Screen grab of the nextgen Madden football.
- Thread starter Qroach
- Start date
Megadrive1988
Veteran
jvd said:
it was probably more like 20 to 25 frames per second, with some dips down to about 15fps it was on the choppy side at times, but if you look at the more recent footage from GDC 2005, it is conciderably smoother. closer to a solid 30fps now, with most of the choppiness gone.
the 4th video, the one of the city, flying over it, was utterly breathtaking.
Shogmaster
Regular
Here's something to help (or hinder) the debate on realtime or not based on lack of jaggies from those pics.
I took a HL2 cap rendered @1280x720 with low amount or none of AA applied to it from an unknown current gen vid card, and then resized it to 720x405.
It got rid of almost all of the jaggies except for the most diagonal and straight surfaces.
I took a HL2 cap rendered @1280x720 with low amount or none of AA applied to it from an unknown current gen vid card, and then resized it to 720x405.
It got rid of almost all of the jaggies except for the most diagonal and straight surfaces.
MechanizedDeath
Regular
Isnt' that just supersampling? PEACE.Shogmaster said:
Shogmaster
Regular
MechanizedDeath said:
Pretty much. But the point was that there's isn't enough eDram on the Xenon to do supersampling AA @ 1280x720, hense folks here saying those can't be Xenon realtime shots. So with my example, I'm saying that bicubic resampled resizing from Photoshop is accounting for the supersampling like effect.
Shogmaster said:
According to Xenon 'leak', the R500 downsamples 32 pixels per cycle to 8 pixels per cycle (4xMSAA for free) before writing to the framebuffer. The framebuffer is on a separate eDRAM chip/module with custom logic, i.e. Z/stencil/alpha/MSAA. The 10MB eDRAM seems enough for 720P with this setup, needing ~ 7.4 MB...
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=495971#495971
Not on the whole framebuffer, I agree.Shogmaster said:
But who said you need the entire framebuffer in eDram?
http://sports.ign.com/articles/606/606601p1.html
So these shots are done by X800 and R500 does better?
So these shots are done by X800 and R500 does better?
Megadrive1988
Veteran
Day 5
lol
what happened?
what happened to the graphics?
lol
im just gonna wait until tomorrow when they show the commercial
lol
hmmmm, i dont like that last pic so much
the coach looks like the coaches in madden games today
and what happened to the "perfected" snow like in the other pics?
the snow looks like something done this gen
they are sending mix messages
i still cant wait until the trailer is shown
if the game looks like that though....im still happy
as long as they bring as much excitement as that vick and TO commercial
what happened?
what happened to the graphics?
lol
im just gonna wait until tomorrow when they show the commercial
lol
hmmmm, i dont like that last pic so much
the coach looks like the coaches in madden games today
and what happened to the "perfected" snow like in the other pics?
the snow looks like something done this gen
they are sending mix messages
i still cant wait until the trailer is shown
if the game looks like that though....im still happy
as long as they bring as much excitement as that vick and TO commercial
one said:
1. This is good news. The fact the QB/RB/Linemen were sharinb basically the same body was a good 5 year step back.
2. It feels good to be vindicated within 1 page in a thread
Acert93 said:
Still good to hear they are aiming HIGHER. There are places in HL2 where the decals and high res textures look leaps and bounds better than this, and I would expect next gen hardware to easily surpass HL2. The Madden concept shots look nice and clean, but the night/snow hides a lot. The rendering seems high quality, but also "prebaked". The screen shots do not show a lot, but like others said we want some interactivity on the field (snow, divots that do not leave, unique player bodies, etc...). The bad news is that the Madden commercial will not be a good indication of how the game will look, play, or animate
I also have to wonder if Madden will make it for 2006 on Xenon. Why show concept work when the launch is 6-7mo away? The first rumors I heard were 2007 and EA has so far only publically mentioned the PS3 next gen version... could this be a subtle hint that 2007 will be the first next gen Madden release? I hope not... more at E3 I guess.
Iron Tiger
Regular
I'd have to disagree if the R500 is going to have the fillrate of a 32 pixel pipeline card and run at 500MHz. At 400MHz, they'd be theoretically equal, and at 500Mhz w/24 pipelines, the R500 would only be 800 megapixels behind.jvd said:
Megadrive1988
Veteran
this new image looks really....not good at all... for nextgen. it almost looks like current-gen with some extra anti-aliasing. I'll bet you Xbox could almost pull that last image off, minus the AA. as a replay.
that image vs...
a current-gen realtime image in high resolution with extra AA
Megadrive1988 said:
I know what you mean MD, but is that not the point?
Previous gens were increasing the IQ in a fairly set resolution.
Now we want the same IQ jump + 3x the resolution per frame + AA.
I think we are expecting a lot out of next gen software: High levels of AA, AF, HD resolutions, physics everywhere, intensive geometry, dynamic lighting, dynamic shadowing, soft shadows, destructible environments/vehicles, online, 5.1 audio standard, high detail textures, varied environments, massive worlds. And we want this in a "game" NOT a "tech demo". We also expect at least 20hrs of gameplay, NEW gameplay mechanics that are revolutionary, excellent stories, and on and on.
Out of the blocks no game will achieve all of the above. Just in the graphics area I would be surpised if more than 3 X2 launch titles make us go, "The PC cannot do that". The development time and budgets to make the games we want, "next gen" games that look and play like new games, will be hit and miss for a while. But as the PS2 has shown, by the 3rd and 4th year developers will come into their own and the gameplay will rock and developers will be squeezing power out of the new systems.
History also tells us that cross platform titles, like Madden, will look good but not cutting edge (comparatively). So AC5, with higher res and AA, looking pretty good comparatively is not a total surprise. Without seeing the Madden in motion, with 22 players on the field, it is hard to judge. The IGN writer indicated that the animation was outstanding.
Some of the developers have hinted that we should be careful not to expect too much. While these artists shots are great, and the real Madden may look a lot better, I think we should keep our enthusiasm in check considering our expectations. I have wanted to not believe this, but they very well be right.
But of course if MS includes 512MB of memory in X2 all bets are off!
(That was a joke...)Iron Tiger
Regular
The 32/64 bit gen had a relatively comparable amount of 640x480 resolution games as the current gen has 720p+ games. So with the move to the current gen, we did get an upgrade in resolution. At an average resolution of say 512x384 (and that's probably above average), the move from the 32/64 bit gen to the current's 640x480 would have been a 1.5x increase in resolution. So maybe we should just cut our expectations for the next gen in half.Acert93 said:
I've been following the rumors that the R500 is going to be built on a unified shader system, and that the PC R600 will be based on it. So if the R600 is going to be a generation's worth faster than the R520, it would stand to reason that the R500 is at least comparable to the R520.jvd said:
RichardCypher101
Newcomer
Similar threads
