Support NeoGAF

[nOoblet16]

This one you can actually have

Not exactly, with a proper day night cycle you see the shadows moving according the the change in light. The image you posted has no shadows at all, for this very reason, it looks like they simply changed the hue of the scene to something darker. Considering how detailed games today are, doing something like that would just make it look much worse than the real time version.

 

[Vulcano's assistant]

Yeah, I was thinking the same. However I don't see why it can't be done, most games have pre-rendered shadow maps anyway.

 

[Alo81]

Because Pre-rendered is indistinguishable from reality ?

Most of the pre-rendered backgrounds we have seen in games have been very low res so its not like they were perfect.

A current gen game would have to have 4k backgrounds (or higher if they were scrolling), to future proof themselves and that's a lot of work.

Yes it would have to do at least 4K backgrounds and that's absolutely what I would expect from a modern pre-rendered game.

I didn't say pre-rendered is indistinguishable from reality but pre-rendered absolutely has the ability to be because there is literally not a limit on render time. Developers can take as long or as little as they want on it.

Real time graphics have an inherent limit of needing to be rendered in real time that pre-rendered graphics do not so they have the ability to be as high of a quality as the developers choose to invest into them.

That looks good obviously, but it's just one have one image with no lightning and the other with lightning and they just alternate between the two. Pick any game from last generation and you'll see how different the lighting and shadows look and move for lightning strikes when compared to the RE make images you posted.

Those aren't real time examples but two things worth noting

1. REMake does have real time shadows as well as pre-baked lighting.

2. We're looking at a game that was released on the Gamecube. There have absolutely been advancements that developers could take advantage of alongside these pre-rendered backgrounds.

You're only focusing on graphics while completely ignoring that games with pre-rendered backgrounds offer very limited environmental interactivity and also limit your ability for dynamic environments. That's why you only see them in games like Bastion, Bravely Default or Pillars of Eternity where these draw-backs don't matter.

Well I mean, so what? No one is saying every game needs pre-rendered backgrounds, just that people like it as an option and can have an appreciation for it when it's done well.

No one is expecting the next Call of Duty to be pre-rendered.

 

[nOoblet16]

Yeah, I was thinking the same. However I don't see why it can't be done, most games have pre-rendered shadow maps anyway.

I disagree, with the exception of UE3 games majority of games had mostly real time shadows with some baked shadow maps here and there and ambient occlusion but with the start of this gen we won't even see that.

 

[DJIzana]

God how I miss pre-rendered backgrounds... What I wouldn't give for a new Chrono or Baten Kaitos with those, in HD. Or a .Hack.

 

[- J - D -]

I love the artistry of pre-rendered backgrounds (I even made a thread a while back about that fondness), but aside from one advantage, today's rendering technology makes real-time backdrops look just as good if locked with a static camera angle. The only give-away is aliasing. That's what makes pre-rendered backgrounds still appealing to me. No jagged edges. Great (if ephemeral) image quality that can only be matched in real-time with huge processing power. However, 3d backgrounds are more dynamic and interactive.

This trade-off is what makes the recent kickstarter game Republique interesting to me. Sometime during development, the team at Camoflaj stated that they transitioned from originally pre-rendered backgrounds to full, dynamic 3d. Now, I'm not sure if all of the backdrops in the game have moved from pre-drawn to real-time, and I haven't been able to play the game yet, but just looking at it, you can see that the 3d backdrops with a static camera angle approximates the look of most games with pre-rendered backdrops. The camera isn't completely static though, as the player's viewpoint in the game is that of the myriad of pivoting security cameras placed throughout the setting.

Giant Bomb's quicklook: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRD-G4Im0jM

Look closely though and you can see aliasing and other signs that give it away.

 

[Alo81]

I love the artistry of pre-rendered backgrounds (I even made a thread a while back about that fondness), but aside from one advantage, today's rendering technology makes real-time backdrops look just as good if locked with a static camera angle. The only give-away is aliasing. That's what makes pre-rendered backgrounds still appealing to me. No jagged edges. Great (if ephemeral) image quality that can only be matched in real-time with huge processing power. However, 3d backgrounds are more dynamic and interactive.

This trade-off is what makes the recent kickstarter game Republique interesting to me. Sometime during development, the team at Camoflaj stated that they transitioned from originally pre-rendered backgrounds to full, dynamic 3d. Now, I'm not sure if all of the backdrops in the game have moved from pre-drawn to real-time, and I haven't been able to play the game yet, but just looking at it, you can see that the 3d backdrops with a static camera angle approximates the look of most games with pre-rendered backdrops. The camera isn't completely static though, as the player's viewpoint in the game is that of the myriad of pivoting security cameras placed throughout the setting.

Giant Bomb's quicklook: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRD-G4Im0jM

Look closely though and you can see aliasing and other signs that give it away.

I watched GB's quick look the other day and thought "It looks pretty decent for a mobile game but still looks like a mobile game."

Looking at those pre-rendered examples, hot damn. If only.

 

[Lady Gaia]

The state of the art has simply moved beyond the point where there's an obvious distinction between what is and is not pre-rendered. Each individual frame tends to combine an amazing array of techniques and shortcuts to give the illusion that everything is computed in real time, but in practice there's a lot of precomputed lighting, occlusion, and textures that simplify the scene.

 

[BumblebeeCody]

What's the point of advancing in technology if we then start asking to go back or wondering why dated design points aren't making a return?
I never liked them and won't miss 'em.

 

[Alo81]

What's the point of advancing in technology if we then start asking to go back or wondering why dated design points aren't making a return?
I never liked them and won't miss 'em.

Pre-rendered graphics aren't inherently dated and aren't inherently worse.

That's sort of like saying 16bit graphics are objectively worse than real time 3D visuals.

They're different and as with most art, can be executed to different effects.

Also, pre-rendered is capable of producing visuals that would be absolutely impossible in realtime.

 

[jett]

Short answer is we don't need this shit anymore. I've been playing Ni No Kuni and the scenery often looks straight out of a Ghibli movie.

 

[Cartman86]

What's the point of advancing in technology if we then start asking to go back or wondering why dated design points aren't making a return?
I never liked them and won't miss 'em.

I assume you don't like 2D fighters, pixel games etc? This is a very specific style of art and often times gameplay. Nothing made in 3D looks anywhere close to a lot of these screens people are posting.

 

[Anticitizen One]

Because game devs don't need to do tricks like this anymore?

Uh not really. The old Diablo and Donkey Kong Country games are far superior looking to the new games that are all polygonal. Ditto for the older Resident Evil games compared to RE 4.

 

[- J - D -]

What's the point of advancing in technology if we then start asking to go back or wondering why dated design points aren't making a return?
I never liked them and won't miss 'em.

There are still viable reasons for why pre-rendered backdrops could still be considered today. Same with 2d or pixel art in games.

 

[Liabe Brave]

Until we reach a point where graphics processing is at the point where it's indistinguishable from reality or we are capable of rendering worlds in real time that look exactly as we want in every possible case, there can always be a benefit to pre-rendered graphics.

But at a cost. You're saying that pre-rendered backgrounds can be made to look better than the best realtime material, which is true. But adding polygons to each object, adding more unique objects, and adding more detailed and diverse textures means that such backgrounds also cost more to make. A lot more, probably, since asset creation is the single most expensive part of game creation. In an era where studios are already struggling with game costs, this is not a recipe for success.

Now, I'm all for using drawn art as assets--I'm playing Don't Starve right now and really liking the look. But super-intensive CGI backgrounds don't make financial sense.

 

[Alo81]

But at a cost. You're saying that pre-rendered backgrounds can be made to look better than the best realtime material, which is true. But adding polygons to each object, adding more unique objects, and adding more detailed and diverse textures means that such backgrounds also cost more to make. A lot more, probably, since asset creation is the single most expensive part of game creation. In an era where studios are already struggling with game costs, this is not a recipe for success.

Now, I'm all for using drawn art as assets--I'm playing Don't Starve right now and really liking the look. But super-intensive CGI backgrounds don't make financial sense.

I absolutely do not disagree with you in that it takes a significant amount of time, effort, and money. The point is just that it's a possibility and benefit of pre-rendered that isn't necessarily present in real-time graphics.

 

[RoadHazard]

Our machines are powerful enough for great real-time visuals now, so no, I see no reason to bring pre-rendered backgrounds back, with all their restrictions. You can still have those types of camera angles and such with real-time graphics if you want to (although most devs choose not to), and you get the advantage of being able to move the camera through the scene, you can have things happen dynamically in the environment, etc.

Just look at something like The Dark Sorcerer as an example of what can be accomplished in real-time on the PS4 when your scenes are small and restricted (similar in many ways to the scenes in a game with pre-rendered backgrounds):

Do we really need shit to look all that much better? Sure, not everyone is Quantic Dream, and most PS4 games won't look nearly this good, but it's an example of what could be done if you follow that kind of philosophy instead of making everything open and huge.

 

[Glass Rebel]

Well I mean, so what? No one is saying every game needs pre-rendered backgrounds, just that people like it as an option and can have an appreciation for it when it's done well.

No one is expecting the next Call of Duty to be pre-rendered.

OP was asking why there aren't graphically impressive games with pre-rendered backgrounds like REmake was for its time and I explained why many developers don't bother with them. People can like whatever they want.

 

[Duxxy3]

The key question - is it cheaper to go with pre-rendered backgrounds?

 

[Vulcano's assistant]

Uh not really. The old Diablo and Donkey Kong Country games are far superior looking to the new games that are all polygonal. Ditto for the older Resident Evil games compared to RE 4.

For Diablo is mostly because of the art style imo. D1 and 2 were quite repetitive looking, like tiles arranged forming the level, since maps where were randomly generated, and didn't have as many assets as D3. If they had used D3 engine with D2 direction, it would have looked the best.

Edit: of course a different engine that D3's would also show possible better results too. I think sui generis shows something good enough to replace prerendered isometric if the game is going to randomly generate its levels.

 

[Jinko]

I love the artistry of pre-rendered backgrounds (I even made a thread a while back about that fondness), but aside from one advantage, today's rendering technology makes real-time backdrops look just as good if locked with a static camera angle. The only give-away is aliasing. That's what makes pre-rendered backgrounds still appealing to me. No jagged edges. Great (if ephemeral) image quality that can only be matched in real-time with huge processing power. However, 3d backgrounds are more dynamic and interactive.

This trade-off is what makes the recent kickstarter game Republique interesting to me. Sometime during development, the team at Camoflaj stated that they transitioned from originally pre-rendered backgrounds to full, dynamic 3d. Now, I'm not sure if all of the backdrops in the game have moved from pre-drawn to real-time, and I haven't been able to play the game yet, but just looking at it, you can see that the 3d backdrops with a static camera angle approximates the look of most games with pre-rendered backdrops. The camera isn't completely static though, as the player's viewpoint in the game is that of the myriad of pivoting security cameras placed throughout the setting.

Giant Bomb's quicklook: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRD-G4Im0jM

Look closely though and you can see aliasing and other signs that give it away.

Yup this is what I'm talking about, there is barely a difference and even less so going into the next generation.

 

[nkarafo]

Oh my, these REmake gifs look amazing. Its like the game hasn't aged a single day. Thankfully, i still have my copy and my CRT ready for it.

 

[TyrantII]

Because as far as graphically intensive games go there are no benefits these days and any improvements in character models would only make it more jarring when the characters clash with the backgrounds.

All depends on the artist. There's good Photoshop and there bad Photoshop. Same with CGI mattes in movies (which is really the same thing and where a next gen prerendered game could go).

A bad implementation will be bad. A good one will blend the art together and be indistinguishable from the rest of the style.

 

[TyrantII]

Another very important plus side of real-time is that you can keep tweaking it until the very end, because you are not using a lot of time rendering every time.

More nonsense. Even to this date many games still are using engines that bake maps, which means yes, rendering. Titanfall will be using source and bsp type maps, which means they have to send their maps to rendering farms to get an output file.

Some newer engines are cometly drop and play, but its a relatively new thing. Rendering 1080p/4k images is simple by comparison. Overlaying the them on a 3d underlying structure is where more of the work comes in.

 

[Labadal]

Dragon's Crown

Muramasa

Ni No Kuni - Nintendo DS (Couldn't find a good pic.)

 

[Vulcano's assistant]

More nonsense. Even to this date many games still are using engines that bake maps, which means yes, rendering. Titanfall will be using source and bsp type maps, which means they have to send their maps to rendering farms to get an output file.

Some newer engines are cometly drop and play, but its a relatively new thing. Rendering 1080p/4k images is simple by comparison. Overlaying the them on a 3d underlying structure is where more of the work comes in.

Well I'm talking about drastic level design changes. However its true that for the games where tweaking like that and real-time lighting could be useful are games that would be near impossible to do with prerendered backgrounds to begin with. Rage is somewhere in the middle though, but that one took forever to finish.

 

[nkarafo]

...and any improvements in character models would only make it more jarring when the characters clash with the backgrounds.

But look at the pictures i posted in the OP and tell me that those 3D models don't blend perfectly in these backgrounds...

 

[AuthenticM]

I wish we could have a new Resident Evil game using pre-rendered backgrounds.

 

[nkarafo]

Dragon's Crown and Muramasa don't really count, these are 2D scrolling games with 2D sprites. We might as well add New Super Mario Bros and Rayman or any other 2D scroller. But here we explore pseudo-3D games with 3D models in pre-rendered backgrounds.

 

[TyrantII]

You're only focusing on graphics while completely ignoring that games with pre-rendered backgrounds offer very limited environmental interactivity and also limit your ability for dynamic environments. That's why you only see them in games like Bastion, Bravely Default or Pillars of Eternity where these draw-backs don't matter.

And you vastly overestimate your ability to interact with objects in full 3d. Throwing a few 3d objects in that use havok and bam, you're replicating 99% of 3d "world interaction".

Hell, even BF4 isn't interactive. You trigger pre-designed destruction while some particle effects and gibs are thrown at the player. Like all games, were nowhere near the point of running simulations. They're all clever tricks and illusions, and the same can be done no matter the style.

Interactivity and destruction not impossible in modern pre-rendered, fixed camera game. Just hasn't been done because there's little demand for these style games.

Pre-rendered isn't even the right word we should be using since the prerendered backgrounds are overplayed on 3d sets. Fixed camera is more appropriate.

 

[copelandmaster]

Do we really need shit to look all that much better?

Yes.

Imagine what this tech demo would look like if it was powered by a Titan.
That's like taking a look at King's Field IV on the PS2 and saying that nothing could look better. The Souls series, especially Dark souls on PC, begs to differ. Hell, look at the CG movies/trailers for the souls games. We're not even close.

There is no need to rush graphics at the expense of ballooning budget's, however. We'll get there eventually.

 

[nkarafo]

Code Veronica had real time 3D backgrounds but the camera was fixed (with some movement sometimes). Big mistake IMO.

What's the point of using real time 3D if the camera you are going to use is fixed? The point of real-time 3D is the freedom of movement. If you are not going to have this then why not use more detailed pre-rendered? REmake looks so much better that its not even funny. Heck, not even RE4 (a much later CG release and one of the most impressive games on the system graphically) can't quite match it.

 

[TyrantII]

Well I'm talking about drastic level design changes. However its true that for the games where tweaking like that and real-time lighting could be useful are games that would be near impossible to do with prerendered backgrounds to begin with. Rage is somewhere in the middle though, but that one took forever to finish.

Sure, but I think that's just saying games take time and money to make. Sure do.

I dont think anyone's arguing that big publishers are going to be spending their time or money on this, when they think its better spent elsewhere. (They're not going to suddenly push minority oriented games)

In the end the demand for these games was low compared to 3d games. Were seeing the same move away from corridor games to open world now.

And open world is more costly than corridor when you factor in the size of the world and the assets needed.

 

[patrickthehedgehog]

Ah, Riven and FFVII are both beautiful.

I have to say I was pretty sad to see that Republique dropped pre-rendered backgrounds. The distinctive look is part of the reason I backed the game :/ but I respect the designers for going with what the felt worked best in the end.

 

[DiipuSurotu]

What's the point of advancing in technology if we then start asking to go back or wondering why dated design points aren't making a return?
I never liked them and won't miss 'em.

That's like saying painting is outdated because photography was invented.

 

[Roto13]

I didn't think pre-rendered backgrounds looked very good back when pre-rendered backgrounds were still a thing because the effect is ruined by the characters looking like they're just kind of floating in front of them. Like a CAD comic with a shitty google image search background.

These days, characters and other things could look like they actually convincingly match the backgrounds. I wouldn't mind seeing more of it.

Kills a lot of the potential for upscaling, though.

Code Veronica had real time 3D backgrounds but the camera was fixed (with some movement sometimes). Big mistake IMO.



What's the point of using real time 3D if the camera you are going to use is fixed? The point of real-time 3D is the freedom of movement. If you are not going to have this then why not use more detailed pre-rendered? REmake looks so much better that its not even funny. Heck, not even RE4 (a much later CG release and one of the most impressive games on the system graphically) can't quite match it.

The real time 3D backgrounds are why we are able to have Code Veronica HD.

 

[nkarafo]

I didn't think pre-rendered backgrounds looked very good back when pre-rendered backgrounds were still a thing because the effect is ruined by the characters looking like they're just kind of floating in front of them. Like a CAD comic with a shitty google image search background.

Like this?

The real time 3D backgrounds are why we are able to have Code Veronica HD.

So, you are saying that they deliberately made it look worse because they knew that 10+ years later an HD version would be released?

 

[akaoni]

Code Veronica had real time 3D backgrounds but the camera was fixed (with some movement sometimes). Big mistake IMO.

I recall it being the majority of the time, but I've never finished CV and don't like it so I'm foggy.

 

[Roto13]

Like this?

Like I said, they look good when the characters and interactive objects look like they could be part of the background. Games where the characters looked as good as the backgrounds were few and far between.

EDIT:

So, you are saying that they deliberately made it look worse because they knew that 10+ years later an HD version would be released?

Maybe. But I'm saying real time backgrounds have their benefits and are much more versitile than pre-rendered once.

Jesus, you're determined to not understand my post.

 

[Jinko]

What's the point of using real time 3D if the camera you are going to use is fixed? The point of real-time 3D is the freedom of movement. If you are not going to have this then why not use more detailed pre-rendered? REmake looks so much better that its not even funny. Heck, not even RE4 (a much later CG release and one of the most impressive games on the system graphically) can't quite match it.

As others have said, a 3D background allows for real time interaction, something a 2D static image can't do.

Of course you can place 3D objects/effects on top of a 2D image to circumvent that limitation but in most cases its not convincing.

Code Veronica did a pretty good job, considering the generation it was made in.

 

[nkarafo]

Like I said,

Sorry, you said "these days" and i thought you meant this generation (meaning that REmake has the problem you are talking about).

 

[Glass Rebel]

But look at the pictures i posted in the OP and tell me that those 3D models don't blend perfectly in these backgrounds...

The environments in REmake are practically non-interactive. It is a very pretty game, even today, but static environments is something games are moving away from. Dynamic lighting, movable objects, cloth physics, water and so on. They might be entirely possible with pre-rendered backgrounds but most likely a ton of work.

And you vastly overestimate your ability to interact with objects in full 3d. Throwing a few 3d objects in that use havok and bam, you're replicating 99% of 3d "world interaction".

Hell, even BF4 isn't interactive. You trigger pre-designed destruction.

That's not impossible in modern pre-rendered, fixed camera game. Just hasn't been done because there's little demand for these style games.

Pre-rendered isn't even the right word we should be using since the prerendered backgrounds are overplayed on 3d sets. Fixed camera is more appropriate.

When I say interaction I also mean stuff like bending blades of grass, leaving ripples in water puddles etc. you want your character to appear as physically present in that word. Are there any examples of this in games?

 

[Roto13]

Sorry, you said "these days" and i thought you meant this generation.

Even that generation, pre-rendered backgrounds weren't common any more and when they were used they didn't match the real time objects and characters at all. REmake was a rare exception.

 

[nkarafo]

The environments in REmake are practically non-interactive. It is a very pretty game, even today, but static environments is something games are moving away from. Dynamic lighting, movable objects, cloth physics, water and so on. They might be entirely possible with pre-rendered backgrounds but most likely a ton of work.

I agree and like i said i also prefer the real time 3D present/future. I do like interactivity, heck i even hate cinematic games... However, once in awhile i have the desire to play something like REmake. But mostly, i am curious to see how would a game like that look today (with all the 3D rendering being used for 3D models). Plus, its a different style. Its not a matter of being better or worst. Its different.

Jesus, you're determined to not understand my post.

I understand it man, i just don't agree.

 

[Alastor3]

Baten Kaitos was beautiful for this reason.

Thank you, I was about to post the exact same thing

 

[Roto13]

I understand it man, i just don't agree.

You don't agree that PS1 character models didn't match their pre-rendered backgrounds, and you don't agree that real time backgrounds are more versatile and can be upscaled?

 

[nkarafo]

You don't agree that PS1 character models didn't match their pre-rendered backgrounds, and you don't agree that real time backgrounds are more versatile and can be upscaled?

I'm referring to your comments about Code Veronica. I didn't disagree to your previous comments.

 

[Roto13]

I'm referring to your comments about Code Veronica.

That the real time 3D backgrounds are why we have Code Veronica HD? Because real time backgrounds are more versatile and can be upscaled?

 

[Go_Ly_Dow]

FF9 is so stunning. Pics incoming...

 

[MagnaderAlpha]

Our machines are powerful enough for great real-time visuals now, so no, I see no reason to bring pre-rendered backgrounds back, with all their restrictions. You can still have those types of camera angles and such with real-time graphics if you want to (although most devs choose not to), and you get the advantage of being able to move the camera through the scene, you can have things happen dynamically in the environment, etc.

Just look at something like The Dark Sorcerer as an example of what can be accomplished in real-time on the PS4 when your scenes are small and restricted (similar in many ways to the scenes in a game with pre-rendered backgrounds):

Do we really need shit to look all that much better? Sure, not everyone is Quantic Dream, and most PS4 games won't look nearly this good, but it's an example of what could be done if you follow that kind of philosophy instead of making everything open and huge.

You have a good point, but I personally don't see them as a restriction any more than great graphics restrict world building(because it's too hard to make everything look REAL and takes toooo damn long to program all that shit). Really, both have their restrictions. To think great, realistic cutting edge graphics are the "end all" is a little ignorant. Especially when it seems like the more powerful graphics become, the more streamlined gaming gets, the less studios want to spend on making explorable worlds rather than endless hallways. To me, you pick your poison. I'd rather have game limited via pre-rendered cut scenes(or even classic game ideas) than "the most amazing looking playable movie". Of course, I'm not saying those shouldn't exist either, but I'm more open to many different types of games being made than just ONE type being the standard that all should strive to be. That makes it great for all of us(variety is great).

An example is, I just saw the PS4 version trailer of Nobunaga's Ambition, and the beginning they show the camera gliding over fields and mountain-scapes(world map-type stuff, that look pretty damn good in HD). While I know that game isn't a JRPG, I could only imagine a traditional JRPG that went back to doing stuff like that, but in HD. You don't have to fully render the entire world in full scale. You don't have to spend(or in some cases, WASTE) money trying to render everything as realistic as possible. The joke I tend to bring up is, a lot of companies waste so much money trying to render the slight interior space within a crack in a wall in the background of a scene. Maybe you could have a JRPG that has a classic world map, has pre-rendered towns and dungeons(while the character models are HD, but fit into the world seamlessly), and keep 3D battles and maybe use the most of the graphical capablities THERE(rendering the character models, monsters, special attacks, animation and battlefield). Imagine how much space and time it would save the team from fully rendering EVERYTHING in fully rotatable 3D?

Personally, the only excuse given to not retread that route is that it's not giving us anything new, but, I'm tired of that excuse. Not all games have to give us something new. Not all games do. I think it could work, I just think some people are soooo enthralled with "change for the sake of change"(and I mean, "don't look back, only forward" type of change), that it limits their perspective.