(PS3) High Resolution photos from GDC

http://eu.playstation.com/iw_images...y/E3/e3_motor_storm/e3_motor_storm_04_big.jpg

http://www.eurogamer.net/assets/articles/a59111/ss_preview_MotorStorm_03.jpg

Here are some other Motorstorm e3 demo shots.

 

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

 

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?

 

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.

 

little O-T : there is a screenshot of lair inside this ppt:
https://www.cmpevents.com/sessions/GD/S1609i1.ppt

 

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...

 

Sweet jesus, that's amazing. A framebuffer grab too.

 

Here's a direct shot for people who don't want to download the whole ppt:





I think this deserves its own thread. The bloomy skin texture is gone! Also, it appears there are humans riding these dragons now?

 

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.

 

Nice. Those guys are real wizards!

 

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...

 

Well, lets see what God In a Box (Revolution) will do.

 

I like it, very nice

 

I was wondering when those 3dmark demoes were actually going to represent something in real gameplay

 

Ah I see what you're saying. I think I have more issue with the art direction than the technical accomplishments.

 

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.

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.

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 (?)

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

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.

 

They one of the mags teem ico said that they had room for improving the engine...

 

See here for motion. I dont'n know if this new footage for you, but it is for me.

 

back left wheel well.