Support NeoGAF

[Lethal01]

1. Yes certain parts are indistinguishable from reality…few parts buts its there…

Not a single one exists, they look good, but clearly fake.

3. Only because it runs on PS4 also…

No game, or even any tech demo is coming close to the quality of that pre rendered trailer. The lighting and effects are simply on another level. Need to stop using prerendered things as a short term goal. They are constantly doing things that require computers that are literally hundred of times stronger than what we have.

 

[SlimySnake]

Sure, they had 10 TF cards

They didn't have a next-gen engine ready to go. They didn't have production assets tailored to the new engine. Re-tooling everything for next-gen takes a while. They were able to hit the ground running, just like GoW:R. You think production has gotten longer, then next-gen production would have been even worse.

Do I like it? Not necessarily. I'd prefer next-gen. But the business case is completely obvious, and combine that with shortages of hardware and Sony is doing the right move. And even with Horizon: FW being cross-gen it's still basically the top visuals the medium has at the time of release.

I'm honestly not that impressed by The Matrix during gameplay. It looks good, but isn't blowing me away. Horizon looks more impressive due to the art direction.

I think that’s what scares me the most. That they have to now retool their engine and start from scratch. In 2022.

If horizon 2 took 5 years on the same engine, are we looking at 2029 for horizon 3? Will it be a cross gen ps6 title?

I think first parties have a direct line to cerny and they should’ve known in 2017 what they needed to do to retool their engine before any of the third party studios did. Starting in 2022 is way too late especially with how unproductive these studios have become since they last shipped games.

 

[Hunnybun]

Sure, they had 10 TF cards

They didn't have a next-gen engine ready to go. They didn't have production assets tailored to the new engine. Re-tooling everything for next-gen takes a while. They were able to hit the ground running, just like GoW:R. You think production has gotten longer, then next-gen production would have been even worse.

Do I like it? Not necessarily. I'd prefer next-gen. But the business case is completely obvious, and combine that with shortages of hardware and Sony is doing the right move. And even with Horizon: FW being cross-gen it's still basically the top visuals the medium has at the time of release.

I'm honestly not that impressed by The Matrix during gameplay. It looks good, but isn't blowing me away. Horizon looks more impressive due to the art direction.

I've found that a lot of the most fervent fans of the matrix demo haven't even played it on a big screen. Not all of course, but quite a few.

It looks brilliant on YouTube but blow it up to 65" or whatever and all kinds of imperfections appear. There's shimmering and flickering everywhere. It must have the worst IQ I've seen since the early days of the last generation.

I much prefer how Miles Morales looks tbh, even though it's about 10% as complex.

 

[ChiefDada]

I think that’s what scares me the most. That they have to now retool their engine and start from scratch. In 2022.

If horizon 2 took 5 years on the same engine, are we looking at 2029 for horizon 3? Will it be a cross gen ps6 title?

I think first parties have a direct line to cerny and they should’ve known in 2017 what they needed to do to retool their engine before any of the third party studios did. Starting in 2022 is way too late especially with how unproductive these studios have become since they last shipped games.

If you're ok with remakes, I think TLOU Remake should satisfy that truly next gen experience you're looking for since Naughty Dog is home to ICE and they undoubtedly know more about the PS5 hardware than any of the other PS studios. And my bet is not only will the character models and environments be photorealistic, but physics and AI will get significant next gen boost as well. Hopefully rumors of late 2022 release are accurate.

I don't think it makes sense to assume the top PS studios (especially ND) haven't been tailoring their engines for PS5 well in advance when we know Sony and Epic were working together on aspects of UE5 that would compliment PS5 abilities some years back.

 

[Hunnybun]

If you're ok with remakes, I think TLOU Remake should satisfy that truly next gen experience you're looking for since Naughty Dog is home to ICE and they undoubtedly know more about the PS5 hardware than any of the other PS studios. And my bet is not only will the character models and environments be photorealistic, but physics and AI will get significant next gen boost as well. Hopefully rumors of late 2022 release are accurate.

I don't think it makes sense to assume the top PS studios (especially ND) haven't been tailoring their engines for PS5 well in advance when we know Sony and Epic were working together on aspects of UE5 that would compliment PS5 abilities some years back.

TLOU Remake is actually my most anticipated reveal just because of that. I'm expecting great things.

 

[Gamer79]

Good thing is that PC cards like the 3080 and 6800xt are already 2x more powerful than the PS5 so 60 fps fans should be set.

Besides, by the time these next gen only games arrive in 2023, we would probably have mid gen console already. It took 3 years for Sony to launch the PS4 Pro.

The issue with the pc market is only like 1% of all pc games are using current level gaming pc's. 99% are still using gtx 970's and such.

 

[SlimySnake]

The issue with the pc market is only like 1% of all pc games are using current level gaming pc's. 99% are still using gtx 970's and such.

Actually most are using 1060 and 2060 so better than 970 but I see your point.

I have not been able to upgrade my 2080 for almost a year and a half now, and my dreams of playing next gen sony games at 60 fps on PC or Pro consoles is not coming true any time soon.

 

[ResetEraVetVIP]

Not a single one exists, they look good, but clearly fake.



No game, or even any tech demo is coming close to the quality of that pre rendered trailer. The lighting and effects are simply on another level. Need to stop using prerendered things as a short term goal. They are constantly doing things that require computers that are literally hundred of times stronger than what we have.

Lol I understand how the tech works…the results speak louder than any numbers…thats why TLOU II looks better than most Xbox Series X and PS5 titles…The fact of the matter is…The Matrix Awakens Demo like real life in several parts…and its not to far off from the Horizon Cimematic Trailer…With further optimizations we could DEFINITELY reach those visuals…by cheats and shortcuts to match it…kinda like TLOU II using baked lighting to achieve perfect results…

 

[Lethal01]

Lol I understand how the tech works…the results speak louder than any numbers…thats why TLOU II looks better than most Xbox Series X and PS5 titles…The fact of the matter is…The Matrix Awakens Demo like real life in several parts…and its not to far off from the Horizon Cimematic Trailer…With further optimizations we could DEFINITELY reach those visuals…by cheats and shortcuts to match it…kinda like TLOU II using baked lighting to achieve perfect results…

Nah, the matrix demo and TLOU II are both planets away from photorealism at any point when you look at the actual results instead of just saying "PS5 is 10x more powerful than ps4" or whatever. They are both clearly very fake and game like.

The lighting isn't anywhere close to that of the CG trailer.

 

[SlimySnake]

Nah, the matrix demo and TLOU II are both planets away from photorealism at any point

You keep saying that when we have actual realtime footage showing otherwise.

We are there in cutscenes already. We are very close in gameplay. On PC, we will have better ray tracing, better resolution, better framerate and better fidelity than the 1080 sub 30 fps we got on consoles.

Saying we are planets away makes no sense when we are getting realtime graphics like this.

 

[staticshock]

I'm honestly not that impressed by The Matrix during gameplay. It looks good, but isn't blowing me away. Horizon looks more impressive due to the art direction.

You are complaining about an aspect of the demo that is clearly due to the fact that it was made under a year with a tiny team of people.
Not 500-1000 people over the span of 5 years.

This is why you see alot of asset repetition. this is why the entire city is bare, crispy clean. Look at the cars, they all look brand new, no dust, no scratch. Which makes them look out of place. Look at the road textures, all identical. Look at the side walks and the ground side of the buildings. Again perfectly clean and bare. That's what's jarring you.

But that's not due to the tech, its due to the facts its not an actual game. you don't have 1,000 people working on it for over 5 years. People are going to be shocked when an actual AAA game comes out that fully ultilizes UE5 features.

Not a single one exists, they look good, but clearly fake.
No game, or even any tech demo is coming close to the quality of that pre rendered trailer. The lighting and effects are simply on another level. Need to stop using prerendered things as a short term goal. They are constantly doing things that require computers that are literally hundred of times stronger than what we have.

This is simply not true. we are ALREADY there when it comes to world lighting, whether you are doing real-time GI or just baked GI.
Where we are not there is the vfx and fluid sim. We will need dedicated NN processers for that in the next PS/Xbox. The other thing we are not there with is scaling character rendering. We ARE there with the rendering but not scaling it. We need Nanite for characters so we can have hellblade 2 reveal fidelity. But clearly we are there with the rendering as you can see.

Lastly again i repeat. The matrix demo only look fake because it lacks art direction and an actual art team the size of what games typically has. Like I said, its environment (streets) are completely bare, too clean, etc.

But this is not the result of the tech, its the result of having only a tiny team work on the project for 1 year rather than 500-1000 people for 5 years.
Its the same reason the 2016 The division trailer is still the best looking trailer ever. It looks even better than the matrix demo. Yet the tech in there is way inferior and if it was converted to use UE5 it would look 10x better.

Why does it then look photorealistic? Its obviously the asset density and variety. I have fooled many people with a pic of this image. I want one of you people to tell me that this pic doesn't look photoreal and how this pic and the entire experience can't be done today in UE5.

Tell me how with Nanite and Lumen and the superior Material shading of UE. How this can't be done today and even better?

I've found that a lot of the most fervent fans of the matrix demo haven't even played it on a big screen. Not all of course, but quite a few.

It looks brilliant on YouTube but blow it up to 65" or whatever and all kinds of imperfections appear. There's shimmering and flickering everywhere. It must have the worst IQ I've seen since the early days of the last generation.

I much prefer how Miles Morales looks tbh, even though it's about 10% as complex.

You prefer Miles Morales because the city received 5+ years of full time 500-1000 person dev time.
Imagine if the matrix demo got that rather than what ~10 people in the Epic special project team for 1 year?
How is it that you people can not understand?

 

[Hunnybun]

You prefer Miles Morales because the city received 5+ years of full time 500-1000 person dev time.
Imagine if the matrix demo got that rather than what ~10 people in the Epic special project team for 1 year?
How is it that you people can not understand?

Lol what the fuck? Nobody who eulogises the Matrix demo does so because of what was achieved under given constraints - they just think it looks amazing, period.

I really have no knowledge of the relative conditions of both games' developments, and it's beside the point.

I just think MM looks more appealing, even though I recognise that it's much much less technically advanced. I've always just hated bad IQ, for a start. It's hard for me to get past.

 

[staticshock]

You keep saying that when we have actual realtime footage showing otherwise.

We are there in cutscenes already. We are very close in gameplay. On PC, we will have better ray tracing, better resolution, better framerate and better fidelity than the 1080 sub 30 fps we got on consoles.

Saying we are planets away makes no sense when we are getting realtime graphics like this.

In addition to that. If someone posted a picture of that without the context. He would actually think that's a pic from the movie.
He won't go. Oh that's a game render. Its funny how biased we are when we know the context of something that challenges our world view. Reminds me of those blind taste test where the cheapest wine/drink is actually picked over the stupid expensive ones. Or the fake luxury store with cheap products with people lining up to get in and praising the products as they leave after unknowingly spending $5k on something that cost $50 dollars. lmao. Its crazy the tricks our mind plays on us.

If Lethal01 was showed that pic in passing he would 100% believe it was from the film. Not only would he believe that, he would also believe its realistic if someone told him it was CGI generated by 1,000 supercomputers. But the minute someone says its running real-time on an econobox....all of a sudden its "not even close to being realistic".

The funny thing is that the character in that CGI horizon video doesn't even look better than the realtime hellblade 2 reveal character that wasn't CGI.

 

[Vick]

I've found that a lot of the most fervent fans of the matrix demo haven't even played it on a big screen. Not all of course, but quite a few.

50'' KRP-500M from less than two meters.
Looks insane, like another window in my room.

It looks brilliant on YouTube but blow it up to 65" or whatever and all kinds of imperfections appear. There's shimmering and flickering everywhere.

There is, on distant buildings. Not a big deal, and it's not hard to realize how easily this could be solved.

It must have the worst IQ I've seen since the early days of the last generation.

I much prefer how Miles Morales looks tbh, even though it's about 10% as complex.

Miles Morales on Performance RT not only looks worse, IQ wise, but also a whole generation behind.

Hell, Spider-Man on PS4 at dusk looks much better than anything i've seen in Miles Morales so far minus RT.

 

[Hunnybun]

50'' KRP-500M from less than two meters.
Looks insane, like another window in my room.


There is, on distant buildings. Not a big deal, and it's not hard to realize how easily this could be solved.


Miles Morales on Performance RT not only looks worse, IQ wise, but also a whole generation behind.

Hell, Spider-Man on PS4 at dusk looks much better than anything i've seen in Miles Morales so far minus RT.

Not to me bud. MM looks pristine compared to Matrix.

 

[SlimySnake]

I've found that a lot of the most fervent fans of the matrix demo haven't even played it on a big screen. Not all of course, but quite a few.

It looks brilliant on YouTube but blow it up to 65" or whatever and all kinds of imperfections appear. There's shimmering and flickering everywhere. It must have the worst IQ I've seen since the early days of the last generation.

I much prefer how Miles Morales looks tbh, even though it's about 10% as complex.

lol I played the Matrix demo for almost 30 hours on a 65 inch OLED screen. the game's TAA works just fine cleaning up the 1080p image. the distant building have a bit of shimmering but unless you are flying you will almost never notice.

Id rather devs use 1080p as base with TAA upscaling than waste 4x more GPU power rendering 4x more pixels if it gets more incredible visual fidelity. I have tried a lot of 1080p games on this tv since that is what I use to play PC games, and the blurries, shimmering and jaggies make it an absolutely ugly experience.

This on the other hand looks straight up 4kcb:

 

[sncvsrtoip]

I've found that a lot of the most fervent fans of the matrix demo haven't even played it on a big screen. Not all of course, but quite a few.

It looks brilliant on YouTube but blow it up to 65" or whatever and all kinds of imperfections appear. There's shimmering and flickering everywhere. It must have the worst IQ I've seen since the early days of the last generation.

I much prefer how Miles Morales looks tbh, even though it's about 10% as complex.

same, I played like 1.2m from 55inch and low res shimering, unstability and generaly too contrasty look wasn't very apppealing to me

 

[ZywyPL]

same, I played like 1.2m from 55inch and low res shimering, unstability and generaly too contrasty look wasn't very apppealing to me

The demo renders at 1080p or so, and upscaling all the way up to 4K can make it look only so much better, we're talking about over 6M missing pixels that have to be injected into the final output image, and while the end result is in fact astonishing considering how much work has to be done, the shortcomings and artifacts are inevitable.

 

[VFXVeteran]

The demo renders at 1080p or so, and upscaling al the way up to 4K can make it look only so much better, we're talking about over 6M missing pixels that have to be injected into the final output image, and while the end result is in fact astonishing considering how much work has to be done, the shortcomings and artifacts are inevitable.

Yea, the lack of bandwidth on these GPUs is keeping them from showing some really awesome stuff. It is extremely important to render true 4k pixel-sized framebuffers that are all the same throughout the entire graphics pipeline. Any reconstruction is going to hinder quality significantly. And while this Matrix demo has many screaming 'next-gen is here', I don't think all games will look like that by the end of this generation. We have seen several newly released games that are considered next-gen and they don't even come close. Every company would have to retool their entire graphics engine pipeline to get results like UE5 and most studios don't have those kinds of resources. We should all look to Nvidia 4xxx for that and that tech will be ahead of PS6/XSX2. The tech just won't develop fast enough for consoles to solve the bandwidth problem which is why I'm seeing cloud render farms in the future.

 

[Lethal01]

You keep saying that when we have actual realtime footage showing otherwise.

We are there in cutscenes already. We are very close in gameplay. On PC, we will have better ray tracing, better resolution, better framerate and better fidelity than the 1080 sub 30 fps we got on consoles.

Saying we are planets away makes no sense when we are getting realtime graphics like this

??? This is clearly not photorealistic. the fact it's computer generated is obvious. We are planets away, doesn't mean where we are can't be pretty, but being pretty and being photorealistic are different.

This is simply not true. we are ALREADY there when it comes to world lighting, whether you are doing real-time GI or just baked GI.

We aren't, even our best implementations of real-time raytracing running on a 3090 is still clearly fake, every shot from the Matrix demo on PS5 is clearly fake. The lighting is still clearly inaccurate and needs more samples.

I'm not saying it's not an amazing achievement, a huge leap, a beautiful sight, and realistic enough that I can actually enjoy it's attempt at realism.

But ps2 games were also a huge graphical leap from ps1. Doesn't mean they were photorealistic.

 

[Hunnybun]

lol I played the Matrix demo for almost 30 hours on a 65 inch OLED screen. the game's TAA works just fine cleaning up the 1080p image. the distant building have a bit of shimmering but unless you are flying you will almost never notice.

Id rather devs use 1080p as base with TAA upscaling than waste 4x more GPU power rendering 4x more pixels if it gets more incredible visual fidelity. I have tried a lot of 1080p games on this tv since that is what I use to play PC games, and the blurries, shimmering and jaggies make it an absolutely ugly experience.

This on the other hand looks straight up 4kcb:

I can only speak for myself. I constantly noticed the shimmering and flickering and didn't remotely have to strain to notice it.

Personally I'd just rather have a cleaner looking image in a simpler game than an ugly image in a very advanced game.

Actually in general I think the kind of detail the Matrix demo specialises in is a bit of a questionable priority at this point. I can see the benefit in a VR game where you're completely immersed in a world, or playing on a genuinely huge screen, but in most set ups in 2022, that kind of detail just seems a bit redundant. And even if you are playing on an 80 inch screen or whatever, you'll just run into the associated problem of low native resolution.

I'd say things like lighting, animation, and just generally making worlds more alive are much clearer priorities than "detail" at this point.

 

[Edder1]

Yes, these also make it obvious we still have a long way to go, but I think in 15~25 years we can get there, hope some of the people in this thread get to live to see it.

Wait, PS5 and Series X can already render near identical CGI movie level scenes in isolated cutscenes (Matrix demo) and you're saying we are 15-25 year away from CGI level visuals? Lol, that's crazy talk. PS6 and Xbox5 should easily be able to do in gameplay what current gen consoles are doing in cutscenes and way more than that. I'm sure in 15-25 years things will improve on what PS6 will be able to do just like you see improvement from Toy Story 3 to Toy Story 4 (10 year gap), but the jump will not be huge because of diminishing returns. CGI visuals are coming next gen, I have no doubt about it.

 

[Haggard]

Wait, PS5 and Series X can already render near identical CGI movie level scenes in isolated cutscenes (Matrix demo) and you're saying we are 15-25 year away from CGI level visuals?

The Matrix is TWENTY-THREE years old, so yes until we reach current levels of good CGI in real time graphics 15+ years is actually rather optimistic.....
We are just now approaching that age old CGI level at 1080p 24/30fps with a LOT of fakery and approximations going on in the lighting and effects department and we´d need the same hardware jump we had from PS4 to PS5 again just to get this compromised construct to acceptable resolutions and framerates for something that`s more than completely static setdressing.

 

[darrylgorn]

So I'm looking at Dying Light 2 and that is pretty much what I expected from this generation.

I'm sure there will be better (and certainly worse) but that's what I would call an average representation of the graphics calibre we're looking at this gen.

 

[Edder1]

The Matrix is TWENTY-THREE years old, so yes until we reach current levels of good CGI in real time graphics 15+ years is actually rather optimistic.....
We are just now approaching that age old CGI level at 1080p 24/30fps with a LOT of fakery and approximations going on in the lighting and effects department and we´d need the same hardware jump we had from PS4 to PS5 again just to get this compromised construct to acceptable resolutions and framerates for something that`s more than completely static setdressing.

Not sure what Matrix being 23 years old has anything to do with PS5/SeriesX rendering in real time what the movie shot in real life. You do realise that the scene with Neo by his computer desk was shot in real life in the original movie, right?

If current gen consoles can do 1080p30/1440p30 (upscaled to 4K) CGI levels visuals in cutscenes (not gameplay) then I see no reason why next gen consoles can't do the same and more at 4K60 in gameplay and cutscenes, especially when things like AI and machine learning will probably be doing most of the heavy lifting. Consoles will always use fakery and shortcuts to achieve their target, that's absolutely fine if it looks like the real deal like DLSS does.

 

[Haggard]

Not sure what Matrix being 23 years old has anything to do with PS5/SeriesX rendering in real time what the movie shot in real life. You do realise that the scene with Neo by his computer desk is real life, right?

If current gen consoles can do 1080p30/1440p30 (upscaled to 4K) CGI levels visuals in cutscenes (not gameplay) then I see no reason why next gen consoles can't do the same and more at 4K60 in gameplay and cutscenes, especially when things like AI and machine learning will probably be doing most of the heavy lifting. Consoles will always use fakery and shortcuts to achieve their target, that's absolutely fine if it looks like the real deal like DLSS does.

you act as if CGI from 20+ years ago was in any way comparable to CGI today....

 

[Edder1]

you act as if CGI from 20+ years ago was in any way comparable to CGI today....

Why do you keep saying it's CGI? The scene I mentioned (Neo on his computer desk) that Matrix demo played in cutscene was shot in real life in Matrix movie. You do understand the difference between real life and CGI, right?

 

[Haggard]

Why do you keep saying it's CGI? The scene I mentioned (Neo on his computer desk) that Matrix demo played in cutscene was shot in real life in Matrix movie. You do understand the difference between real life and CGI, right?

which part exactly are you referring to?
Aside from the wake-up scene maybe everything else is 95% greenscreened and/or post-processed. That movie`s action scenes are heavily heavily cgi modified....and the age of that CGI shows.

 

[Edder1]

which part exactly are you referring to?
Aside from the wake-up scene maybe everything else is 95% greenscreen....

I'm talking about waking up scene, I clearly mentioned that in my original reply. This scene was not CGI at the time and it's running real time on current gen consoles, with a generational jump those level visuals should be easily feasible on next gen consoles in gameplay.

 

[Haggard]

I'm talking about waking up scene, I clearly mentioned that in my original reply. This scene was not CGI at the time and it's running real time on current gen consoles, with a generational jump those level visuals should be easily feasible on next gen consoles in gameplay.

You`re basing your assumptions on a scene with a scope of ~2m² while ignoring the other 99% of the demo....k.

Sorry, my fault for replying to that in the first place.

 

[Edder1]

You`re basing your assumptions on a scene with the scope of ~2m² while ignoring the other 99% of the demo....k.

Sorry, my fault for replying to that in the first place.

Also the scene with Morpheus and Neo by two red arm chairs uses real life actors in the original movie with green screen for background, now that whole scene is running real time on current gen consoles.

The fact that you think we can't do those visuals on next gen consoles when they're already possible in cutscenes on current gen consoles is mindboggling.

 

[Haggard]

Also the scene with Morpheus and Neo by two red arm chairs uses real life actors in the original movie with green screen for background, now that whole scene is running real time on current gen consoles.

The fact that you think we can't do those visuals on next gen consoles when they're already possible in cutscenes on current gen consoles is mindboggling.

You fail to realise that you can do near photorealism on nearly every toaster if you make the scope of a scene small enough.
The only parts in that demo that are any good for actual reference are the parts you can actually play......And there we have characters worlds away from those Keanu fakes running around in a 100% static best case Nanite environment with lumen not even being able to keep up with fast movements and faking or downright scratching features/accuracy @ 1080p/30 with heavy drops....

 

[Edder1]

You fail to realise that you can do near photorealism on nearly every toaster if you make the scope of a scene small enough.
The only parts in that demo that are any good for actual reference are the parts you can actually play......

So there will be reduction in fidelity when the scene gets busy like we see in the car chase cutscene, that is obviously obvious, but to claim that with a whole generation jump we won't get to CGI level visuals is just ridiculous.

 

[Haggard]

So there will be reduction in fidelity when the scene gets busy like we see in the car chase cutscene, that is obviously obvious, but to claim that with a whole generation jump we won't get to CGI level is just ridiculous.

And here we go again with the CGI term.
CGI from ~20 years ago...maybe. CGI as we have today, no way, not even close (Talking about good cgi obviously)

 

[Edder1]

And here we are again with the CGI term.
CGI from ~20 years ago...maybe. CGI as we have today, no way, not even close (Talking about good cgi obviously)

From 20 years ago? Lol, Beowulf was from 2007 and that level of CGI should be easily feasible even on current gen consoles.

Your argument about current gen CGI makes little sense since CGI when next gen consoles release will be even more superior to CGI today, but there's a factor of diminishing returns with CGI, just look at how little Pixar stuff has improved visually in the last 10 years. At some point CGI hits a wall and you only get minor improvements, next gen consoles just have to get close enough to where that wall begins.

 

[Haggard]

From 20 years ago? Lol, Beowulf was from 2007 and that should easily be trumped by games even on current gen consoles.

.
Take a game that doesn´t even look remotely as good as that movie, turn all lights into actual lightsources with realistic lightbouncing and shadows and watch your pc/console burn. You seriously underestimate just how much "reality" is cut out of our games to make them run even today.

look at how little Pixar stuff has improved visually in the last 10 years.

That is simply not true. Material rendering and detail density has improved dramatically.

Your argument about current gen CGI makes little sense since CGI when next gen consoles release will be even more superior to CGI today,

Which is why I said that the term "better than CGI" is simply nonsense without saying which gen cgi you mean....
The situation is simple, really. For anything with noteworthy scope current gen CGI is completely out of reach as a next gen real-time rendering target. A 3090 today wouldn`t be able to render a single fps/s with the amount of RT (actually it`s mostly pathtraced already afaik)modern CGI uses to look like it does....
You are on point with the diminishing returns as we`ll need downright ridiculous jumps in performance for anything that actually impacts visuals in a meaningful way from here on out.

 

[VFXVeteran]

From 20 years ago? Lol, Beowulf was from 2007 and that level of CGI should be easily feasible even on current gen consoles.

Your argument about current gen CGI makes little sense since CGI when next gen consoles release will be even more superior to CGI today, but there's a factor of diminishing returns with CGI, just look at how little Pixar stuff has improved visually in the last 10 years. At some point CGI hits a wall and you only get minor improvements, next gen consoles just have to get close enough to where that wall begins.

You don't get it. And you talking to people who are in the CG industry and knows how complicated rendering is compared to these little tricks in games.

PS6/PS7, etc.. won't ever have enough hardware to render out current path-traced CG quality which takes hours to render. Eventually PCs (not consoles) might approach enough bandwidth to see a movie done in realtime, but as Haggard said, we are a long way off. 15yrs is definitely being optimistic. The consoles now struggle with the most basic rendering (hair primitives, shadow casting lights on EVERY light and not just 1, etc..) tasks lowering the resolution due to bandwidth constraints.

 

[Edder1]

That is simply not true. Material rendering and detail density has improved dramatically.

Which is why I said that the term "better than CGI" is simply nonsense without saying which gen cgi you mean....
The situation is simple, really. For anything with noteworthy scope current gen CGI is completely out of reach as a next gen real-time rendering target. A 3090 today wouldn`t be able to render a single fps/s with the amount of RT modern CGI uses to look like it does....
You are on point with the diminishing returns as we`ll need downright ridiculous jumps in performance for anything that actually impacts visuals in a meaningful way from here on out.

Maybe actualt post a proper refutation insteadt of posting silly emojis.

Those improvements from Toy Story 3-4 are very small compared to improvements in 2-3. Both have a gap of 10 years and yet diminishing returns are very obvious when going from 3-4.

As for what I mean by CGI then I would say Toy Story 3 is very good level CGI that will not age in time like previous entries have, the fact that 4 looks better doesn't change the fact that 3 looks like a very good CGI movie. And this is what next gen consoles have to do, hit CGI level visuals that are of high enough quality that they will stand the test of time. The fact that better level CGI is available or will come along doesn't detract the fact that there can be another CGI product that still looks respectable.

You can also think of this in 2D animation terms, 2D animations have obviously improved, but at some point in the past they got good enough in quality that we can still watch them today and not be put off by their visual presentation.

 

[Edder1]

You don't get it. And you talking to people who are in the CG industry and knows how complicated rendering is compared to these little tricks in games.

PS6/PS7, etc.. won't ever have enough hardware to render out current path-traced CG quality which takes hours to render. Eventually PCs (not consoles) might approach enough bandwidth to see a movie done in realtime, but as Haggard said, we are a long way off. 15yrs is definitely being optimistic. The consoles now struggle with the most basic rendering (hair primitives, shadow casting lights on EVERY light and not just 1, etc..) tasks lowering the resolution due to bandwidth constraints.

I think it's pretty obvious next gen consoles won't do path tracing unless there's some unforeseen breakthrough in that regard. However, you can bring any PIxar movie from 10 years ago and they still look amazing without using path tracing. Using ray traced GI should be sufficient for next gen consoles to make games look of high quality when it comes to lighting. Something like Metro Exodus with way better materials and textures than the ones they use now would look amazing with their current RT GI lighting solution.

 

[Haggard]

Maybe actualt post a proper refutation insteadt of posting silly emojis.

You`re right, I edited my post afterwards, but you had it already quoted when I hit save.
For example: Take a game that doesn´t even look remotely as good as that movie, turn all lights into actual lightsources with realistic lightbouncing and shadows and watch your pc/console burn. You seriously underestimate just how much "reality" is cut out of our games to make them run even today.

Those improvements from Toy Story 3-4 are very small compared to improvements in 2-3. Both have a gap of 10 years and yet diminishing returns are very obvious when going from 3-4.

Watch a movie that sports an artstyle which is not purposely over-simplistic....
Something like that Disney(?) movie, Raya and the last dragon is leaps and bounds above what was feasible a mere 5 year ago in CGI (despite being an incredibly shitty movie). The progresss that was made in material and hair rendering is incredible.

 

[SlimySnake]

I can only speak for myself. I constantly noticed the shimmering and flickering and didn't remotely have to strain to notice it.

Personally I'd just rather have a cleaner looking image in a simpler game than an ugly image in a very advanced game.

Actually in general I think the kind of detail the Matrix demo specialises in is a bit of a questionable priority at this point. I can see the benefit in a VR game where you're completely immersed in a world, or playing on a genuinely huge screen, but in most set ups in 2022, that kind of detail just seems a bit redundant. And even if you are playing on an 80 inch screen or whatever, you'll just run into the associated problem of low native resolution.

I'd say things like lighting, animation, and just generally making worlds more alive are much clearer priorities than "detail" at this point.

I wouldnt mind if they stuck with 1440p and then used their incredible upscaling technique TSR to push it to 4k like they did with the first UE5 demo.

I think we have to keep in mind that this is an open world game set in a massive city you can fly through. How many games even let you do that. In more linear games like say Returnal or Ratchet, this might not even be a big deal since they dont need to render those massive open worlds. So 1080p 30 fps with TSR should be good enough in linear games without any shimmering you might have noticed.

 

[Edder1]

Take a game that doesn´t even look remotely as good as that movie, turn all lights into actual lightsources with realistic lightbouncing and shadows and watch your pc/console burn. You seriously underestimate just how much "reality" is cut out of our games to make them run even today.

Watch a movie that sports an artstyle which is not purposely over-simplistic....
Something like that Disney(?) movie, Raya and the last dragon is leaps and bounds above what was feasible a mere 5 year ago in CGI (despite being an incredibly shitty movie)

I think you're overestimating Beowulf, that's not a very impressive level of visual fidelity. Remember, this was the best they could do in 2007 and I fully expect current gen consoles to better it when 2nd and 3rd wave games release. Maybe some things like hair rendering etc will not be matched, but overall I expect more impressive visuals.

I didn't say Pixar stuff today isn't more impressive, but anything made 10 years still stands the test of time. As I said, at some point you are at a point of diminishing returns and everything from that moment onwards ages well.

 

[Lethal01]

Wait, PS5 and Series X can already render near identical CGI movie level scenes in isolated cutscenes (Matrix demo)

They can't, they have put out nothing that comes close. That's the point, we are atleast a decade away from photorealism.

 

[Hunnybun]

I wouldnt mind if they stuck with 1440p and then used their incredible upscaling technique TSR to push it to 4k like they did with the first UE5 demo.

I think we have to keep in mind that this is an open world game set in a massive city you can fly through. How many games even let you do that. In more linear games like say Returnal or Ratchet, this might not even be a big deal since they dont need to render those massive open worlds. So 1080p 30 fps with TSR should be good enough in linear games without any shimmering you might have noticed.

I suspect I'd find the original demo much better looking, yep.

1. No ugly but expensive RT reflections eating up resources and forcing a lower resolution.

2. An environment that actually SUITS an infinite geometry system. Cliffs and rocks and statues etc just blatantly require a lot of polygons to render properly. Instead we got a city full of skyscrapers and other modern buildings, all made out of right angles and flat panels of glass. Yeah.... that never really seemed the wisest choice...

It still looks great if you zoom in enough, but in general gameplay, and just speaking for myself, I can kind of take it or leave it.

 

[Edder1]

They can't, they have put out nothing that comes close.

They obviously can because Matrix demo exists.

 

[Haggard]

They obviously can as long as we are talking about extremely limited scope and/or best case rendering scenarios because Matrix demo exists.

fixed that for you.

 

[VFXVeteran]

I think it's pretty obvious next gen consoles won't do path tracing unless there's some unforeseen breakthrough in that regard. However, you can bring any PIxar movie from 10 years ago and they still look amazing without using path tracing. Using ray traced GI should be sufficient for next gen consoles to make games look of high quality when it comes to lighting. Something like Metro Exodus with way better materiala and textures then they use now would look amazing with their current RT GI lighting solution.

I beg to differ. You need path-tracing for good approximation to light sources especially using environment HDR textures that need to be evaluated across a differential area. If you have to ray-trace then you are using standard light loops with one ray cast. But that's getting away from the initial argument.

Firing any ray is going to require memory and bandwidth - which the consoles and PC GPUs don't have at the moment. Games will require implementation like Nvidia's Marble demo (which looks better than that Matrix demo) in order to look on par with CG of today. CG 10yrs ago isn't saying much really.

 

[Edder1]

fixed that for you.

Limited scope on current gen consoles yes, but we're talking talking about consoles 6-7 years form now. You can pretend like tech won't progress anymore all you like.

 

[Haggard]

Limited scope on current gen consoles yes, but we're talking talking about consoles 6-7 years form now. You can pretend like tech won't progress anymore all you like.

aaaaand we`re back to square one..

You`ve understood literally nothing I´ve said.

 

[SlimySnake]

2. An environment that actually SUITS an infinite geometry system. Cliffs and rocks and statues etc just blatantly require a lot of polygons to render properly. Instead we got a city full of skyscrapers and other modern buildings, all made out of right angles and flat panels of glass. Yeah.... that never really seemed the wisest choice...

It still looks great if you zoom in enough, but in general gameplay, and just speaking for myself, I can kind of take it or leave it.

I dont know about that. The first UE5 demo and the Valley of the Ancient demo features a lot of Cliffs and rocks, and it looks a gen ahead of Horizon's cliffs and rock. Look at the draw distance and asset quality vs what sacrifices GG had to make. So much fog. So blurry. And this is from a native 4k trailer.

It currently cannot do foliage but they said it will eventually be supported.