Allelulia!
UC4: Best looking gameplay? *SPOILS*
- Thread starter RenegadeRocks
- Start date
-
- Tags
- uncharted 4
- Status
Eh if anything UC4 engine is doing things far more complex on average. For starters it's rendering a metric ton more polygons per frame, more dynamic object if we convert those foliage into pure polygons, more shaders such as SSS on foliage, humans, fire, water, volumetric lights and volumetric shadow, dynamic GI from torch, much more open and sand box like environment and most of them have details packed to the teeth, way more detailed character models and much more quantity, last but not the least, much more physics based destruction. Doom aside from some occasional gpu particles, smooth motion blur and demon disembowelment I'm really not seeing anything too demanding technically. The game is poly starved to hell, quite literally.
rockaman
Regular
I was really wondering what the shader on those splash effects was. It looks really nice, I should've zoomed in more... hahaha. Love particle effects in this game. Really outstanding stuff. Quite interesting it's both transparent (translucent?) and also has a SSR effect on top 
Also on foliage subject: I think at the time of the PSX Demo in 2014, I was very worried that ND/PS4 would not be capable of outputting rich enough foliage to make it super dense like it is in final game.
The demo foliage looked overall "more dense" than last-gen of course, but it felt like it was just under the amount enough to make it really look "rich." But I think the final game, or maybe it's just other areas, really got past that mark to great degree.
Even the "stealth grass/plants" I have been impressed with. I was worried they would less dense/only as dense as PSX demo, but it looks much richer and more colourful in the final game.
Also on foliage subject: I think at the time of the PSX Demo in 2014, I was very worried that ND/PS4 would not be capable of outputting rich enough foliage to make it super dense like it is in final game.
The demo foliage looked overall "more dense" than last-gen of course, but it felt like it was just under the amount enough to make it really look "rich." But I think the final game, or maybe it's just other areas, really got past that mark to great degree.
Even the "stealth grass/plants" I have been impressed with. I was worried they would less dense/only as dense as PSX demo, but it looks much richer and more colourful in the final game.
Transparent is clear like glass and water. Translucent is having light pass through (subsurface scattering) like leaves and fabric and skin.
VFX_Veteran
Regular
I've started studying realtime in the past week (for my own leisure) and to be honest, hardware limitations is about the main difference between the two.
All realtime 3D starts with knowing 3D graphics in general. Knowing 3D graphics in general pretty much could land you any job in the industry whether film or videogames -- trust me, I've worked with people that have been hired from both fields.
Just because I don't know how to specifically create a SSR using one of the popular APIs (right now) doesn't mean I don't know the general idea from which the technique was created in the first place or how to implement the true technique.
Most of you look at my posts with contention rather than a professional who may have a valid point. If I've caused the damage here, so be it.. I'll take it. But to outright be rude and tell me things like "your opinion isn't wanted".. it pretty disrespectful. I may have my biases and I'll gladly own them, but that doesn't make me any less knowledgeable in this industry.
But like said I don't say you are incompetent but you aren't working on a realtime videogame project with performance analyser and knowing exactly what going under the hood on PS4 or Xbox One. I have two friends working on PS4 exclusives.
For example many people think best technical first party studio is Sony Santa Monica. I heard it is not the case and the most impressive first party studio is Naughty Dog pushing the hardware further. The God of war team is an artist driven team, like Quantic Dreams...
I know for sure a E3 2009 anecdote about ND where a big 3rd party studio during Sony conference repetition seeing Uncharted 2 asked to have the trailer of the game they made to be shown not on the middle big screen like UC2 but on the two little screen on each side of the big one. It is a big franchise and I can give you a little hint in 2009 trailers they did were running on consoles (360 or PS3) now it is PC or sometimes CG looking like realtime... And the trailer was in 30 fps...
Another very impressive team and probably one of the best project management schedule is Insomniac games.
And Media Molecule a very good team technically speaking, and with a medium size team can take risk and they have probably the most innovative 3d engine this gen...
Q games is impressive too and one of the programmer was one of the best CELL programmer.
In engine trailer are often non indicative of real gameplay but UC4 teaser trailer or Detroit one were running on PS4 but not at 30 or 60 fps but much much less under 10 fps for Detroit for example and it was some sort of internal target render... I have too an idea about Watchdog first trailer...
On 3rd party side I heard great things about DICE.
Edit: From his side of view the best PBR graphic pipeline is the Star Wars Battlefront one, he said to me other rendering engine are PBS based but not fully PBR, he is artist... I need to ask him what he means for more detail...
Last edited:
It's not an apples/oranges comparison... my post was for VTX Veteran : you have to consider the whole picture if you want to make a valid comparison.
The problem is that you are often wrong and you usually make unsupported claims.
For instance, you said that there are no true volumetric lights in Uncharted 4 : :
You should back up your arguments with actual data.
rockaman
Regular
I think they definitely have to be. Especially when taking the Xbone perf. deficiency into account compared to PS4.
To get those very large full screen shader and warping effects I'm sure took a lot of work from Remedy on the software engineering side, and that's on DDR3 RAM + ESRAM bandwidth, both of which are quite a bit lower than GDDR5 on PS4. And even if it's quite a bit lower resolution, it's still impressive IMO.
And I would hazard a guess that Sony gives a much larger budget to ND than MS gives to Remedy. But I think they both achieved extremely highly given each under their own circumstances.
rockaman
Regular
The only way people are taking your posts is from what content is contained within them. I think others are now asking it of you, to back up with some support of whatever you are claiming.
Similarly I asked you to bring some images from other games to support claims in what ways you feel other games look better than UC4, in one or another specific way. It would help everyone, including your own argument, to make at least somewhat of a more objective comparison with some kind of supporting evidence.
If you are leaving room for doubt in what you are saying, there is nothing wrong with people asking questions.
VFX_Veteran
Regular
Yeah, look at L-Ys post history! There are so many posts of his with actual information about the technology he uses in his profession, giving fascinating insights. He really takes time to go into detail and formulates posts that also non-professional can follow. Typically, he gives precise arguments why he likes something and why not. No wonder he is one of the most respected poster here! Hasn't much to do with the fact he works on CG, but what(!) he is posting here.
Just as an explanation for you:
Now look at your post history VX and compare...just as an example, this very thread, the last couple of pages:
You jump in, state that finally someone is telling the truth at B3D and it wasn't only you, the PS4 bias, the PS4 conspiracy, the PS4, the exclusives PS4, the PS4 free pass, the PS4, yadda yadda yadda (typically, a bunch of neogaf quotes are in, not this time), I know for a fact that UC4 looks worse no need to bring arguments, multiplats are always better, look at my 5k$ PC => I am a troll.
If you want respect, e.g. mine, than: get over neogaf, get over PS exclusives...and start Laa-Yoshian type posts, where you give us information and actually share your experience! It sounds super interesting what you are doing and imo you could be a great contributor to B3D, if you want to.
To troll or not to troll, that is the question. Decide
You make a good point.. my comments concerning games is my own personal bias and shouldn't be taken to judge my knowledge or my profession (which is entirely different). If I make a comment about lighting, it shouldn't be miscontrued as a troll opinion just because it doesn't fit the opinion of a PS4 gamer. There are many comments I've made that make sense and have several "likes" but I still get drawn into this subjective war with the PS4 gamers. We should stop and ask why isn't it with PC gamers, or even X1 gamers? Why is it always PS4 gamers?
Lastly, I can't talk about a lot of stuff I work on in depth because the tech is confidential. I got reemed from a CEO back in 2004 for just telling people when the Matrix Reloaded trailer was going to air during the Superbowl half-time.
But, I can give a hint:
I don't think anybody told you that, only that your opinion may not be as valuable to them since you frequently make bold claims about things you are often proven wrong about. And the "Ps4 gamer" crap is getting old, this isn't NeoGaf. Make arguments, present evidence, and we can have a discussion. What is there to discuss when we post (i can be part of the problem as well) "x is so much more advanced than y!" without providing anything to back that up? One example of an even comparison with evidence is what i posted some pages ago with the RotTR/QB/U4/TO comparison.
To be fair, there's many different effects in UC4 in different cases. There aren't true volumetric lights in a lot of places, so it's not hard to see no volumetric lights anywhere.
What data does one provide to show no volumetric lights in the whole of UC4? You'd need a video of the entire game. Videos of lights that aren't volumetric don't prove their absence across the entire game.
Last edited:
rockaman
Regular
I found it, the SSR cut off thing in DriveClub, I forgot I was uploading to FB long ago ^^
The reflection in the road abruptly cuts off XD
I do love the graphics in this game though ^^
You're taking it from the wrong angle. That video was simply to prove that there is sometimes volumetric lighting, which makes "none such lighting" false. The video doesn't say anything more than that, like there is "always" volumetric lighting. That would be a very long video even if it proved that ^^
To prove from "none" you only need one Very literal language English is
The reflection in the road abruptly cuts off XD
I do love the graphics in this game though ^^
But that's the difference. He said there was "none at all", not that there was "mostly none". Those phrases mean completely different things lol. And if you say there is "some" like that video shows, it doesn't mean always. That's just bad extrapolation on your own part lol.
You're taking it from the wrong angle. That video was simply to prove that there is sometimes volumetric lighting, which makes "none such lighting" false. The video doesn't say anything more than that, like there is "always" volumetric lighting. That would be a very long video even if it proved that ^^
To prove from "none" you only need one
Very literal language English is
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
