Support NeoGAF

[DISSESHOWEDO]

We should go vocal on tweeter or something #NDstoplyingtous.

 

[dragonbane]

They definitely dug their own grave coming out and saying how awesome and important 60 fps is, how going back to 30 fps would make the game look "broken" and they hope that it becomes a new standard. Looked really silly when only a few months later they had to backpedal

 

[Three]

#TLOU

#They lied to us

On a serious note did they ever say realtime cutscene and gameplay were the same? They have never been the same.

 

[gamerMan]

Dictator posted the slides in his other thread and I dont think it means what you all are taking it to mean. They really didnt mention that trailer at all.



Yes people need to understand this. Because the final game had to be scaled back as a whole means nothing about a particular slice being rendered in a trailer.

If you read the slides carefully, they state the hair could never been rendered in realtime on a PS4 because of the overdraw. The hair in the teaser used a lot of alpha blending which would have caused too much of overdraw if it was running in realtime.

 

[Bornstellar]

I find it a bit hard to fathom that the excellent engineers at Naughty Dog would have estimated at any point that they could achieve the exact level of IQ in that original trailer on PS4 in-game. I find it more likely that there was a decision made where marketing took precedence over engineering.

.

 

[rokkerkory]

Make UC great again thread?

 

[rambis]

If you read the slides carefully, they state the hair could never been rendered in realtime on a PS4 because of the overdraw. The hair in the teaser used a lot of alpha blending which would have caused too much of overdraw if it was running in realtime.

No, they state that most of the hair couldn't be alpha blended because of the overdraw. That's not saying anything about Nate in particular.

 

[test_account]

Yes people need to understand this. Because the final game had to be scaled back as a whole means nothing about a particular slice being rendered in a trailer.

Indeed, and in that final comment they say real-time demo. The first slides that were posted were about expectations about what the PS4 could handle, but whent he PS4 came, the reality was something else. Its not related to their 2014 teaser, at least that is how i understand it. Link to all the slides here for those who are interested:

http://advances.realtimerendering.c...olumetric-based Materials in Uncharted 4.pptx

If you read the slides carefully, they state the hair could never been rendered in realtime on a PS4 because of the overdraw. The hair in the teaser used a lot of alpha blending which would have caused too much of overdraw if it was running in realtime.

http://i.imgur.com/g4wrD62.jpg

I read that slide more as a general expectation to the PS4, not just regarding the 2014 teaser. In slide #27, they say that they ended up making something that looked great (probably referring to the teaser), but it was very GPU-heavy and they could sacrifice gameplay for how the hair looked (silde #28).

 

[platina]

I'm embarassed for you.

Lol well shame on me for pointing this out then. I can't wait for their next game unveiling to set unrealistic expectations and people having the same duplicate reaction of this thread.

Because they lied?
Judging from your reaction you like being like to.

ikr?

 

[rokkerkory]

I bet neo could run it like that.

Would be awesome.

 

[tuxfool]

Indeed, and in that final comment they say real-time demo. The first slides that were posted were about expectations about what the PS4 could handle, but whent he PS4 came, the reality was something else. Its not related to their 2014 teaser, at least that is how i understand it. Link to all the slides here for those who are interested:

http://advances.realtimerendering.c...olumetric-based Materials in Uncharted 4.pptx

It absolutely is related to their teaser, because the teaser is using techniques that they said they couldn't do.

 

[xviper]

sure the final game didn't look as good as the first trailer but still looks amazing and better than any game i have ever seen or played

 

[gamerMan]

No, they state that most of the hair couldn't be alpha blended because of the overdraw. That's not saying anything about Nate in particular.

The E3 2014 teaser featured
a)high res texture maps
b)fully alpha blended hair transparency maps
c)multi sample anti aliasing
d)high res shadowing

Go look at it. The textures, Nate's hair, anti aliasing, and shadowing in the trailer is superior to the final game. These are all things that are "impossible to run realtime in engine."

 

[Servbot24]

sure the final game didn't look as good as the first trailer but still looks amazing and better than any game i have ever seen or played

but they LIED
they also committed greed and coveting. put them in jail imo

 

[test_account]

It absolutely is related to their teaser, because the teaser is using techniques that they said they couldn't do.

Well, the post with the two slides that were posted earlier is in the wrong order though. The first slide is #27, but the 2nd one is slide #5. Slide #5 also has this comment in PowerPoint: "We had certain expectations of what next-gen consoles were capable of handling". Seems to be talking more about PS4 in general, in my opinion.

Slide #29 has a screenshot of how the hair was, and i assume that this is from the 2014 teaser:

 

[napata]

I bet neo could run it like that.

Would be awesome.

At what framerate though. MSAA kills performance. Probably 8x or 16x as well.

More likely even a 1080 wouldn't be able to run this properly.

 

[rambis]

The E3 2014 teaser featured
a)high res texture maps
b)fully alpha blended hair transparency maps
c)multi sample anti aliasing
d)high res shadowing

Go look at it. The textures, Nate's hair, anti aliasing, and shadowing in the trailer is superior to the final game. These are all things that are "impossible to run realtime in engine."

It absolutely is related to their teaser, because the teaser is using techniques that they said they couldn't do.

No, its not related to the teaser. Quoted again

"The most valuable lesson we learned was - Shipping a game was way different than making a real-time demo.Gameplay and having smooth framerates are always the number one priority. There are so many things in our game could slow down the frame rates, such as crowds, particles, complex environments, etc.

We had to cut down the cost of characters constantly, instead of mainly focusing on pretty images. There were so many times we almost lost hope about whether we were able to ship something decent with such strict limitations.Fortunately, we have a great team with all kind of creative ideas and always there to help each other. It’s a great honor to be part of the team, and it’s a great learning experiences to work on this challenging project."

Because they had to scale back features for the whole game does not mean the E3 demo itself didnt render as shown. Really can't simplify this anymore. They even seemingly reaffirm there, that the demo was realtime.

 

[exmachina64]

How are these excuses to what they have done? Who cares that everyone does it? Who cares that the game looks good? And why this should get a pass while others do not?
They lied and they deserve crap just as everyone who does.

I'm not arguing that this gets a pass, I'm asking what does "giving them crap" entail? What does that look like?

 

[icespide]

I'm not arguing that this gets a pass, I'm asking what does "giving them crap" entail? What does that look like?

that's what I wanna know. what exactly has to happen for their "pass" to be taken away?

 

[tuxfool]

Well, the post with the two slides that were posted earlier is in the wrong order though. The first slide is #27, but the 2nd one is slide #5. Slide #5 also has this comment in PowerPoint: "We had certain expectations of what next-gen consoles were capable of handling". Seems to be talking more about PS4 in general, in my opinion.

No, its not related to the teaser. Quoted again

Because they had to scale back features for the whole game does not mean the E3 demo itself didnt render as shown. Really can't simplify this anymore. They even seemingly reaffirm there, that the demo was realtime.

Sigh. If features in the teaser weren't in the final game, it means they couldn't use it. I don't give a crap over what is or isn't possible on the ps4. In the context of the whole game the quality of the teaser cannot be extrapolated to the quality of the final game.

One should ask, whether the teaser was an accurate representation of the final game: No, it wasn't, despite statements otherwise at the time. This isn't something people should get angry about, but have a more healthy scepticism about projects that are early and under development.

 

[00ich]

It wasn't a Ubisoft games so no need to complain about it.

The Witcher 3 got the same treated as UC4, "It still look good!', "Heh I'll just wait for a patch", "The game is so big anyway" "It's still playable" were the usual reaction I saw.

Not disputing the downgrade, but Ubisoft showed a more immersive experience than the final game delivered.
For Uncharted and Witcher you need high res shots and some technical knowledge to spot the differences. Watchdogs just looked a generation worse.

 

[NullPointer]

If you read the slides carefully, they state the hair could never been rendered in realtime on a PS4 because of the overdraw. The hair in the teaser used a lot of alpha blending which would have caused too much of overdraw if it was running in realtime.

...

Can anybody explain specifically what is meant here in using the PS4 as a render farm?

I only know the term from Pixar movies and the like where you'd have a ton of servers crunching on each frame for hours at a time. Not sure how to interpret it here.

 

[rambis]

Sigh. If features in the teaser weren't in the final game, it means they couldn't use it. I don't give a crap over what is or isn't possible on the ps4. In the context of the whole game the quality of the teaser cannot be extrapolated to the quality of the final game.

One should ask, whether the teaser was an accurate representation of the final game: No, it wasn't, despite statements otherwise at the time. This isn't something people should get angry about, but have a more healthy scepticism about projects that are early and under development.

I get that you want consistent quality, but the subject of this particular thread and the reason for this particular bump is discussion of that particular trailer and the quotes around them.

 

[ShutterMunster]

Sigh. If features in the teaser weren't in the final game, it means they couldn't use it. I don't give a crap over what is or isn't possible on the ps4. In the context of the whole game the quality of the teaser cannot be extrapolated to the quality of the final game.

One should ask, whether the teaser was an accurate representation of the final game: No, it wasn't, despite statements otherwise at the time. This isn't something people should get angry about, but have a more healthy scepticism about projects that are early and under development.

Man, a lot of you are trying to make this out into the Killzone 2 debacle and it's impressive how far you're willing to stretch to do so.


Stay mad, bruh.

 

[tuxfool]

Man, a lot of you are trying to make this out into the Killzone 2 debacle and it's impressive how far you're willing to stretch to do so.


Stay mad, bruh.

you mean despite my statements that nobody should be angry over this?

How hard is it for people to recognise objective reality and accept it?

That you felt you had to attack me for stating objective truths. That makes me somewhat angry.

 

[WordsintheWater]

lol the Defense Force for Naughty Dog is incredible...
It has been factually proven that they have blatantly lied and what are the responses? "you are salty", "it looks incredible get over it", "what is the point of this bump?"

Typical portion of Sony-GAF... never touch their naughty dogs.
Kudos to you bumper, you are doing god's work.

This post just made me cringe so damn hard

 

[icespide]

I still think Killzone 2 ended up looking damn close to that CG reveal trailer

 

[Caayn]

They definitely dug their own grave coming out and saying how awesome and important 60 fps is, how going back to 30 fps would make the game look "broken" and they hope that it becomes a new standard. Looked really silly when only a few months later they had to backpedal

This is to me the part that made ND look silly. All the messages about the greatness of 60fps, dreaming in 60fps, TLOU 60fps, etc. Only to back pedal massively and release a game at 30fps that doesn't match the initial "60fps in-engine reveal".

 

[rambis]

Can anybody explain specifically what is meant here in using the PS4 as a render farm?

I only know the term from Pixar movies and the like where you'd have a ton of servers crunching on each frame for hours at a time. Not sure how to interpret it here.

This is being taken out of context I think. They were detailing their shader creation proccess.


First they create a high quality "basic" shader that is usually beyond what the system can render in RT. And then they rewrite it until it works on their target realtime. So basically start with something that runs at a low or non realtime frame rate and optimize it until it runs at target.

Im sure other studios do the same thing

 

[tuxfool]

I still think Killzone 2 ended up looking damn close to that CG reveal trailer

It looked pretty great. But in no way did that trailer represent what the final product looked like.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

Even downgrading from the original reveal is still pretty good. I felt the same about Quantum Break. It was clearly downgraded from the original reveal, but a downgrade from borderline CG quality is still a fucking great looking game.

Still feel the same way.

Uncharted 4 (and QB) are still fantastic looking games. But it still kinda staggers me that in this day and age, people still get fooled by pre-rendered trailers that are highly controlled cutscenes with no physics, AI etc etc running and still think it'll be representative of the final product.

But then, let's be honest, no doubt this will happen again the next time a dev shows us an "in-engine" trailer that looks way above what the final product will.

The Last of Us 2 trailer thread will im sure follow a similar pattern.

 

[test_account]

Sigh. If features in the teaser weren't in the final game, it means they couldn't use it. I don't give a crap over what is or isn't possible on the ps4. In the context of the whole game the quality of the teaser cannot be extrapolated to the quality of the final game.

One should ask, whether the teaser was an accurate representation of the final game: No, it wasn't, despite statements otherwise at the time. This isn't something people should get angry about, but have a more healthy scepticism about projects that are early and under development.

Sure, and Naughty Dog said that they learned the lesson from this. But some people were talking about it being a lie, as in that the teaser wasnt runing in real-time based on what those two slides says, but the slides posted doesnt necessarily indicate otherwise. I just wanted to point that out. Its definitelly no doubt that the initial teaser didnt match the final game and that downgrades had to be made in the final game compared to what we saw in the teaser. The other slides (there are 70 in total) also shows some sacrifices they made a long the way to make the game.

 

[johnnydrama]

Why is any of this important? Naughty Dog created an isolated cutscene to market their game that was clearly too early in development to show off anything substantial. You guys are acting like publishers overselling their product is a new thing to happen in this industry,

 

[DangerMouse]

Someone was just aching to bump this thread weren't they...

for people that think ND "got a pass" for this. what do you mean exactly? there was quite a bit of discussion and rage when it was announced that the single player would in fact, be 30fps and not 60fps.

what exactly constitutes as your pound of flesh for this?

Exactly. It was pretty heated when they announced they were now shooting for 30fps to get as close to this as possible and no longer 60fps (especially from those who really want 60fps). They didn't get a pass for that. Especially after being so gung-ho about 60fps to such silly lengths given they clearly didn't know if they could truly do it.

In the end I think it also helped that no one really thought they would have even been shooting for 60fps in the first place until they brought it up themselves which was what initially made a lot of us believe (since no one that already loved the series was really demanding it from an Uncharted game coming off UC3), since their previous games were all 30fps shooting for maximum visuals.

Meanwhile, graphically at 30fps they still delivered one of the best looking games ever made (minus art style preferences).

1) It didn't get a pass, look at this thread and the other thread when naughty dog confirmed the game will run at 30fps.

2) They never showed a gameplay demo running at that fidelity that was not achievable, something that has happened for other games, thus avoiding the really heavy criticism that some of those other games got.

3) The first gameplay they ever showed was in December 2014, setting the expectation a year and a half ahead of time of what the game will look like (the final game surpassed it, or at the very least matched it depending on who you ask).

That is why they're not getting as much crap as everyone else who did.

This. They ended up doing themselves a huge favor by not showing gameplay until they were showing something representative and then improving continuously on it like they did following that first real jungle gameplay demo showing how much wider the areas were going to be this time. The way they were able to continuously improve how good the game looked starting from that initial real gameplay reveal really helped them avoid worse blowback since the game looked stunning every time as the best looking console game so far whenever they showed it. As exampled by how every showing lead to stunning gifs that generally outdid all of the competition.

They got pretty close and their next game will probably get even closer (probably shooting for 30fps) now that they know what bogged them down while making UC4.

 

[Lord Error]

They definitely dug their own grave coming out and saying how awesome and important 60 fps is, how going back to 30 fps would make the game look "broken" and they hope that it becomes a new standard. Looked really silly when only a few months later they had to backpedal

They stuck by that for multiplayer portion of the game, where the difference actually matters for gameplay.

 

[gamerMan]

Can anybody explain specifically what is meant here in using the PS4 as a render farm?.

A bunch of PS4s hooked up together to render out a single frame like this.

I read that slide more as a general expectation to the PS4, not just regarding the 2014 teaser.

I think you have to look at the first slide as well. I think these two slides make it very clear that the E3 2014 trailer wasn't running in realtime. The things that are impossible to render in realtime are listed under 1 in lowercase letters, which are the things that the hair was using in the E3 2014 trailer.

 

[tuxfool]

Why is any of this important? Naughty Dog created an isolated cutscene to market their game that was clearly too early in development to show off anything substantial. You guys are acting like publishers overselling their product is a new thing to happen in this industry,

It isn't important at all. But it certainly is something worth considering if people create expectations based on early demonstrations. There is a certain narrative that only Ubisoft does this when it clearly isn't the case.

At the same time I'd like developers to feel comfortable showing work early if they so choose. But to do that people should just have a bit of perspective about the final product. If somebody expresses scepticism others shouldn't jump down their throats, with statements "I'm sure X developer knows what they're doing, why are you doubting them?". The developer may in fact not know what they are doing during those early stages.

 

[PeterLegend]

Just need that Neo patch and we'll be good to go

 

[Strangelove77]

Sometimes I'm embarrassed to be a "gamer." Now is one of those times.

 

[katkombat]

Well now that the game has been out for a couple of months we finally face the reality, the game never looked like that. Sit back, grab some popcorn, enjoy re-reading through the first few pages and remember,things aren't always what they seem to be. mr skeltal is watching u bros. stay frosty.


60 frames-per-second,msaa,higher hair fidelity,incredible shadows,better lighting, much better textures

so you bumped just to stir shit up or

 

[Fix The Scientist]

Haha, i remember this thread and its smug title... There was always a slight waft of bullshit with those reveal graphics. Hopefully they don't pull this again with TLOU2

 

[Lord Error]

I think you have to look at the first slide as well. I think these two slides make it very clear that the E3 2014 trailer wasn't running in realtime. The things that are impossible to render in realtime are listed under 1 in lowercase letters, which are the things that the hair was using in the E3 2014 trailer.

That probably means they treated PS4 as a render-farm of PS3s early on, as their engine at that time (running on PS3) couldn't do those things in real time, but they were hoping once the final engine was running on PS4, it would. Well, I'm sure that's not the end of it, and as someone said before, the marketing maybe took their part in all this, but it really sounds like the early prototyping (maybe including that trailer) was done on their old cutscene rendering PS3 render farm.

I don't know if those slides discredit or in fact confirm that the first trailer was running on PS4, but in the end, looking at the DF comparison of a similar scene, I don't know, you'd have to be truly nitpicky with how good it looks, to actually mind that it's not *omg identical* to the early trailer.
The image quality in the game is especially outstanding, better than bog-standard MSAA IMO, and definitely better than the first shown gameplay footage, which is obvious in DF comparison video where there's places where some of the trees shimmer in the old gameplay footage, but they do not in the final game.

 

[rambis]

A bunch of PS4s hooked up together to render out a single frame like this.




I think you have to look at the first slide as well. I think these two slides make it very clear that the E3 2014 trailer wasn't running in realtime. The things that are impossible to render in realtime are listed under 1 in lowercase letters, which are the things that the hair was using in the E3 2014 trailer.

Thats not what they meant at all. They explain what they meant in the flow chart of slide 7. These are two completely seperate slides and are being taken out of context.

The slide about the hair doesnt have that bit about not possible to run. It is very possible that the demo did run with the hair at higher quality.


You seem to miss the major point that this talk was about. They were able to ahip the demo running like that. It didnt work for the whole game. Quoted one last time.

The most valuable lesson we learned was - Shipping a game was way different than making a real-time demo.Gameplay and having smooth framerates are always the number one priority. There are so many things in our game could slow down the frame rates, such as crowds, particles, complex environments, etc.

 

[DangerMouse]

Thats not what they meant at all. They explain what they meant in the flow chart of slide 7. These are two completely seperate slides and are being taken out of context.

The slide about the hair doesnt have that bit about not possible to run. It is very possible that the demo did run with the hair at higher quality.

You seem to miss the major point that this talk was about. They were able to ahip the demo running like that. It didnt work for the whole game. Quoted one last time.

Yup.

 

[Clear]

Sometimes I'm embarrassed to be a "gamer." Now is one of those times.

Yeah, people need to stop talking like experts when its plainly obvious they have no understanding whatsoever of the technologies and processes they are prating on about.

Its desperately sad, particularly when its all in service of what exactly? What are they trying to prove by throwing shade on developers and acting like they are trying to deceive them?

It makes no sense whatsoever as a complaint either because if it was a campaign of deliberate deception, wouldn't all pre-release material be similarly different from the final product?

 

[Wishmaster92]

A bunch of PS4s hooked up together to render out a single frame like this.




I think you have to look at the first slide as well. I think these two slides make it very clear that the E3 2014 trailer wasn't running in realtime. The things that are impossible to render in realtime are listed under 1 in lowercase letters, which are the things that the hair was using in the E3 2014 trailer.

This might be easier to explain

Most of that hair is extremely over-budgeted, impossible to run.

This is all talking about the 2014 teaser graphics

 

[Budi]

Yeah, people need to stop talking like experts when its plainly obvious they have no understanding whatsoever of the technologies and processes they are prating on about.

Its desperately sad, particularly when its all in service of what exactly? What are they trying to prove by throwing shade on developers and acting like they are trying to deceive them?

It makes no sense whatsoever as a complaint either because if it was a campaign of deliberate deception, wouldn't all pre-release material be similarly different from the final product?

What i'm wondering is how many have actually been "fooled" by any of these things.
I mean how many bought Witcher 3 for example and were surprised that it didn't look like it did in 2013 trailers.

 

[lowhighkang_LHK]

sure the final game didn't look as good as the first trailer but still looks amazing and better than any game i have ever seen or played

Yes, but - you know....YOU KNOW....like, cmon man controversy.

To be honest I knew this game wasn't going to be 60 fps. But hot shit did it not turn out to be quite possibly the best looking game of all time, especially when you consider the size and scope of the game.

 

[me0wish]

I'm surprised that I couldn't find "but not a single PCMR game looks as good as Uncharted 4 does!".

It's like a sin to dislike ND games.

 

[Servbot24]

It's like a sin to dislike ND games.

Plenty of people don't like the game, they're not being called out. What's ridiculous is the drama-mongering.