(PS3) High Resolution photos from GDC

Xbot360 said:
e3_motor_storm_04_big.jpg


ss_preview_MotorStorm_03.jpg


Here are some other Motorstorm e3 demo shots.
Click to expand...

it was pure CG, not a demo
and visually maybe it can be matched by x720 or PS4 in 2010

NB, you can post images not bigger of 800x600, so this two are safe
 
Griffith said:
it was pure CG, not a demo
and visually maybe it can be matched by x720 or PS4 in 2010

NB, you can post images not bigger of 800x600, so this two are safe
Click to expand...

Well, would you have believed that PS2 was able to produce graphics like Burnout 3 or ZOE2 or Shadow of the Colossus, before PS2 was released, with the "demos" Sony showed prior to release?
 
Griffith said:
it was pure CG, not a demo
and visually maybe it can be matched by x720 or PS4 in 2010
Click to expand...


I agree. That is not achievable this generation. The cockpit view is a movie. If people think that will match in game your delusional on drugs or both. Seriously, I don't know how much a system would cost that could pull that off but it ain't around $500.
 
I guess people think GRAW or Oblivion are the pinnacle of visuals for both the Xbox360 and PS3, also the PC for that matter. I think the general visual look of the Motorstorm CGI is acheivable. Not sure if its acheivable this year or within the next 3 years. I'm using the visual advances gained from first generation PS2 games to what we're seeing now as reference.

*i've said it before but the dynamic camera angles in the Motorstorm CGI seems to make it more unrealistic than it really should be. I would compare it to Metal Gear Solid and its Cinematic scenes. Also, I picture the Burnout series (developed by Criterion) to take on that same exact look of the car breaking into pieces in this Next Generation.

There ARE things here and there in the Vid that are quite possibly impossible to do ingame but I think Evolution has the talent to get very close to whats in the CGI.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is it really fair to make similar extrapolations, especially given how alien the GS is compared to a more conventional graphics processor :?: I'd be more willing to extrapolate based on the NV2A...
 
Hmmm, I have Burnout Revenge (not sure how much better it is than Burnout3) and Shadow of the Colussus and I don't see them in the same league at all. Colussus has some unique gameplay elements but graphically, it's a dog IMO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Titanio said:
I think this deserves its own thread. The bloomy skin texture is gone! Also, it appears there are humans riding these dragons now?
Click to expand...

Nice. Those guys are real wizards!
 
trinibwoy said:
Hmmm, I have Burnout Revenge (not sure how much better it is than Burnout3) and Shadow of the Colussus and I don't see them in the same league at all. Colussus has some unique gameplay elements but graphically, it's a dog IMO.
Click to expand...

Lots of people would disagree with you, but i guess it comes down to taste.
Still, you can't deny the importance of having "simulated" HDR, Fur rendering, huge characters and backgrounds, soft self-shadowing, motion blur and all sorts of effects all happening at once in a PS2 game.
Sure the game's framerate is crap, but still...
 
nintenho said:
:oops:
I leave for a few hours and come back to see people still arguing about Motorstorm! It's simply not that impressive looking under any standard and it doesn't even look as though it's using the same assets as the trailer shown at the last E3. Weren't there any other PS3 games shown at GDC?
Click to expand...


Well, lets see what God In a Box (Revolution) will do.
 
london-boy said:
Lots of people would disagree with you, but i guess it comes down to taste.
Still, you can't deny the importance of having "simulated" HDR, Fur rendering, huge characters and backgrounds, soft self-shadowing, motion blur and all sorts of effects all happening at once in a PS2 game.
Sure the game's framerate is crap, but still...
Click to expand...

Ah I see what you're saying. I think I have more issue with the art direction than the technical accomplishments.
 
Griffith said:
of course there will be some differences, those can be performance difference when hdr fp + SSAA are used (I don't think that rsx can handle this, with a 128 bit bus to framebuffer)
Click to expand...

Any performance difference would be completely dependent on the profile of the game in the first place - where the bound is, and how it might shift on PS3, if at all.

Griffith said:
or they can use integers instead of floating point, moving from a RGB space to calc hdr + MSAA, but this is not good as hdr fp (take a look at HL2, compare his hdr to the one in far cry or oblivion and you get the difference between the two hdr)
Click to expand...

The shader-based implementations are not all the same. NAO32 isn't what was being used in HL2. Also, if you're referring to NAO32, Deano has said they get the same range of luminosity with the same colour fidelity as FP16 - that's what is important purely from a HDR point of view, so it certainly is not "not as good as hdr fp". The lighting calcs etc. are done with full FP32 precision (hence NAO32), and in a colour space far better suited to HDR than RGB. In fact, FP16 might be considered more lossy. From a pure dynamic range POV, technically these solutions are in fact better than the HDR implementation you would porting from. Porting and just straight up using a FP16 buffer in the "normal" way, would still also give you technically greater range - just obviously you can't opt for MSAA in that case.

Griffith said:
and wastes a lot of shader processing time because the shaders have to do conversion for and from the RGB space for each transparent texture applied
Click to expand...

I never quite looked into the whole blending issue on NAO32, but it sounded like it was still a work in progress. But the HDR implementation you're porting from may bear limitations also with just 4 distinct values for alpha in a colour (?)

Griffith said:
the second way is the best of the two, but it's not as good as a true hdr fp + msaa
Click to expand...

What is 'true' HDR? 10 bits of precision with just 2 for transparency? :p

Seriously, there's no such thing as 'true' HDR, beyond the definition that the dynamic range is higher than what your monitor can display, I guess. Everything we have to work with is just an implementation toward that, with different ranges and different trade-offs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
london-boy said:
Lots of people would disagree with you, but i guess it comes down to taste.
Still, you can't deny the importance of having "simulated" HDR, Fur rendering, huge characters and backgrounds, soft self-shadowing, motion blur and all sorts of effects all happening at once in a PS2 game.
Sure the game's framerate is crap, but still...
Click to expand...
They one of the mags teem ico said that they had room for improving the engine...
 
Griffith said:
why you laught?
so we have to see motostorm in motion, but from this pics, it looks to me a bit worse, surely not better
Click to expand...

See here for motion. I dont'n know if this new footage for you, but it is for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top