-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Graphical Fidelity I Expect This Gen
- Thread starter ResetEraVetVIP
- Start date
It's all in the wrist
Member
All this love for Callisto Protocol. I'm interested in it, but that gameplay trailer put my expectations in check. It's not at the same level as what Sony puts out. I doubt it'll look as good as Dead Space, even.
I feel like these threads miss the forest for the trees. Maybe the character models in TLoU don't look realistic, but it all looks very cohesive with the environment, and the attention to detail is staggering. They made the right compromises.
I feel like these threads miss the forest for the trees. Maybe the character models in TLoU don't look realistic, but it all looks very cohesive with the environment, and the attention to detail is staggering. They made the right compromises.
GymWolf
Member
It never looked any better than ds remake to me except the hyper detailed protagonist face where they probably spended half of the budget.
I don't.
3liteDragon
Member
Pretty sure that's a CG trailer.
Oh for sure but I really liked the CG used here. This is the kind of graphics we would like to see in real time which is why I posted this, but I wonder if it is feasible at the end of this gen, or is it impossible?
3liteDragon
Member
It's possible this gen.
ResetEraVetVIP
Member
We aren’t far, I predict all games will look close end of this gen and it will be the standard next gen…We have a realtime playable demo now…PC GPUs are gonna be pushing 200 or more TFLOPS…
These are realtime…these match the CGI quality…
Last edited:
Dampf
Member
Yes, thanks to Machine Learning, DX12 Ultimate featureset, HW-Raytracing, higher efficiency asset loading etc, I'm pretty certain we will see similar quality (with some compromises in terms of image quality of course, given it runs at real time) to these GCI trailers by the end of the generation.
The last gen consoles are holding back games right now.
The last gen consoles are holding back games right now.
GymWolf
Member
Yeah, and people in here troll by saying that they can think of a better graphic than tlou remake and gow ragnarock so it is good to remember these people how moronic it is to think that.
Last edited:
Hobbygaming
has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
If you're choosing Knack over the PS5 games that are out, that's a YOU problem
That lion video is something else, no idea how people were ripping on it saying it is mostly a static image and no environment but a desert and just two moving objects. It looks absolutely gorgeous. Now granted having a full-on game with graphical fidelity that matches that will require some huge computing power but hopefully we are getting there!
GymWolf
Member
Especially when knack 2 is also out and it's the far superior one.
Haggard
Banned
"All games"
uh huh...... aren`t we forgetting a teeny tiny thing here? Budget!
~1% of games have cutting edge graphics and that is exactly the fraction that may maybe be able to reach the level of something like the matrix demo by the end of the gen...
Lumpyoatmeal
Member
VIP, I can literally guarantee you that won't happen. Whatever is going on in your mind and the real world is essentially operating with v-sync toggled off right now.
There's more to CGI than just posting a cherry picked screenshot on this forum, there are massive amounts of frames/screenshots dedicated to simulating motion. To be fair those CGI trailers are not even impressive man, but it's a huge gap compared to those tech demos. Just look at the Enemies demo, the animation is ass; There's hardly anything moving in the frames and when things do move like her dress it don't even look like soft cloth it looks like newspaper with obvious object clipping at 1:19 in the video, at least the Horizon trailer masked the object clipping with so many things moving in the frames.
Ignoring those CGI trailers, we probably won't even get that Enemies tech demo quality no time soon. Shit, I'm still waiting on visual quality from tech demos that were published over 10 years ago on GTX 680, GTX 580 hardware by videogame developers!
Last edited:
Lumpyoatmeal
Member
Remember this tech demo published in 2012? What videogame on the retail market is using these kind of assets and animation? ..Nothing
Last edited:
Toots
Gold Member
Isn't forspoken based on this (technology and art direction) ?
It doesn't look as good by a long shot, but it will be the closest thing to this CGI trailer Square will produce for a long time isn't it ?
(I'm really asking the question...)
Lumpyoatmeal
Member
Toots, I don't even have an answer, I'm now hearing about this videogame. From what little I just seen it looks like ass though man.
From sources it is using the same branded engine (Luminous Engine). The art direction however seem to be based in the same location as Oscar the Grouch, a whole trash bin.
Last edited:
Toots
Gold Member
You are right it really does
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Playing CoD Vanguard and Im not gonna lie, this is great. It's not woke like I thought it would be. It's not some Avengers in WW2 game they marketed it. This a classic WW2 campaign with all your favorite iconic war setpieces. The Midway ripoff level was amazing.
BUT the game looks like a PS2 game at times. Indoors with fancy lighting and good material quality, it looks ok but these outdoor levels have this really bad lighting that is far worse than what I remember in PS3 CoD games like Modern Warfare. This game's lighting gives me Medal of Honor frontlines vibes.
And to me this is the cost of 60 fps. Im not saying 60 fps next gen games will look this bad but we have arguably the biggest franchise held back by having to offer 60 fps in every single game. Whats hilarious is that the game uses incredible CG quality cutscenes and A LOT of them. This feels like a Naughty Dog or Kojima game in terms of the minutes per cutscene. And they are all prerendered CG. They must have spent tens of millions on these cutscenes because they look absolutely phenomenal. The CG midway carrier explosions looked just as good if not better than the movie. Then you switch to gameplay and its PS2 quality. At least outdoors. Like i said before, some of the indoor lighting and materials are really good. Character faces also look great up close during ingame cutscenes.
BUT the game looks like a PS2 game at times. Indoors with fancy lighting and good material quality, it looks ok but these outdoor levels have this really bad lighting that is far worse than what I remember in PS3 CoD games like Modern Warfare. This game's lighting gives me Medal of Honor frontlines vibes.
And to me this is the cost of 60 fps. Im not saying 60 fps next gen games will look this bad but we have arguably the biggest franchise held back by having to offer 60 fps in every single game. Whats hilarious is that the game uses incredible CG quality cutscenes and A LOT of them. This feels like a Naughty Dog or Kojima game in terms of the minutes per cutscene. And they are all prerendered CG. They must have spent tens of millions on these cutscenes because they look absolutely phenomenal. The CG midway carrier explosions looked just as good if not better than the movie. Then you switch to gameplay and its PS2 quality. At least outdoors. Like i said before, some of the indoor lighting and materials are really good. Character faces also look great up close during ingame cutscenes.
It is funny you brought up COD. The other day my buddy and I were talking about shooting games (COD, Battlefield etc.) and how they were ahead of most games in terms of visuals during the ps3/360 era but how far behind other games they are right now graphically (to me at least). When I watch videos of like Bad Company 2 or Modern Warfare I cannot but admire the visuals and how they were kinda ahead of their time, they still hold pretty well today. Might be the 60 fps tax you mentioned!Playing CoD Vanguard and Im not gonna lie, this is great. It's not woke like I thought it would be. It's not some Avengers in WW2 game they marketed it. This a classic WW2 campaign with all your favorite iconic war setpieces. The Midway ripoff level was amazing.
BUT the game looks like a PS2 game at times. Indoors with fancy lighting and good material quality, it looks ok but these outdoor levels have this really bad lighting that is far worse than what I remember in PS3 CoD games like Modern Warfare. This game's lighting gives me Medal of Honor frontlines vibes.
And to me this is the cost of 60 fps. Im not saying 60 fps next gen games will look this bad but we have arguably the biggest franchise held back by having to offer 60 fps in every single game. Whats hilarious is that the game uses incredible CG quality cutscenes and A LOT of them. This feels like a Naughty Dog or Kojima game in terms of the minutes per cutscene. And they are all prerendered CG. They must have spent tens of millions on these cutscenes because they look absolutely phenomenal. The CG midway carrier explosions looked just as good if not better than the movie. Then you switch to gameplay and its PS2 quality. At least outdoors. Like i said before, some of the indoor lighting and materials are really good. Character faces also look great up close during ingame cutscenes.
Lumpyoatmeal
Member
Is that the PC version?Playing CoD Vanguard and Im not gonna lie, this is great. It's not woke like I thought it would be. It's not some Avengers in WW2 game they marketed it. This a classic WW2 campaign with all your favorite iconic war setpieces. The Midway ripoff level was amazing.
BUT the game looks like a PS2 game at times. Indoors with fancy lighting and good material quality, it looks ok but these outdoor levels have this really bad lighting that is far worse than what I remember in PS3 CoD games like Modern Warfare. This game's lighting gives me Medal of Honor frontlines vibes.
And to me this is the cost of 60 fps. Im not saying 60 fps next gen games will look this bad but we have arguably the biggest franchise held back by having to offer 60 fps in every single game. Whats hilarious is that the game uses incredible CG quality cutscenes and A LOT of them. This feels like a Naughty Dog or Kojima game in terms of the minutes per cutscene. And they are all prerendered CG. They must have spent tens of millions on these cutscenes because they look absolutely phenomenal. The CG midway carrier explosions looked just as good if not better than the movie. Then you switch to gameplay and its PS2 quality. At least outdoors. Like i said before, some of the indoor lighting and materials are really good. Character faces also look great up close during ingame cutscenes.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
PS5. 120 hz mode might have been turned on in the second pic because i used to play MP in 120 fps mode, but the first screenshot is definitely their so-called 4k 60 fps mode.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
I will quote my post again.
Im not playing knack. I am playing nothing.
Well, finally decided to give th cod campaign a try but you can see how amazing it looks above. I wish i was playing nothing.
My son wants me to buy knack 2 which is only $8 but why the fuck is it not on PS+ Premium? It's a first party game. It's shovelware. You are essentially giving it away for price a kids meal, and its not on your premium service? WTF are they doing? TLOU isnt on the trial either. So they were supposedly forcing devs to release all games as trials but wont even release their own game on their own premium service worth $120 a year. Nothing Jimbo does makes sense to me.
Im not buyng it on principle. 1. It's trash. 2. I got it for free thanks to the NZ store debacle at launch, but cant remember my NZ account username and password. 3. it should be on PS+ premium.
Last edited:
Negotiator101
Member
PS2? I hate the extreme exaggerations.Playing CoD Vanguard and Im not gonna lie, this is great. It's not woke like I thought it would be. It's not some Avengers in WW2 game they marketed it. This a classic WW2 campaign with all your favorite iconic war setpieces. The Midway ripoff level was amazing.
BUT the game looks like a PS2 game at times. Indoors with fancy lighting and good material quality, it looks ok but these outdoor levels have this really bad lighting that is far worse than what I remember in PS3 CoD games like Modern Warfare. This game's lighting gives me Medal of Honor frontlines vibes.
And to me this is the cost of 60 fps. Im not saying 60 fps next gen games will look this bad but we have arguably the biggest franchise held back by having to offer 60 fps in every single game. Whats hilarious is that the game uses incredible CG quality cutscenes and A LOT of them. This feels like a Naughty Dog or Kojima game in terms of the minutes per cutscene. And they are all prerendered CG. They must have spent tens of millions on these cutscenes because they look absolutely phenomenal. The CG midway carrier explosions looked just as good if not better than the movie. Then you switch to gameplay and its PS2 quality. At least outdoors. Like i said before, some of the indoor lighting and materials are really good. Character faces also look great up close during ingame cutscenes.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
A handful of devs. 1 dev was able to create an environment in 3 days max. Even the Matrix demo took 80 devs just 8 months to make. UE5 has made things so simple you can literally drag and drop assets into the game from the quixel library which is now free for everyone using UE5. Lumens has made baked lighting and reflections a thing of the past. Everything should just work. There will still always be work required but in terms of resources, games should be far easier to make as long as they arent wasting 5-6 years making 50 hour games.
If indie devs stick to 8-10 hour campaigns then i dont see how they wont be able to hit matrix or UE5 quality games. The Unity demos look insane but again they are all real time. Just compare last gen's demos to this gen and you will see that a lot of the games came very close. Especially linear ones. In cutscenes, they look even better. So if matrix looks that good in cutscenes running on a ps5 and xsx, i dont see how most devs from Ubisoft, EA, SquareEnix, and all the AAA studio recently acquired by Embracer Group like Crystal Dynamic, Quantic Dream and 4A Games wont be able to top Sony and Microsoft first party efforts this gen.
I mean look at Starfield. Made by a studio that has always sucked ass at creating graphics. Created the worst looking PS360 game in Skyrim. Created the worst looking PS4x1 gen AAA game in Fallout 4. And yet they were able to produce these stunning visuals on an xsx despite targeting 4x the resolution of the Matrix. Again, Bethesda is probably the best studio MS owns right now but their graphics capabilities have always been trash, if they can do this on an awful engine like the Creation engine anyone can.
arkhamguy123
Banned
It's cross gen garbage. I'm sure the game will be fine but just like Horizon 2 it's developed around 2012 hardware and scaled up.
GymWolf
Member
A handful of devs. 1 dev was able to create an environment in 3 days max. Even the Matrix demo took 80 devs just 8 months to make. UE5 has made things so simple you can literally drag and drop assets into the game from the quixel library which is now free for everyone using UE5. Lumens has made baked lighting and reflections a thing of the past. Everything should just work. There will still always be work required but in terms of resources, games should be far easier to make as long as they arent wasting 5-6 years making 50 hour games.
If indie devs stick to 8-10 hour campaigns then i dont see how they wont be able to hit matrix or UE5 quality games. The Unity demos look insane but again they are all real time. Just compare last gen's demos to this gen and you will see that a lot of the games came very close. Especially linear ones. In cutscenes, they look even better. So if matrix looks that good in cutscenes running on a ps5 and xsx, i dont see how most devs from Ubisoft, EA, SquareEnix, and all the AAA studio recently acquired by Embracer Group like Crystal Dynamic, Quantic Dream and 4A Games wont be able to top Sony and Microsoft first party efforts this gen.
I mean look at Starfield. Made by a studio that has always sucked ass at creating graphics. Created the worst looking PS360 game in Skyrim. Created the worst looking PS4x1 gen AAA game in Fallout 4. And yet they were able to produce these stunning visuals on an xsx despite targeting 4x the resolution of the Matrix. Again, Bethesda is probably the best studio MS owns right now but their graphics capabilities have always been trash, if they can do this on an awful engine like the Creation engine anyone can.
I'm really not sure what you see here that is impressive on a graphical standpoint other than the evocative artstyle in that gif.
Textures looks flat\stylized\last gen as hell, extremely far from ue5 famous demo, hell even hfw looks better.
Shit death stranding on pc probably looks better...starfiled doesn't even look like its using photogrammetry.
Not even shitting on the game since i'm gonna buy it at day one.
Last edited:
arkhamguy123
Banned
A handful of devs. 1 dev was able to create an environment in 3 days max. Even the Matrix demo took 80 devs just 8 months to make. UE5 has made things so simple you can literally drag and drop assets into the game from the quixel library which is now free for everyone using UE5. Lumens has made baked lighting and reflections a thing of the past. Everything should just work. There will still always be work required but in terms of resources, games should be far easier to make as long as they arent wasting 5-6 years making 50 hour games.
If indie devs stick to 8-10 hour campaigns then i dont see how they wont be able to hit matrix or UE5 quality games. The Unity demos look insane but again they are all real time. Just compare last gen's demos to this gen and you will see that a lot of the games came very close. Especially linear ones. In cutscenes, they look even better. So if matrix looks that good in cutscenes running on a ps5 and xsx, i dont see how most devs from Ubisoft, EA, SquareEnix, and all the AAA studio recently acquired by Embracer Group like Crystal Dynamic, Quantic Dream and 4A Games wont be able to top Sony and Microsoft first party efforts this gen.
I mean look at Starfield. Made by a studio that has always sucked ass at creating graphics. Created the worst looking PS360 game in Skyrim. Created the worst looking PS4x1 gen AAA game in Fallout 4. And yet they were able to produce these stunning visuals on an xsx despite targeting 4x the resolution of the Matrix. Again, Bethesda is probably the best studio MS owns right now but their graphics capabilities have always been trash, if they can do this on an awful engine like the Creation engine anyone can.
So hyped for Starfield. Bought a series X for it. Next gen kinda starts next year in 2023.
Haggard
Banned
you are seriously...SERIOUSLY underestimating the work that goes into anything that`s not a simple asset swap or a tiny scope static landscape and has to run on a tight performance budget with xyz mechanics in the background on top of it........
Especially "Everything should just work"......makes my software architect soul literally do a Frankenstein laughter.
It´s a nice but utterly naive dream that`s not gonna happen...ever, at least not if you don`t want total stagnation.
You want candy, you gotta pay.
......And how is a game like Starfield with 5+ years of development time and still at best okayish graphics an argument?
Last edited:
Negotiator101
Member
This is exactly my opinion.
Lumpyoatmeal
Member
Lol, Negotiator101 excluding the weapon model you don't think that level of detail in the environment wouldn't actually look that out of place at all in a retail videogame from like 2004-2006 ish at least on PC using GeForce 6800/GeForce 7800 hardware?
Last edited:
Bernd Lauert
Banned
Just for reference, this is how PS2 COD looked:Playing CoD Vanguard and Im not gonna lie, this is great. It's not woke like I thought it would be. It's not some Avengers in WW2 game they marketed it. This a classic WW2 campaign with all your favorite iconic war setpieces. The Midway ripoff level was amazing.
BUT the game looks like a PS2 game at times. Indoors with fancy lighting and good material quality, it looks ok but these outdoor levels have this really bad lighting that is far worse than what I remember in PS3 CoD games like Modern Warfare. This game's lighting gives me Medal of Honor frontlines vibes.
And to me this is the cost of 60 fps. Im not saying 60 fps next gen games will look this bad but we have arguably the biggest franchise held back by having to offer 60 fps in every single game. Whats hilarious is that the game uses incredible CG quality cutscenes and A LOT of them. This feels like a Naughty Dog or Kojima game in terms of the minutes per cutscene. And they are all prerendered CG. They must have spent tens of millions on these cutscenes because they look absolutely phenomenal. The CG midway carrier explosions looked just as good if not better than the movie. Then you switch to gameplay and its PS2 quality. At least outdoors. Like i said before, some of the indoor lighting and materials are really good. Character faces also look great up close during ingame cutscenes.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
I literally said that there will be more work required but surely you arent saying that sitting there for hours baking in lights and reflections would take fewer resources than creating a system that literally generates them dynamically. Thats the whole point of moving to ray tracing and dynamic GI.
And Im also a software architect. I have integrated my software into over a half dozen different systems, and as long as you have a good codebase with general purpose APIs, yes, stuff should just plug in. Thats literally what UE5 is. You arent sitting there writing your own lighting model, or adding ray tracing to your engine from scratch. Everything is there for you to plug into. You dont need artists sitting there baking in light probes or creating reflections to make them look perfect. Just ask insomniac why it was easier for them to have better puddle reflections this time around compared to the PS4. Once they had RT implemented in their engine, the reflections literally just worked.
With UE5, devs will no longer have to create different LODs for every single object in the game. Create reflections for every single reflective surface in the game. Baking in lights is a thing of the past which is going to save artists a ton of time since they can now dynamically adjust light sources inside the editor. There will always be work for them to do, but a lot of the roadblocks have been removed with UE5 and any engine using dynamic GI or ray tracing.
Haggard
Banned
You probably believe Axe Deodorant commercials, too....
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
The lighting, the draw distance and yes the art is whats so impressive. The game does not look that impressive when on the ground, but those vista shots are godly thanks to the draw distance. Especially considering they came from Bethesda, from the worst graphical engine on the planet WHILE targeting native 4k. Literally wasting 50-75% of the GPU on rendering pixels instead of increasing visual fidelity.
Here is what those draw distance look like on current gen games. Notice the fake fog, the low quality assets and bizarre way they try to mask the shitty draw distance by pretending we cant see beyond a 100 yards.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Nah, i believe my eyes. I have played the Matrix demo on my 10 tflops ps5. A full living breathing city with better AI simulations and destruction physics than any game last gen. No one can convince me its not possible.
Last edited:
Lumpyoatmeal
Member
That Axe will pull in all types of freaks, these consoles won't.
ChiefDada
Member
AI in Matrix Demo? Where? Also the destruction tanked an already sub-optimal performance even lower.
GymWolf
Member
Any example of this IA being better than rdr2 or watch dogs 2 ia simulations?
Pretty sure they have way more limited behaviours than these games, probably more limited than any rpg with a day night cycle, working, drinking, going to bed etc.
TheRedRiders
Member
Consoles have been consistent in exceeding technical demos in terms of visuals, especially with Unreal Engine.
UE5 Matrix demo is no exception.
UE5 Matrix demo is no exception.
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
This happened while I was just driving around and crashed. For a while, I didnt even realize that traffic had begun to pile up. I never see stuff like this in current gen games. Most of them basically have traffic stop displaying two blocks down the road.
The whole AI system is simulated. it's not faked and scripted like RDR2 AI. Here is what Epic had to say:
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
I find Infinites art style to be pleasing to the eye as well. Some of the texture work is indeed nice. My issue with Infinite is the lack of any and all dynamic elements. The lack of motion in the world. The trees are static. The foliage is static. No cloth physics. There are hardly even any particles floating around like dust, bugs, etc. I think I might seen a waterfall somewhere in the world though. 1 waterfall.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
The weird part about Infinite is that all of that stuff was in the realtime splitstream demo so they had that up and running in the engine.
One day 343i needs to do a deep dive into what went wrong and what the aim to do to avoid these mistakes. Especially in a game that had a 6 year dev cycle with MS giving them a full year to fix issues. Who does that nowadays? And they wasted it. Say what you will about cyberpunk's buggy release, but the final game looked better in many ways on PC. Yes, the last gen versions looked like dog shit but they didnt let trash last gen consoles ruin their vision. If they had someone like Phil backing them up with MS cash, they wouldve delayed and shipped a far better product. 343i squandered every advantage MS brought to them.
Sosokrates
Report me if I continue to console war
Whats so special about the Ai simulations in matrix demo, they seem just as dumb as GTA5's little puppet plebs
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Posted above.Whats so special about the Ai simulations in matrix demo, they seem just as dumb as GTA5's little puppet plebs
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
Surprised there are people here who don't think Callisto Protocols graphics are great ...what is it that's not jiving with you all?
Last edited:
Sosokrates
Report me if I continue to console war
The weird part about Infinite is that all of that stuff was in the realtime splitstream demo so they had that up and running in the engine.
One day 343i needs to do a deep dive into what went wrong and what the aim to do to avoid these mistakes. Especially in a game that had a 6 year dev cycle with MS giving them a full year to fix issues. Who does that nowadays? And they wasted it. Say what you will about cyberpunk's buggy release, but the final game looked better in many ways on PC. Yes, the last gen versions looked like dog shit but they didnt let trash last gen consoles ruin their vision. If they had someone like Phil backing them up with MS cash, they wouldve delayed and shipped a far better product. 343i squandered every advantage MS brought to them.
Its not that complicated, they were simply over ambitious and had shoddy management.
In a way it reminds me a bit of GTA4, while GTA4 was a good game loads of stuff from GTA:sa had to be cut because the tech move was so drastic.
People underestimate how much more challenging open world games are
CamHostage
Member
True, it's really impressive work. It might not necessarily be defined as next-gen technology though?
I believe they did the traffic and pedestrians through the Niagara VFX/particle system, which was introduced in UE 4.2X in 2018 (to replace Cascade) and works to some capacity on all platforms UE4/5 supports. This is how flocks of fish and birds are managed, you can also do armies of soldiers in this way by tracking masses of independent objects as "particle" behavior, and then you can of course do effects and things which are less tangible and more what one would expect from a "particle system".
The ability to manage that many cars and people without having to drop them into low-fi models or sprites or even fading them out on the horizon, that's pretty amazing, and that's Nanite (at least, for the cars) doing the impossible rendering of all of these cars all on screen all at full detail all the way into the distance of the highways. Then just the sheer amount of cars and people is I would assume beyond what an old console could handle on a good day? It's a great flex of these new consoles and high-end PC hardware. It's more volume and lack of fidelity compromise than shall we say "next-gen magic" making this possible, though.
As I've said about other topics on this thread, I believe the missing wow-factor of next-gen consoles isn't necessarily because these new consoles have been held back from accomplishing something never possible before because they're anchored down by barnacle hardware. (There's some of that, but that factor is IMO overblown, as much as I hate to say it. I was bullish on cross-gen-never before the gen started, but the more I come to understand scaling approaches, the more I get how even cellphones can play apps previously only possible on ultra-high-end systems not too long ago.) Rather it is more to do with new features/technologies coming late into maturity (Niagara came out of beta and certified production-ready in May of 2020; UE5's Lumen and Nanite were still classified as experimental and early-access until 2021; Chaos Physics is still considered to be in beta; and that's just UE5 features, there's a lot else out there swirling around in experimentation but only solidified in usage in professionally-produced games here and there) and this wretched plague (and unexpected complications of development... and bad management) pushing back everything that was on the leading edge of technology. 2023 should be to be the second wave of "real next-gen" if you will that 2022 or even 2021 should have been, and some of it is even going to come in cross-gen flavors as well as in next-gen exclusives.
Small correction: you apparently would still have different LODs in a Nanite environment, they're just included as steps in on the detail scaling approach. Reflections also isn't solved just by going to UE5, in a Lumen environment would still put upon you the same choices (with the same positive/negative aspects) of SSRO or raytracing or whatnot to make reflections. And then, baking in lighting... phew, that seems to be a toughie with graphic technicians as far as how much Lumen can or can't handle the demands of an entire scene, but basically it's a tool and it;s a great tool but it's not the one ultimate tool which makes all other tools obsolete.
...I'd really like somebody smarter than me to come between us and say what it's like actually working with these technologies (I am not a game designer) but I think at the very least it's fair to say that the promise of UE5 solving all of the problems of game development is a little bit of salesmanship.
Last edited: