Support NeoGAF

[Pagusas]

We've seen impressive UE5 conversions. This is not one of them.

 

[ahtlas7]

Textures, textures everywhere but I all want to see is a physically interactive world.

 

[Grildon Tundy]

Infinite looks better

You'll have to take my word on this, but I'm being sincere and not trying to incite a flame war when I ask: Is this bait? Because, to my eyes, Infinite overall does not look this good, and if others think otherwise, I think I might be literally going crazy.

Anyone?

 

[IntentionalPun]

It'd be more impressive if they remade Unreal Engine 5 inside of Halo.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

Looks like shit and yes Halo Infinite looks better. People need to stop spamming shit on UE5 and start making games instead.

The only thing that looks better in Halo Infinite is the model and proportions of the gun and the animation (and even that isn't great in Infinite).

The volumetric lighting in this demo + the high-resolution textures + seeming PBR materials, all look three steps ahead of Halo Infinite. One of Halo Infinite's real weaknesses is the lighting, and in that vein, this demo is superior without question.

 

[Myths]

Dislike the brown fog density

 

[Bo_Hazem]

The only thing that looks better in Halo Infinite is the model and proportions of the gun and the animation (and even that isn't great in Infinite).

The volumetric lighting in this demo + the high-resolution textures + seeming PBR materials, all look three steps ahead of Halo Infinite. One of Halo Infinite's real weaknesses is the lighting, and in that vein, this demo is superior without question.

This looking worse than Halo Infinite doesn't mean Halo Infinite doesn't look like garbage either though.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

This looking worse than Halo Infinite doesn't mean Halo Infinite doesn't look like garbage either though.

I didn't say that either.

Halo Infinite looks like a competent-looking last generation open-world game. Artistically, it isn't bad, just inconsistent, but it does very little notable in terms of the rendering technology, and issues like the flatness of the lighting and very poor particle VFX drag down the overall presentation quite a bit.

This demo's volumetric lighting makes everything in the scene pop, in a way that Halo Infinite's doesn't. It's a testament to how much of a difference really good lighting makes to the overall visual presentation of a game.

An example of an open-world game with great lighting that I'd argue is comparable to this demo in terms of visual quality, is RDR2. It's a similar level of high-quality radiosity that seemed to be present in the original Slipspace Engine demo released by 343i but apparently never made it into the final game. Which is a shame, especially for the XSX and PC versions.

 

[VFXVeteran]

I didn't say that either.

Halo Infinite looks like a competent-looking last generation open-world game. Artistically, it isn't bad, just inconsistent, but it does very little notable in terms of the rendering technology, and issues like the flatness of the lighting and very poor particle VFX drag down the overall presentation quite a bit.

This demo's volumetric lighting makes everything in the scene pop, in a way that Halo Infinite's doesn't. It's a testament to how much of a difference really good lighting makes to the overall visual presentation of a game.

An example of an open-world game with great lighting that I'd argue is comparable to this demo in terms of visual quality, is RDR2. It's a similar level of high-quality radiosity that seemed to be present in the original Slipspace Engine demo released by 343i but apparently never made it into the final game. Which is a shame, especially for the XSX and PC versions.

That can be said about both platforms. Only full RT featured games can boast this (which isn't that many).

 

[abacab driver]

I mean yeah. With considerably less content than even halo 3, but sure. Infinite is technically a game

And all it took was twice the time of the usual halo release. Weird.

Now that you got those unrelated feels off your chest, ask yourself; how long would it take these guys to make an actual game, much less a Halo game? Spoilers: they can't.

 

[niilokin]

only game that needs UE5 treatment right now is fucking new UNREAL TOURNAMENT!

 

[peronmls]

Something is off about that Assault Rifle

UE lighting still makes things look like plastic or appear to have a wax coding on them.

 

[CuteFaceJay]

Infinite looks a lot better IMO. Infinite is actually a really good looking game despite all the hate it gets. I’ve played a lot of next gen games and still think it’s near the top. I just really like the way it looks and performs overall

Should bloody so given how unfinished it is.

 

[Batiman]

Should bloody so given how unfinished it is.

Unfinished or not. It’s got a lot more content than most AAA games. So I’m not sure where that argument comes from. The campaign alone has more content than most single player games. That’s not even considering the MP. I’ve put more than 100 hours into this game while something like TLOU2 gave me 10-12. Which came with no MP and has me waiting for it ever since

 

[ResetEraVetVIP]

biggest problem of halo infinite that it only looks good or rather looks how it is supposed to look like at brute force, native 4k (yes, not even 1440p saves this one). and only series x runs the game at 4k/60 fps. playing @120 fps mode brings the resolution to 1080p-levels and game quickly becomes a blur show, to a point where the game looks ... really hideous.

only people who played infinite @4k on sx or pc (if they have capable hardware, which is rare, because for 4k/60 fps, it needs a 3060ti) can actually appreciate halo infinite's graphics for what it is. even then, as others said, its not particularly a "showcase", but it really looks gorgeous in that setting. especially their GI.

as a person who saw the difference between 1440p and 4K on that game first hand, its really saddening how much the resolution can impact the overall image quality of this game. Simply put: Their temporal anti aliasing implementation is horrible and needs a high, brute force pixel count.

here is an example,

https://imgsli.com/MTA4NjI2

foliage looks muddy and ugly. @4k they actually look decent.
even the accessory on weapon looks more realistic and detailed @4k and looks like a lastgen asset @1440p
majority of valuable texture detail is erased @1440p pixel input. you can observe the effect on the assets that are on the background

another comparison,

https://imgsli.com/MTA4NjMx

specifically note that foliage looks particularly bad at anything below 4k. and since the game has a lot of foliage, most will people think that the game just looks bad. also notice how bad rocks look @1440p.

wish it wasn't this way. their TAA is pretty bad. nothing can be done about it aside from them improving it themselves. or maybe fsr 2.0. or dlss. or something.

Yeah It looks awesome at 4k120fps Ive played it on my 3080 with a LG C1.

 

[supernova8]

There are so few games to be excited about that GAF has become a dumping ground for "woah [insert game] remade in Unreal Engine 5!".

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

That can be said about both platforms. Only full RT featured games can boast this (which isn't that many).

I don't share this view.

Lumen doesn't use RT, but it's a very sophisticated approximation that produces astonishing results.

Also, no game uses "full RT", i.e. full Monte Carlo path-tracing. Even current RT implementations are limited to visual features like reflections, sub-surface scattering and soft-shadowing/AO.

The best static baked lighting solutions, as well as dynamic approximations like SVOGI and other voxel or cone-tracing lighting solutions, can produce respectable enough results.

Full RT'd lighting or even more, aggressive RT GI and full RT'd shadowing just isn't possible with current hardware and the costs aren't even worth it considering what approximate solutions like Lumen can achieve.

Imho, too many folks like to wank over current hybrid RT implementations that they fail to notice that the actual visual benefits are so subtle as to be barely noticeable; especially so in fast-paced games.

 

[grfunkulus]

Yeah It looks awesome at 4k120fps Ive played it on my 3080 with a LG C1.

3080 does get 4k120 even in multiplayer...must be using dynamic resolution (the game's minimum fps mode)

 

[SoloKingRobert]

The Halo version in Dreams is like having a sezure with the amount of Motion Blur.

 

[Vognerful]

I tried the demo and it's a mixed bag.
There are several things it does really bad, for example the camera axis is all wrong. It also makes terrible use of film grain, chromatic aberration, lens flares and a disgustingly bad motion blur.
Disabling all this crap, makes the demo sharper and much better to appreciate the detail.

I see some people are saying the demo looks bad. Probably because they are watching a youtube video, at 1080p, with the issues of video compression.
Most didn't even try the demo for themselves. And much less, with settings to disable film grain, chromatic aberration, lens flares and motion blur.
So here are some screenshots with all that crap disabled, so people can take a better look at what the demo really has to offer.

pulling great work

 

[DeepEnigma]

Wish.com Halo assault rifle.

 

[MrTroubleMaker]

When is the cheap crap camera simulation going to end.

 

[Vognerful]

This looking worse than Halo Infinite doesn't mean Halo Infinite doesn't look like garbage either though.

 

[tommib]

Infinite looks so much better and with an actual art direction.

 

[VFXVeteran]

I don't share this view.

Lumen doesn't use RT, but it's a very sophisticated approximation that produces astonishing results.

Lumen can use RT. It's optional.

Also, no game uses "full RT", i.e. full Monte Carlo path-tracing. Even current RT implementations are limited to visual features like reflections, sub-surface scattering and soft-shadowing/AO.

When I say full RT, I'm talking about all the areas (shadows, ambient occlusion, GI, reflections, refractions, volume FX, etc..) that can use RT - not Path tracing. Each of the added implementations cost ms in the render. That's why we don't see all of the features available at once on the consoles (with the sole exception being Metro but that uses very low sample numbers).

The best static baked lighting solutions, as well as dynamic approximations like SVOGI and other voxel or cone-tracing lighting solutions, can produce respectable enough results.

Any 2D screenspace trick can have "respectable" results but that's not good enough for pushing visuals further. When you start introducing more dynamics into a scene, you're going to run into a lot of problems using 2D screenspace techniques - which is why companies are moving to RT.

Full RT'd lighting or even more, aggressive RT GI and full RT'd shadowing just isn't possible with current hardware and the costs aren't even worth it considering what approximate solutions like Lumen can achieve.

Approximating a lighting solution using worldspace spheres of baked lighting has way too many problems and doesn't yield good results. Consider ambient occlusion (dynamic) of any object that's already in shadow. Light probes isn't enough to add contact shadows. Also consider shadow-casting light sources that need to pick up fine details of an object like foliage or hair. To get that kind of precision requires enormously big shadow maps. Not practical at all.

Imho, too many folks like to wank over current hybrid RT implementations that they fail to notice that the actual visual benefits are so subtle as to be barely noticeable; especially so in fast-paced games.

It's all about realism. Games now using nothing but a 2D screenspace pipeline just don't look convincing enough. Memory is a big problem, and bandwidth is also a problem. Using analytical 3D algorithms (i.e. RT) will always save the day and avoid massive memory usage.

 

[DR3AM]

Every time is see UE5 these days, its looking less and less impressive.

 

[Dibils2k]

Every time is see UE5 these days, its looking less and less impressive.

Almost as if you are looking at content made by hobbyist and not AAA developers who have years of experience and resources

 

[ResilientBanana]

One man vs 1000 developers?

This whole demo is a mere fraction of what Halo Infinite is. Sure, it looks pretty, but it's empty, small, with no enemies, animations, missions, weapons and, simply put, content.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

Lumen can use RT. It's optional.


When I say full RT, I'm talking about all the areas (shadows, ambient occlusion, GI, reflections, refractions, volume FX, etc..) that can use RT - not Path tracing. Each of the added implementations cost ms in the render. That's why we don't see all of the features available at once on the consoles (with the sole exception being Metro but that uses very low sample numbers).


Any 2D screenspace trick can have "respectable" results but that's not good enough for pushing visuals further. When you start introducing more dynamics into a scene, you're going to run into a lot of problems using 2D screenspace techniques - which is why companies are moving to RT.


Approximating a lighting solution using worldspace spheres of baked lighting has way too many problems and doesn't yield good results. Consider ambient occlusion (dynamic) of any object that's already in shadow. Light probes isn't enough to add contact shadows. Also consider shadow-casting light sources that need to pick up fine details of an object like foliage or hair. To get that kind of precision requires enormously big shadow maps. Not practical at all.


It's all about realism. Games now using nothing but a 2D screenspace pipeline just don't look convincing enough. Memory is a big problem, and bandwidth is also a problem. Using analytical 3D algorithms (i.e. RT) will always save the day and avoid massive memory usage.

As with everything there is a trade-off between physical accuracy, aesthetic quality (the two aren't actually equivalent) and performance cost.

Currently, the collection of RT techniques you describe is altogether too expensive for current-gen hardware. So approximate solutions, however less accurate, are relied upon to produce overall visuals that are both aesthetically pleasing as well as performant. They may break down in some certain edge cases, but that's the compromise devs will continue to have to make.

I agree that where RT features might make more sense, is in cases where a number of approximate solutions are used in place of a simple RT feature that while costly, isn't that much more costly than the combination of approximations that comprise the alternative. Fundamentally, as we move forward into the future, this dilemma will become more and more common across the rendering pipeline, where using RT with reasonable sample rates and AI denoising makes more sense that a bunch of expensive hacks.

Currently, however, in the short term, we just aren't there yet. So RT features at the quality level achievable by current-gen console hardware, broadly speaking aren't worth it for the minor visual benefit they offer.

 

[abacab driver]

Gaf: The forum were the Hellblade 2 gameplay "wasn't real gameplay" but some random dude's mock Zeta level mAdE hAlO aLmOst GoOder tHaN 343 DiD!

 

[bentanchorbolt]

Yeah. That fucker doesn't have 60 bullets in the clip.

It's not a clip. It's a magazine.

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

It's not a clip. It's a magazine.

 

[Barakov]

It's not a clip. It's a magazine.

The point stands.

 

[bentanchorbolt]

The point stands.

Aye

 

[nemiroff]

I'm sorry to say that looks like trash.

 

[ResetEraVetVIP]

3080 does get 4k120 even in multiplayer...must be using dynamic resolution (the game's minimum fps mode)

Nope native 4K.

 

[grfunkulus]

Nope native 4K.

Bullshit. You definitely have MINIMUM FRAMERATE option checked and just have no idea what you're talking about. There are parts in the below video where it drops to 120fps with a 3080ti and a 12900k with a minimum framerate option of 120 checked, a fact that people in the comments pointed out as not representative of '4k' because he's using resolution scaling. At native 4k, the min framerate would've been MUCH lower. Do you have a 12900k too? It doesn't matter. If a 3080ti and a 12900k isn't powerful enough to get the result you're claiming, then a 3080 plus whatever you're running ain't doing native 4k120 in multiplayer consistently, much less campaign. Here's another video nearer launch (second link below) with averages in the 60s and 70s at native 4k. Granted there has been optimization since then and he's running ultra settings but neither of those accounts for a twofold increase in framerate. This is obvious man. I have a Strix 3080 and a great cooling solution so I know you're just making this up.

 

[DrumNBassDanTTV]

What's wrong with the PC graphic of halo infinte?

Nothing.

 

[Three]

You'll have to take my word on this, but I'm being sincere and not trying to incite a flame war when I ask: Is this bait? Because, to my eyes, Infinite overall does not look this good, and if others think otherwise, I think I might be literally going crazy.

Anyone?

This certainly looks better graphically but artistically I think it's lacking and not recreated faithfully.

 

[Grildon Tundy]

This certainly looks better graphically but artistically I think it's lacking and not recreated faithfully.

That makes sense. I was thinking in terms of it approximating reality and maybe they were thinking aesthetically.

 

[01011001]

like most of these "XXXX recreated in Unreal Engine" this looks like absolute shit. no sense of artstyle, overpowering effects blinding you from every side and the general feel of assets being plunked down without much care.

I don't expect any person to actually put a lot of work in such a little project they do just for fun, but god damn games media has to fucking top writing and making videos about every single ugly one of these...

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

Nope native 4K.

And not 120fps

 

[ResetEraVetVIP]

Bullshit. You definitely have MINIMUM FRAMERATE option checked and just have no idea what you're talking about. There are parts in the below video where it drops to 120fps with a 3080ti and a 12900k with a minimum framerate option of 120 checked, a fact that people in the comments pointed out as not representative of '4k' because he's using resolution scaling. At native 4k, the min framerate would've been MUCH lower. Do you have a 12900k too? It doesn't matter. If a 3080ti and a 12900k isn't powerful enough to get the result you're claiming, then a 3080 plus whatever you're running ain't doing native 4k120 in multiplayer consistently, much less campaign. Here's another video nearer launch (second link below) with averages in the 60s and 70s at native 4k. Granted there has been optimization since then and he's running ultra settings but neither of those accounts for a twofold increase in framerate. This is obvious man. I have a Strix 3080 and a great cooling solution so I know you're just making this up.

I literally played it at native 4k120fps…it would drop to 110, 115 on average…minimum framrate set to 120 and max set to 120…ultra everything.

 

[grfunkulus]

I literally played it at native 4k120fps…it would drop to 110, 115 on average…minimum framrate set to 120 and max set to 120…ultra everything.

Dude. Minimum framerate = dynamic resolution. How is this hard??

 

[ResetEraVetVIP]

Dude. Minimum framerate = dynamic resolution. How is this hard??

The issue is I’ve never noticed a change in resolution or anything else lol and I can pick it up easily but you’re correct in the minimum framerate option.

 

[yamaci17]

The issue is I’ve never noticed a change in resolution or anything else lol and I can pick it up easily but you’re correct in the minimum framerate option.

that's because halo infinite continus to render native LODs regardless of the internal resolution at 4K

Imgsli

you can see here that 4K+%50 res. scaling looks vastly better than native 1080p. so even if your resolution drops dynamically to 1080p (not that i say it does for you), LODs, post process effects and assets will still be rendered at raw 4K, hence the image quality will still be decent