The cloud is just over the horizon [2018-2019]

Discussion in 'Console Technology' started by Lalaland, Jul 16, 2018.

  1. iroboto

    iroboto Daft Funk
    Legend Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    7,788
    Likes Received:
    6,080
    Scripted. It always happens exactly the same way. It’s just changing the level while you watch an animation happen.

    If you took Crackdown tech and you applied it to a space sim, like descent free space. We could literally blow ships apart deck by deck piece by piece. Fly through them appropriately all according to physics and how the game dynamically unfolds.
     
  2. milk

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,952
    Likes Received:
    2,514
    You are thinking of the big set-piece "levolution" thing of BF4. BF1 & BF5, as well as Bad Company 1 & 2, actually have procedural destruction in single player and online.
     
    orangpelupa, lefantome and DSoup like this.
  3. iroboto

    iroboto Daft Funk
    Legend Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    7,788
    Likes Received:
    6,080
    Okay. Even then. It’s not at the same level as CD. And not all buildings can collapse
     
  4. milk

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,952
    Likes Received:
    2,514
    Sure, but shifty's question was what the cloud is computing if the debris are non interactive. Is it computing their animation just for aesthetics then?
    Is every moving piece non-interacting? Even if a whole bridge collapses? If not, how big does a structure have to be to remain solid when moving?
    Those are interesting questions.
     
    lefantome likes this.
  5. Shifty Geezer

    Shifty Geezer uber-Troll!
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    40,611
    Likes Received:
    11,043
    Location:
    Under my bridge
    Are Crackdown 3's pieces solid? Can you flatten someone by dropping debris on them?
     
  6. lefantome

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Messages:
    154
    Likes Received:
    71
    Every multiplayer game synchronises data across all clients, I don't see anything impressive in what they are showing.

    Destruction wise it looks worse than Red Faction Guerrilla (No floating structures allowed) but on a slightly larger scale.
     
  7. AlBran

    AlBran Ferro-Fibrous
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    20,671
    Likes Received:
    5,761
    Location:
    ಠ_ಠ
    By that token, a Battle Royale game is unimpressive next to a single player RTS. Feel free to point out the flaws or disingenuity.
     
    Silent_Buddha and BRiT like this.
  8. iroboto

    iroboto Daft Funk
    Legend Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    7,788
    Likes Received:
    6,080
    They are solid.
    Unsure if you can flatten someone by dropping debris on them. Might be a game decision. I'm not sure. I'm not part of the technical test so I can't make my own yet.
    Looks like you get damaged if it does fall on you.
    As for whether it relates to gameplay. For a lot of gamers, at first glance it doesn't. Most people don't get it. For a lot of players who play these types of games, it does.
    If you ever played World of Warcraft Arena, everything is lock on, auto attack. The only way to stop a group from hitting you is to break line of sight, ie hiding behind a pillar.
    There is absolutely no other way except line of sight and kiting them out of range of their attack. And team members need to work together to flush healers out of cover, control the attacks etc etc. There is a ton of coordination around it, and an e-sport that eventually died off on it over the past 2 years.

    And this game is exactly the same. It has a lock on which is how you fire, since you don't aim. So once you're locked on, you have to break LOS to stay alive. One of those ways is going to be hiding in buildings etc. But clearly with the right weaponry they can punch through it. And you can do the same by breaking through walls of your choice etc.

    If you want to say that Battlefield destruction is like Crackdown, you're welcome to. I can't stop you from making that commentary. But to me, it's like saying baked GI and dynamic GI are the same. Except they aren't when things get moving.

    Look at how debris does stay grounded.
    Link 1






    BFV for comparison.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIwOZs7csjc

    I'm fairly confident, BFV has some very specific ways buildings explode.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0BFe5cGSjk

    Not quite the same as the more physically based setup around crackdown.
     
    #88 iroboto, Feb 15, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2019
    BRiT likes this.
  9. AlBran

    AlBran Ferro-Fibrous
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    20,671
    Likes Received:
    5,761
    Location:
    ಠ_ಠ
    We do have to be a bit careful in making a comparison of the physics destruction in the context of the allowable gameplay surrounding it. Crackdown's gameplay loop allows for a much more dynamic flow of movement compared to military shooters (COD: AW/IW notwithstanding *cough*).

    That said, the dynamism should be readily apparent compared to levolution even if the scripted events tied to the latter (flooding, for example) can be more impactful for various reasons.

    *sidenote: reminds me of a couple Gears 2/3 maps that had a trigger for map-changing events, though obviously scripted.
     
    #89 AlBran, Feb 15, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2019
  10. iroboto

    iroboto Daft Funk
    Legend Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    7,788
    Likes Received:
    6,080
    I don't disagree with that, but they brought forward how it's different from Battlefield. I can only compare what they want me to compare to. There's no other game like crackdown. So I'm not sure what I should be comparing against. The argument against crackdown cloud destruction is not needed, and that we can see equivalent destruction in other games. So by default I have to use them as examples.
     
  11. AlBran

    AlBran Ferro-Fibrous
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    20,671
    Likes Received:
    5,761
    Location:
    ಠ_ಠ
    I would be rather curious to see lots of soldiers firing rockets etc. at the building in BF just to simulate the higher rate of fire we do see in Crackdown, for instance. That way we can remove the typical gameplay loop just to look at how the tech responds.

    As a game changer, well, you know my own thoughts on Crackdown being chosen as the IP for destruction tech, but I find it's a fairly inadequate setting that's been forced to integrate it as a solution looking for a problem, so it's not a great showcase to impress upon the potential of the dynamism on there when we could have a Battlemech Grand Melee, and I'll stop there. :V

    Unfortunately for CD3, there's probably zero interest in developing anything more, but it's a bit of a shame they don't take advantage of the Agency Vehicle and a system of MP character progression (in place of orbs) to change up the gameplay from just being a rather glorified rocket arena.
     
    #91 AlBran, Feb 15, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2019
  12. iroboto

    iroboto Daft Funk
    Legend Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    7,788
    Likes Received:
    6,080
    I don't want to get into the politics of it. For me, they either succeeded or didn't in developing the technology.
    They took a physics based engine with destruction, amped it up to 10, that would run well on any GPU sure, i guess there are limitations to how much debris will stay on the floor before memory maxes out. But they took that concept, and they synced it with all the other players in real time so that they coudl see everything exploding and crashing all at once, without slow down. Running on a jaguar CPU, and 1.3TF GPU.

    To me, they succeeded at what they wanted to do. What they do with that knowledge or tech is entirely up to them as it could certainly be applicable to things like Mech Warrior, or a new Descent Freespace with super carriers etc.
     
    milk, AzBat and AlBran like this.
  13. Shifty Geezer

    Shifty Geezer uber-Troll!
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    40,611
    Likes Received:
    11,043
    Location:
    Under my bridge
    I do wish people wouldn't put words in my mouth. All I've done is ask questions. All I know of in-game destruction in these multiplayer games is a few snippets of video clips online - I don't play them. To me, seeing video clips, I don't understand that difference between Crackdown 3 and other games, which is why I ask, and where your new videos do show a scale I hadn't seen before and thus informing me of the differences. [/shrug]
     
    lefantome likes this.
  14. iroboto

    iroboto Daft Funk
    Legend Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    7,788
    Likes Received:
    6,080
    my apologies. i just read this specific comment (it's nothign better than Red Faction, nothing special over battlefield etc etc) so many times from so many different angles and directions in so many threads that it's easy to just lump people together into a group.
     
  15. milk

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,952
    Likes Received:
    2,514
    Great selection. These videos make it clear the scale of C3 are indeed beyond anything that came before it on console. It's not too unlike RFG, but with 10x the scale (although somewhat similar debris size)
    As for BF games, yes, the destruction is less detailed. The models are segmented in fewer bigger pieces, bit the physics are still procedural the same way. And C3/RF still also has "pre-baked" parts at which geometry will break. Geometry is not segmented in real time, the pre made pieces are just separated.
    Anyway, C3 sure is synching A LOT of moving objects at the stress points there. Cudos to the team to pulling that off. Say what you want about the game, the promised tech did come through (downgraded, but still beyond anything anywhere else)
     
    AzBat and BRiT like this.
  16. lefantome

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Messages:
    154
    Likes Received:
    71
    They are both unimpressicu because they both use established technology and do nothing extraordinary.

    Crackdown 3 was supposed to surprise us with amazing physics powered by the cloud and has nothing of it

    Yes like RFG that came out 10 years ago, but on a bigger scale but not that much.

    Not impressive.

    Of course being a multiplayer mode everything is better simulated server side where an hardware more powerful than jaguar may be available (this has been valid for any multiplayer game with dedicated servers) but still the gains are not that much.

    What's the cost of it?
    We don't know but it's clear that Microsoft was willing to put a lot of money oncthe project for the last 5 years while nobody else has done the same for other products.

    There are 0 games announced with amazing cloud powered features.
     
    #96 lefantome, Feb 16, 2019
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 16, 2019
  17. steveOrino

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    Messages:
    479
    Likes Received:
    140


    I guess they came to the realization that engineering gigantic points of failure into games was bat shit insane.
     
    lefantome and Recop like this.
  18. function

    function None functional
    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Messages:
    5,135
    Likes Received:
    2,248
    Location:
    Wrong thread
    Embedding a YouTube isn't a legitimate response to milk's statement. He said the technology came through. It did.

    I guess you missed Apex Legends.
     
  19. DSoup

    DSoup meh
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    Messages:
    10,923
    Likes Received:
    5,723
    Location:
    London, UK
    The 'individual bullet' demonstration should have raised some flags and I'm curious about the engineering behind the 2015 demonstration given the pistol-like weapon fires multiple rounds a second with a near-instantaneous impact time which is impossible to simulate in realtime on the cloud because of the latency in sending data, having it simulated, then the data sent back, processed in the game world and finally rendered.

    I also have newfound respect what Red Faction did with big structure physics on lastgen consoles. What most stands out in the released game is the weird lack of projectile-impact effect on geometry; it's almost as though projectiles vanish. No puff of concrete dust or spark on metal.
     
    lefantome likes this.
  20. milk

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,952
    Likes Received:
    2,514
    @steveOrino why did you cut this part (downgraded, but still beyond anything anywhere else) out of the quote?

    I acknowledged there was a big downgrade. But they still delivered massive amounts of physics through the cloud. It's still a lot of data you have to send from server to client at very little lag for this to work. It's not as simple as throwing money at servers. Computing the physics is the easy part. The challenge had always been synching it up between users. Even if the scale is not as big as the first demos (we all knew that would happen from the beginning) they still manage to make it work.

    Does it impact gameplay meaningfully? Does it fit the gameplay style of the series well? Is it as good as the ridiculous old demo? Is it economically practical? Will many more games use this level of cloud compute? Does it reduce the power gap between PS4 and XBONE as promised? (God, I had to laugh while writing this last one)
    Those are all debatable, and I'm very critical of these whole shenanigans.
    To me this was no more than a very expensive marketing ploy that came out too late for it to still work and too unimpressive to even work as a marketing move. It should have been cancelled.

    Still, regardless of all that. There is more real time dynamic moving objects synched up between multiple clients in C3 than in any other game EVER. We need to give credit where it is due.

    Also, where more games might not wanna contract a bunch of Azure servers for their game just because of Crackdown, whatever technical wizardry developed to transfer this much real time data in an action game online sure would be useful to any other online action game with physics.
     
    Silent_Buddha and iroboto like this.
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...