Tomb Raider: Underworld

[ShootMyMonkey]

I'm talking about high-res hand painted and layered textures. Since every texture is different in uncharted, and you can differntiate between them, it has a very clean look.

Every texture is different? Are you kidding me? I spotted texture and geometry repetition in Uncharted before even a single second passed. Granted, it's something that I just happen to habitually spot in every game I ever look at (longest it's ever taken me to spot a case is 4 seconds), but you have to be joking if you think there's really any sort of texturing uniqueness.

For me, what killed Uncharted when I saw the demo was the torsion springs on the grass. It took almost nothing to get the grass to spin around wildly at hundreds of RPMs cutting through the geometry. It's not so much that I look upon that as some unforgivable misuse of physics, but that I found twisting the grass into semi-resonance so incredibly amusing that I just wanted to do that over and over rather than play anything.

I was under the impression that Uncharted used a good amount of repeated textures, though through layering it helps break the monotony.

That's basically it. We do the same as that's really the only thing you can do when you have so little memory to work with (sorry, but the Gears approach is insanely resource-hungry). And Uncharted had less to spare than we did on the PS3 since it came out that much longer ago. There's little reason to think for an instant that there's a shortage of repetition -- there is no genuine uniqueness of texture or geometry in any game. There is only a question of how apparent it is.

In reality, all deepbrown is talking about is the effects of the high saturation and contrast.

nooooooooooooooo must not be sub HD (never mind that 30%-50% of games this gen are)

I think the figure is higher than that, but whatever. A big part of it is that PS3's OS takes up too much RAM (and framebuffer is an easy target, especially considering that and nobody likes tiling on 360. The long and the short of it is that anybody who thinks these consoles are *suitable* for HD-level rendering in this day and age, especially 1080, is completely deluded. Doesn't mean it's not possible, just that being suited to it is not the case. I know the hardware looks overall in the same league that was able to handle some impressive resolutions on the PC, but we often forget how much more people try to do with it at this stage, especially considering the kind of power the CPUs have. If the benchmark of graphics was still Doom3, then we'd probably be fine, but not with the kind of stuff that is targeted by most anyone today. We also couldn't even move very much data quickly to the GPU on PCs in the days when chips of this level were new, so fillrate never appeared to be an issue, but when you're this much closer to any GPU, the faults are bared for all to see.

SMM was there any talk of delaying the title until after the holidays or was there concern that TRU would get overshadowed by the other titles appearing on shelves this holiday season.

Delaying until after the holidays would likely be far more suicidal than standing toe-to-toe with juggernauts. Missing that time window when people actually buy luxury items like games is equivalent to not selling. Certainly being on the shelf at the same time as say, a Gears of War which is going to get the prime shelf space whether you like it or not, is quite a dire place to be, but it's typically safer to be there for the day Post-Thanksgiving shopping season and suffer the hit you're going to take when POP and Gears and LBP and so on are all out than it is to wait out the fade which will basically take you out into early 2009. Most predictions say that if we were to wait out that long, we'd be better off doing it after the next inauguration and hope and pray that it will be Obama being sworn in. Kind of a lousy spot to be in any way you slice it. Since any product's lifespan on the shelf is really tiny, it's always best to get that tiny window when people will buy than to hope there will be another chance.

 

[deepbrown]

Every texture is different? Are you kidding me? I spotted texture and geometry repetition in Uncharted before even a single second passed. Granted, it's something that I just happen to habitually spot in every game I ever look at (longest it's ever taken me to spot a case is 4 seconds), but you have to be joking if you think there's really any sort of texturing uniqueness.

For me, what killed Uncharted when I saw the demo was the torsion springs on the grass. It took almost nothing to get the grass to spin around wildly at hundreds of RPMs cutting through the geometry. It's not so much that I look upon that as some unforgivable misuse of physics, but that I found twisting the grass into semi-resonance so incredibly amusing that I just wanted to do that over and over rather than play anything.


That's basically it. We do the same as that's really the only thing you can do when you have so little memory to work with (sorry, but the Gears approach is insanely resource-hungry). And Uncharted had less to spare than we did on the PS3 since it came out that much longer ago. There's little reason to think for an instant that there's a shortage of repetition -- there is no genuine uniqueness of texture or geometry in any game. There is only a question of how apparent it is.

In reality, all deepbrown is talking about is the effects of the high saturation and contrast.

I'm sorry, of course I didn't mean every texture is unique. What I meant was there are a huge amount of unique textures, which becomes clear as you progress the game (and play more than just the demo.) And the textures that are layered are so different and high-res that you can differntiate between them. Low-res textures = hard to differentiate, meaning blurry and muddy look.

As for the grass, that's clearly part of ND's cartoony style - I felt it suited the game very well. It amused me too. Amusing grass movement didn't "kill" the game.

And once again, don't reduce my comments to "saturation and contrast" - I can reduce the saturation so far down on Uncharted to B&W and the textures would still look better than TRU. Uncharted is arguably the graphical king on consoles, and to think that it's only the case because of "saturation and contrast" is idiotic. You might be layering textures, but they aren't particularily high-res.

I'm not sure whether you're suggesting TRU must necessarily be sub-HD because of memory constraints, but if you are, I don't think that's the case. Remember, you apparently have more memory than ND when they made a 720p game. In the end, it all comes down to budget and whether the game is exclusive or not. Still - I've seen very good looking 720p multi-platform games...

Anyway, 1. I may have played an old build. 2. It looks good.

 

[ShootMyMonkey]

As for the grass, that's clearly part of ND's cartoony style - I felt it suited the game very well. It amused me too. Amusing grass movement didn't "kill" the game.

That sounds more apologetic for an obvious flaw than anything else. There are obvious glaring flaws in any game that are so easy as pie to exploit if you know where to look... but when exploiting the flaw is the thing that amuses you most, that's a little troublesome.

I'm not sure whether you're suggesting TRU must necessarily be sub-HD because of memory constraints, but if you are, I don't think that's the case.

What I was getting at with memory constraints was about how you have to manage texture resources. The approach of few big high-res textures is really quite foolhardy compared to many lower res blended, tiled, layered textures.

Going for less framebuffer resolution is generally not going to save you much in terms of memory capacity at all... memory bandwidth and fill rate utilization, that's a different story. And since it's such an easy target for making yourself a little more efficient, you do have some advantage associated with it. That is to say nothing of the fact that more texture layers means more texture reads and filtering, and that is going to take a huge hit if your framebuffer operations are hogging the bus... the impact of resolution is really indirect in that case... With 360, this is less of a concern because the framebuffer isn't going to share any of that main memory bandwidth, but tiling as implemented on the 360 (that is to say, highly intrusive and non-transparent) can never be viewed in a positive light.

Now being a sub-HD game in the more generic sense has more to do with fillrate and in the case of PS3, bandwidth as well... With regards to fillrate, the PS2 is really the only console that didn't suck. And rendering several times more texture layers and a couple times more polygons in this day and age only magnifies the incongruity to the point where a lot of the "new-fangled" optimization techniques are not at all optional. They're applied with a level of desperation one would normally associate with being a hostage.

 

[deepbrown]

That sounds more apologetic for an obvious flaw than anything else. There are obvious glaring flaws in any game that are so easy as pie to exploit if you know where to look... but when exploiting the flaw is the thing that amuses you most, that's a little troublesome.


What I was getting at with memory constraints was about how you have to manage texture resources. The approach of few big high-res textures is really quite foolhardy compared to fewer lower res blended, tiled, layered textures.

Going for less framebuffer resolution is generally not going to save you much in terms of memory capacity at all... memory bandwidth and fill rate utilization, that's a different story. And since it's such an easy target for making yourself a little more efficient, you do have some advantage associated with it. That is to say nothing of the fact that more texture layers means more texture reads and filtering, and that is going to take a huge hit if your framebuffer operations are hogging the bus... the impact of resolution is really indirect in that case... With 360, this is less of a concern because the framebuffer isn't going to share any of that main memory bandwidth, but tiling as implemented on the 360 (that is to say, highly intrusive and non-transparent) can never be viewed in a positive light.

Now being a sub-HD game in the more generic sense has more to do with fillrate and in the case of PS3, bandwidth as well... With regards to fillrate, the PS2 is really the only console that didn't suck. And rendering several times more texture layers and a couple times more polygons in this day and age only magnifies the incongruity to the point where a lot of the "new-fangled" optimization techniques are not at all optional. They're applied with a level of desperation one would normally associate with being a hostage.

That grass is so obviously over exaggerated that you can see it's deliberate. Other foliage moves differently when you interact with it - it's pretty clear they meant the grass to move like that.

And so for 720-1080p games that look incredible? Why is that not open to all developers? As far as I'm concerned - money and time.

 

[Daozang]

The demo is actually very good! One thing that I didn't like though was the camera whith the weapons drawn. Very close to the character... Other than that, great! I playd the demo on pc, and I find it hard to believe that the console versions can do a better job in the graphics department... I'll check the xbox version when it becomes available for us silver members...!

 

[Arwin]

That sounds more apologetic for an obvious flaw than anything else. There are obvious glaring flaws in any game that are so easy as pie to exploit if you know where to look... but when exploiting the flaw is the thing that amuses you most, that's a little troublesome.

I think the charm of Uncharted is that the whole forest sways in the wind, and the (even if it's just some and it's limited) interactive leaves, the quality of the lighting and dynamic shadows (that move along with the individual leaves of the trees, over the character, etc.), makes for a compelling whole, especially in combination with the huge variety of the game's graphics in general.

That said, I'm not even sure if it's fair of any of us to ask you to even like Uncharted. Also I do appreciate that the jungle in Tomb Raider looks pretty good, with a lot of varied foliage and trees.

What I was getting at with memory constraints was about how you have to manage texture resources. The approach of few big high-res textures is really quite foolhardy compared to fewer lower res blended, tiled, layered textures.

This is a bit weak though - the way textures are handled and even the complete graphics pipeline in Uncharted is pretty well documented by ND themselves, and you can read it back in a fair bit of detail in their gdc released pdf. For me, the combination of quality and quantity in their title is very good, and I think it's an example of where the combination of the HDD and the BluRay is put to good use.

In fact, if I were to discuss the whole rendering pipeline further, I would much prefer to take ND's document as a guideline. They do some interesting things there, but as not all games are that well documented, it's hard to compare notes on that respect. If you can point out where the PS3's architecture has held them down in that document, it would be interesting to know. Also, with next year probably seeing the next Uncharted, with no doubt a whole lot of improvements to the engine, it would be fun to predict where those improvements have been made in the light of what their current bottlenecks are.

Though probably that's best done in the Uncharted thread?

In general though I think it's much fairer to appreciate Tomb Raider's accomplishments in the light of its multi-platform development - generally we look a lot more harshly on upscaled games when they are platform exclusive (like Haze? ).

 

[el_rika]

Is this game a direct sequel to Tomb Raider: Legend ?

10x

 

[AzBat]

Is this game a direct sequel to Tomb Raider: Legend ?

10x

From what I was able to gather, yes, it's suppose to be a sequel to Legend. From the demo it seems the story is on par as far as quality goes.

Tommy McClain

 

[ShootMyMonkey]

That grass is so obviously over exaggerated that you can see it's deliberate. Other foliage moves differently when you interact with it - it's pretty clear they meant the grass to move like that.

I don't really believe that's the case. It's actually passable and hardly noticeable for the case of running straight through. It only shows its ridiculous nature when you deviate from the primrose path that they've laid out for you. I also don't agree for an instant that other foliage isn't flawed in its motion, albeit not equally screwed. For the most part, everything I saw in the way the foliage moved was the most basic (and hence, don't require a lot of power). I'm not even a physics/simulation guy, and I could see the equations pop into my head just watching it...

And so for 720-1080p games that look incredible? Why is that not open to all developers? As far as I'm concerned - money and time.

That's a beautifully naive and glib oversimplification. You make it sound as if there are either one-size fits-all solutions out there, or countlessly many available... both of which are completely untrue. Even with infinite money, you can't change what it is you're working with, and if your priorities go down one path, then sacrifices will have to be made at some point. Nothing ever works like the Creature's response to bump-mapped ragdoll assets with the universal solution of "But I'm a millionaire." The idea that every problem has a solution is patently false.

Try to do too much of X and you will suffer in Y. Try to optimize the hell out of Y, and you'll hit limits in Z. Try to do it all, and failure is an absolute certainty. And working your way around to find a compromise creates complexity. Complexity breeds fragility, and fragility creates surprises, and there is simply no such thing as a surprise that works in your favor. The ground fundamental principle in all fields of engineering is that the universe in all its glory exists only to conspire against you, the engineer.

If you want a more generic way of putting it, games that look good at 720/1080 do not look as they because the team did something to make it possible, but because they did NOT do things that put it out of reach. Granted, in the case of Uncharted, there are visual enhancements and post-processing that serve for most of its look, but having the room for that involves just more stuff that was not done.

This is a bit weak though - the way textures are handled and even the complete graphics pipeline in Uncharted is pretty well documented by ND themselves, and you can read it back in a fair bit of detail in their gdc released pdf.

Small error in what I typed where I meant to say many smaller, tiled, blended texture layers. In any case, what I was getting at was not Uncharted's pipeline, but more like the Gears pipeline. In terms of texture management strategies, I think it's fair to say that Uncharted and TR are pretty darn similar. I think the biggest differences tend to lie in quantities -- TR tends to have more of everything that eats up resources and less of everything that's cheap. And in turn, what a lot of people naturally think is the gold standard because they hold certain absolutes in a vacuum with no context. It's funny how when it comes to things that are viewed in a positive light, people always talk about it as if there is only one way to skin a cat. But when it's something that is viewed in a negative light, all of a sudden there are a million and one ways to deal with it, and any and all failure to do so is unquestionably for lack of trying.

Is this game a direct sequel to Tomb Raider: Legend?

That is correct.

 

[digitalwanderer]

The game has one serious lack, it needs more chrome.

 

[deepbrown]

That's a beautifully naive and glib oversimplification. You make it sound as if there are either one-size fits-all solutions out there, or countlessly many available... both of which are completely untrue. Even with infinite money, you can't change what it is you're working with, and if your priorities go down one path, then sacrifices will have to be made at some point. Nothing ever works like the Creature's response to bump-mapped ragdoll assets with the universal solution of "But I'm a millionaire." The idea that every problem has a solution is patently false.

Try to do too much of X and you will suffer in Y. Try to optimize the hell out of Y, and you'll hit limits in Z. Try to do it all, and failure is an absolute certainty. And working your way around to find a compromise creates complexity. Complexity breeds fragility, and fragility creates surprises, and there is simply no such thing as a surprise that works in your favor. The ground fundamental principle in all fields of engineering is that the universe in all its glory exists only to conspire against you, the engineer.

If you want a more generic way of putting it, games that look good at 720/1080 do not look as they because the team did something to make it possible, but because they did NOT do things that put it out of reach. Granted, in the case of Uncharted, there are visual enhancements and post-processing that serve for most of its look, but having the room for that involves just more stuff that was not done.

Then what does TRU do that Uncharted doesn't? What does Haze do that Uncharted doesn't? What does TRU do that Killzone 2 doesn't? Seriously. The best looking games on the PS3 are Uncharted, Ratchet, GT5P, LittleBigPlanet, Killzone 2. All are over 720p. If they made sacrifices to reach such amazing visuals AND at 720p, then you should be taking notice and learning from the moves they've made. All are well versed with the SPU's, all understand the PS3's kinks, and all know what sacrifices to make. To say TRU is doing so much more than these games so it has to drop resolution is a cop-out.

It all comes down to this. Time, Money, Knowledge, and the want to find a solution without sacrificing resolution. And ND didn't achieve what they did by "not doing" things. Of course they made sacrifices, but they did a hell of a lot in SPU research, in using the HDD and Blu-ray. Their PS3 tech is arguably at the very top and it's not because they're "not doing stuff," it's because they are extremely pro-active.

And I'm not saying TR looks like crap - from what I've seen, it doesn't look incredible. I am impressed by the amount of geometry. I don't have a pre-defined standard of what looks good and what doesn't. I just know what looks better than something else. I said the same about Haze, and Free Radiacal were just as stubborn - telling me how much more their game was doing. I referenced Uncharted once again, and in response I got "yes it looks good, but I bet it has lots of loading." I wish developers would realise that just because they are using "100%" of the resources, it doesn't mean there isn't more to give. Otherwise, they will always be miffed when other games come out that look magnitudes better than theirs. Yes, you're doing a lot with the hardware, but you could always do more - with time, money and knowledge. Free Radical had two of those things - the other they claimed they had by saying "they know PlayStation hardware" and thus turned down Sony technicians to help them...

 

[Dominik D]

Then what does TRU do that Uncharted doesn't?

Gives you the ability to play on a large map? In other words: it's not a corridor action game.

What does TRU do that Killzone 2 doesn't?

Based on vids - IKA for character's feet.

 

[L. Scofield]

And another thread gets crapped on by the SDF. Great job deepbrown.

 

[gongo]

Why single out deepbrown? I certainly agree with him Uncharted looks better than TRU, 360 or PS3 versions. A first generation game that is 720p with 2xAA. If the rumors that PS3 TRU is rendering at 576p SD, then it is a shame. Uncharted is ND territory, first party exclusive and all. There is always, always going to be a difference in quality and talent put behind such titles. What is there to dispute?

Sadly, ND programmers do not post here so nothing about that.

 

[Daozang]

I think that the tech behind Uncharted suits perfectly the art direction that went with it. It seems that it's doing everything right only because the artists used the tech efficiently. TR, at least from the pc demo, is IMO very good technically and perhaps more importantly, it's good evenly on most aspects of its engine.

 

[L. Scofield]

Why single out deepbrown? I

You're right. You too stop ruining this thread

 

[AlNom]

Why single out deepbrown?

I haven't quite followed every post* (yet!), but there shouldn't have been game comparisons to begin with. And as all of you can see... there's a good reason for it.

Edit:

*Not picking on anyone in particular of course

 

[betan]

I haven't quite followed every post (yet!), but there shouldn't have been game comparisons to begin with. And as all of you can see... there's a good reason for it.

To be fair though, deep is not the one who brought up Uncharted.

 

[L. Scofield]

To be fair though, deep is not the one who brought up Uncharted.

The thread went downhill starting from here:
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1234238&postcount=239

 

[deepbrown]

The thread went downhill starting from here:
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1234238&postcount=239

No I didn't bring up Uncharted. I said it didn't look great graphically - naturally i expect the developer to disagree. Plus when someone says it looks better than one of the most impressive games out on consoles - why the hell shouldn't I respond? I then have a developer saying Uncharted only looks better (different) than TR because of contrast and saturation... Shoot me for taking the bait I guess.

Gives you the ability to play on a large map? In other words: it's not a corridor action game.

Based on vids - IKA for character's feet.

If you believe that those things mean TRU must necessarily be sub-HD then I personally do not agree.

Why single out deepbrown? I certainly agree with him Uncharted looks better than TRU, 360 or PS3 versions. A first generation game that is 720p with 2xAA. If the rumors that PS3 TRU is rendering at 576p SD, then it is a shame. Uncharted is ND territory, first party exclusive and all. There is always, always going to be a difference in quality and talent put behind such titles. What is there to dispute?

Sadly, ND programmers do not post here so nothing about that.

They used to.