is anyone actually impressed by these supposed next gene graphics? I wouldn't mind source 2 graphics with more imaginative visuals instead
is anyone actually impressed by these supposed next gene graphics?
is anyone actually impressed by these supposed next gene graphics? I wouldn't mind source 2 graphics with more imaginative visuals instead
disgusting
Dude stop playing game
Chasing realism is only going to get you so far. Just make it fun and make it smooth
and no matter what techno mumbo jumbo they use, the result still looks uncanny, blurry, smeared, plastic, foggy, the npc always look like walking mannequins
leaning towards hyperrealism is not feasible so why do they keep doing it?
something bugs me about faces nowadays
It's impressive, but I play games to escape reality. Why the frick would I willingly put myself into another dimension of depression when reality already sucks so hard and future is grim? I swear "artists" are just copy pasting reality, which is actually a cheap art. What the frick happened to imagination and art style, offering different worlds and universes to people?
Commercials
>ew wtf
E3, SGF, Gamsecom
>frick yeah 3h of commercials
>but I play games to escape reality
This
Fricking normalhomosexuals want realism because they can't cope with things that aren't their boring normalhomosexual reality
city skylines 2 is going to look like this
Not really no.
I unironically find oldschool, handcrafted + phototextures direct-rendering engine games more appealing. And kinda more "realistic" to boot.
that looks kino, that's literally all I'd ever need if I want a drab cityscape
all this extra power should be used on interactivity instead
is that The Getaway? excellent taste.
The Getaway was a miracle of the Universe
It's technically impressive but its no longer necessary, graphics are no longer the main hurdle when it comes to making good games.
lil bit
that looks good but I don't know if all the super duper lighting calculations and virtual geometry are necessary for rendering boxes that you could slap photo textures on, see google maps
that's nice, except this is all real-time hardware-lumen/nanite (RT global illumination/ambient/shadows) and near-perfect geometry LOD
that's nice except I don't give a frick about anything other than what I experience when playing the game
i feel ya, graphics aren't everything, just a graphics prostitute bawdting out
I feel like you could get that pic without relying on super duper real time rendering methods and it's not like that scene looks like it needs to be interactive
the whole point of this "super-duper real time rendering methonds" was to take CGI rending methods (Toy Story/FF:spirit within/Pixar/Dreamworks) that took render farms to render a single frame for 1 frame of 23 and we can that locally at 4k/60fps
just bake the lighting no one notices when you're doing static shit anyway and it's not like you can have interactive shit when you need to recompute the BVH if you change the environment
There are a lot of dynamic moving light sources and reflective objects in CP2077 though so it does benefit enormously from path tracing in a lot of areas.
game looks like plastic
Only without path tracing.
I hate how smeared and blurry everything is because they have to render games at 240p and upscale using ten different dogshit filters and then they love using hazy fog on top of that
I don't care how realistic the lighting is I want the game to look good
Go look at the DLSS 3.5 demo video. All of the pathtracing is now ultra sharp and detailed because they got rid of the denoisers and use an AI ray insertion process instead.
you're still running games at 1080p -> 4k (or worse) and it still looks blurry
2K to 4K on quality mode.
yeah well I prefer looking at old ass games run at high resolutions
DLSS is great at 4k. at 1440p I find the internal resolution to be too low (quality at 1440 is like 960p render, which is lower than performance mode at 4k.
>motion blur: OFF
>depth of field: OFF
>gaytracing: OFF
>upscaling: OFF
>anti-aliasing: OFF
Yep, it's gaming time.
>graphics: OFF
>kino: ON
Everyone knows video games went to shit the moment you could see what was happening.
You're thinking of FS2020, but most big cities are handcrafted
seriously it's beyond me why games focus on being as blurry and hazy as possible instead of looking goog like in that image
I'd take that clarity over scientifically accurate lighting any day
Last update on handcrafted cities dropped like 3 days ago
Everytime I see repeating texture tiles on a surface, I immediatly remember it's a video game and it's all fake.
It's annoying and especially visible on buildings.
ready for Alan Wake 2, 2nd AAA that has full path traced rendering.
muh neon lights and haze
>EGS exclusive
Dead game.
Getaway 3 mogged this nearly 20 years ago.
wet dream is snoy coming out with a PS5 getaway that has a 1:1 London like it's Test Drive meet's Guy Ritchie
London in 2002 and London today are quite different. It's become boring. Greater London is half ultra sanitized (except for the prolapsed anuses) half Islamabad. The ethnic Anglo crime scene depicted in the first game has essentially disappeared.
Yes. I'm not too impressed at how they've been utilized so far but the technology is impressive. Source 2 has the same advanced next gen graphics and it looks great because of that.
>is anyone actually impressed by these supposed next gene graphics? I wouldn't mind source 2 graphics with more imaginative visuals instead
It's the fact that all of the high-quality lighting is actually being calculated in real-time instead of being baked (pre-rendered into the textures during development) as games traditionally used to do in previous generations.
but if it doesn't change anything to the end user except tank the performance, it's shit
Day/night cycles, destructible environments, movable objects, etc.
day/night cycles aren't new, destructible environments are extremely limited still because you need to recalculate the BVH if you do that
it's not like you need lights flying around your scene randomly at mach 5 for no reason for your average game when you think about it
All things we had in games in the very early 2000's.
but all of these were better in the past?
I haven't been impressed by graphics in over a decade. What is impressive however is how fricking garbage UE5 runs despite barely looking better then UE4, now i finally get the hate for unreal.
Before, the most common way to get global illumination would be to fake it by literally pre-rendering (or "baking") the lighting into the textures. The downside with this technique means that affected objects had to be static or else it would ruin the illusion. Sadly this means developers would have to choose between interactivity/destructibility or lighting.
Now with UE5's Lumen and other RT-based realtime lighting systems, there no longer has to be any compromise between the two.
yeah bullshit even botw has decent ambient lighting by using probes
who the frick cares when in-game this would look no different than the dynamic lighting we've had in games for over two decades, and at a fraction of the performance cost.
>Look guys after 30 years we have dynamic lights
>Don't actually use it for anything
Hand-placed lighting will always look nicer.
Here's a video that goes into depth about Lumen, it's pretty cool:
>bro we literally hecking calculate the light path against voxels/distance fields/screenspace/geometry based on if it's offscreen or not
yawn
We need to go back
Graphics peaked in 2006 with crysis and the only thing that changed is the removal of gameplay mechanics, lighting, dedicated servers and addition of shitty looking npc characters.
No. Because the things that actually matter (gameplay, AI, sound, interactvity) are still archaic as shit. Also, these open world games always have the same doll-like NPCs that do nothing, the same shitty structure and the same movieset environments. It's embarrassing when Zelda addresses these issues on an old tablet device. FPS games are all the fricking same, too, and haven't improved beyond Halo in 2001. Still, there's some hope of things actually evolving, with VR and and the new AI shit.
I'm way more impressed with stuff like some of the 'impossible' ports on Switch, or Series S packing so much grunt for such a small, cheap console. Remember when you could run through the frozen water in Blinx? That type of shit still wows me even today.
Huge difference between traditional rasterized lighting and real-time path tracing (aka "Overdrive") as we see in CP2077.
In the rasterized scene here, his boots are not casting any shadows, the bottom of her opaque coat is not blocking the pink light from her thighs as it should, the light is going through his head to reach the right side of his hat, her left ear is also being lit by the pink light for some reason as if her head is transparent and the trays next to his boots are not casting any shadows whatsoever.
both look like peak goyslop
It really makes the world blend together much better so the characters don't look out of place like they're floating on top of the environment.
Modern games have a readability issue because of people trying make stuff "blend together". It's unnecessarily difficult to tell who or what you can interact with in modern games. It's why modern games have ugly yellow paint swatches on parkourable bits and so on.
dogshit on both left and right
pleasing to look at
I hate this trend of people trying to compare games with raytracing on/off and pretending that with raytracing off is how all games used to look. Rasterized lighting doesn't look that bad in any game designed for it.
I'm impressed, but TAA makes modern graphics looks super disgusting in ways I think not even the good old FXAA didn't. I'd rather see 480p integer on my 4K tv than res scaling fake 4K with TAA, and I mean it. Emulating old consoles with their native res looking sharper than modern shit with TAA is a serious blunder.
They really need to sort that shit out. I think you're better off cutting on RT and geometry by a lot to make room to increase resolutions and use a better AA solution that's not fricking temporal.
Also good graphics will never replace good art direction.
Only a few games went the lenght to make truly next-gen games
>I wouldn't mind source 2 graphics
Source 2 doesn't support realtime GI IIRC.
real time GI is a gimmick, you just need some barebone approximation and you're set
just get rid of depth of field, what my eyes focus on shouldn't be blurry
Just get rid of your eyes then, its a natural ocurrence
the game doesn't know what's in my peripheral vision, I can stare at the blurry parts because the game decides what's in focus and what's not, in real life it's my peripheral vision that blurs
That's like, what the user who took the screenshot wanted, if you didn't want that you wouldn't take that photo in that way.
You could always play it on vr mode too so you focus on what you want
yeah I don't use depth of field just because it doesn't know what I want to look at so it's just better to have no depth of field, VR would fix it
Yay, even more bloated budgets.
doom eternal had like pixel sized polygons without nanite, modern hardware is just powerful enough to render so dense geometry that you're no longer limited
I was hoping graphics would stop advancing at PS2 eras and video game worlds worlds would start being immersive. I mean just look at all those buildings, they are nothing more than empty shells that take up space. All those NPCs walking around are going to walk forever, they have no destination, they have no purpose. There really is nothing going on here. This is the way open worlds have been for a long time.
I'm impressed by nice graphics. I think it's cool the devs are pushing the tech and their ambition.
However, I don't need or want these kinds of graphics in my GAMES. Games should look like games. The graphics need to serve the gameplay, and ideally not distract from the experience. When the priorities are wrong, you get pretty-looking non-interactive dioramas like the matrix demo. Developers need to concern themselves with what kind of experience they are giving players. Like - what's the point of making this a game vs a movie or piece of art?
Pep in step.