Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora [XBSX|S, PC, PS5]
- Thread starter chris1515
- Start date
cheapchips
Veteran
And blast processing?
Finally all those hidden second GPUs will be activated.
https://gamestar.de/artikel/avatar-frontiers-of-pandora-raytracing,3371105.html
It seems Turing, Ampere and RDNA 2 use hardware raytracing acceleration. Maybe GI is not triangle based raytracing on consoles?
This is impossible to set off raytracing /software or hardware translation from an era guy:
Very interesting, seeing they pobably use some Mesh shading/Primitive shading and they exploit the SSD and lighting engine is optimized aroud realtime GI, realtime raytraced reflection and raytraced shadows hardware or software solution. We can say this is how you do next gen.
Last edited:
I really don’t get why people are so excited by this. It looks good, but it’s a UBISOFT game based on bloody Avatar. We already know what kind of game it will be: talk to npc in a clearly marked point in your map, go collect something, deliver something, kill some guy, talk to npc, go find something, deliver it, kill a guy or two.
Climb a
because you can play with this
That always looked weirdly sexual.
That's why we'll have to be careful where we stick it in.
Nothing quite like drinking and passing out in woods and week later the area is overrun by triffids.
cheapchips
Veteran
1-2 years is a long wait to shag a six legged space horse.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Fuck cross gen
Yes, fuck possibly the only thing that is allowing the game industry to support increasingly higher and higher development costs.
Ignore that cross gen likely has little to no impact on the visuals that a game can deliver as long as they target the more performant hardware profile and then backport (either via a different engine - [bad] ... or via a scalable engine with alternative rendering paths {only if needed} - [good]) to the lower hardware profile. That's more associated with how much time, effort and manpower a developer can throw at a game.
Then again, I guess it could affect things if the developer only ever developed for console and didn't have a clue how to make their engine scalable.
Obviously at some point there will be an inflection point where there are enough people on current gen hardware that a developer no longer needs the previous gen in order to not go bankrupt developing and selling a game. But we're quite obviously not there yet for the more ambitious titles. Sony tried some current gen only games, but quickly backtracked from that, likely due to the financial impact of only selling to current gen console owners.
Regards,
SB
Last edited:
Visuals don't scale very well at all IMO. Resolution and framerate sure, the end visual experience not so much. You also end up paying inordinate amounts of performance for that tiny bit of visual scaling you do get. Cross gen absolutely affects visuals. Manpower has to be spread among more optimization targets and core techniques/budgets have to be functional on the most outdated hardware you are supporting.Yes, fuck possibly the only thing that is allowing the game industry to support increasingly higher and higher development costs.
Ignore that cross gen likely has little to no impact on the visuals that a game can deliver as long as they target the more performant hardware profile and then backport (either via a different engine - [bad] ... or via a scalable engine with alternative rendering paths {only if needed} - [good]) to the lower hardware profile. That's more associated with how much time, effort and manpower a developer can throw at a game.
Then again, I guess it could affect things if the developer only ever developed for console and didn't have a clue how to make their engine scalable.
Obviously at some point there will be an inflection point where there are enough people on current gen hardware that a developer no longer needs the previous gen in order to not go bankrupt developing and selling a game. But we're quite obviously not there yet for the more ambitious titles. Sony tried some current gen only games, but quickly backtracked from that, likely due to the financial impact of only selling to current gen console owners.
Regards,
SB
because you can play with this
I see... That's what that strap-on xbox controller is for...
Silent_Buddha
Legend
That's only true when scaling up from base hardware to better hardware (IE - scaling up from PS4/XBO to PS5/XBS-X), not when scaling down from base hardware down to worse hardware (IE - scaling down from PS5/XBS-X to PS4/XBO). Base hardware indicates target development platform(s).
Currently most cross-gen titles are scaling up from PS4/XBO because those are the platforms they started development on. There's likely less than a handful of titles that have been released that scaled down from PS5/XBS-X or higher spec'd PC because those weren't the primary development targets.
Basically, are you going to contend that Doom 2016 on PS4/XBO are only a tiny bit better looking than Doom 2016 on Nintendo Switch?
Or that Cyberpunk 2077 on PC is only a tiny bit better looking than Cyberpunk 2077 on PS4/XBO?Conversely, when looking at NSW titles that are scaled up to higher spec'd hardware, as expected the differences aren't exactly groundbreaking. Octopath Traveller for instance or Monster Hunter: Rise (which was excellently done considering it was scaling up, but it's still not as impressive as it would be if it had targetted better hardware before being scaled down to the NSW).
I mean hell, Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora is already by definition cross gen because it supports PC and thus has to scale down below current gen consoles.
Regards,
SB
Last edited:
Sure but in practice no games are really developed this way. I don't think Cyberpunk is a great example either as in many ways the visuals are quite similar. It's a poorly made game all around so the differences are larger than the majority of cross gen titles but the visuals are clearly rooted in the previous gen. When you compare the visual experience between the console generations the improvement is far from matching up with the gap in hardware technology. Can you name a single game developed primarily for PS5/Series X and back ported to last gen?That's only true when scaling up from base hardware to better hardware (IE - scaling up from PS4/XBO to PS5/XBS-X), not when scaling down from base hardware down to worse hardware (IE - scaling down from PS5/XBS-X to PS4/XBO). Base hardware indicates target development platform(s).
Currently most cross-gen titles are scaling up from PS4/XBO because those are the platforms they started development on. There's likely less than a handful of titles that have been released that scaled down from PS5/XBS-X or higher spec'd PC because those weren't the primary development targets.
Basically, are you going to contend that Doom 2016 on PS4/XBO are only a tiny bit better looking than Doom 2016 on Nintendo Switch?
Conversely, when looking at NSW titles that are scaled up to higher spec'd hardware, as expected the differences aren't exactly groundbreaking. Octopath Traveller for instance or Monster Hunter: Rise (which was excellently done considering it was scaling up, but it's still not as impressive as it would be if it had targetted better hardware before being scaled down to the NSW).
I mean hell, Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora is already by definition cross gen because it supports PC and thus has to scale down below current gen consoles.
Regards,
SB
Doom is a good example but that situation only occurs for switch ports.
I personally think using different engines produces the best result. See Forza Horizon 2.
Last edited:
