We've obviously hit a road block in terms of graphics in these past few years. Now what?
 |
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
|
We've obviously hit a road block in terms of graphics in these past few years. Now what?
We've obviously hit a road block in terms of graphics in these past few years. Now what?
|
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
|
Now try to make an actual advancement in physics, destruction or literally anything else.
You focus on getting lighting right.
Thats the bottelneck right now. Look at mgsV. It came out 2015. And texture quality is low. Its ps3 game.
But becouse they put extra effort to Lighting. It dosent look as old as it is.
This is case when ever they focus on lighting.
Fear is another example.
Proper sound would be nice too. Not just playback from sound file. And make npc aware sound.
Raytracing will solve the lighting question pretty well once the hardware gets good enough for it. Obviously it doesn’t negate the need for artistic eye, as you need that even in real life when designing scenes for movies etc., but at least it should make the bar ridiculously low for making something that doesn’t look flat and boring.
>gaytracing
People always forget that it's not about
>le heckin hyper realistic graphix yo
but about FRICKING ARTSTYLE.
A game doesn't need to look "realistic" to look amazing, most visually impressive games are that way because they don't focus on some fricking worthless shader effects but put the emphasis on a consistent art style.
Even a game from 25 years ago can look better in my eye than some modern AAA slop with no soul and textures the size of a small server.
>proper sound
>not just playback from sound file
what the frick do you mean?
how else do you want the recorded audio files to play?
>recorded audio
How about generated audio. Instead of recorded sounds, make the physics for proper sound waves. Mad $$$ to be made!
>But becouse they put extra effort to Lighting. It dosent look as old as it is.
Are you saying Kojima was right all along?
Halo 3 is also a good example. Otherwise it has nothing that would stand out today graphically, and some parts of it like character models were ugly as frick even on release. But they put their effort in lighting, and thus especially the outdoor areas still feel nice to look at, despite the game being 17 years old.
>advancement in physics, destruction
I'm down with this. Funny enough, RDR2 is still ahead of every game in those departments too.
>Funny enough, RDR2 is still ahead of every game in those departments too
it can't even match skyrim with ENB
Lmao frick off Todd. Go back to sucking Rockstar wiener.
bot post
bot post
>ray tracing. The pro
have a nice day dishonest homosexual
first 2 are fine already
+ more dynamic npc behavior like a mix of hitman and bg3
for reference skyrim with ENB allows it to have grass lighting, shadows, tree LOD lighting, dynamic cubemaps and much more
all of these are missing from the product of a billion dollar developer like Rockstar
then you get down to details like ground collision or even something as basic as footsteps on mud
all these things were present in crysis back in 2007 without any mods btw
>it's got good physics because... funny rockstar ragdolls
moron
I'll wait for you to know something better than Euphoria physics. You can't but I will wait. No other dev has their own unique physics system on top of their in-game engine system.
doesn't even support dismemberment when even GTA3 had it
It does have dismemberment, it's just weirdly selectively applied. You can only do it to the gang member NPCs, and there's also weird shit like certain dismemberments proccing more on low honor than high honor or dumb shit like that.
>use cheats to give yourself infinite molotovs and dynamite sticks
>throw them everywhere in a forest or in a city
>NOTHING breaks
>nothing catches on fire
>you just see an explosion special effect and people dying
>no dismemberment either
>fire doesn't spread
yeah Rockstar has some really delusional "fans" with no standards
GTA6 will come and it will have its own gaggle of morons trying to call it revolutionary when it will end up being just as dumbed down.
reminds me of witcher 3, another proof of normaltard insanity. I felt like I was trying to understand the mind of a schizophrenic. What the frick makes RDR2 and Witcher 3 good games? Fricking NOTHING. Literally more boring than GTA SA. The police is psychic. Use cheats and you'll notice how cops spawn behind you like overpowered anime superheroes. Even if you use that cheat code that turns your piston into a cannon you can't keep up with how many cops are spawning. They spawn constantly.
There's no art in making game engines anymore either so don't tell me "muh graphix". These incompetent devs just google "how to implement <graphics thing> stack overflow" and shit up some badly optimized code in a few hours then get back to cucking, fricking, sucking and shit testing each other
cry about it
thanks for giving me attention, slave
Genuine brainrot, rdr 2 has dismemberment you fricking incel
RDR2 doesn't really have anything complex going on with regards of destruction and physics simulations.
A lot of the really cool shit that would go on PHYSICS threads aren't actually like, simulated stuff, they're basically numerous amount of bespoke interactions manually added by rockstar. It's still very impressive, don't get me wrong, but it's moreso a product of a tremendous amount of manual effort on the devs, rather than RAGE magically doing everything for them. Like, say, an example on the top of my head is the bit where you bomb that bridge late game, or all the big fight around the rubble with all the explosions in guarma. That shit looks fricking great, but that's a canned animation. It's not like, say in Just Cause, or Red Faction, where you're dynamically blowing the thing up.
>grass lighting, shadows, tree LOD lighting, dynamic cubemaps
The only thing missing from RDR2 in this is grass lighting I'm pretty sure. They even have a jank, screen space based solution for distant tree shadows hitting the ground. It's pretty jank, you can see it shimmer on the edge of the screen, but it's there.
>then you get down to details like ground collision or even something as basic as footsteps on mud
Short of I wanna say, the Decima Engine games, R* probably has the best implementation of this too. Both on the decal end and the whole mudrunners style, warping end. Like, look at the Bayou, or the mud in Valentine, for example.
what the frick is this?
>that fricking skybox
am I being gaslit right now or do you just have 0 standards?
That's not a skybox? What are you talking about?
That's the game geometry. And you were talking about tree LOD shadows, that's what I was highlighting, It's a low res, janky screen space solution, since the game's made for 8th gen consoles, but it's there.
>That's not a skybox
no fricking shit
The skybox is an entirely separate beast on its own
those LODs are worse than the original far cry
They are so bad you can't even call them LODs anymore
????
>skybox
Can you blow up a house?
can blow an 'orse
The next big breakthrough is unironically ray tracing. The problem is the hardware is not there yet.
We've pretty much peaked in terms of geometry and materials. All that is left is lighting. We're pretty much at the point where we're seeing the limits of baked lighting, at least without super bespoke work of tailoring the lighting manually for every scene in a cutscene like you would in film. And the way to fix that is unironically getting real time RT to work right. Full RT at least, like having every light in any scene actually be phyisically rendered, not just piece-meal shit like RT reflections or RT postprocesseing like RTAO and the like.
After that, actually getting proper, real time physics to work with no shortcuts, as said will probably be the next threshold, but as far as the AAA market is still focused on narratively driven, theme park experiences rather than real sandbox experiences, I don't think the shift'll happen.
ray tracing is a meme
Ray tracing is literally just accurate lighting. RTX is a meme.
Nvidia basically shot themselves in the foot by initially selling ray tracing as shitty gimmicks like reflections and postprocessed overlays instead of doing it for real like what Cyberpunk does with Path Tracing.
Now, laymen will consider ray tracing as a whole as shitty gimmicks that eat up half your FPS for fancy reflections or marginally better AO instead of it being an accurate, albeit expensive, simulation of how light works.
>we've obviously hit a ro-ACK!
Now try playing RDR2 at a resolution above 660p and look at things closely. Even on totally maxed out settings, texture quality on anything that isn't a character is complete fricking shit. Irredeemable. There are compression artifacts on book and journal pages. Trees up close look like they're from Oblivion. Even in your zoomed out screenshot, there are visual issues like a total lack of lighting on the ground and grass, scenery textures considerably lower than even the bucket Arthur is carrying.
Every single motherfricker out there claiming some bullshit like "oooo graphics have hit a roadblock diminishing returns poopoopeepeee" is seriously blind.
Poorgay cope. Raytracing is not just lighting. There's a reason the raytracing suite, whether an individual dev implements it all or just one or two bits, includes lighting, reflections, shadows, and even sound. Get a job so you can afford adequate hardware and you'll finally be able to stop calling it a "meme" because they're the grapes you can't reach.
>Poorgay cope. Raytracing is not just lighting. There's a reason the raytracing suite, whether an individual dev implements it all or just one or two bits, includes lighting, reflections, shadows, and even sound. Get a job so you can afford adequate hardware and you'll finally be able to stop calling it a "meme" because they're the grapes you can't reach.
Nothing I said conflicts this you fricking moron. I understand how it really works, I'm saying that Nvidia's shitty branding makes it so that dumbass who doesn't now thinks that it's all just dumb gimmicks.
I bought a 2080 Ti when they came out. I raytraced games at 4K.
I no longer bother turning it on. It's not worth the performance hit, I'd rather have a high and smooth frame rate.
Yikes. If you buy a top tier card it’s merely an investment to buy the next top tier in two years after you sell it. Now your ti isn’t worth shit lol
>lying on the internet
>I'm a moronic zoomer who thinks the stagnation of hardware requirements during the 7th console gen is how things always worked: the post
You'd piss your little panties over how Quake required buying a graphics accelerator and a better processor because buying hardware is somehow a sin. Get a job.
>redditjak
Underageb& spotted.
Guys like this will always keep gaming locked into a hardware cycle and games won't get better they'll just get flashier and guys like this will just bring up money...
Look into the eyes of your enemy here, a whale
Normies don't want those
What I've never understood about the "ultra photo realistic graphics" and "1000 individual hairs on the characters face" is that the player has zero way of actually appreciating this in most games because the camera is locked to a set distance. It legit feels like devs put time into this shit just to jack off to their own work and nothing else
I was actually pretty impressed with the destructibility of rdr2, it's nothing crazy but the way windows blow out when buildings burn, wooden features shatter from gunshots and way some sheds can literally be completely destroyed was nice
>le super realistic game
no, frick off. realism and better hardware is literally what got us to this point.
Realistic graphics did not physics
Focus on gameplay and story
>Focus on gameplay
Yes.
>... and story
No.
Now realismgays keep trying to unsuccessfully recreate nature and everyone else just copies Fortnite and Overwatch.
we go back to pixels and early 3d models
pic not related?
Hopefully we'll move on from this era where games have little to no art direction besides being realistic and we can go back to having games that are pleasant to look at and not grey soulless wastelands.
This.
We've traded artstyle for photorealism.
That actually requires vision rather then telling workers to model man or building. Or showing them man or building you want modeled.
Artistic vision and corporate culture are polar oposites.
>Now what?
We keep the same visual fidelity but the recommended specs will keep increasing.
But we've been doing that for 10 years already.
Actual physically accurate simulations of water, cloth, destructible environments, etc.
Optimizing for 60 fps. It's amazing how many devs still don't understand that this is the new industry standard.
stop making console games and we can blast past it
>campfire light shines through the tent material
Absurd lighting engine.
botw is probably the second best for neat graphical bits but the gap between these games is massive
I'm assuming this is the general grafeex thread.
I don't know what the RGG team with the dragon engine after Judgment, but all the games after that looks like shit compared to it and Y6. Everything just looks so fricking flat, it feels like they basically ripped out all the dynamic lighting and just stuck to the one sky lighting over everything.
Speaking of BOTW, I really love how TOTK handles light, especially when you're super high up.
I can't explain it, but the way the make the sky gradient look when you're on those islands makes the game look exponentially better. Shame the overworld geometry still looks like shit.
I feel the well lit scenes still look good but yeah, anything gloomy doesn't look so fly.
LAD is the worst looking DA game that they have ever released. But they probably downgraded the visuals for the then new RPG system.
Gaiden actually looks really nice most of the time, it's still not on par with Y6/Y2 but the improvement is there.
LAD:IW looks way better compared to LAD.
But yeah something has to be done here, it's like they forgot how to make dragon engine look nice but at the same time they improved the performance of the engine a lot, eh, I'm glad that they are still using their own tech, hope they don't ditch it for UE5.
Rockstar has to have some of the best engine developers and artists in the industry.
Its time that we go back.
I don't like how modern graphics look. It's fricking boring. Wow a big open field that looks just like the field 5 minutes from my house. Wow i can now spend 30 minutes walking through it so i can get to the next quest. How realistic. Why is this done? How is this interesting to anyone? Where's the game? Games spend so so much time and resources in boring shit. Yawn.
>I don't like
yawn
Just make games fun, i don't care how detailed the tree leaves are, damn. I was satisfied eith ps2/ps3 era graphics, everything after that had massive diminishing returns.
>dude who cares about using a literal supercomputer to render a realistic simulation of the real world... give me cheevos and DLCs and a like button!!!!
moronic NPC
Nice cope tendie
RDR2 is the highest quality game out there still. Guess we'll have to wait for GTAVI to take that spot away from it. Damn.
Hope for more people who can put together a good image come together.
The actual tech behind graphics continues to improve year after year but the people in charge of putting it altogether to create a good looking image are few and far between.
I firmly believe a good looking game will look good forever because looking good is more than just 8k texture, 40 billion poly models and photogrammetry it's the overall composition.
have you seen chordosis?
never heard of it.
ayylmao horror game being made by a small team
looks really good
>past few years
but Arkham Knight came out like a decade ago, anon
Knight is one of the last good AAA games, it's a work of master craftsmanship.
nuDoom was released almost decade ago and has great graphics with good optimization.
can it have more than 30 enemies in a level now?
doom2016 was my introduction to TAA and thanks to the pace of the game I thought it was just some fancy motion blur.
little did I know.
TAA is neat but it's pretty much been overtaken by DLAA at this point right? at least in terms of "economical" options. MSAA still looks better, but I consider that a bruteforce option.
Was that ever an issue with nuDoom? I feel like I've fought that much in a single room in Eternal, although I might be misremembering. Counting the mooks at least.
>TAA is neat
You misunderstand me anon.
I fricking hate TAA, I hate the blurriness, I hate the ghosting. I hate that a "make my image look worse" option is the industry standard.
Yeah, I get it, but I don't think it's going anywhere anytime soon. At least with regard to eyecandy games, there's still people who prefer that blurry, artifact-y look rather than just have pure aliasing.
It's better than FXAA I guess, but there's still a long way to go.
There is a spreading fire effect, but it's practically a decal.
as for dismemberment, another anon said, try tweaking your honor. The system is there, you can see it in the vid below. You can try using a shotty to people's heads and limbs, but it is weirdly esoteric. Or you can just mod it and have all the gore "unlocked".
>There is a spreading fire effect, but it's practically a decal.
>as for dismemberment, another anon said, try tweaking your honor.
why the frick did they censor gore if you don't have low honor? this is beyond stupid
>There is a spreading fire effect, but it's practically a decal.
it's completely lazy
games like red faction guerilla, far cry 2, half life 2, gmod, etc. had more advanced tech
who cares about a big, open, dead world
NuDoom had a 16 living entities limit. Fights could and did spawn more as enemies died but there was never more than 16 active at any time.
Don't know if they bumped the limit up for eternal.
>Was that ever an issue with nuDoom
yeah
its Snapmap was so fricking pathetic they axed it for the sequel
and even then they have to spawn in enemies in waves
more fun
more content
more immersive options
frick road-blocks! i want my fricking ue5 matrix demo graphics and i want it right goddamn now!
It's very funny how there's a number on people here who's actually trying to talk about stuff on a technical level, even if it's just surface level, digital foundry tier-stuff, and they're trying to talk to someone who can't even keep up with that.
it's very funny how moronic and pathetic you are
I FRICKING HATE LENS FLARES AND BLOOM PIECE OF SHIT
worse handling than gta vice city
Nothing wrong with bloom when implemented well. The RE engine games do a great job with it.
So that's why the water quality settings fricking tanks your FPS.
Looks ugly.
The muddy (heh) textures are noticeable but the lighting, attention to detail, animations, and scale elevate everything. Also something no one ever brings up, the games really amazing sound design. It's the sum of its parts that makes RDR2 a technical marvel.
Shell texturing is so fricking smart, especially when CDPR was so gungho on that super expensive hairworks bullshit just a couple years back.
It's so cheap too that you can port it to fricking skyrim and it doesn't even hurt performance. It's not perfect, sure but for how economical it is, it's fricking great.
I was so disappointed when I got the remastered version of Judgment for PC only for it to look like shit compared to the PS4 release. It's such a fricking shame.
It really only looks bad up close when you can notice the seam between the model and fur texture. Otherwise yeah, it looks fantastic.
>seam between model and fur texture
wuh
the Judgment remastered is not that simple a case, since the lighting in that is technically "better", with additions like a more naturalistic subsurface scattering look for the skin, and technically a more "realistic" DOF solution, for example.
The issue moreso is that the port job is haphazard, and they just seem to have just slotted all the old animations to the new system without any regard of all the manually placed lights in said scene.
Like, a lot of scenes in LJ, with the same lighting engine as remastered, but it's not missing all the shit that's missing in the remastered.
RDR2 looks like shit when you look at it for more than a few seconds.
>that grass, those shadows
>ground is a flat texture
>horrid tree rasterization
>low-res textures everywhere
now optimize performance and reduce filesize
>now gimp the visuals so they'll run on my toaster because I'm too poor for real hardware
Destiny
had a hard life
started death stranding the other day. that game looks really nice in certain shots but a lot of the terrain looks like ass up close. the far off shots are kino though.
Death Stranding does a very fricking stupid decision where they have this really great looking short grass/moss solution that is on pretty much every grassy surface when you start the game, but they slowly disappear due to the game's dynamic path system where the more you walk through the terrain, the more they flatten and form a desire path, but said path looks like fricking trash cause it's just a flat blending texture.
If they're gonna keep that system for DS2, I hope they at least make it look better
Check the squirrel above from RDR2. you can see the fuzzy artifacting and seams around where the joints are. I assume he's talking about that.
I don't want to alarm you but walking trails ARE flattened out grey/brown messes.
Yeah, but surely they can make it look better than this
I never finished RDR, I don't think I've gotten far into the story aswell. The gameplay feels like shit honestly, cumbersome and slow. Looked pretty though
Graphics gays will never be satisfied
Games will never get better as long as whales and consumers exist
I'm hyped up for native 32k@288hz + full RT. That's going to be the biggest game changer since Sony invented the Cell.
There is no roadblock. Rockstar just doesn't do annual releases.
Now we dedicate time to actually populate the game's world
You may not like it but the next step is VR. There's only so much detail you can give a frick about on a small flat screen. When it's all around you at a real life scale, suddenly you can take all the detail in at a different level. What looked boring in flat now looks mindblowing, not that I can post it on Ganker with a flat image, this image looks boring but in VR it was blowing my mind
Maybe putting the focus on decent gameplay?
20-year old games have more ideas that are better executed than most of the modern filfth.
Do you want games with good gameplay to look like shit? I'd like to have both, we used to have both back in the day
Next they’re going to inject doses of absurdity into ultra-realistic graphics. Just wait and see.
Look at that grass and tell me there isn't major room for improvement.
Also, every single tree is obviously a billboard.
Anon this is RDR2 not flipping Gran Turismo 4.
Every single one is a billboard
You mean like flat sprites? I don't think so.
Nah, the game has 3D LOD models. It's just all blurred to shit due to the game's garbage TAA solution.
Prioritize:
Writing
Gameplay
Physics
Lighting
Put on backburner:
Music
Lore/World building
Cross play
AI randomness
we've hit the flat part of the asymptote of photorealism and the next gen of consoles won't be much of a technical improvement. the AAA sector of the industry is shuttering studios left and right and laying off generations of talent that won't be replaced. as of now most of the big studios no longer have the ability to chase extreme high fidelity photorealistic graphics. 2023 was the swan song of that type of thing. expect a very dry few years in terms of AAA games.
in its place we will probably see a surge in AA games made by independent but growing studios and small teams. we're also moving fully into the revival of early 3D PSX-type graphics, which are now feasible for a solo dev to achieve, so expect a lot of retro throwbacks. personally i'd be happy to see a little 3D platformer renaissance.
i'm also not expecting any interesting peripherals or input devices to show up soon, from nintendo or anyone else. consumer VR still has quite a while to go.my prediction is that the next real graphical leap is in VR but not for another decade. still need to solve some problems re: processing power, headset design, and most importantly focal distance. until then, i look forward to some excellent AA metroidvanias, the switch 2, whatever mobius digital does next, and hopefully a thriving godot ecosystem.
There won't be a huge graphical leap in VR since they NEED to target huge framerats to combat motion sickness.