Technical Game Engine Comparisons: non-subjective *OffTopic Cleanup Spawn*

Status
Not open for further replies.
Recop said:
Not impressive, yet i've never seen such a large animal ever rendered in any video game. Also, the camera moves constantly so your point is wrong.

It's everything that looks better : textures, polys, shaders, lighting. Saying that HZD has better assets only due to higher polys is simply false.

Here is an example of what i mean :

en9yob2l88ky.jpg


https://flic.kr/p/32785512600
Click to expand...

Thats a character model I'm talking about the environmental graphics. Soil textures have a higher resolution in Wildlands. Horizon does not use a lot of tesselation and Wildlands while useses it for some buildings etc.as well. Why is the lighing better? It also has lower the shadow LODs closer.

As for moving objects. Star Citizen already has very datailed and big objects in the playable Alpha version
 
Last edited:
Recop said:
Is this a serious question ? Could you imagine the same scale on PS1 ?

If it doesn't cause any technical challenge, then we should have already seen such big animals on much weaker hardwares.
Click to expand...

Like the brumocks or corpsers or reavers on X360?
 
Jupiter said:
Thats a character model I'm talking about the environmental graphics. Soil textures have a higher resolution in Wildlands. Horizon does not use a lot of tesselation and Wildlands while useses it for some buildings etc.as well. Why is the lighing better? It also has lower the shadow LODs closer.
Click to expand...

Indeed, on PC, the ground is far more detailed on Wildlands but i doubt textures have a higher resolution... but don't get me wrong, i find the game impressive technically. It's just that they put too much ressources on that incredible map size.

I'm waiting for the final version of Star Citizen. At the moment it's difficult to judge. But if they really aim high end PC with a good budget, it should crush anything made in the gaming industry from a graphical standpoint.

BRiT said:
Like the brumocks or corpsers or reavers on X360?
Click to expand...

The world serpent is much bigger than that.
 
Last edited:
Recop said:
Do they have to deal with this kind of thing with no loading times and no camera cuts ? :

godofwar_201804181806u3q0m.png
Click to expand...

Yeah, one thing I noticed is that the new GOW handles level loading in a similar way to Gears of War 4. Each adventure area is separated from other adventure areas by small asset loading transition areas. In GOW, these are things like crouching and walking through a minimally interactive transition area like a cave where you can do nothing but walk forward and other such minimally interactive sections.

For the lake/sea where the World Serpent is located the first level load area happens in the cave leading to the Witch's hut. There's another one that separates the World Serpent/Teleporter hub section from another water level (which leads to the first dragon). More detailed adventure areas of the game feature smaller areas and more frequent level load transitions sections. The Giant's mines inside the mountain, for instance features many adventure areas separated by small asset loading sections.

It's all a very clever way to have the highly detailed levels of games which preload gameplay areas without a lot of the issues that can crop up with streaming of assets (pop in, etc.).

The game really shouldn't be compared to open world games, although it's inevitable that people will do it.

Regards,
SB
 
BRiT said:
But Corpser takes up more of the screen, thus it requires more resources to render. I'm not getting your technical statement.
Click to expand...

Because the world serpent certainly has a much higher poly count, so it is far more difficult to render.
 
BRiT said:
But Corpser takes up more of the screen, thus it requires more resources to render. I'm not getting your technical statement.
Click to expand...

When the world serpent moves the water level in the lake drops by like 12 feet. He's still pretty far away in that screenshot. You see his coils moving around the distant mountains. Not that size is any actual indicator of technical accomplishment. His voice is actually the most impressive thing in this game to me.
 
BRiT said:
I'm just trying to direct a technical thread back to technical aspects, so dealing with actual quantitative numbers should be a goal.
Click to expand...
Here's a list of high end techniques and features employed by GoW from what I've gathered from DF analysis and eye balling as per technical thread.
Dynamic GI bounce
Voxel Grid volumetric lighting and fog
Subsurface Scattering
Very liberal usage of GPU particles
Snow tessellation
Water caustic
POM
Advanced fur shading that moves in the wind
Muscle deformation on Kratos
SSR
Mountain sized characters rendered and animated in impeccable detail
Very high quality assets both in polycount and texture res sprawling in dense environment throughout

Now I am missing poly count data on models and etc until SSM shares with us but those listed above are the obvious, that is if you've playing or played the game.
What does Ghost Recon Wildlands have?
Terrain tessellation
Vast draw distance
Dense environment
Dynamic TOD
Less advanced version of Volumetric lighting

That's it.
 
You listed a few points and some of them Wildlands doesn't have. For example, I miss interaction with snow.

But Wildlands also uses:
-SSS for characters and snow for example
-SSR
-POM
-GI

I would not call tesselated volumetric lighting less advanced.
Nvidia_Godrays_on by X-RAY-89, auf Flickr
Wildlands_z (1).jpg

It also has for example:
-dynamic time of day
-dynamic weather
-does not collapse at very high speeds even with all the tesselation and vegetation around
-HBAO+
-polygon (non 2d) gras which can react physically correct
NVidia Grass - reaction by X-RAY-89, auf Flickr

Assets
Assets in interior are low quality in comparison to The Division but the lighting and shadowing can make interiors still ok looking
Wildlands_z (2).jpg

Tesselation on the left building
Wildlands_z (4).jpg

I really like the shading. It makes the game realistic looking
Wildlands_z (5).jpg

Tree looks quite complex in my opinion
Wildlands_z (3).jpg

Do not forget that vegetation reacts to player related phsyics

When watching this video I am surprised that people are wondering why the game needs so much performance at ultra settings. Just look at all the vegetation and compare this with the simple paper 2D trees from Witcher 3. In my opinion Witcher III is the most graphically overrated game of this generation.

Once I saw a gigantic storm and it looked almost like the first Jurassic Park movie from the lighting and the mood. The trees reacted to the wind physics even at a distance of hundreds of meters.
 
Last edited:
Wildlands has poor assets tho in general, very low poly count models, structures, average texture res, no SSS on characters. And those count for a lot into making a game look great consistently. Wildlands sacrificed too much in asset quality for a big open world and it shows clearly here.
 
Another comparison with Quantum Break PC max settings ingame non cutscene models. The leap is huge, QB almost looks last gen in comparison.
0UAkbaX.jpg

jVo3XtP.jpg
 
Fanboys gonna fanboy.

Recop said:
Is this a serious question ? Could you imagine the same scale on PS1 ?

If it doesn't cause any technical challenge, then we should have already seen such big animals on much weaker hardwares.



As you can see, it's really easy :


It's probably why we already saw this process in several games...
Click to expand...
1. So, you don't know.

2. I'm thinking MGSV. Why not more? Because the devs want multi-shot cutscenes.
 
OCASM said:
1. So, you don't know.

2. I'm thinking MGSV. Why not more? Because the devs want multi-shot cutscenes.
Click to expand...

1) I don't know what ?

2) MG5 is full of loading screens...

God of War is the only game doing that = no loading time, no camera cuts.

But according to you, it's easy, even though Santa Monica especially says otherwise in their video...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top