whats so special about that screen?
Ace Combat 6 for Xbox 360 ? *confirmed* *rules: post #111
- Thread starter Megadrive1988
- Start date
whats so special about that screen?
To refresh the memories of people who weren't here a few years ago this is what I was officially expecting
http://www.tmalliance.com/uploads/024176/PS3_ACE_DIAGRAM_FINAL.jpg
Ah well, maybe we'll see aircraft with this quality later on this gen or on the ps4..
http://www.tmalliance.com/uploads/024176/PS3_ACE_DIAGRAM_FINAL.jpg
Ah well, maybe we'll see aircraft with this quality later on this gen or on the ps4..
Megadrive1988
Veteran
that looks good, but you know, if you play AC6 on a smaller HDTV, during the replays and/or external camera views, i'll bet AC6 will look pretty close to that render.
Megadrive1988
Veteran
this is what I concider to be some nice CG for developers to strive for in the next gen of consoles.
that is what I kind of expect from 1st-gen Xbox720 & PS4 games. a large leap in image quality as well as lighting.
(Ace Combat 8 or 9 hehe). I don't expect raytracing or other radical types of realtime rendering that still seem out of reach for the next 10 years or so. just a very nice increase in visual quality, complexity, etc.
Since next-gen won't start 4 years after this gen started (2005 ====> 2009, no) more like 6 to 7 years (2011-2012), we should see a large leap in GPU performance--combine that with NOT having another large increase in resolution--games should still be 720p, 1080i and 1080p--this should allow developers to make games that look far better than Xbox360, PS3 games.
Perhaps we'll even see a similar leap like we saw from PS1 to PS2, or at least PS1 to Dreamcast. I do not buy into the idea of diminishing returns. the only reason some people feel we have diminishing returns is because of the fact that a) the current Xenos and RSX GPUs are not an enormous leap from Graphics Synthesizer, Flipper and NV2A -- that combined with having to render visuals at, at least 720p, we don't have such a huge leap in graphics this gen. that is probably why people perceive the diminishing returns. GPUs are not THAT hard to use. if the power is there- developers can easily tap into it. programming for highly complex CPUs is a different matter altogether though.
The way I see it is, current-gen consoles will last 1-2 years longer than last gen, thus next-gen hardware will be a bigger leap forward and developers will be targeting pretty much the same resolutions as they are today. HDTV resolutions.
that is what I kind of expect from 1st-gen Xbox720 & PS4 games. a large leap in image quality as well as lighting.
(Ace Combat 8 or 9 hehe). I don't expect raytracing or other radical types of realtime rendering that still seem out of reach for the next 10 years or so. just a very nice increase in visual quality, complexity, etc.
Since next-gen won't start 4 years after this gen started (2005 ====> 2009, no) more like 6 to 7 years (2011-2012), we should see a large leap in GPU performance--combine that with NOT having another large increase in resolution--games should still be 720p, 1080i and 1080p--this should allow developers to make games that look far better than Xbox360, PS3 games.
Perhaps we'll even see a similar leap like we saw from PS1 to PS2, or at least PS1 to Dreamcast. I do not buy into the idea of diminishing returns. the only reason some people feel we have diminishing returns is because of the fact that a) the current Xenos and RSX GPUs are not an enormous leap from Graphics Synthesizer, Flipper and NV2A -- that combined with having to render visuals at, at least 720p, we don't have such a huge leap in graphics this gen. that is probably why people perceive the diminishing returns. GPUs are not THAT hard to use. if the power is there- developers can easily tap into it. programming for highly complex CPUs is a different matter altogether though.
The way I see it is, current-gen consoles will last 1-2 years longer than last gen, thus next-gen hardware will be a bigger leap forward and developers will be targeting pretty much the same resolutions as they are today. HDTV resolutions.
Last edited by a moderator:
Megadrive1988
Veteran
Ace Combat 6 screens look quite alot better than Ace Combat 5 screens, especially the real AC5 screens at medium resolution, with no AA.
AC5 never look THIS good:
AC6
AC5
(the PS2 AC5 screen here is even getting the benefit from being a "bullshot" since it's in high resolution with AA something the actual game doesnt have)
AC5 never look THIS good:
AC6
AC5
(the PS2 AC5 screen here is even getting the benefit from being a "bullshot" since it's in high resolution with AA something the actual game doesnt have)
Last edited by a moderator:
Megadrive1988
Veteran
And then we need to subtract the "AA" from the AC5 image!
yeah -- and if you look carefully, you can see jaggies in the AC6 Xbox 360 images. it seems the screens released of AC6 have 2x or 4x AA (i can't really tell), yet they do have jaggies, unlike the bullshots of AC5 PS2 which have NO noticable aliasing.
hopefully with NEXT gen, we'll have at least 16x AA in every game.
Megadrive1988
Veteran
ok now onto how the series has progressed
AC2
AC5
AC6
AC2
AC4
AC6
......................................AC2....................................................AC4.......................................................AC6
AC2
AC5
AC6
AC2
AC4
AC6
......................................AC2....................................................AC4.......................................................AC6
Last edited by a moderator:
DuckThor Evil
Legend
Not going to happen and imo that's a good thing. Anything above 4x is waste of processing power imo. I'd be perfectly happy with 1080p with 4x AA in next gen, and I'm not even expecting to actually get that.
Mintmaster
Veteran
QFT.
Ok, 23 posts on 2 pages must be a new record.
Reminder: This is now obviously labelled as sensitive thread (God knows how AC6 turned out to be controversial). Anything, that goes in here should should be at least reconsidered once if it's too flammy, etc. There'll be no leniency.
P.S.: Changed topic title.
Reminder: This is now obviously labelled as sensitive thread (God knows how AC6 turned out to be controversial). Anything, that goes in here should should be at least reconsidered once if it's too flammy, etc. There'll be no leniency.
P.S.: Changed topic title.
Now why would you need realtime AO for something as static as an airplane? No deformations there, and the various flight control surfaces are small enough not to have too much of an effect either. This is the perfect case where you can just bake occlusion into the textures...
Hopefully by then, we'll be getting 'smarter' forms of AA such as CSAA ala G80, although I'm not sure what the bottleneck for that is...
http://developer.nvidia.com/object/coverage-sampled-aa.html
Megadrive1988
Veteran
modern PC GPUs are doing 16x AA, and with SLI or CrossFire, they're doing upto 32x AA.
I don't see why next-gen consoles can't do 16x AA for 720p games and 8x AA for 1080p games.
I don't think anti-aliasing is waste of processing power, so long as it doesn't suck up a large amount of GPU resources. the Xbox 360's Xenos EDRAM chip doing 4x AA for very low-cost in performance is pointing the way forward, IMO.
4x AA is not enough to achieve a "CGI-ish" look, which is what next-gen consoles should be aiming for.
with that said, framerate should be more important than AA, so I would agree that 4x AA would be a waste if it makes framerates suffer. that said, framerates will no doubt STILL suffer even in the next generation <sigh> because many developers want to push the most complex graphics they can at ~30fps.
Megadrive1988
Veteran
Ok, 23 posts on 2 pages must be a new record.
Reminder: This is now obviously labelled as sensitive thread (God knows how AC6 turned out to be controversial). Anything, that goes in here should should be at least reconsidered once if it's too flammy, etc. There'll be no leniency.
P.S.: Changed topic title.
in an effort to make this thread less sensitive, less controversial, I will say (again) that Ace Combat will be on both Xbox 360 and PS3, beyond a shadow of a doubt.
more Ace Combat for everyone this generation.. perhaps Wii will get an AC game too.
does that help?
DuckThor Evil
Legend
That's because the high end and SLI/CrossFire setups have prosessing power to waste. PC games are built for low to mid range cards and basically the higher end cards are "too good" for them, that's why they can crank up the image quality, but it's a rather high price for it. In the console world the development is somewhat different with only one sku, unless the gpu manufacturers figure out some super efficient way to do AA, I don't think we'll see over 4X used even in Next gen, because it would be a heavy tradeoff.
Megadrive1988
Veteran
a heavy tradeoff for some GPU architectures, but probably not a heavy tradeoff for other GPU architectures. I don't see why we can't have 8x or 16x AA next-gen given that 4x AA on Xenos doesn't cost very much performance.
Mintmaster
Veteran
Modern GPUs have 384-bit and even 512-bit busses. Its effectively double that for SLI. I doubt we'll see more than 256-bit next gen.
You can't forget the space needed either. If consoles still use eDRAM next gen (and I don't see why not), I'd say 64MB is the most they'll have. That's enough for 1080p, 32bpp, 4xAA. Devs can then forget about tiling. If they have to choose between 4xAA and 16xAA with tiling, what are they going to choose? If most console gamers today don't even care about 4xAA, why would they care about 16xAA over 4xAA? I most certainly don't, and I care about AA far more than a typical console gamer.
At 1080p I don't think you're right. Maybe when examining screenshots up close, but not while playing, and not for most people.
4x AA (1080p) should be enough and there is is more to make it feel and look CGI-ish. Animation smoothness, framerate smoothness and CGI-ish like motion blur for moving objects.
Last edited by a moderator:
