Indiana Jones is also a big step down in terms of asset quality and lighting compared to UE5 Lume+ Nanite driven titles.
More detailed graphics are useless if the glasses you're viewing the graphics through aren't good enough.
Thing about that is that these games often have dynamic res and can/will scale up on future hardware. That's pretty important. Also, nobody is being forced to use Nanite or Lumen. UE5 has enough improvements outside of those features where you can confidently say that UE5 is better for these consoles than UE4 is. It's the developers who need to make smarter decisions for their games.
Ironic that you would post this since UE5's state of the art GPU-driven renderer (Nanite) was closer to John Carmack's (one of the original creators of id Tech) vision of future advances in rendering since he too wanted to sought out a solution to the unresolved problem of virtualizing geometry ...
UE5 and Nanite was meant to run on current-gen hardware - at 1080P 30FPS with lighting provided by Lumen and VSMs on their lowest settings. It achieved that goal. At the time UE5 development began, 30 FPS had been standard for three console generations, consumers put up with a measly resolution increase from 720P to 900P from the 7th to 8th gen consoles, 4K TVs weren't standard yet, and HWRT wasn't on the horizon yet. Thus 1080P 30FPS without HWRT was a perfectly reasonable goal.
Wasn't the target 1440p 30 with hardware lumen and 1080p 60 with software lumen?
I have yet to see their upcoming results/advances with Indiana Jones but maybe id Tech has a higher performance profile because it aims for a lower graphical fidelity ceiling ? UE5's Nanite Virtualized Geometry by comparison is a fully GPU-driven renderer w/ a hybridized deferred texturing/shading approach which sports high performance compatibility for complex material systems like Substrate ...
It may be that if we look at it technically, 1080p/30FPS is suitable as a target result, but only if we look at the original XOne and PS4 resolutions. But in the meantime, there was a PS4pro and an XOneX, which consoles brought 1440p and 4K native image quality, sometimes even with 60FPS!
There have been several. Doom 2016 was the first.
Yes. I fixed my post.
Nanite and other modern systems that pack hundreds of millions of micropolygons onto the screen are all performance-demanding, there have been games that only use Nanite, but the rendered resolution is low. This is even more true when used together with ray-tracing.
From the Unreal documentation:
So 1080P 30FPS on one preset, 1080P 60FPS on another preset, and higher resolutions can be achieved by lowering quality settings below the presets.
Oh, I remembered wrong. Anyways, let's wait for cdpr, the coalition or some Sony first party to really judge UE5. Before paragon, ue4 was terrible on console. Any time now...
UE4 has become OK on PS4, but at only 30fps (on PS4 Pro too). It's excellent on PS5 at 60fps and increased resolution. I fear that UE5 will never be great on PS5.
To be fair, most games on PS4 are CPU limited, almost no complex, ambitious game is 60 on it. Let's have some faith, I'm sure we won't have to wait too long for someone to use a recent version of UE targeting 1080p to 4k with TSR. The best practices to use with nanite and lumen are being experimented right now. It's just that games take so long to come out, that there aren't enough examples to even understand if there are improvements.
Completely disagree. PS3 X360 gen was a lot better.
And yet, games were usually running at 30 fps with frequent drops to 20 or even lower. Games that weren't using deferred rendering were running pretty well, and were also sharper with a higher resolution. That's the same situation we have right now with ray tracing, with the added problem of FSR being not great.
