Support NeoGAF

[Self]

We've already seen RT on Minecraft running on an SX at WAY higher quality than anything else on the consoles.

Using Minecraft as an example of 'high quality' should be considered a crime against humanity.

 

[tryDEATH]

nah,dont give this poor soul any attention,he is clearly butthurt,just ignore the poor dude,as i said before any mod can pm and i will give him the receipts

Your the one with the warning title about being a troll and looks like you are going back to the trolling.

 

[Hunnybun]

Using Minecraft as an example of 'high quality' should be considered a crime against humanity.

It was path traced ffs! That's pretty high quality.

 

[v_iHuGi]

Using Minecraft as an example of 'high quality' should be considered a crime against humanity.

1080p and barely hitting 30fps too. Path Tracing is 10 years away from AAA games.

 

[v_iHuGi]

It’s a night and day difference too

Ghost of Tsushima looks so much better than Infamous SS

The leap from Uncharted to TLOU2 isn’t as big, but it’s still very much present. And UC4 was more of a “mid gen” game anyhow

I think it’s delusional to think we won’t see much better looking games than what we see in the launch window

GoT looks a Generation ahead of Infamous SS no doubt, devs have acess to new SDKs and lower level Apis as the Generation goes, plus better optimization techniques etc.

That´s why early gen games look like dog poop compared to late Gen Games.

 

[01011001]

1080p and barely hitting 30fps too. Path Tracing is 10 years away from AAA games.

at ran at around 45fps on Series X at 1080p after only a few weeks of development to implement pathtracing and porting it over

Using Minecraft as an example of 'high quality' should be considered a crime against humanity.

well it's great to know to dismiss anything you will ever say about graphics technology from this point forward. since you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Lethal01]

I said you won't see more performance and/or features at 0 cost.

Better performance at no or totally indistinguishable cost is something that constantly happens in software when you are working with it for 7 years.

I said you won't see more performance and/or features at 0 cost. The fact that you guys can't really come up with several examples from last gen means it's just a wishful dream you have. You HOPE that you'll get more RT features than what's being shown now. You HOPE that you'll get faster FPS at higher resolutions, etc..

No hope needed, look at any game engine update log and you will see constant patches saying things like "30% more in (X feature)", or often specifically "(X Feature) now runs up to 2x faster on (Y platform) with lower memory utilization"

People probably just think it's to obvious to waste time checking themselves and just assume they are right. This could be dangerous and lead to them regurgitating nonsense in cases, luckily in this case it is that obvious.

Maybe he's a dev.. but the way he talks, you would think he might be a dev of some other job.

This is just funny to see you type after hearing you people to, (Paraphrasing)"attack my logic, but trying to downplay/question my qualifications is really low)

 

[Self]

well it's great to know to dismiss anything you will ever say about graphics technology from this point forward. since you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

Yeah, see you again when Pong gets the raytracing treatment.

 

[VFXVeteran]

Better performance at no or totally indistinguishable cost is something that constantly happens in software when you are working with it for 7 years.

We are talking consoles here. You have never seen a game have higher for after a patch due to performance except subpar performance.

No hope needed, look at any game engine update log and you will see constant patches saying things like "30% more in (X feature)", or often specifically "(X Feature) now runs up to 2x faster on (Y platform) with lower memory utilization"

Again you speaking about a PC that always undergoes optimization because of it's open architecture. Not the same comparison with consoles that are fixed.

This is just funny to see you type after hearing you people to, (Paraphrasing)"attack my logic, but trying to downplay/question my qualifications is really low)

Because I don't believe he is the proper developer for this context otherwise he would ha e stated it.

People know my qualifications and still knock it as if I don't know shit..and they arent developers themselves. That's a complete and utter disrespect just because it's me. Not the same situation.

 

[Evilms]

Relax, it's just for laughs.

A little humour won't hurt.

 

[sinnergy]

It was path traced ffs! That's pretty high quality.

Yup, better than what we have seen until now on PS5 and most Xbox Series X games, if the devs are believed this implementation can also run on much higher polygon count games. I watched the DF videos in which they explain this.

 

[Lethal01]

We are talking consoles here. You have never seen a game have higher for after a patch due to performance except subpar performance.

First of all you seriously need to rewrite that because I'm having to guess what you are attempting to communicate.
I assume you are basically trying to say that there hasn't been a game that has gotten better performance after a patch.

Even if that were true It doesn't affect what I said at all. To keep it simple, You use engines to make games. When an engine like unreal engine or a companies internal engine gets updated with something that let's them raytrace 20% faster or use 10% less memory on particles that translates into future games having better performance than earlier ones.

 

[SlimySnake]

It’s a night and day difference too

Ghost of Tsushima looks so much better than Infamous SS

The leap from Uncharted to TLOU2 isn’t as big, but it’s still very much present. And UC4 was more of a “mid gen” game anyhow

I think it’s delusional to think we won’t see much better looking games than what we see in the launch window

I think the fact that we are seeing native 4k games to start off a gen while still providing that wow factor should be proof enough that games will look better as the devs begin to use UE5 demo's 1440p 30 fps target instead. thats more than twice the GPU power left on the table, and seeing as how no one was able to tell that the UE5 demo was 1440p until epic told DF, i think it's obvious that devs will go with 1440p as the gen progresses.

We still havent seen the CPU being utilized either. we are getting a lot of 4k 60 fps and in some cases 120 fps modes, but next gen is going to be more about destruction, interactivity and higher NPC counts/better a.i than higher framerates. When people see truly lived in cities, it will be hard to look at these cross gen launch games and say that nothing has been improved since launch.

so 2x the gpu power and perhaps more than twice the cpu power is currently being wasted on higher framerates and resolution, and that is simply not going to be the case as the gen wears on.

 

[alabtrosMyster]

In any case, even on that I'm not sure he's correct. We've already seen RT on Minecraft running on an SX at WAY higher quality than anything else on the consoles.

Wasn't it 1080p at a somewhat low frame rate?

 

[alabtrosMyster]

at ran at around 45fps on Series X at 1080p after only a few weeks of development to implement pathtracing and porting it over

Wouldn't that translate to around 12fps in 4k?


It's an interesting demo, but not encouraging for the future.

 

[VFXVeteran]

First of all you seriously need to rewrite that because I'm having to guess what you are attempting to communicate.
I assume you are basically trying to say that there hasn't been a game that has gotten better performance after a patch.

Even if that were true It doesn't affect what I said at all, You use engines to make games. When an engine like unreal engine or a companies internal engine gets updated with something that let's they raytrace 20% faster or use 10% less memory on particles that translates into future gameshaving better performance than earlier ones.

Let's just agree to disagree.

I will be looking at all of these games through a microscope and will call out any claims that people will be making as we move forward this generation. For now, everything on the console side is considered at ground zero. Let's see what new advances they make with RT and increasing performance from 4k/30 to native 4k/60.

 

[Hunnybun]

Wasn't it 1080p at a somewhat low frame rate?

That's not the point.

 

[alabtrosMyster]

That's not the point.

That's the point, at a low frame rate it doesn't show power or prowess as much as it should.

 

[Hunnybun]

That's the point, at a low frame rate it doesn't show power or prowess as much as it should.

No, the point is that the consoles don't have fixed budgets for certain features like RT.

They can do more by making trade offs, as with Minecraft in terms of resolution, frame rate, and overall fidelity.

So it stands to reason that Mr Vfx having conceded that fidelity can be improved by more efficient coding, the same fidelity would be achievable with less tax on the hardware and therefore leaving more power to spend on hardware features such as RT.

It's just not true that there's some fixed amount of (for example) RT that the consoles can leverage. It's all relative to the other work the games are doing. So therefore it's not true that the fidelity we're seeing now is something close to the maximum.

This is actually already clear just by looking at the huge difference in fidelity between Miles Morales and Ratchet & Clank, both of which use RT and run at native 4k.

 

[alabtrosMyster]

It's just not true that there's some fixed amount of (for example) RT that the consoles can leverage. It's all relative to the other work the games are doing. So therefore it's not true that the fidelity we're seeing now is something close to the maximum.

There is a set amount,and you explain why... A console's GPU/cpu (specs really) is a known quantity in therms of computing power, you can apparently move the needle around by making more efficient use of it, doing more of one thing and less of another (as you say)--that is exactly why there is a set amount of one thing that can be done at any given time.

We don't know how far or close to the maximum potential of the consoles what we have seen so far is.

 

[Hunnybun]

There is a set amount,and you explain why... A console's GPU/cpu (specs really) is a known quantity in therms of computing power, you can apparently move the needle around by making more efficient use of it, doing more of one thing and less of another (as you say)--that is exactly why there is a set amount of one thing that can be done at any given time.

We don't know how far or close to the maximum potential of the consoles what we have seen so far is.

I think we're broadly in agreement tbh.