cheapchips
Veteran
More Lords of the Fallen footage.
Unreal Engine 5, [UE5 Developer Availability 2022-04-05]
- Thread starter mpg1
- Start date
DavidGraham
Veteran
The Isle Evrima is an early access UE5 title, released with Hardware Lumen.
GhostofWar
Regular
Wonder if the ark ue5 upgrade will help or hurt performance, I know it used to be pretty heavy and the console version was rough.
Secluded Orchid UE5 tech demo via DSOG.
Love all this ultra realism stuff (Unrecord etc), looking forward to being dropped in an open world environment that looks and plays like this. Maybe next gen before it matures?
FYQD Studio, the team behind Bright Memory Infinite, has shared a video, showcasing its latest Unreal Engine 5 Tech Demo, called Secluded Orchid. This tech demo will give you an idea of what FYQD Studio aims to achieve in its next title.
Love all this ultra realism stuff (Unrecord etc), looking forward to being dropped in an open world environment that looks and plays like this. Maybe next gen before it matures?
FYQD Studio, the team behind Bright Memory Infinite, has shared a video, showcasing its latest Unreal Engine 5 Tech Demo, called Secluded Orchid. This tech demo will give you an idea of what FYQD Studio aims to achieve in its next title.
I could see PS6 being capable of this.
cheapchips
Veteran
It's a content tool. It'll never run on a console and it's output is nanite objects. It should be fine for creating current gen content. In principle, it's just Matrix Awakens tools taken to the next level.
What was punting it to next gen for you (other than it's 0.1 status and how long game dev seems to take these days)?
Last edited:
The density and fidelity of the city. I am certain we will never see an actual game on PS5 that hits that level of fidelity.
cheapchips
Veteran
I don't see it rendering any more complexity and variety than the Matrix Awaken already demonstrates on XSS?
Matrix isn't an actual game.
cheapchips
Veteran
It seems like a meaningless distinction. It has plenty of sophistication for npc and physics behaviour. You could build a game with the components it demos. The open question is the scope of the experience you could squeeze in alongside the elements already on show.
UE5 devs explicitely said that the demo had some headroom for added gameplay ressources, and all the crash physics during the demo are real time and not baked, even during the chase sequence, that's why you can have different results even if the shooting demo is on rails.
The demo is 2 years old now, lots of optimizations have been made to the engine, it would run even better on consoles now.
The demo is 2 years old now, lots of optimizations have been made to the engine, it would run even better on consoles now.
I don’t believe the future software will reflect this but time will tell. We are going on year 4 and at this point I am beginning to accept that we will be getting moderately spiced up PS4 visuals with an RT effect or 2 sprinkled on top. Certainly no game on the horizon we have any real footage of looks anything like the various UE5 demos. PC will have whatever cool tech Nvidia puts out of course but that will be a very rare title here or there.
If CDPR can’t deliver a jaw dropping experience with UE5, put it out of its misery.
I’m more interested to compare what Playground can do with the next Fable and compare that with UE5 releases around the same time.
These demos are starting to become “trust me bro“ levels.
I’m more interested to compare what Playground can do with the next Fable and compare that with UE5 releases around the same time.
These demos are starting to become “trust me bro“ levels.
The development window for a AAA game means even the studios with the best technical chops only get 1 decent kick at the can before the hardware and engine architecture go under the knife for a revamp. Couple that with the business reality of needing cross-generation support and the reluctance to deviate from commercially proven gameplay formula. Whatever games people end up looking back on as the definitive showpieces for UE5, I'm not convinced they'll be anything more than better looking versions of existing games (that were themselves better looking versions of prior games.)
So I'll take your pessimism a step further: Even if it did, so what? Any studio that's actually able to deliver a game with those visuals and production quality aren't likely to do anything new or interesting with it.
So I'll take your pessimism a step further: Even if it did, so what? Any studio that's actually able to deliver a game with those visuals and production quality aren't likely to do anything new or interesting with it.
Talos Principle 2 demo is out. Messed around a bit to get some performance stats in an area with lots of geometry and a few reflective surfaces (water).
3090 @ 3840x1600
Medium: 95-100 fps
High: 70-75 fps
Ultra: 50-55 fps
Ultra + DLSS quality: 75-80 fps
Looks nice overall during regular gameplay but not a UE5 showcase. There are some issues once you start pixel peeping. Texture and geometry LOD streaming is very aggressive. If you turn away from an object for a second and then turn to look at it again it takes 3-5 seconds for the most detailed LOD to stream in. Lots of free VRAM available to keep those LODs resident but the game doesn’t seem to be taking advantage of it.
There are lots of walls with intricate carvings that look nice from far but pretty bad up close. The highest detail LODs are most definitely not using pixel sized triangles. Shadows look good on ultra but start looking pixelated on lower settings especially on fine geometry (grass, shrubs). Couldn’t see any reflections on water or on my metallic robot body.
The settings menu says that higher GI and reflection settings use a more accurate raytracing method but I’m not sure what it means. I assumed it meant HW vs SW Lumen but the profiler showed zero usage of hardware RT units. There were lots of compute dispatches as expected along with a surprising amount of hardware raster too. Overall SM utilization was very good with occupancy averaging ~30%.
3090 @ 3840x1600
Medium: 95-100 fps
High: 70-75 fps
Ultra: 50-55 fps
Ultra + DLSS quality: 75-80 fps
Looks nice overall during regular gameplay but not a UE5 showcase. There are some issues once you start pixel peeping. Texture and geometry LOD streaming is very aggressive. If you turn away from an object for a second and then turn to look at it again it takes 3-5 seconds for the most detailed LOD to stream in. Lots of free VRAM available to keep those LODs resident but the game doesn’t seem to be taking advantage of it.
There are lots of walls with intricate carvings that look nice from far but pretty bad up close. The highest detail LODs are most definitely not using pixel sized triangles. Shadows look good on ultra but start looking pixelated on lower settings especially on fine geometry (grass, shrubs). Couldn’t see any reflections on water or on my metallic robot body.
The settings menu says that higher GI and reflection settings use a more accurate raytracing method but I’m not sure what it means. I assumed it meant HW vs SW Lumen but the profiler showed zero usage of hardware RT units. There were lots of compute dispatches as expected along with a surprising amount of hardware raster too. Overall SM utilization was very good with occupancy averaging ~30%.
I hope it's eventually good as my wife and I still enjoy playing the original PvE style occasionally. Given how the original Ark went I don't necessarily expect it to be great right off the bat though. In theory it's a good fit for the new systems (large open world with fully dynamic lighting), but I suspect it will take a fair amount of time for them to tune everything, as it did with the original (and you could argue it's still effectively an indy game that blew up rather than something with AAA or even AA polish).
But hey dinosaurs fun, even if a bit jank
Last edited:
Similar threads
