The Order particles do not look impressive? are u serious, they are beautiful, even Cliffy B in his Order stream said he would hire the man that's responsible for the particles, but i guess you know graphics better than him right?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Next-gen consoles have reached CGI rendering in real time ?
- Thread starter Toxa
- Start date
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
Isn't KKRT a graphics programmer? Or am I confusing him with someone else? Also, isn't Cliffy more of a level/game design guy, not a graphics/rendering engineer or VFX artist?
Also, something can look pretty and still not be impressive in terms of complexity or technical implementation.
JordanN
Banned
To be fair, The Dark Sorcerer was still being built around PS3 development pipelines and ran on unfinished dev kits.
One of the devs even said it ran up to 90fps at times, so it's not even fully optimized either.
That said, there have been some recent advances in subsurface scattering (what Gollum uses) . Time will tell how good developers can get close to offline render quality.
Well I think Cliffy as someone who is working for years in this industry can account for what is considered impressive and what's not, doesn't even matter how complex you think it is, it looks impressive and you can't deny it.
Another thing, when people say that The Order looks like CGi they don't necessarily mean the latest Pixar film or LOTR quality, they do mean a low-tier CGi like the Onimusha 3 opening that we were once all amazed by at the time- with The Order we can actually say we are there, as well as others non High end CGi like FF or the RE pic someone put here, even if we are not 100% there, we are starting to touch that quality and it feels like The Order is the first one to do so.
No, they dont look impressive. Actually smoke looks like it is half-res and made from big blocks
Infamous, Alien Isolation, Battlefield 4, Ryse, Evolve, Metro LL, Warframe all have better particles.
Do You really think those smoke 'splashes' looks good?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1YhysRbEqg#t=230
Or all those big sparks later on from the termite weapon?
Game looks amazing, but particles are definitely the weakest part of its graphics.
I have to agree. With all the things The Order gets right with graphics, some of the effects stick out like a sore thumb.
So? Perfection wasn't the question, can it be considered CGI level is and the answer is yes. In fact, some real-time FX in game look better than CGI in mainstream TV shows.
Personally, I ask this: when looking at a real-time scene, can it be considered or thought of as CGI (.i.e. pre-rendered)? Looking at some of these newer games and demos, simply yes. And I would watch a movie, commercial, show with such level of graphics no problem.
I also used to like games with CGI cutscenes because they looked day and night compared to in-game ones. With the current gen (and some examples with the previous one as well) I have no problem watching cut-scenes in in-game quality. That's how good and versatile in-game graphics has gotten- and it's about damn time.
Modern CGI are basically very life-like.
For reference, this is what modern CGI looks like. Games aren't anywhere close in realtime.
GhostTrick
Banned
No, they didn't.
Unless you consider old CGIs... but then, PS2 reached beyond FF VII CGI's.
Technology evolves and so CGI does. The reason next gen consoles looks better than old CGI is related to shaders.
Unless you consider old CGIs... but then, PS2 reached beyond FF VII CGI's.
Technology evolves and so CGI does. The reason next gen consoles looks better than old CGI is related to shaders.
Even unreleased games can't compete with decade old cgi, let alone modern cgi. People need to stop with this delusion.
Dark Sorcerer Demo:
2002 CGI:
Good old; these two things don't look alike, therefore one is better fallacy.
It's difficult for me to take the first image and objectively extrapolate that it's automatically worse (or better than) the second, given how much conditions and variables change.
The only kind of person that would even make a comparison like this would be a know-nothing amateur that would fall for this sort of fallacious argument (and therefore make it).
From an objective analysis of what they're both doing - they're both doing a lot of the same or similar things on a technical level!
There might be more detail in Gollum's skin texture - but that is as easily an artistic choice as it is a technical limitation. It's also an artistic resource limitation (it takes time to draw out all the wrinkles on a person's body in a manner that's believable - much easier to just use a preexisting texture that doesn't indicate directionality of creasing as much).
The only thing I can really spot is very limited or very muted subsurface scattering in the top pic. But a few posts up, we have a fantastic example of real time SSS showing that something of a similar quality could be done on a real time basis if desired.
I'm not saying that they're technically the same - but to use them as 'an obvious example of the night and day difference between CG and real time' is to ignore the psychological effects of seeing different pictures and automatically preferring one of another.
For reference, this is what modern CGI looks like. Games aren't anywhere close in realtime.
in my OP I said that current CGI are way above but today video games real time graphics are similar to mid 2000's video games CGI
I was talking more about the sparks, why do you think Cliffy chose to give the particles a nod in his stream if not?
They look very good, don't know how you can claim otherwise.
It seems people don't get the OP, PS2 games have terrible IQ and you can see the polygons and the rough imperfections from miles, they clearly look like a game.
OP is talking about a certain look, film like, like CGi from mid 2000, opening pre-rendered scenes of PS2 games for example- we can say now that we are there.
Smoke looks different in game dependant on where it's coming from, that is thermite smoke it burns hot and quick so it barely leaves smoke, things like smoke granades look very different and other smoke in the world.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
You need to specifically mention you mean video game CG and not just a general date range, because otherwise a lot of people will continue to think of stuff like:
This is 2006 CG after all.
nelsonroyale
Member
She looks like she has a massive head in that shot. We are definitely getting there...I can still tell it isn't a real human when viewed like that though.
You need to specifically mention you mean video game CG and not just a general date range, because otherwise a lot of people will continue to think of stuff like:
This is 2006 CG after all.
yes indeed you're right.
T4 intro was amazing 12 years ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nruEPZqFpjY
and the spritis within is still my dream since 2001
dampflokfreund
Banned
Even unreleased games can't compete with decade old cgi, let alone modern cgi. People need to stop with this delusion.
Dark Sorcerer Demo:
2002 CGI:
Is this a blueray remaster? Unfair comparison, you have to put the original in here which surely is 4:3 and SD
Btw, I think the Dark Sorcerer Demo looks better
supernormal
Member
yes indeed you're right.
T4 intro was amazing 12 years ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nruEPZqFpjY
and the spritis within is still my dream since 2001
Looking at The Spirits Within now, we're definitely at least there (I might say even better, in some aspects) when it comes to comparing stills. As soon as a character moves in a game and you see their clothing and other objects that should deform (skin, muscle tissue, hair) remain completely intact then you can tell where videogames fall flat against CGI.
thelastword
Banned
Yeah, I think the order has definitely surpassed that, not just the character models and detail, but especially the animation. I always felt the animation in Spirits Within was very under-whelming. The effects were pretty good though.
The animation on this was much better than spirits within, though it came out in 2005.
CyberPunked
Member
You seriously need to get your eyes checked if you think the Dark Sorcerer demo looks better...
maverick40
Junior Member
Really? What game does it better so?
thelastword
Banned
This is how I imagine a KZ2 remaster would look, with all that fine detail, insane MB and booming effects. I think KZ2 got close enough but there's a level of detail and overall IQ where it can still improve. Come to think of it, KZ2 could be replicated quite well on the order's engine.
Woodchipper
Member
Am I crazy if I'm already looking forward to the next generation of consoles? I saw MGS GZ on PC and it's amazing how far behind the PS4 is already.
That doesn't mean anything. As it was said before already, it's not only about the power and poly count. Tools and artist skills, but also capture methods are just way better now so i'm pretty sure something like the order or Ryse are equally far behind in power needed, yet far superior in look, compared to mid 2000's cgi. That's the way things go.
Agreed. Right now based on what we have of both games The Order 1886 holds the graphics crown. To be honest I think Uncharted 4 will have some amazing set-pieces on the PS4 that will blow people's minds, but the real cinematic look and feel of the Order probably won't be topped until maybe David Cage's PS4 project. I think the color palette used in The Order is very different to the color range used in Uncharted 4 which by comparison makes it feel a little more vibrant but also cartoony.
nelsonroyale
Member
Pretty crazy in my opinion. The difference between the Order 1886 and MGS GZ at least on PS4 is massive. Even given differences in scale (and the level in GZ isn't even that big), I think the Order looks much better than GZ on PC as well. It looks like a cross gen game to me, albeit still nice looking and running very well.
iratA: Although I kind of expect U4 to at least match or top the Order in visual spectacle, I am pretty damn confident that God of War PS4 absolutely will. What they achieved on PS3 still holds up.
I think a more interesting question might be at what level of CG fidelity do todays top games compare favourably too. Technology changes too much to make exact comparisons (ie shaders). We could say games like The Order are comparable to the first Lord of the Rings - surpassing it in some ways and missing it in others. It will be interesting to see where the comparisons lie.
Auto-Reply
Member
Realtime graphics have caught up with the shortcomings of traditional film, that's the way I would put it. The end goal seems to be photorealism, which is devoid of grain, frame to frame motion blur and other heavy post process filters and without taking realtime physics into account of course.
UnrealEck
Member
I know what the game looks like. I'm not commenting from complete ignorance. Or was the video meant as a demonstration of the consistancy difference? I'm not sure how you would compare using that video, but I'm sure you'll find it easier to find areas in ACUnity which have graphical shortcomings compared to other parts of the game than you would in TO1886. The reason why I think that is because TO1886 is an incredibly directed, linear, on-rails affair whereas ACUnity is much more open-spaced with large environments.
As mentioned above, don't forget linear level design.
On a side note, I feel I'm taking crazy pills though with the amount of praise TO1886 is getting for its graphics. I just don't get it. It looks good and filmic because of the post processing and tonemap etc, but not outstanding.
SMOK3Y
Generous Member
Ya i hate CGI in games even CoDAW the difference between cutscenes & actual gameplay was way too big a difference why do they even bother
nelsonroyale
Member
Graphical discrepancies in Unity are very, very evident. Pop in is terrible, Lod is pretty poor, lots of NPCs and the materials on them are good, but the poly count isn't particularly. Yeah it has larger environments and thus has had to make a lot of comprimises in terms of localised geometry and level of detail. I am not saying it isn't a technical achievement up there with Order 1886; in many ways it is, just much more shoddily held together. But it I don't think it looks as good in terms of visual output.
I don't think you are crazy on your opinion of the Order, you just have a tendency against it. Your opinion is pretty strongly against the grain. That is fine, different people look for different things. It is obvious you don't like the filmic approach. I will admit I have a tendency against the AC games. They are at the opposite end of the scale to the Order: with a small amount of repeated content stretched over a massive, open world. The world maybe large but the content isn't, it is just multiplied.
Alex Roman's Cg video.
Made in 2010.
Surpasses almost all Cgs I've ever seen.
https://vimeo.com/7809605
Made in 2010.
Surpasses almost all Cgs I've ever seen.
https://vimeo.com/7809605
Auto-Reply
Member
Dude is insane
https://vimeo.com/15630517
I wonder how long it took him doing these videos from start to finish?
Edit:
http://www.fxguide.com/featured/3D_or_Real_Above_Everything_Else/
Remember the Audrey Hepburn spot? It was in 2013 but still look imprisive.
Yes, only the face is CGI but still is a amazing work for budget that manage for ads.
They used two models for the body, for some reason.
Oh!, and IKEA Catalog, 75% of the ‘Photography’ You See is CGI
Yes, only the face is CGI but still is a amazing work for budget that manage for ads.
They used two models for the body, for some reason.
Oh!, and IKEA Catalog, 75% of the ‘Photography’ You See is CGI
Mizuchi Engine by Silicon Studio is runing on pc and PS4 as well at 1080p/30 fps
this is cg quality
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnTYhlxi-Cs
this is cg quality
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnTYhlxi-Cs
xenorevlis
Member
Leave it to KKRT00 to call The Order 1886's particle effects poor and cite only the weapons. Let's just ignore the volumetric particle system that includes depth fog into very expansive, distant environments, the smoke stacks, the weather, atmospheric effects on the ground, explosive clouds, etc. Also, I love how a game using Tress FX makes it "automatically better" then other games.
I think titles like Driveclub and The Order, along with Ryse and even moments within Infamous have achieved the look and feel of something that is offline (pre) rendered and playing back as a video. We may not get all the bells and whistles afforded by having petaflops of rendering power the Pixar, Dreamworld, Weta, etc. have, but we are at the forefront.
Games on PC how already been making headway into this territory as far as image quality and (high) framerate, but we will see more consistent high quality visuals on the consoles and then counterparts on PC later as the hardware is closed and thus QA is less of a headache then the thousands of modern computer setups.
I think titles like Driveclub and The Order, along with Ryse and even moments within Infamous have achieved the look and feel of something that is offline (pre) rendered and playing back as a video. We may not get all the bells and whistles afforded by having petaflops of rendering power the Pixar, Dreamworld, Weta, etc. have, but we are at the forefront.
Games on PC how already been making headway into this territory as far as image quality and (high) framerate, but we will see more consistent high quality visuals on the consoles and then counterparts on PC later as the hardware is closed and thus QA is less of a headache then the thousands of modern computer setups.
I dont know why he gave nod to them, they look like some overblown particles from Crysis 2 mods.
Have You played any game i listed? Really observe smoke and spark particles there, especially in Infamous, Metro:LL or Warfame.
---
Smoke granades arent better, they look somehow worse than KZ2 particles from granades, even though they are probably higher res.
There are no volumetric particles in that game.
---
Wait what? If You're talking about U4 to SC comparison, read the post again. And yes, having a model that is rendering individual strains of hair, make hair automatically much more superior to stacked hair blocks.
It also showed at what fidelity they are aiming for.
What people need to understand is that there's a variance of quality in CG and in real time.
There is *absolutely* an overlap in quality between the two areas even when talking about only on a current day real time to current day CG basis.
A lot of factors don't come down to the computing power that goes into it - but down to artistic design. A lot of what we consider 'bad cg' (especially in movies) isn't necessarily because of less rendering power - but of design and use choices that highlight the unbelievability of a scene. This can just as readily affect real time visuals, if not more so.
Similarly, people need to realize that CG can be composited, which gives it a huge advantage in getting the 'picture perfect look'. Go have a look at the making of for Wrath of the Lich King intro - and you'll understand how much of it is smoke and mirrors.
There is *absolutely* an overlap in quality between the two areas even when talking about only on a current day real time to current day CG basis.
A lot of factors don't come down to the computing power that goes into it - but down to artistic design. A lot of what we consider 'bad cg' (especially in movies) isn't necessarily because of less rendering power - but of design and use choices that highlight the unbelievability of a scene. This can just as readily affect real time visuals, if not more so.
Similarly, people need to realize that CG can be composited, which gives it a huge advantage in getting the 'picture perfect look'. Go have a look at the making of for Wrath of the Lich King intro - and you'll understand how much of it is smoke and mirrors.
I see what you did there -_-
I have Infamous:SS myself and can't see how its particles are superior over The Order's Thermite Rifle for example, the effect looks incredible, I think i can count on Cliffy on this subject, no offense.
Parhelion69
Member
Infamous has the BEST particles yet imho, heck, they used most of the PS4 compute abilities just for that iirc.
Not saying that the Order has bad particle systems (some people just love hyperbole), actually it has nice ones, but Infamous is on another level.
I own both games btw, and IMHO The Order is the superior graphical showcase. Heck, it's the most graphically impressive game on ANY platform yet (I've got a PC with GTX 970, and own Ryse, AC Unity, Crysis 3, BF4, and none of these games on max settings impressed me as much as the Order did)
The feel of pre-rendering CGI. All the bells and whistles are the things that make pre-rendered CGI years-light above from real-time. But if The Order still used cubemaps for most of refractions...
You know what? I wont argue with you if Infamous is superior in this department or not, but calling them not impressive like they are some cheap effects when even Cliffy gave them a nod in his stream... I don't like this hyperbole, he could have said particles are great but they are even better in Infamous, but calling them not impressive is going too far, but he likes to do it with non Crytek games and PS games specifically so I'm not too surprised. (although he is generally a good user don't get me wrong, just seems a little biased)