Support NeoGAF

[nasos_333]

Yeah, could be part of it. People aren't realizing that even PC games are held back by console ports, so a generational jump will allow everything to move forward.

And people saying developers will balk at the expenses of going to 1080p with better textures/engines, you do realize that game company profits have never been higher in history than they are now, right? Gaming was one of the few recession proof industries. Yes, it will be hard for indie developers to stand out, but it already is, and they never sold on graphics anyways, they sold on innovation. So that won't change.

Actually games are held back from older PCs with ancient hardware and consoles, it is both most dfinitly

That is why we see games like Gears 3, Halo 4, Uncharted 2-3, GOW3-Ascension etc etc on consoles, with unbelievable graphics and far fewer like those on PC exclusives

In fact has been so many years now that i went wow in graphics from a PC exclusive, which means consoles are the last thing about games not using PC top hardware fully, otherwise all PC games would look like FF 15 Agnes and they dont

The only way we move forward is the lower end across platforms become a GTX680 or better, like 8800 was the lowest end for this generation (and still largly is)

 

[XtremeXpider]

Actually games are held back from older PCs with ancient hardware and consoles, it is both most dfinitly

That is why we see games like Gears 3, Halo 4, Uncharted 2-3, GOW3-Ascension etc etc on consoles, with unbelievable graphics and far fewer like those on PC exclusives

In fact has been so many years now that i went wow in graphics from a PC exclusive, which means consoles are the last thing about games not using PC top hardware fully, otherwise all PC games would look like FF 15 Agnes and they dont

The only way we move forward is the lower end across platforms become a GTX680 or better, like 8800 was the lowest end for this generation (and still largly is)

GTX680 is not really needed for a "wow" factor.

 

[i-Lo]

I would know it to be a generational shift if at least we can get Gears 3 or Uncharted 3 like visuals in open world games. By the end of the generation, it'd be interesting to see where we'll be. On an even more curious note, I wonder whether the next gen will also last as long as this one (7 years) or whether it'll go back to half a decade cycle...

I remember getting blown away by the Dark Sector demo in the day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lY-MQ5l2OM

Now look what we have. The end of this upcoming gen is going to be madness.

That became THIS. Btw, I still like looking at the Dark Sector trailer from time to time.

 

[Agent Ironside]

I would know it to be a generational shift if at least we can get Gears 3 or Uncharted 3 like visuals in open world games. By the end of the generation, it'd be interesting to see where we'll be. On an even more curious note, I wonder whether the next gen will also last as long as this one (7 years) or whether it'll go back to half a decade cycle...



That became THIS. Btw, I still like looking at the Dark Sector trailer from time to time.

I... did not know this. Disappoint that it's a MMO though : /

 

[i-Lo]

I... did not know this. Disappoint that it's a MMO though : /

OT: But people love it so far. There is a closed beta key giveaway thread here (if you can find it). If you have a decent PC you can run it and check it out for yourself. But you remember what happened with Dark Sector; they should have just have not made the game.

 

[Karak]

I have been sitting back and thinking of the hundreds of games I have seen announced as "launch titles" that never got made. The original Xbox had a couple that I still remember. I always wish I could play whatever they had created if they got that far.

 

[tinfoilhatman]

Everyone for some reason thinks Microsoft will have backwards compatibility. If this is not the case then GAF will implode.

Most mainstream Xbox 1 games play on 360(going from x86 to IBM PPU) with software emulation(and patches) this should be easier this next gen.

It's pretty much a given that it will ATLEAST as good as Xbox1 to 360 most likely much much better

 

[kikonawa]

Most mainstream Xbox 1 games play on 360(going from x86 to IBM PPU) with software emulation(and patches) this should be easier this next gen.

It's pretty much a given that it will ATLEAST as good as Xbox1 to 360 most likely much much better

who would care about XBOX1 compatibility on XBOX720?

 

[tinfoilhatman]

who would care about XBOX1 compatibility on XBOX720?

I was comparing Xbox1 games being compatible on Xbox 360 in relation to XBox 360 games being compatible with Xbox720.

It should be FAR easier to port Xbox 360 games to 720 than it was for Xbox1 to 360 because of the GPU and CPU types and issues surrounding that.

 

[Gravijah]

Actually games are held back from older PCs with ancient hardware and consoles, it is both most dfinitly

Heh, I wish more developers targeted a wider arrange of systems. Higher res textures are useless, but more people being able to play your game, now that's somethin' important.

 

[Mascot]

That became THIS. Btw, I still like looking at the Dark Sector trailer from time to time.

Via this, of course. Am I one of only a few people on the planet who really enjoyed Dark Sector..?

 

[RoboPlato]

On theory I have about next gen on consoles is that we're going to see post-process AA a lot more, although hopefully not FXAA. Most of the next gen tech demos are running at least 4x MSAA, which would be a ton of processing power.

Now look at this shot of God of War Ascension:

Not a jaggy in sight and not blurry at all either, unlike with FXAA. This is also a game that's running a lot of advanced effects at a framerate above 30fps at 720p on current gen hardware. If both MS and Sony find some kind of similar post process AA the next gen systems will be able to add it at very little cost with will help them hit 1080p/30fps targets and leave a lot of headroom for other effects while still having dramatically improved IQ from the current gen. Combine this with the fact that the next gen demos haven't even gone through basic optimization, not even counting console optimization, and the last time we saw them was a year and a half before release I think that they're definitely do able at launch at 1080p if specs are anything like these rumors.

 

[Karak]

On theory I have about next gen on consoles is that we're going to see post-process AA a lot more, although hopefully not FXAA. Most of the next gen tech demos are running at least 4x MSAA, which would be a ton of processing power.

Now look at this shot of God of War Ascension:

Not a jaggy in sight and not blurry at all either, unlike with FXAA. This is also a game that's running a lot of advanced effects at a framerate above 30fps at 720p on current gen hardware. If both MS and Sony find some kind of similar post process AA the next gen systems will be able to add it at very little cost with will help them hit 1080p/30fps targets and leave a lot of headroom for other effects while still having dramatically improved IQ from the current gen. Combine this with the fact that the next gen demos haven't even gone through basic optimization, not even counting console optimization, and the last time we saw them was a year and a half before release I think that they're definitely do able at launch if specs are anything like these rumors.

I love the use of SMAA and other things of that ilk. I hope they use ANYTHING but FXAA.

 

[RoboPlato]

I love the use of SMAA and other things of that ilk. I hope they use ANYTHING but FXAA.

I could see Sony developing their own type of SMAA since they did an awesome job on their custom MLAA and it uses a lot of the same principles. Their MLAA just required a lot of SPU power so few games used it, which is unfortunate.

Even if it's not customized I want to see SMAA over FXAA. It's pretty much the same negligible performance cost, covers edges better, and doesn't introduce blur.

 

[Aasir Osu]

For my own sanity, I've been trying to get clarity on what I think I'm reading here. A couple of questions that come to mind, though:

Would it be possible to take the functional elements of a GPU, and disperse them evenly across multiple CPUs? Can an 8 core (or any 1+ core) CPU pass any type of data with each other - including graphics & texture data, etc.? Why not divide the rendering of a scene across multiple cores, but make the execution removed or transparent for the developer as they see fit? The devs tell the system what to draw, and the system just draws it - even if the texture units are on one core, the CU's or whatever they're called are spread out over others, etc.

We're reading rumors of a big, System On Chip, with a lowish clock speed for the CPU (I know clock isn't everything). So, what would be the barrier preventing the creation of a chip in which the distinction between CPU and GPU is completely blurred, if not outright obliterated? It may not make software rendering wholly practical as of yet, but if the target is in the low-end power wise, why not lay the groundwork now?

On the flip side of that, considering the fact that these are closed console boxes, why the need to have dedicated GPUs with Graphics Compute Next cores? Would it not be possible to achieve greater speed with the current VLIW standards? I'm all for the shiny and cutting edge, I just don't understand the benefit of GCN in a fixed environment versus a more flexible PC one.

On the OS front, as others have said, I imagine the OS will use <200MB in daily use, but reserve 1.5 to 2 gigs for future use. MS may never give that ram back to games, but if, after year 5 they realize they don't need that much and do give some back, it'll be a nice bump I suppose for late generation games. My understanding of the way Win8 works is that Apps suspend when not in active use - I don't know if that consumes memory. Maybe the possible 2 gigs being reserved is for all non-game applications, with hard limits on how much memory an individual app can use at any one time? Then maybe premium, super special apps would be allowed to exceed the reserve amount, with the understanding that multitasking may not be possible when those types of app are in use?

 

[XtremeXpider]

On theory I have about next gen on consoles is that we're going to see post-process AA a lot more, although hopefully not FXAA. Most of the next gen tech demos are running at least 4x MSAA, which would be a ton of processing power.

Now look at this shot of God of War Ascension:

Not a jaggy in sight and not blurry at all either, unlike with FXAA. This is also a game that's running a lot of advanced effects at a framerate above 30fps at 720p on current gen hardware. If both MS and Sony find some kind of similar post process AA the next gen systems will be able to add it at very little cost with will help them hit 1080p/30fps targets and leave a lot of headroom for other effects while still having dramatically improved IQ from the current gen. Combine this with the fact that the next gen demos haven't even gone through basic optimization, not even counting console optimization, and the last time we saw them was a year and a half before release I think that they're definitely do able at launch at 1080p if specs are anything like these rumors.

The background looks like Unreal Engine 3. Kratos looks ok.

 

[Karak]

I could see Sony developing their own type of SMAA since they did an awesome job on their custom MLAA and it uses a lot of the same principles. Their MLAA just required a lot of SPU power so few games used it, which is unfortunate.

Even if it's not customized I want to see SMAA over FXAA. It's pretty much the same negligible performance cost, covers edges better, and doesn't introduce blur.

I totally agree. I know SMAA and other AA's have their various issues but god damned they also offer some serious improvement for such minimal cost. Really crazy.

And yes Sony has REALLY led the way in using their Custom AA in a couple games. Almost perfect implementation. Pretty outstanding stuff really. It is great that people just keep cooking up new ways to do the work and new techniques.

 

[GodfatherX]

I remember how hyped I was to get any new info on the Xenon and PS3 back in late 04 early 05, the first pics of what turned out to be Kameo and PGR. This will be my first generation since the PSX and N64 that I won't be buying multiple systems at launch. The Wii and PS3 were major disappointments for me and although I will likely get a PS4/Orbis eventually, Durango is where I'm putting my money to start this generation.

So far the specs are nice, hoping for another memory solution then ddr3, and that the gpu has a decent amount more power then the 8800 series with its custom silicone.

 

[ekim]

For my own sanity, I've been trying to get clarity on what I think I'm reading here. A couple of questions that come to mind, though:

Would it be possible to take the functional elements of a GPU, and disperse them evenly across multiple CPUs? Can an 8 core (or any 1+ core) CPU pass any type of data with each other - including graphics & texture data, etc.? Why not divide the rendering of a scene across multiple cores, but make the execution removed or transparent for the developer as they see fit? The devs tell the system what to draw, and the system just draws it - even if the texture units are on one core, the CU's or whatever they're called are spread out over others, etc.

We're reading rumors of a big, System On Chip, with a lowish clock speed for the CPU (I know clock isn't everything). So, what would be the barrier preventing the creation of a chip in which the distinction between CPU and GPU is completely blurred, if not outright obliterated? It may not make software rendering wholly practical as of yet, but if the target is in the low-end power wise, why not lay the groundwork now?

On the flip side of that, considering the fact that these are closed console boxes, why the need to have dedicated GPUs with Graphics Compute Next cores? Would it not be possible to achieve greater speed with the current VLIW standards? I'm all for the shiny and cutting edge, I just don't understand the benefit of GCN in a fixed environment versus a more flexible PC one.

On the OS front, as others have said, I imagine the OS will use <200MB in daily use, but reserve 1.5 to 2 gigs for future use. MS may never give that ram back to games, but if, after year 5 they realize they don't need that much and do give some back, it'll be a nice bump I suppose for late generation games. My understanding of the way Win8 works is that Apps suspend when not in active use - I don't know if that consumes memory. Maybe the possible 2 gigs being reserved is for all non-game applications, with hard limits on how much memory an individual app can use at any one time? Then maybe premium, super special apps would be allowed to exceed the reserve amount, with the understanding that multitasking may not be possible when those types of app are in use?

Roughly speaking : You can't omit the gpu architecture and let the CPU do all the work. You may read some basics about rendering pipelines, shaders and so forth. This should help you in understanding why a GPU is better in doing "image altering" "brute forcing" while a CPU fits better for complex algorithms.

 

[Tzeentch]

The background looks like Unreal Engine 3. Kratos looks ok.

The ship looks like it's sitting in a lake of mud. Yuck

 

[Karak]

The ship looks like it's sitting in a lake of mud. Yuck

That's...not mud blach!

 

[RoboPlato]

The ship looks like it's sitting in a lake of mud. Yuck

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=45899562&postcount=236

Better screens here. The water does look kind of bad in that first shot I posted. I just thought it was a good representation of the IQ.

 

[lightchris]

On theory I have about next gen on consoles is that we're going to see post-process AA a lot more, although hopefully not FXAA. Most of the next gen tech demos are running at least 4x MSAA, which would be a ton of processing power.

Now look at this shot of God of War Ascension:

Looks like a bullshot to me, downsampled from a higher resolution.

edit: Didn't know the source. If this is all ingame I'm impressed, even if it is a bit blurry (and I wouldn't be surprised if it is not post processing only). Reminds me a bit of Nvidia's TXAA.

 

[les papillons sexuels]

On theory I have about next gen on consoles is that we're going to see post-process AA a lot more, although hopefully not FXAA. Most of the next gen tech demos are running at least 4x MSAA, which would be a ton of processing power.

Now look at this shot of God of War Ascension:

Not a jaggy in sight and not blurry at all either, unlike with FXAA. This is also a game that's running a lot of advanced effects at a framerate above 30fps at 720p on current gen hardware. If both MS and Sony find some kind of similar post process AA the next gen systems will be able to add it at very little cost with will help them hit 1080p/30fps targets and leave a lot of headroom for other effects while still having dramatically improved IQ from the current gen. Combine this with the fact that the next gen demos haven't even gone through basic optimization, not even counting console optimization, and the last time we saw them was a year and a half before release I think that they're definitely do able at launch at 1080p if specs are anything like these rumors.

maybe it's not poorly aliased, but that lack of geometry and ao. It looks horrendous. Also it looks hella blurry to me, maybe it's the textures and that haze effect but it doesn't look good at all.

Next gen rope right there...

 

[Dark_AnNiaLatOr]

maybe it's not poorly aliased, but that lack of geometry. It looks horrendous. Also it looks hella blurry to me, maybe it's the textures and that haze effect but it doesn't look good at all.

Kratos probably takes up so many of those precious polygons.

 

[Izayoi]

Too bad we'll never be able to fix shader aliasing on consoles. That shit is terrible (especially in the GOW screenshot above - look at that water). Consoles will never be powerful enough to supersample.

 

[Psychotext]

Not a jaggy in sight and not blurry at all either, unlike with FXAA.

That whole thing looks blurry to me. That, or it's got some sort of grain filter over it.

 

[RoboPlato]

Looks like a bullshot to me, downsampled from a higher resolution.

edit: Didn't know the source. If this is all ingame I'm impressed, even if it is a bit blurry (and I wouldn't be surprised if it is not post processing only). Reminds me a bit of Nvidia's TXAA.

That screen and the other ones are all direct feed captures from the Total Recall demo. That shot is blurrier than the others but that's my fault, I just chose a screen I found quickly.

This shot's a bit clearer aside from the DoF on the arm.

 

[aegies]

How do you sort through the crap? Or better yet what clues you in on information might be the real deal?

Proof of life, as it were.

 

[HokieJoe]

And yet taken as the whole, Reach looked considerably better than 3; and 4 looks bettter than both IMO. Games are meant as optical illusion. Jacking off over texture detail under a microscope misses the point if other aspects of IQ aren't kept in balance. Halo 3's lighting effects were very nice, but other parts didn't receive the same level of devotion IMO. I suppose it all gets down to personal preference.

Halo textures were great in Halo 3. It was one of the very few games where texture detail didn't deminish as you got closer to the textures. This, combined with amazing HDR lighting spawned website after website, dedicated to showcasing Halo 3's beauty. Halo: Reach was a slightly downgraded in this regard, but not distracting as it is in Halo 4.

 

[Reiko]

And yet taken as the whole, Reach looked considerably better than 3; and 4 looks bettter than both. Games are meant as optical illusion. Jacking off over texture detail under a microscope misses the point if other aspects of IQ aren't kept in balance. Halo 3's lighting effects were very nice, but other parts didn't receive the same level of devotion IMO.

On a technical aspect, Halo 3 and Halo Reach were too ambitious for Xbox 360 hardware. Yes, Halo 4 looks better, and is HD... But you can see where sacrifices were made.

 

[specialguy]

On a technical aspect, Halo 3 and Halo Reach were too ambitious for Xbox 360 hardware. Yes, Halo 4 looks better, and is HD... But you can see where sacrifices were made.

halo 3 too ambitious when it looks like crap? thats a first.

play halo 4 for an hour then pop in 3 directly after, i dare you.

 

[Gorillaz]

halo 3 too ambitious when it looks like crap? thats a first.

play halo 4 for an hour then pop in 3 directly after, i dare you.

Halo 4 didn't have the same level of sandbox gameplay that halo 3 did.

EDIT: what im trying to say is halo 3 was doing more "behind the curtains" then halo 4 last time I checked.

 

[Reiko]

halo 3 too ambitious when it looks like crap? thats a first.

play halo 4 for an hour then pop in 3 directly after, i dare you.

Would Halo 3 look like crap if it retained all of the effects, and ran in 720p with 4XMSAA?

 

[higherARC05]

This is zoomed up microscoply close to a rock

Dose scratches

Dat face detail love the sub-surface scattering shadder and texture detail on the face and the hair is so nice with the shadding shown on the face.

 

[SapientWolf]

I love the use of SMAA and other things of that ilk. I hope they use ANYTHING but FXAA.

FXAA with a small amount of sharpening looks okay, I guess. That's the combo I use for BF3. HDTVs use a ton of sharpening by default.

Without sharpening it's unusable, and SMAA is preferable.

 

[Moegames]

HD 8800 OEM is DX 11.1, HD 7800 is DX 11... there are small differences to these cards that amount to bios updates and clock speed changes, but it is more than just simply calling HD 7000 series cards HD 8000 series cards.

HD7800's are DX 11.1 too

 

[Moegames]

Every thread I read your statements in, including the Crysis 3 ones, you think your going to get that kind of fidelity at 1080p on next gen systems... whereas 2 SLI'd 680's will probably struggle at 60 fps at 1080p for that game.


I can't wait to see you weep tears at E3... because although next gen will be a huge step up, its not going to be Crysis 3 ultra at 1080p at launch, or even after launch ... that my friend will only happen in your dreams.

Do yourself and the rest of us a big favor..stay out of console threads and stick to PC threads, pal.. because all you do is get all pissy when people are expecting great things with next gen consoles which they rightfully should..with these kind of specs in a closed box...these next gen consoles will have games on them that will surpass the best looking games on PC for at least the first two years just like it's always been, you dont like that do ya? Deal with it... i love my new PC rig i just built but i am not such a stubborn jealous PC fanboy to get panties in a twist to just go around hate'n in console threads like you always seem to do.

Believe me, Crysis 3 ultra level type visuals will be done with games on next gen consoles at 1080P... like someone else said..people seem to think 1080p is some kind of impossible achievement from 8 years ago to next gen graphics...next gen consoles are going to rock some serious eye candy, bro. A closed box with high end hardware can do some impressive things dude

 

[Plywood]

So with all these 8's flying around are they going to call it Xbox 8 or be clever and call it Xbox &#8734;.

 

[ugoo18]

Do yourself and the rest of us a big favor..stay out of console threads and stick to PC threads, pal.. because all you do is get all pissy when people are expecting great things with next gen consoles which they rightfully should..with these kind of specs in a closed box...these next gen consoles will have games on them that will surpass the best looking games on PC for at least the first two years just like it's always been, you dont like that do ya? Deal with it... i love my new PC rig i just built but i am not such a stubborn jealous PC fanboy to get panties in a twist to just go around hate'n in console threads like you always seem to do.

Believe me, Crysis 3 ultra level type visuals will be done with games on next gen consoles at 1080P... like someone else said..people seem to think 1080p is some kind of impossible achievement from 8 years ago to next gen graphics...next gen consoles are going to rock some serious eye candy, bro. A closed box with high end hardware can do some impressive things dude

Why should a dev go 1080p when they can go 720p + more eye candy effects?

EDIT: Have you seen the high end requirements for Crysis 3?

I seriously doubt Crysis 3 PC Ultra level graphics will be popping up on the 720/PS4 anytime soon.

 

[Reiko]

Why should a dev go 1080p when they can go 720p + more eye candy effects?

We'll be seeing more 1080p games regardless of that.

My personal favorite is

720p/60 1080p/30

And the rare: (For Gran Turismo & Forza)

1080p @ 60fps

 

[Angelus Errare]

Why should a dev go 1080p when they can go 720p + more eye candy effects?

Why go 720p + more eye candy when you can go 360p + more MORE eye candy!

 

[RoboPlato]

Why should a dev go 1080p when they can go 720p + more eye candy effects?

A lot of the added eye candy and detail would go to waste at 720p anyway.

 

[ugoo18]

A lot of the added eye candy and detail would go to waste at 720p anyway.

But it would be easier to pull off at 720p as opposed to 1080p. Granted there will be the 1080p game every now and then but 720p will be a lot more common than most people here think.

 

[Lambda Pie]

And the rare: (For Gran Turismo & Forza)

1080p @ 60fps

fighting games should run like that as well.

 

[shinobi602]

Why go 720p + more eye candy when you can go 360p + more MORE eye candy!

Because then it's no longer high definition.

 

[ACH1LL3US]

Do yourself and the rest of us a big favor..stay out of console threads and stick to PC threads, pal.. because all you do is get all pissy when people are expecting great things with next gen consoles which they rightfully should..with these kind of specs in a closed box...these next gen consoles will have games on them that will surpass the best looking games on PC for at least the first two years just like it's always been, you dont like that do ya? Deal with it... i love my new PC rig i just built but i am not such a stubborn jealous PC fanboy to get panties in a twist to just go around hate'n in console threads like you always seem to do.

Believe me, Crysis 3 ultra level type visuals will be done with games on next gen consoles at 1080P... like someone else said..people seem to think 1080p is some kind of impossible achievement from 8 years ago to next gen graphics...next gen consoles are going to rock some serious eye candy, bro. A closed box with high end hardware can do some impressive things dude

Why would I stay out of these threads? I am looking forward to the next gen systems as is anyone else.

I just have FAR more realistic expectations the you and Reiko.

Do I think the launch games will look like Crysis 3 on ultra at 1080p? No... No not in a million years.

If you and others feel that's going to happen with the fidelity of crysis 3 with aa, af on ultra at 1080p then great, but it doesn't mean it's going to happen.


Also what console threads do I go into and hate?? That is news to me...

This generation is different then pass ones, were not getting a system that is more advanced then what can be built on the pc scene. I think YOU need to deal with that pal.

 

[Karak]

FXAA with a small amount of sharpening looks okay, I guess. That's the combo I use for BF3. HDTVs use a ton of sharpening by default.

Without sharpening it's unusable, and SMAA is preferable.

I actually agree with that totally. I just don't think everyone has the same idea of sparing use and you get that weird FXAA look.

 

[Angelus Errare]

Because then it's no longer high definition.

In 10 years we'll look back and wonder why we ever considered 1280x720 "HD"

 

[Reiko]

fighting games should run like that as well.

I hope Virtua Fighter 6 starts the baseline for 1080p 60fps.

How long has it been since we had a 1080p 60fps fighter?

Tekken 5 on PS3?