Spyder_Monkey
Banned
I think what they mean by "captured" is that that scene was made, rendered, and played back on a PS4 in real time using Uncharted 4's engine.
There's no need to over complicate things.
IGN: Nathan Drake will use identical model in cutscene and gameplay.
- Thread starter Khalifa Jayy
- Start date
I think what they mean by "captured" is that that scene was made, rendered, and played back on a PS4 in real time using Uncharted 4's engine.
There's no need to over complicate things.
Primethius
Banned
If you scroll up, people have answered this question.
It's a pre-rendered video. Why would ND downgrade a pre-rendered video?
And anyone using that reddit picture must be trolling or something, if you can't see the differences in location, time of day and the fact that one Nathan Drake is wet and the other isn't.
It's ridiculous how easily people fall for this stuff.
Can't talk about a downgrade when it would be hard for them to prove it there.
Can someone please explain what "real time rendered in-engine" means? I thought real time= ingame, pre-rendered=cutscenes (in many games, not all of them).
I do love the transitions of MP3.For example...
xenorevlis
Member
Excellent demostration!!
Every time you post in a thread like these I start to wonder if I should have your name, because you say a lot of things that are completely incorrect or based solely on offline rendering that does not apply to real time visuals. I'm not even a veteran, but you're wrong so often that I think that name is false advertising
The model looks pretty much the same, though I don't doubt the geometry does change on the character all the time. Same model, but silhouette tessellation seems present on principle models (more so during cut scenes) and shading precision seems to dim down when Drake is further from the camera. However, the changes between states is amazing, from wet and droopy hair to mud all over the shirt. The same wet-look is present from the E3 reveal during the cave section as well.
EDIT - As for lighting, which is the foundation of how ANYTHING looks different regardless of (though also due to) shaders on geometry and sprites, when you do a cutscene you have complete control over the camera and thus can plan out and place lights all over the place like you would in a CG movie. These lights are generally not visible other than the effect they have on objects. This is how filmmaking works as well especially in dramatic close-ups, only you actually have to place the lights outside of the visible frame and film "around" it.
In gameplay, you can assign similar lights that keep the player model semi-illuminated in darkness and add to the pop, but if they don't blend into the scene and react to the lighting present in the environment (whether its a lamppost or sunlight through the trees) it would feel out of place and pull you out. This is specifically stated by Naughty Dog as well, and why you won't see every bit of detail at all times on Drake as there are certain things that will cause the visibity of detail to change or even appear in the first place (such as veins, stains, clothing under a wet shirt, muscle / bone deforming skin, pores, etc.)
SupJabroni
Neo Member
Here are some screens of Drake from actual gameplay during that demo. All three of these pictures look quite a lot better than the Drake shown close up in the beginning of the demo in my opinion.
This is most likely due to the flat lighting in the beginng. Even the actual playable model of Drake looks closer to the E3 teaser than the one used in that fake image:
Yeah these look way better to me than the close up being used to "confirm downgrade", which though I admit the gameplay from psx isn't quite where the e3 teaser was, it's pretty close and still really impressive a year away from launch.
Naughty Dog haven't given us too many reasons to doubt them, they consistently pushed visuals with every release last gen and I trust the next Uncharted won't be any different. Honestly, I was most happy to see all the improvements to gameplay.
gamerMan
Member
You may be right. However, typically my understanding of a "capture" in computer graphics is that something is written to a file. I'm just looking at what Naughty Dog told us, not what some else said. I guess it depends on you interpretation of what capture means.
Here is the language they used in the E3 teaser:"The following trailer was captured directly from a playstation 4"
Here is the language they used in the gameplay footage:"The following footage is running entirely in realtime on a Playstation 4 system."
If they mean the same thing, they should use the same language. To me, they mean two different things. It is subtle difference in language. The first one uses language that is a bit ambiguous, but the gameplay footage uses clear language.
At any rate, even if both the E3 teaser and gameplay footage are running in realtime, while the modeling looks the same, there is a pretty clear difference in the complexity of the lighting . Like I said earlier, perhaps they can scale the lighting and shaders depending on scene complexity.
Raitosaito
Member
This is going to be passed around as evidence for someone's argument for sure.
their pre-rendered cut scenes are in-engine.
so if the downgreade their engine..
in the uc3 and now the uc4 pics their is a downgrade in the lighting, not different lighting.
why would they change the lighting, to something that doesn't look as good as it did before, when they wouldn't have a reason to do so?
Made this for y'all
VFX_Veteran is coming for this.
Coolbgdog12
Member
The retail version of that scene was made in engine and not pre rendered.
Yea sure, I also think that the gameplay will not hit the quality of the E3 teaser for sure, but it will still look incredible. But I think that certain cutscenes will reach the quality of that teaser. The models shown during the cutscene at the end of the demo are on par with the one shown in the E3 video. Also the atmosphere and lighting condition in the teaser were made to look awesome. Even in movie scenes with incredible lightning and atmosphere will look better than just ordinary scenes.
But we will see what naughty dog will deliver. And I still believe that with the photo mode incredible looking pictures will be made that look just as good as the E3 teaser under certain conditions. (as the teaser was aswell)
Big Green Anus
Member
I like 60fps games, but I'm hoping Naughty God makes the Single player 30fps with visuals close to the reveal trailer and the multiplayer 60fps. At times, the current visuals looks great, but other times it looks like Last of Us remastered. However, still does not look close to the reveal trailer, which some programmer from Naughty Dog on Twitter said that they are aiming higher than that.
I know The Order has a smaller scope based on what was shown so far, but the visuals for that looks a generation ahead
I wonder if Naughty Dog is actually looking at the REAL complaints that were shown for the gameplay reveal, which was disappointing visually, but gameplay looks PHENOMENAL
I know The Order has a smaller scope based on what was shown so far, but the visuals for that looks a generation ahead
I wonder if Naughty Dog is actually looking at the REAL complaints that were shown for the gameplay reveal, which was disappointing visually, but gameplay looks PHENOMENAL
Jacksinthe
Banned
Wonder when he's gonna drop Magnum on us.
Drake is very versatile
VFX_Veteran
Banned
Does not apply to realtime visuals eh? What have I said that doesn't apply to realtime visuals. Furthermore, what have I said that is objectively incorrect?
I'm not even a veteran, but you're wrong so often that I think that name is false advertising
I must be a fake then.. geez. I don't know how I fool so many companies when they hire me.
Basically you want to say that the PAX gamplay footage is the same as the E3 footage, correct?
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Cutscene at the end looks about the same (E3 was also obviously cutscene footage), does it not? I mean as far as it can be compared as one is happening during day, and the other during night, on completely different locations, and noone is wet.
Speaking strictly about UC3, you can't seriously believe that, when there's many more scenes in it where characters in pre-rendered scenes look much better than that, and so many other scenes in game looked the same as that earlier trailer. Why would they change it? Probably because the re-positioned lighting made everything else during that scene look better, or more visible, or something, at the expense of that one shot looking worse.
VFX_Veteran
Banned
I'm not comparing cutscenes like most of you are. It's absolutely similar to the E3 footage.
That's not the point. The point is the gameplay. Period. And it looks significantly worse than the E3 footage. There should be consistency.
As someone who was trolling tried to imply..
xenorevlis said:
If the MIP mapping of the textures is choosing a much higher level because of how the camera is away from the character, then res up the texture or bias the MIP map to a lower level so that the gamer can still see the detail at the camera's threshold while playing the game! Ryse does it very effectively..
I moved the camera around to see Marius' face. It looks almost like the cutscene face in actual gameplay. Nothing is blurred or out-of-focus. I don't see this kind of detail in gameplay with Drake.
A wet character doesn't look better than a dry character just because you have more direct specular and reflections. It's just a different kind of look. And that's purely subjective.
What? No, it doesn't.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Why would you compare gameplay to it, is what I don't understand, when the original trailer was so clearly a cutscene. Don't compare apples to oranges and claim a downgrade. Or maybe not you specifically, but whoever is doing/saying that.
Well, I suppose if you wanted to compare if the 'wet' shader looks the same as before, you couldn't from that scene.
Why people forget Uncharted teaser was a Cutscene using in game assets like every uncharted...
when saw the actual scene that follows as gameplay!
VFX_Veteran
Banned
Is not the whole point of the UC4 argument about how the inital reveal had many people thinking that's how it would look in actual gameplay? And when they saw the gameplay, they were disappointed? I'm only addressing the actual concern. I've never thought it was the E3 footage vs. the gameplay cutscene footage.
tringworldso
Member
Surely I'm not the only one hating the yellow and blue clothing combo? Why couldn't they go for blue and dark grey combo? :-(
Did you find this on misterxmedia's site?
do any of you people realize this was originally a joke post?
I see VFX_VETERAN has been hard at work.
I kid
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
I don't know. It's always weird to me when people expect that, especially in a game that has more or less open environments. You can't just place the lights in perfect spots, or have regular face close-ups to see sweat on the forehead during gameplay, in a game like this. To me, the forest looked similarly dense, water looked similar, and character from the same distance you see him at the end of the E3 trailer also looked similar. The one thing I thought they may have faked in E3 trailer was image quality, but they pulled through with that IMO, providing the best AA solution I've seen. Another thing that pleasantly surprised me with gameplay that the E3 trailer didn't even hint at, is how much everything interacts with everything. I can't think of another game where the characters seem more the actual part of the world, rather than 3D objects pasted within some scenery.
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
It was made as a joke on Neogaf and people are taking it seriously on the internet, not realizing where it came from.
Neogaf-->internet-->Neogaf
It has come full circle like beautiful poetry.
VFX_Veteran
Banned
It's not a joke though.
Here is what people expected during gameplay:
Here is what was shown at the PAX (irregardless of the lighting/wet/dry -- there are so many big differences between the 2 images it's not even funny):
I, personally, never expected the gameplay to look like the E3 reveal.. but many people did.
JordanN
Banned
I'm confused what significantly worse means anymore.
You have to watch the whole trailer and see not one part of the game is the same. In fact, that same cropped out "downgrade" picture, ignores how massive the game is. Drake isn't just in a jungle, he's on a whole island.
You didn't see that at the e3 reveal.
People have also posted the close ups of Drake you see during gameplay. When all the lights are going off in the scene, you can see Drake's skin and clothing react to that (i.e visible SSS on his fingers, arms and ears).
It's not a joke though.
Here is what people expected during gameplay:
Here is what was shown at the PAX (irregardless of the lighting/wet/dry -- there are so many big differences between the 2 images it's not even funny):
I, personally, never expected the gameplay to look like the E3 reveal.. but many people did.
Why don't you wait to see the E3 cutscene in the final game, instead of comparing two different places with two different times of day and two different lighting settings?
The only way we will know if there was actually a downgrade from E3, is by watching the E3 sequence in the final game.
That wasn't my reading of the "the trailer was running in-engine in realtime" thread at the time.
Also there is no such word as "irregardless."
I think Corrine Yu specifically used the word real time for it somewhere.
It's not a joke though.
Here is what people expected during gameplay:
Here is what was shown at the PAX (irregardless of the lighting/wet/dry -- there are so many big differences between the 2 images it's not even funny):
I, personally, never expected the gameplay to look like the E3 reveal.. but many people did.
Please, do highlight the changes in the image that aren't dependent on lighting and wetness. I'd like to hear your (surely well-reasoned) arguments.
Drake is covered in water/dirt/sweat in the E3 teaser. The lighting is perfectly staged for a carefully planned cutscene and one can't expect Drake to be lit that way all the time in gameplay. There is also DoF at work.
VFX_Veteran specifically said the footage looked worse "irregardless of lighting/wet/dry" so pointing out lighting isn't meaningful.
To me the texturing/hair seems lower quality in the gameplay footage.
I dunno, looks like Drake has a bit less Geometry going on.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
I don't see what's so hard to understand about the sentiment.
The only thing we had seen of Uncharted 4 before the gameplay footage was the E3 reveal that looked off-the-wall incrediballs and Naughty Dog said they were aiming even higher. Just check that thread to see how many people thought the actual game would looks like that (no, even better!) when you're actually controlling it. Naughty Dog and Sony certainly didn't try to temper expectations by telling people it was just a cut scene and that gameplay segments would not look the same.
Now, I'm not saying it's reasonable for people to have expected the same visual quality from the gameplay, but I can see why some would have gotten their hopes up.
You cannot be serious. Those two look to be the same quality to you? Just time-of-day lighting differences?
This "different time of day" shit is becoming ridiculous.
I think it's pretty silly to compare those images.
Both are of really bad quality.
The one from the E3 teaser doesn't even look half as amazing as it does in full quality.
Also the one from the gameplay demo also doesn't look too hot in that quality.
The only thing you COULD compare would be the lighting... which is pretty pointless in two different locations... at two different times of the day...
Both are of really bad quality.
The one from the E3 teaser doesn't even look half as amazing as it does in full quality.
Also the one from the gameplay demo also doesn't look too hot in that quality.
The only thing you COULD compare would be the lighting... which is pretty pointless in two different locations... at two different times of the day...
CyberPunked
Member
I mean he's not wrong about it looking clearly worse. But I do think waiting to see how that actual scene compares in the released game, is the best thing to do. If it was running at 60fps in e3, then at 30fps that cutscene will probably look better.It's not a joke though.
Here is what people expected during gameplay:
Here is what was shown at the PAX (irregardless of the lighting/wet/dry -- there are so many big differences between the 2 images it's not even funny):
I, personally, never expected the gameplay to look like the E3 reveal.. but many people did.
VFX_Veteran
Banned
Are you saying the ONLY differences between those 2 images is day/night and wet/dry? As other posters have said, "you've got to be joking?"
Look at the right shoulder and how well it's formed compared to the gameplay footage. Look at his pants/butt too. Or his shirt and the siluoette edges. Or the trees and how they look more polygonal than the tree in the E3 footage. The back of his head in the E3 seems more full of hair. His neck looks thicker than the gameplay footage as well. Those are just eyeballing physical differences. We haven't even gotten to the indirect lighting, shaders, or FX yet.
CyberPunked
Member
Completely unrelated to the topic but I think you'll find, "irregardless", is very much so a word. It's quite funny that you thought it wasn't a word
How's my spelling?
You're a visual FX veteran but you purposefully leave out the fact that there's no shot of the forest that isn't obscured by DoF, which gives your claims of "obviously" higher/smoother geometry no credence. Are you getting all this from your blurry ass picture?
keltickennedy
Member
I think now is about the right time to take Druckmann's advice and stop looking at neogaf. This thread is ridiculous. lol.
JordanN
Banned
Re-itering my previous post, you can't judge just that one part of the demo. You have to judge all of it.
This area for instance, looks better and the camera is even closer up to Drake so you don't miss any detail.
Again, the game is huge and bigger than what they showed at e3. Naughty Dog isn't spending all their resources on one area. Quality wont look consistent across the board in what is obviously pre-alpha.
There are other things the demo added that again, wasn't at e3. The use of depth of field and special effects you see when Drake throws a grenade.
SolidSnakex
Member
He didn't say not to look at GAF. He just says that he doesn't look to this forum when designing games. Which is a good idea. The same goes for any forum really.