systems used to make Spider-Man 1 on PS4 and Spider-Man 2 on PS5.)

You're LOLfacing at me as I describe your definition of "next-gen" as subjective, but even your example goes along with what JaksGhost said that this discussion is "a bunch of Gaffer are still arguing about what next-gen means to them without clearly and concisely SAYING what that exactly is," rather than providing an agreed-upon definition with tangible examples for the conversation points, or reasons why next-gen tangible examples given in the product we're talking about 'don't count'.

If people don't agree that extensive RT use and fast-traversal and water deformation in Spider-Man 2 still doesn't add up to expectations, okay, but that's what this game is adding. It's doing next-gen stuff. It's also doing a lot of old-ways stuff. Same as a wide majority of games we've all enjoyed as "next-gen" entertainment on new boxes throughout the years.

What makes a next-gen game is not subjective. It's something so objective that anyone with a pair of eyes can see it. Anybody, a random non-gamer even, can tell there's a massive difference between Uncharted 3 and Uncharted 4, same for KZ3 and KZSF, etc. And that's been the case EVERY SINGLE GENERATION. Tech is fundamental for such differences but simply applying a coat of paint over a previous gen title doesn't make it next-gen.

Perhaps this will make it clearer to you:



Quake 3 already had stencil shadows. Adding normal mapping on top woudn't make it look radically better. But artists combining both in a way that properly showcases the tech yielded a massive leap forward that anyone and their dog could instantly notice:

 

[rofif]

Don't you guys think your standard of graphic is getting way too high?

No. People are jest waiting for anything next gen that’s more than ps4 game with better settings.
Nobody says it looks bad. It’s just not showing this next gen factor uncharted 3 to 4 or tlou 1 to 2

 

[diffusionx]

Because with enough time and resources games will\should be on the level of that tech demo at some point. That's the point of them making a tech demo. It represents what can be done in a game on these systems and more.

Then when those games exist we can talk about them. Spider-Man 2 should be compared to actual games not theoretical ones.

 

[rofif]

If it runs like that I will pass. No excuse for it

You are not a gamer then. This is not your hobby. Best games ever were 30fps.
It’s stupid and hypocrisy to not play a game because of either res or fps.
If a game is good you will forget about any of downsides.
Sharp knees won’t bang vibes

 

[Sleepwalker]

Their games are way smaller than the other sony games, that's why.

Make em do an open world as big as horizon or a "linear" game like ragnarock and see how 3 years are not gonna be enough.

Spidey was one of the smallest open world out there, morales is a 8 hours campaign and ratchet was like what? 10 hours at best?

I have more than 100 hours on both ragnarock and horizon, probably no more than 50 between spidey, morales and ratchet combined.

Its true but smaller and more consistently released games should go back to being the norm.

I dont want 50 hour campaigns on every game.

 

[sendit]

You are not a gamer then. This is not your hobby. Best games ever were 30fps.
It’s stupid and hypocrisy to not play a game because of either res or fps.
If a game is good you will forget about any of downsides.
Sharp knees won’t bang vibes

Simply not true. Games were 30 FPS because of hardware limitations, not because developers wanted to make a good game. Now that most games are available on PC, many of those FPS/resolutions limitations are removed given the right hardware. It absolutely makes for a much better gameplay experience. Going from 30 to 60 to 120 FPS is a night and day difference.

 

[GymWolf]

Its true but smaller and more consistently released games should go back to being the norm.

I dont want 50 hour campaigns on every game.

The opposite for me, i'm ok with waiting more to have bigger and more ambitious games.

 

[Whitecrow]

Simply not true. Games were 30 FPS because of hardware limitations, not because developers wanted to make a good game. Now that most games are available on PC, many of those FPS/resolutions limitations are removed given the right hardware. It absolutely makes for a much better gameplay experience. Going from 30 to 60 to 120 FPS is a night and day difference.

Nobody cares about the reasons.
Not obsessing over fps made some great games possible.

And he is totally right. When you are playing a 'masterpiece', which excels at many areas, even framerate cant make you not want to play it.

Honestly, it would suck A LOT being someone that misses out on incredible experiences on purpose because 'the difference between 30 and 60 is like night and day'

 

[BennyBlanco]

To me it was just underwhelming. Looks marginally better than SM remastered.

 

[Gamer79]

You are not a gamer then. This is not your hobby. Best games ever were 30fps.
It’s stupid and hypocrisy to not play a game because of either res or fps.
If a game is good you will forget about any of downsides.
Sharp knees won’t bang vibes

Call me what you want but I have been gaming before you were in diapers. You also will not call me $70 less for a sub par product. Lacks 4k and 60fps? Inexcusable this far in the generaton. Pass

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Call me what you want but I have been gaming before you were in diapers. You also will not call me $70 less for a sub par product. Lacks 4k and 60fps? Inexcusable this far in the generaton. Pass

is this real a joke?

 

[bender]

Why do I need to make a thread for that?

Make a thread motherclucker. I dare you.

 

[ChiefDada]

Because it's a tech demo! And it was built on an "in-progress" Graphics engine.

And this is a vertical slice taken from a game that's still in development.