The demo seems pretty grounded in reality to me. Despite still being a tech demo, they did frame it like a 3rd person game. Unlike their recent RT demos which seemed more targeted at animation studios, this new UE5 demos seems very focused on GAME making.
I'll point out a few thoughts still running through my head:
LODing: Any game with large environmenta still needs LOD management. When they say they don't need LODs, I am certain they actually mean "artists don't need to worry about LODs"
How are the LODs transitions handled? Maybe with micro-polygons they feel no transition is needed at all. New polys pop in and out of screen with no attempt to smooth that out and it still looks ok because they are all pixel sizef changes.
The implication of that are that this tech then NEEDS geometry to to be near-pixel sized for it to actually look good. It is a whole paradigm shift. So I'm very curious about how that can scale down.
Texturing/shading. So with a reyes-like world, do they bother to texture these micro-polies traditionally? They might just use gourad shaded polys at this point, becausw the mesh is dense enough for that to be enoigh and sounds so fucking high tech to me.
That also changes a lot about how one can encode/store/compress that data. And for XBSX's HW decompression to be leveraged, as I understand it, that data must be encoded as a texture, and holefuly in a way that ends up highly compressable in that format. SONY's more flexible choice for Kraken compression might be a big win here.
And Shading. Do you guys actually think they went full reyes here and went with object space shading? Doing it all per vertex? Ironic how old becomes new hugh... Anyway, I don't think they are going that route. my guess is they are sticking to deferred shading. For a generalist engine like UE, it is a good idea to have a G-Buffer, and it keeps stuff well separated. Object space shading just entangles lighting and material shading with geometry processing and all their culling and LODing wizzardly. Makes the engine too unwildly. I'd bet money that they are sticking to deferred.
I'll point out a few thoughts still running through my head:
LODing: Any game with large environmenta still needs LOD management. When they say they don't need LODs, I am certain they actually mean "artists don't need to worry about LODs"
How are the LODs transitions handled? Maybe with micro-polygons they feel no transition is needed at all. New polys pop in and out of screen with no attempt to smooth that out and it still looks ok because they are all pixel sizef changes.
The implication of that are that this tech then NEEDS geometry to to be near-pixel sized for it to actually look good. It is a whole paradigm shift. So I'm very curious about how that can scale down.
Texturing/shading. So with a reyes-like world, do they bother to texture these micro-polies traditionally? They might just use gourad shaded polys at this point, becausw the mesh is dense enough for that to be enoigh and sounds so fucking high tech to me.
That also changes a lot about how one can encode/store/compress that data. And for XBSX's HW decompression to be leveraged, as I understand it, that data must be encoded as a texture, and holefuly in a way that ends up highly compressable in that format. SONY's more flexible choice for Kraken compression might be a big win here.
And Shading. Do you guys actually think they went full reyes here and went with object space shading? Doing it all per vertex? Ironic how old becomes new hugh... Anyway, I don't think they are going that route. my guess is they are sticking to deferred shading. For a generalist engine like UE, it is a good idea to have a G-Buffer, and it keeps stuff well separated. Object space shading just entangles lighting and material shading with geometry processing and all their culling and LODing wizzardly. Makes the engine too unwildly. I'd bet money that they are sticking to deferred.
Last edited: