Support NeoGAF

[BigTnaples]

That's like saying Final Fantasy VII looks exactly like that via mods. That's not what the game looked like, I'm sorry.

It's not like that at all actually.

One has modded textures, the other is just upscaled with AA added.


I can play Halo 2 in HD with added AA on 360. Graphics are identical, image quality is better.

 

[Risette]

That's like saying Final Fantasy VII looks exactly like that via mods. That's not what the game looked like, I'm sorry.

Except Wind Waker looks the way it does in those screenshots without mods, just the game running as released in an emulator.

Bad logic.

 

[Avallon]

No, is not the same. FF VII mod changes models, textures, etc.... The WW dolphin shots only add more res and AA. models, effects, textures are exactly as they were on GC.

Should we dismiss all this Witcher 2 shots, because lots of ppl can't play the game at that res and with AA added?

A PC can play the Witcher 2 and have it look that good. It is the native hardware. A GCN/Wii cannot play Zelda and have it look like that. I guess it's really a question of what you define as fair when discussing a games graphics. I would assume "best graphics" would be vanilla -- native hardware, no mods, no downsampling, no up res, etc

 

[dr. apocalipsis]

So you know this, yet you rag on uncharted 3 for not having dynamic sand on 2006 hardware?

What? I'm just saying that it is not dynamic sand, because some people here think it is.

As I said earlier, as many achievements ND got, they are praising the wrong stuff at Uncharted 3 tech, and in the wrong way.

That's all.

As someone asked before, this is about tech, art direction, eye candy or what?

 

[Eideka]

Well I am hyperbolic person Plus a lot of my impression is colored by how much I loathed actually playing the game. One of the few games that I preferred just getting to the next under-ground checkpoint because the atmosphere was so great.

I really loved the game but I can definitely relate to that. The game isn't flawless and sometime is downright boring.

There is a huge margin for improvement, hopefully Last Light delivers.

 

[BigTnaples]

A PC can play the Witcher 2 and have it look that good. It is the native hardware. A GCN/Wii cannot play Zelda and have it look like that. I guess it's really a question of what you define as fair when discussing a games graphics. I would assume "best graphics" would be vanilla -- no mods, downsampling, up res, etc

Given the last 16 or so pages of this thread, you assumed wrong.

 

[perineumlick]

So you know this, yet you rag on uncharted 3 for not having dynamic sand on 2006 hardware?

Lol, that's what I was saying to myself. What the fuck is your point then?

 

[Avallon]

Except Wind Waker looks the way it does in those screenshots without mods, just the game running as released in an emulator.

Bad logic.

The emulator itself adds all sorts of bells and whistles to the game

 

[Shion]

Wind Waker looks like this:
http://www.the-nextlevel.com/previews/gamecube/zelda_wind_waker/zelda_wind_waker_3.jpg

Not like this:
http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/...ames/dolphin/Dolphin2012-08-0409-22-32-93.jpg

I played Wind Waker yesterday on my HDTV and it looked nothing like this shitty screenshot.

 

[perineumlick]

What? I'm just saying that it is not dynamic sand, because some people here think it is.

As I said earlier, as many achievements ND got, they are praising the wrong stuff at Uncharted 3 tech, and in the wrong way.

That's all.

As someone asked before, this is about tech, art direction, eye candy or what?

Why can't U3 get technical praise? Are ND not using cutting edge methods on aging hardware? It sounds more like you have an agenda; telling people what they should and should not feel is praiseworthy. You disagree, fine; now you move on then. Stop trying to prove people "wrong" in a thread where so much is subjective.

 

[Stallion Free]

Naughty Dog actually built the entire ocean, then built a ship, and dropped it into the water, physics and all and then turned on weather to affect it. All of the waves, mist, etc. are dynamic events.

When they script that

Spoiler

the ship capsizes (which is obviously a 100% scripted event), the water flooding the boat isn't scripted, that's the actual water from the actual ocean they built, pouring into the actual boat they built.

It's sick to even begin to contemplate how they pulled it off and I hate to see people knocking the tech on display here because they are so used to the smoke and mirrors that most games use. There is some seriously impressive shit going on in Uncharted 3.

Are you sure about all of that?

 

[dr. apocalipsis]

The tech was there, even when they didn't have the HW at the time.

If people are posting images of heavily modded games that PC's at the time struggled to move at vainilla versions, I don't understand why improved emu shots should be discarded.

That emus are running on the same PC's you use to play current games.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

Are you sure about all of that?

Its in their making of docs.

 

[Stallion Free]

Its in their making of docs.

The power point earlier in this thread on their water tech didn't seem to point to that.

 

[Gui_PT]

I played Wind Waker yesterday on my HDTV and it looked nothing like this shitty screenshot.

I actually watch the guy that holds the speedrun record in that game and it does not look as shitty as it does in the picture he posted.

No, the guy does not play it in an emulator.

 

[synchronicity]

I'm not speaking in technical terms, rather in regards to artistic design and the impact a game's graphics had on me personally. Dark (and Demon's) Souls have such a hand-crafted touch to them. They seem more like real places that could theoretically exist somewhere in space than any other games I've ever played. So beautiful and haunting for me.

 

[EvB]

I'm not speaking in technical terms, rather in regards to artistic design and the impact a game's graphics had on me personally. Dark (and Demon's) Souls have such a hand-crafted touch to them. They seem more like real places that could theoretically exist somewhere in space than any other games I've ever played. So beautiful and haunting for me.

I actually think it's a very ugly game, probably more due to the developers technical prowess more than anything. I have no doubt the original concept art looked amazing, but I think they failed to get it right in game form.

 

[IdreamofHIME]

Pretty sure 100% of the posters in this thread are aware of that. But thanks.

Well, we have a guy posting a pic from a live action commercial, so i'd say you're probably wrong with that 100%.

 

[BigTnaples]

Well, we have a guy posting a pic from a live action commercial, so i'd say you're probably wrong with that 100%.

Haha. Forgot about that guy...

 

[Avallon]

I actually watch the guy that holds the speedrun record in that game and it does not look as shitty as it does in the picture he posted.

No, the guy does not play it in an emulator.

Maybe I just found a poor quality screenshot. Here, this is from IGN

 

[synchronicity]

I actually think it's a very ugly game, probably more due to the developers technical prowess more than anything. I have no doubt the original concept art looked amazing, but I think they failed to get it right in game form.

Well, we all see things differently, but I couldn't disagree more.

 

[Plywood]

That's like saying Final Fantasy VII looks exactly like that via mods. That's not what the game looked like, I'm sorry.

None of Wind Waker's assets are replaced, this is not the same thing.

 

[dr. apocalipsis]

Why can't U3 get technical praise? Are ND not using cutting edge methods on aging hardware? It sounds more like you have an agenda; telling people what they should and should not feel is praiseworthy. You disagree, fine; now you move on then. Stop trying to prove people "wrong" in a thread where so much is subjective.

Ok, bro.

It looks like few of you have hard times getting my point.

Look at this video:

Silpheed.

Many magazines at the time wrongly spread the information that the game actually ran the polygons in realtime. That it's not true, since it is a FMV running in background. Of course many readers wondered why no Virtua Racing in MegaCD since Silpheed looked better than Genesis SVP V.R.

By saying this or that are no actually realtime I'm not arguing it have good graphics, wich makes no sense since both tittles (U3 and Silpheed) looks damm good.

You don't need to activate damage control everytime someone clarify something about your favourite title.

As I said, best of Uncharted 2 and 3 is not about raw bruteforce effects. It's about how ND put together so many things in a restricted HW such as PS3. That is the expertise wich deserve our praise. It's like when someone yells at a plain high res texture and don't notice the lighting or any other more subtle tech achievement. It makes me feel sad.

 

[clutch.as.it.gets.]

Incorrect. The Campaign is precisely what I'm talking about here (in regards to micro-stutter). It definitely suffers from it. It's not 100% of the time, but it is quite regular.

Reach has drops, but there are no issues with micro-stutter so I find it feels much smoother overall.

Halo Anniversary is just a mess, though. Runs like dogshit compared to any other contemporary Halo title and looks worse too. I appreciate what they attempted but the results don't impress.

Yes, Halo 3 has those small, always present micro stutters, but honestly i prefer Halo 3`s framerate over Reachs. Reach was - like you already said - very smooth when no fight was going on. But boy did this game drops the frames when the shit got started. Nearly every firefight had major framerate drops and for me that was way more annoying than Halo 3`s solution. Halo 3 never had those major drops.

And while i agree with you that Halo Anniversary´s framerate was the worst of any Halo game and abysmal, the game was a looker with nice texture work, great lighting and a nice particle system.

 

[RooMHM]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=36114628&postcount=454

Welp

Discussing with him on Halo or any thing related is quite useless

Exactly. I don't like Halo, I must be stupid.
Maybe opening your eyes would help you see further. Halo 4 is looking good, nothing exceptionnal but it must be the best looking game ever because it's Halo right?
Also, the thread is about the best looking game(s) PERIOD, no?

Every thread I post in about Halo, I'll see people without arguments, without any will to discuss with me and challenge my view just those refering to my post history (that I absolutely assume). To each his own.

 

[Metalmurphy]

Wut? Have you ever been on a beach or something? Even your low res photos proves my point.

Your only proving my point even further. Look at the fingers going through ondulations and still remaning what you call "flat". I also don't see of if this was an issue, it would be an issue with the actual sand as you claimed and not the shadowing...

Of course it is. Can you tell the difference between a scripted event and a physics engine driven event?

Sometimes it's very dissapointing to see people praise the wrong things when talking about tech. Most of them confuse artworks and art direction with tech engine. Best of uncharded is not how ND did this or that, it's how many things do in a given frame being a PS3 title.

For example, Bungie did a lot of great stuff at Halo 3 lighting, but failed hard at most basics artwork stuff, so most of people just thinks Halo 3 have bad graphics.

It's not scripted. You're in total control of the character you can go anyway you want and the sand will react even if you are in different places.

Yes even the part where he's struggling to go up the dune is a played controlled part.

 

[Gui_PT]

Maybe I just found a poor quality screenshot. Here, this is from IGN

Ah that looks considerably better

 

[Metalmurphy]

The power point earlier in this thread on their water tech didn't seem to point to that.

It could have been referring to something else though, like the how they created the waves in the ocean based on the parameters of the ocean being simulated, or something. The powerpoint is not very specific on that.


But yes, that is exactly what they say on the making of videos.

 

[DocSeuss]

Its in their making of docs.

I need a link to this. Everything I've read before says that it's all pre-rendered stuff, and none of it is dynamically animated. I'd really like to read up on how they did it if it's not the case. Sounds fascinating. Didn't know the PS3 could dynamically simulate water physics, especially since the only game that does that, to my knowledge, was Hydrophobia, and even it was cheating.

 

[perineumlick]

Ok, bro.

It looks like few of you have hard times getting my point.

Look at this video:

Silpheed.

Many magazines at the time wrongly spread the information that the game actually ran the polygons in realtime. That it's not true, since it is a FMV running in background. Of course many readers wondered why no Virtua Racing in MegaCD since Silpheed looked better than Genesis SVP V.R.

By saying this or that are no actually realtime I'm not arguing it have good graphics, wich makes no sense since both tittles (U3 and Silpheed) looks damm good.

You don't need to activate damage control everytime someone clarify something about your favourite title.

As I said, best of Uncharted 2 and 3 is not about raw bruteforce effects. It's about how ND put together so many things in a restricted HW such as PS3. That is the expertise wich deserve our praise. It's like when someone yells at a plain high res texture and don't notice the lighting or any other more subtle tech achievement. It makes me feel sad.

That's what people ARE praising! The fact that ND can achieve what they have with old tech is amazing. Sure it's a lot of smoke and mirrors, but the end result is some of the most consistently beautiful graphics around this generation. I could care less whether Drake deforms the sand in real time or not, it looks amazing and that's the point. I think you're being a little too anal about some of this stuff.

 

[Majmun]

Well, we all see things differently, but I couldn't disagree more.

Yeah, I love how the Souls games look like. Maybe not technical marvels. But the world From Sofware creates is amazing. Especially when it comes to scale.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

I need a link to this. Everything I've read before says that it's all pre-rendered stuff, and none of it is dynamically animated. I'd really like to read up on how they did it if it's not the case. Sounds fascinating. Didn't know the PS3 could dynamically simulate water physics, especially since the only game that does that, to my knowledge, was Hydrophobia, and even it was cheating.

Ill find it.

 

[Metalmurphy]

I need a link to this. Everything I've read before says that it's all pre-rendered stuff, and none of it is dynamically animated. I'd really like to read up on how they did it if it's not the case. Sounds fascinating. Didn't know the PS3 could dynamically simulate water physics, especially since the only game that does that, to my knowledge, was Hydrophobia, and even it was cheating.

The pdfs docs posted already say it's not using a looped animation, so it has to be dynamic at some point. The question is whether the ocean is simulated or not, the making of says it is.


I cant find the making of vids that are on the game on youtube, but I did find this:

The other sequence involves quite a moving scene as well. In fact, it is the cruise ship and dry-dock levels, which are entirely physics-based. Both levels are attached to a simulated dynamic ocean, which was built with mathematical curves and particle simulations atop the mesh. “We spent about a year making this ocean work and had to figure out how to attach a level to it; the designers were then bound by the mood of this dynamic ocean and all the crazy things it was doing,” says Guerrette. “The rest of the team had to build the environments [before the ocean was complete] without knowing what it would mean for them.”

http://www.cgw.com/Publications/CGW/2012/Volume-35-Issue-2-Feb-Mar-2012-/Drakes-Deception.aspx

 

[Suairyu]

Its in their making of docs.

Not the one you linked. Are there others?

 

[Metalmurphy]

Not the one you linked. Are there others?

Yes, the ones that come with the game.

 

[RoadHazard]

Of course it is. Can you tell the difference between a scripted event and a physics engine driven event?

None of the things you bring up are "scripted". Are we talking about a physically accurate simulation of how a billion grains of sand behave in a sand dune? No, of course not. But the sand does react very dynamically to how the player moves, so the term "scripted" certainly doesn't apply.

When the sand "flows" down the sides of dunes, some of the same (or similar) tricks as when creating the flow of water are used.

http://www.slideshare.net/agebreak/water-technologyofunchartedgdc2012

 

[DocSeuss]

The pdfs docs posted already say it's not using a looped animation, so it has to be dynamic at some point. The question is whether the ocean is simulated or not, the making of says it is.


I cant find the making of vids that are on the game on youtube, but I did find this:



http://www.cgw.com/Publications/CGW/2012/Volume-35-Issue-2-Feb-Mar-2012-/Drakes-Deception.aspx

From that link:

When the sims would have to behave consistently within the game, the team would often prebake them in Maya and save them out as animations. For smaller, incidental objects in the levels, the group would use dynamics.

For flooding in the hallways of the cruise ship level, where Drake searches for the kidnapped Sully, the group used a Next Limit Real­Flow simulation that was run through Side Effects’ Houdini. The resulting mesh was then imported back into Maya for skinning before it was incorporated into the game.

The giant mounds of sand in the desert environments have their own baked simulations created within Houdini using a similar process as the flooding on the ship but without the use of RealFlow. The footprints in the sand, however, were accomplished with particles and render buffers that were projected onto various surfaces.

So... yeah, what was said earlier was bullshit. This stuff was pre-rendered. The footprints aren't dynamic sand simulation either, and far less impressive than the earlier-mentioned Halo 3 tesselation. Like--and I'm going off of memory here--Uncharted 3's sand basically does what Uncharted 2's snow did: it creates this bulge of 3D stuff in the shape of a footprint based around Nate's hand or foot, but it's not actually him dynamically moving the snow he's touching. Kinda like how Batman in Arkham City isn't spraying explosive foam directly out of his applicator and it's being created based on the angle of his hand and the substance of the wall or whatever.

Saying Uncharted 3 has good graphics based on the stuff above (meaning that there are other things about great graphics, such as lighting and particles, that I haven't really looked at in-depth and can't comment on) is a bit like saying Planescape: Torment has good graphics based on all that pre-rendered stuff. It's irrelevant, because the game isn't actively computing that stuff in real time.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

Not the one you linked. Are there others?

This isn't the one that came with the game. I am still looking for that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=V1I4mUFGZ60#t=319s

 

[Psychological Intellect]

I need a link to this. Everything I've read before says that it's all pre-rendered stuff, and none of it is dynamically animated. I'd really like to read up on how they did it if it's not the case. Sounds fascinating. Didn't know the PS3 could dynamically simulate water physics, especially since the only game that does that, to my knowledge, was Hydrophobia, and even it was cheating.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oypy1-LSsV0&feature=channel&list=UL&t=5m40s

 

[Metalmurphy]

From that link:



So... yeah, what was said earlier was bullshit. This stuff was pre-rendered.

Man, at least read the whole thing. That section is about cloth physics/particle simulations/ and some other stuff. It's not about the ocean.


And the flooding hallway is that section where drake is running from the water behind him, again, nothing to do with the ocean.

Saying Uncharted 3 has good graphics based on the stuff above (meaning that there are other things about great graphics, such as lighting and particles, that I haven't really looked at in-depth and can't comment on) is a bit like saying Planescape: Torment has good graphics based on all that pre-rendered stuff. It's irrelevant, because the game isn't actively computing that stuff in real time.

So not only did you not play the game, you didn't even bother to look at the links I posted?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oypy1-LSsV0&feature=channel&list=UL&t=5m40s

Yeah that's the one.

 

[clutch.as.it.gets.]

My vote would be

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oypy1-LSsV0&feature=channel&list=UL&t=5m40s

Nice job.

From that link:



So... yeah, what was said earlier was bullshit. This stuff was pre-rendered. The footprints aren't dynamic sand simulation either, and far less impressive than the earlier-mentioned Halo 3 tesselation. Like--and I'm going off of memory here--Uncharted 3's sand basically does what Uncharted 2's snow did: it creates this bulge of 3D stuff in the shape of a footprint based around Nate's hand or foot, but it's not actually him dynamically moving the snow he's touching. Kinda like how Batman in Arkham City isn't spraying explosive foam directly out of his applicator and it's being created based on the angle of his hand and the substance of the wall or whatever.

Saying Uncharted 3 has good graphics based on the stuff above (meaning that there are other things about great graphics, such as lighting and particles, that I haven't really looked at in-depth and can't comment on) is a bit like saying Planescape: Torment has good graphics based on all that pre-rendered stuff. It's irrelevant, because the game isn't actively computing that stuff in real time.

Ah I see why this is confusing. You haven't actually played the game. Interesting

 

[Stallion Free]

And the flooding hallway is that section where drake is running from the water behind him, again, nothing to do with the ocean.

The claim that brought all of this water tech into question stated that: "When they script that the ship capsizes (which is obviously a 100% scripted event), the water flooding the boat isn't scripted, that's the actual water from the actual ocean they built, pouring into the actual boat they built."

And that clearly isn't true based off this:

"For flooding in the hallways of the cruise ship level, where Drake searches for the kidnapped Sully, the group used a Next Limit Real­Flow simulation that was run through Side Effects’ Houdini. The resulting mesh was then imported back into Maya for skinning before it was incorporated into the game."

 

[jett]

Nice job.




Ah I see why this is confusing. You haven't actually played the game. Interesting

What? He described the sand in UC3 perfectly. It's just like UC2's snow. It doesn't deform or anything of the sort, it's nothing like Journey's. I find nothing impressively about it aside from the pretty texturework.

 

[Metalmurphy]

What? He described the sand in UC3 perfectly. It's just like UC2's snow. It doesn't deform or anything of the sort, it's nothing like Journey's. I find nothing impressively about it aside from the pretty texturework.

The claim that brought all of this water tech into question stated that: "When they script that the ship capsizes (which is obviously a 100% scripted event), the water flooding the boat isn't scripted, that's the actual water from the actual ocean they built, pouring into the actual boat they built."

And that clearly isn't true based off this:

"For flooding in the hallways of the cruise ship level, where Drake searches for the kidnapped Sully, the group used a Next Limit Real­Flow simulation that was run through Side Effects’ Houdini. The resulting mesh was then imported back into Maya for skinning before it was incorporated into the game."

Sorry, I didn't highlight the spoiler, I thought people were still talking about the simulated ocean. Yeah that part isn't part of the ocean simulation. But the whole waves, and how the ships rocks about and objects in them react, that's completely dynamic.

 

[Gustav]

Still the best looking game:

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

What? He described the sand in UC3 perfectly. It's just like UC2's snow. It doesn't deform or anything of the sort, it's nothing like Journey's. I find nothing impressively about it aside from the pretty texturework.

Nah Jett I am talking about the Ocean and why he is merging the cloth, sand portion of the article to somehow discredit the ocean simulator. Wait, did I not read him correctly?

 

[Metalmurphy]

Still the best looking game:

Yuck. Source engine really didn't age that well, despite the countless upgrades.

 

[Stallion Free]

That does look exactly like the snow footprint technique they used. There is nothing wrong with it and it is the implementation that makes the most sense on current hardware.

Yuck. Source engine really didn't age that well, despite the countless upgrades.

That is Source engine without the countless upgrades.

 

[Rodney McKay]

Saying Uncharted 3 has good graphics based on the stuff above (meaning that there are other things about great graphics, such as lighting and particles, that I haven't really looked at in-depth and can't comment on) is a bit like saying Planescape: Torment has good graphics based on all that pre-rendered stuff. It's irrelevant, because the game isn't actively computing that stuff in real time.

If a game looks good, it looks good. My eyes don't care what the system is doing behind the scenes to run the game.