A Generational Leap in Graphics [2020] *Spawn*

[pjbliverpool]

DF have pointed out that both the XBone and PS4 versions are apparently running with the same assets and shadow resolutions as their mid-gen upgrades (PS4 Pro and OneX), meaning there has been very little optimization for the 2013 consoles.
Also, both the PS5 and SeriesX versions are just running the code for their respective mid-gens, just at higher framerates or dynamic resolutions. The RDNA2 consoles are probably just running emulated Polaris code.

In the end, this points to CDPR having focused their console efforts on the PS4 Pro and OneX first and foremost, and then planned to scale it up for the 2020 consoles and scale it down for the 2013 consoles (but never got enough time for this last part).
Which.. seems like a pretty terrible decision from the get-go, I think?

This is baseless speculation. Most games appear to target the original consoles and simply allow the mid gen refreshes to scale up resolution and framerate, perhaps sometimes with a few tweaked settings.

There's no basis for assuming CB2077 hasn't done the same. The fact that both versions use the same assets is evidence of nothing. Performance on the mid gen consoles is already insufficient so why would the devs add more taxing assets and effects on top of that rather than just focusing on getting performance to where it needs to be and resolution out of the basement?

None of which matters to the point I made. The UE5 demo just looks much better than anything out there, and for whatever the engine limitations it might still have, by the time the games made on it start shipping, I'm sure devs will make up some trickeries to hide them.
What matters is the demo looks next-gen to the untrained eye. And the market is driven / games are purchased mostly by untrained eyes, not experts.

But again, it's just a tech demo. Why are you comparing a tech demo that might be representative of game graphics in a few years to a game that is released and playable today?

And also, why are you implying that a maxed out CB2077 doesn't look "next gen" to untrained eyes? Are you seriously suggesting that this doesn't look seriously impressive?

 

[cwjs]

"while it is true that CP2077 on Xbox One 2013 runs the exact same assets as PC, it doesn't really count because the frame rate and resolution is low!! So PC represents a generational leap"

this is getting ridiculous.

"same assets" is pretty meaningless dude (and not technically true w/ lods but thats in the weeds). Do you think the renderer does whatsoever similar work on pc max settings vs xbox one settings? How much frame time do you think rasterizing and texture sampling takes in cyberpunk? Pretty sure you could turn off all the lighting, volumetrics, shadows, etc, use lower mip maps and rendering resolution, and get it running on an xbox 360 too.

 

[Shortbread]

Cyberpunk 2077 has the best lighting engine of all games and maybe before next generation console. This is a generational leap. It is one of the three best looking games of 2020.

I agree CP 2077 RT is gorgeous and the best implementation of RT out there... buuutttt... RDR 2 environmental lighting and weather system (while not RT) is still unmatched from an artistry standpoint. But that's my opinion...

 

[chris1515]

I agree CP 2077 RT is gorgeous and the best implementation of RT out there... buuutttt... RDR 2 environmental lighting and weather system (while not RT) is still unmatched from an artistry standpoint. But that's my opinion...

I don't like to compare games in nature and city, the rendering is different but technically Cyberpunk 2077 is better. We will compare GTA 6 to CyberPunk 2077 it will be more interesting.

EDIT: And density in a city is much higher and Cyberpunk has some verticality GTA 6 will never have too.

 

[pjbliverpool]

By some logic, GTA V on PC was also a generational leap because it ran the game better than PS3 on which it launched 2 years earlier

No this isn't the same at all. While a lovely looking game, no-one ever seriously considered GTAV when it launched on the PC to be representative of a generational graphical leap, nor was it able to bring the highest end GPU's to their knees without the benefit of reconstruction.

I guess you don't agree with the following then? :

"while it is true that CP2077 on Xbox One 2013 runs the exact same assets as PC, it doesn't really count because the frame rate and resolution is low!! So PC represents a generational leap"

The statement is deliberately misleading so why would anyone agree with it? The base assets may be largely the same (although there are large differences in texture resolution), however the effects applied to those assets are hugely different between the two. It's that coupled with the fact that the last gen consoles are clearly unable to run the game even in it's massively cut down form that supports the argument that CB2077 is worthy of being considered a generational leap.

 

[Scott_Arm]

I agree CP 2077 RT is gorgeous and the best implementation of RT out there... buuutttt... RDR 2 environmental lighting and weather system (while not RT) is still unmatched from an artistry standpoint. But that's my opinion...

I'd actually agree with this. Cyberpunk 2077 has a lot of last-gen looking npcs walking around etc. You can see the cross generational aspect to it. RDR2 overall is just full of artistry that's unparalleled in open world games. That's kind of how I see it. What cyberpunk has is next-gen lighting and shadows. I don't really care about where the line is drawn in terms of what game is next-gen and which is not. I just know that what cyberpunk is doing with lighting and shadows actually looks natural while still being fully dynamic. That's something totally new that we couldn't get before. To me, that's next gen and it affects the overall image. It's not just one feature like hair.

I think if you were to take games like RDR2, Last of Us 2, God of War, Ghosts of Tsushima and jack them up with ray tracing, people would probably be really impressed. I do think it's going to take a generation of games with RT as a base level feature to really make it stand out. Games with destructible or dynamic environments etc that can really show off what you can do with lighting design when you don't have to worry about it working on an old platform that requires baking in high quality shadows etc.

I'd also like to highlight that youtube is the great equalizer if you want to make old games hold against newer ones. Youtube compression really can make old games look more similar to new games than they actually are.

Also the argument that a game can't be next-gen because a game two to three years later will look better is just kind of ... that's how this works. Newer games looking better than older games across generations of hardware or not. Naughty Dogs next game will look better than their last one. Rockstar's next game will look better than their last one. Regardless of the platforms.

 

[Shortbread]

I don't like to compare games in nature and city, the rendering is different but technically Cyberpunk 2077 is better. We will compare GTA 6 to CyberPunk 2077 it will be more interesting.

That's the thing we're picking and choosing areas of a particular game (such as RT) and proclaiming the game as a whole is next-generational leap over other titles. For me, a next-generation leap requires everything to be a full package. Which means good AI, good audio, good post-processing effects, and complex geometry and shaders beyond prior titles. CP 2077 is lacking in three of those categories, IMHO. There is no denying CP 2077 is gorgeous, but not revolutionary from my point of view.

 

[BillSpencer]

No this isn't the same at all. While a lovely looking game, no-one ever seriously considered GTAV when it launched on the PC to be representative of a generational graphical leap, nor was it able to bring the highest end GPU's to their knees without the benefit of reconstruction.



The statement is deliberately misleading so why would anyone agree with it? The base assets may be largely the same (although there are large differences in texture resolution), however the effects applied to those assets are hugely different between the two. It's that coupled with the fact that the last gen consoles are clearly unable to run the game even in it's massively cut down form that supports the argument that CB2077 is worthy of being considered a generational leap.

were the PS3 and Xbox360 also “clearly unable to run the game”?

 

[Shortbread]

were the PS3 and Xbox360 also “clearly unable to run the game”?

Bill let's move on. The back and forth isn't necessary. You made your point, no need to keep hammering away. I mean this in a nice way... :smile2:

 

[Svensk Viking]

That's the thing we're picking and choosing areas of a particular game (such as RT) and proclaiming the game as a whole is next-generational leap over other titles. For me, a next-generation leap requires everything to be a full package. Which means good AI, good audio, good post-processing effects, and complex geometry and shaders beyond prior titles. CP 2077 is lacking in three of those categories, IMHO. There is no denying CP 2077 is gorgeous, but not revolutionary from my point of view.

Well said, I fully agree.

I'm also not really convinced by the game's super bad performance on the last gen consoles somehow being representative of what a leap this is either. Granted, I don't know of any game that has been this bad these last ten years, but there were games with bad performance last-gen too that more often than not dipped to the low 20s (eg Far Cry 3 and Crysis 3), yet people didn't use those games as examples of what showed a true generational leap for the PC versions.

I'm of course eager to see the comparison to the actual PS5 and Series versions when they're released, but I'm also excited for the TW3 Remaster.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

It's not the RT on vs Off that makes this game a generation leap in some peoples views. It's the RT on top of what is already a visually stunning game that can't really run on the previous generation consoles.

In that case it's so much simpler on my end. CP77 is even less of a generation leap without RT, in my opinion.

That's not the purpose of the video and it's disingenuous of you to suggest that it is. Alex is explaining the technology behind the RT, not pointing out where to look for it. The differences are obvious at a Macro level, and yes, I do question the motives of people suggesting they're not

The video description literally says "Hardware accelerated ray tracing can prove transformative to the PC version of Cyberpunk 2077 in many scenarios, but equally, its effects can be more subtle elsewhere."
Are you also accusing the person who wrote DF's video description of having ulterior motives, or is that treatment reserved to specific B3D users who disagree with you?

Your implication being that people looking at a maxed out Cyberpunk 2077 would not be impressed without having to have it's RT elements explained to them?

I think that's a statement that most reasonable people would find unreasonable.

I'm saying CP77 does not invoke the same reaction as the UE5 demo on the general population, regardless.
This is my anecdotal experience and I'm sorry that you find it unreasonable. I have BTW a couple of close friends playing the game right now on the PC with RTX GPUs (which they only bought because I advised them to do so, by the way), and this is their opinion too.

As amazing as it looks, it's a demo made using assets that would be impossible to use in a shipping game due to it's size.

The statements I've seen from the engine/demo's own developers are directly contradicting your theory.

So why do you seemingly care so much whether some see CB2077 as a generational leap or not?

I do not.
This was a thread where people were expressing their opinions and I expressed mine. I made zero reference to other people's opinions whatsoever.
And right after that, in just one page, everyone not following one particular narrative had been accused of waging some war against DF/Alex, of being jealous of RTX owners (lol), of being a "stubborn gamer who didn't try the content" and of " having their motives questioned".

So it's definitely not me who's caring too much about what others think. Feel free to roam this thread and try to find a post of mine making the same crude generalizations and accusations about the opinions different than my own, that you've been making.
I'm not the one here trying to bully others into changing their opinion on the game to match mine. This is really not that important to me.

You've invested a lot of your time to try persuade people that's not the case (citing PlayStation exclusive games that you think look better in an entirely unpredictable twist)

This is just a lie and next time I'd advise you to read the posts you quote with more attention (assuming it was just a distraction).
I was not the one to bring Miles Morales into the conversation, nor did I ever say it looks better than CP77.
In fact, the irony in your statement is that one of the users who said Miles Morales looks better a few pages back is the one who's been agreeing with your points.
There's been plenty of posts comparing both games, but this comparison only became an issue for you the moment I entered the conversation.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Well said, I fully agree.

I'm also not really convinced by the game's super bad performance on the last gen consoles somehow being representative of what a leap this is either. Granted, I don't know of any game that has been this bad these last ten years, but there were games with bad performance last-gen too that more often than not dipped to the low 20s (eg Far Cry 3 and Crysis 3), yet people didn't use those games as examples of what showed a true generational leap for the PC versions.

I'm of course eager to see the comparison to the actual PS5 and Series versions when they're released, but I'm also excited for the TW3 Remaster.

To be clear, I'm not citing the poor last gen performance as proof that the game on PC can be reasonably considered a next gen leap. It's the way the game looks which makes me hold that viewpoint.

I merely bring up the poor last gen performance because Bill was attempting to use the fact that the game also runs on last gen consoles as proof that it can't represent a generational leap on the PC. So I've pointed out that it actually doesn't run very well at all on the last gen consoles which to my mind at least, undermines that point.

In that case it's so much simpler on my end. CP77 is even less of a generation leap without RT, in my opinion.

So you agree that RT does add positively to the games visuals then. It seems we're in agreement.

The video description literally says "Hardware accelerated ray tracing can prove transformative to the PC version of Cyberpunk 2077 in many scenarios, but equally, its effects can be more subtle elsewhere."
Are you also accusing the person who wrote DF's video description of having ulterior motives, or is that treatment reserved to specific B3D users who disagree with you?

That's a pretty outlandish claim, I'm not sure how helpful it is to the discussion. Anyway you seem to have missed the first half of that sentence about RT being transformative. Your argument above has been based on the premise that people can't see the RT effects unless they're pointed out. And while that would obviously be true for more subtle effects, it's not true as a general statement.

In addition, just because a specific effect may not be immediately noticeable, it doesn't mean it doesn't add to the overall quality of the scene. Ambient Occlusion is probably a good example of this. Most regular people wouldn't notice it specifically and would certainly need it pointing out to them, but without it the scene can look a lot worse on a macro level, and people may not even immediately be able to pinpoint why.

I'm saying CP77 does not invoke the same reaction as the UE5 demo on the general population, regardless.
This is my anecdotal experience and I'm sorry that you find it unreasonable. I have BTW a couple of close friends playing the game right now on the PC with RTX GPUs (which they only bought because I advised them to do so, by the way), and this is their opinion too.

That wasn't my argument at all. I agree the UE5 demo is more "next gen looking" than CB2077 (although the scale an complexity of each makes this an entirely unfair comparison), I've never argued otherwise. My point is that that doesn't somehow mean that CB2077 therefore can't be reasonably considered as a generational leap. Many considered Killzone Shadowfall a generation leap when it launched on the PS4 for example and I don't see why that was an invalid viewpoint just because the likes of BFV looked much better years later. Of course CB2077 will be exceeded, that has no bearing on whether it sets a new graphical standard today.

The statements I've seen from the engine/demo's own developers are directly contradicting your theory.

In what way? No-one's suggested that Lumen and Nanite won't work on modern consoles because they require impractically large assets. Only that this particular demo used impractically large assets so expecting something that looks just like this across an entire game may be unrealistic. The UE5 tech will obviously scale down to more realistically sized assets.

However - and I already said this further up the thread - I do expect to see games that look comparable to that demo in the future. I just don't see the point in comparing the graphics of what is today, and likely the for at least the next year or so just a tech demo, to a commercially available game.

I'm not the one here trying to bully others into changing their opinion on the game to match mine. This is really not that important to me.

No-ones trying to bully anyone, I'm not sure that's a particularly helpful statement. If you're telling me your interest in talking down the graphics of this game has nothing to do with it looking it's best on a platform/IHV hardware that differs from your preferred platform/IHV hardware then I'll happily accept that at face value.

 

[BillSpencer]

looks like the fanless 2020 MacBook Air can run the game at 720P medium settings on its integrated GPU, pretty good as well:

That means 2 things; 1; the consoles versions are severely unoptimised and 2; my mobile phone (iPhone 12 Pro) should be able to run the game as well!!

 

[Scott_Arm]

looks like the fanless 2020 MacBook Air can run the game at 720P medium settings on its integrated GPU, pretty good as well:

That means 2 things; 1; the consoles versions are severely unoptimised and 2; my mobile phone (iPhone 12 Pro) should be able to run the game as well!!

It means the console cpus are dogshit Jaguar cores.

 

[BillSpencer]

It means the console cpus are dogshit Jaguar cores.

They are still native x86, the MacBook is ARM emulating x86 and DX12

 

[Scott_Arm]

They are still native x86, the MacBook is ARM emulating x86 and DX12

If you look up benchmarks the M1 performance when running software in emulation is very good. Yah, you're also running windows etc. Really shows how bad Jaguar is and how far it is from a modern cpu.

 

[PSman1700]

Cyberpunk 2077 has the best lighting engine of all games and maybe before next generation console. This is a generational leap. It is one of the three best looking games of 2020.

Yes, in the total overall package, its the best looking game out there now. Im in agreement with DF on that one.

I agree CP 2077 RT is gorgeous and the best implementation of RT out there... buuutttt... RDR 2 environmental lighting and weather system (while not RT) is still unmatched from an artistry standpoint. But that's my opinion...

Rockstar has the advantage of a much larger and more skilled team. There is no studio that can match Rockstar.

I don't like to compare games in nature and city, the rendering is different but technically Cyberpunk 2077 is better. We will compare GTA 6 to CyberPunk 2077 it will be more interesting.

GTA6, if it comes and its targetting PC (or even PS5 gen), will probably blow away CP2077. Lets hope it happens, a GTA6. Will be a hit as usual.

That means 2 things; 1; the consoles versions are severely unoptimised and 2; my mobile phone (iPhone 12 Pro) should be able to run the game as well!!

Your iphone12 has the A14 chip, not the M1 chip. Its a large difference between those two. Your iphone12 wont even come close to what that M1 was doing in the video.

Really, CP2077, on a high (er) end pc atleast, looks out of this world, its the next gen experience (as noted by df). Its beyond spiderman MM and then some. Demon souls is up there in its own right, but a totally different game (linear, corridor, no ray tracing). CP2077 will probably get the 1st award with DS coming in second, or maybe FS2020 (if thats considered a game?), perhaps watch dogs as a runner up somewhere.

 

[function]

They are still native x86, the MacBook is ARM emulating x86 and DX12

Apple have been working towards replacing x86 with their own custom ARM processors for years. As a result, I think it is extremely likely that fast translation of x86 instructions to ARM instructions is built directly into, or at least accelerated by, the silicon. So even running x86 code an M1 core could probably outperform a Jaguar core, at least up to the point it throttled heavily. If it couldn't, it'd be a pretty shitty experience for buyers of their expensive products when it came to backwards compatibility.

It's not an accident that Apples processors are able to do what they can do.

 

[dten]

I wouldn't judge the UE5 demo until we see a real game with AI, npc's, scripting, time of day, city environments, user camera control, simulated open world, etc. And let's see when it runs on lower end PC and/or PS4 to see how much is truly not possible without PS5/Series X.
A lot of "what is really next gen" is arguing from theory of an unknown future possibility. We have 2077 with RT today which we know is impossible in PS4/XBox1X, regardless if people like the art direction or use of resources. I'm not sure how else you could define next gen. It seems like folks are arguing next gen based more on software, less on hardware.

 

[Panino Manino]

I really can't understand how Cyberpunk is better than Metro. Cyberpunk have the advantage of the city to provide more opportunities for the RT to be seen and felt, and that's it. And as far as I understand the game only have RT because of Nvidia, if CDP really wanted to have this next gen lighting model in their game they should have worked with Microsoft and AMD to support DXR1.1 and Vulkan_RT (because alone they aren't able to).

Disappoints me that "gamers" can be fooled for this thin coat of graphical fidelity while everything else is crumbling beneath it failing to meet the most basic expectations.