Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora [XBSX|S, PC, PS5]
- Thread starter chris1515
- Start date
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
It's weird that Ubi keep making the same game over and over again...
Not really when 10 million people keep buying each one.
There is still polishing to be done. The game faces big challenges because of the verticality and the possibility of flying in the jungle environment with lots of trees. I'm particularly bothered by the many pop ups, the low LOD stage of trees when flying, the low resolution clouds and the strange lighting in places when flying. I don't like the flying in the videos at all graphically.
Flying in Horizon Forbidden West didn't look the best in places with lots of deciduous trees either. It is very difficult to make such a scenario work very well.
In contrast, some ground scenes look good. The asset quality from close is not the problem. With the dynamic day and night changes, there are also times of day where it looks worse. In reality, it also looks boring when the sun shines directly from above.
The game will also use raytracing GI; shadows and reflections. I am curious how it will look an a high-end-pc in the end.
The gameplay might appeal to me but the scenario doesn't. It's not just that Ubisoft always brings similar games. From Sony also comes out almost only the same. Many franchise games, third person, cinematic etc.
Flying in Horizon Forbidden West didn't look the best in places with lots of deciduous trees either. It is very difficult to make such a scenario work very well.
In contrast, some ground scenes look good. The asset quality from close is not the problem. With the dynamic day and night changes, there are also times of day where it looks worse. In reality, it also looks boring when the sun shines directly from above.
The game will also use raytracing GI; shadows and reflections. I am curious how it will look an a high-end-pc in the end.
The gameplay might appeal to me but the scenario doesn't. It's not just that Ubisoft always brings similar games. From Sony also comes out almost only the same. Many franchise games, third person, cinematic etc.
Last edited:
Nanite won’t magically add geometry to assets that are built with low poly counts.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
I think the point isn't that Nanite could or would improve low poly objects, but that when games with low poly objects are compared to a game with Nanite or other high poly solution, those games with low poly objects will increasingly start to look worse or at least it'll be much harder to ignore the low poly nature of them.
Compare to the recently released Ark: Survival Ascended (PC only currently). Avatar may still release with better lighting but just about everything else looks much better in Ark due to the high poly geometry being better able to present a more realistic and more detailed scene which greatly increases believability and provides a potential for better interaction with light (light interacting with actual geometry instead of attempting to replicate that interaction with texture tricks).
Regards,
SB
DLSS and XeSS was already confirmed. which features of DLSS is unknown
I think nanite either has or they're developing tessellation. One of the issues with making everything super high poly is storage space. But I'd say nanite kind of necessitates much higher poly assets otherwise the benefits are lost.
cheapchips
Veteran
davis.anthony
Veteran
The Avatar game that released on Far Cry 2's Dunia engine years ago was also average in the gameplay department so I'm not really surprised about this.
cheapchips
Veteran
IGN has a video on how part of a mission was put together. Even 'average gameplay' has an awful lot of effort put into it. 
There's a lot of geometry and the scale looks great. The pop in is very noticeable and LODs change at a fairly close distance. Overall the actual assets look very good. Much better than those preview vids that went around not long ago.
Overall you could not pay me to play this game. Gameplay wise it's a no. Also if I had a time machine I'd go back and make sure those movies never happened.
Overall you could not pay me to play this game. Gameplay wise it's a no. Also if I had a time machine I'd go back and make sure those movies never happened.
Last edited:
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Oh wow is that bad. The LOD and detail pop in so close to the camera. Shadows just popping into existence not far in front of the character? Tree's look pretty bad until really close and then they still don't look as good as Ark 2. World looks not bad until you have multiple levels of LOD pop-in as you move through the world. Foliage density is nice once it all pops in.
Ground textures can be quite bad comparatively speaking if you aren't looking at them at the correct angle.
Regards,
SB
