Unreal Engine 5, [UE5 Developer Availability 2022-04-05]
- Thread starter mpg1
- Start date
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
In the past few weeks he's made 2 videos on an extensive mod for Control and another video looking at Cyberpunk overdrive. It's not simply endless videos on #stutterstruggle.
And lol at 'a bit buggy', come on man. DF is primarily about a channel dealing with technology that exists in actual products, while TSR improvements would be interesting to see at some point, it's ultimately more relevant to their userbase to see how technology in in shipping games is actually being implemented. DF would be receiving a lot of flak, and rightfully so, if they continually forgoed looking at major releases like Jedi Survivor in lieu of making another video at the state of reconstruction tech - hell they got some grief for not covering TLOU before now. He's one dude. I'm sure TSR will get more coverage when it's in actual games and can be compared to DLSS/FSR, but I don't really see the point of a seperate video covering it when it's main usage right now is in demos unless it brings something truly revolutionary to the table.
Maybe if we had more outlets that actually provided this level of analysis you would get a more positive mix in DF's PC coverage, but it's not Alex's fault that publishers have deemed fit to release games lately that fall so far short, so often, and other channels give the most threadbare analysis to the actual software which we purchase hardware for. "Too much critique of the state of PC games" is really the least of PC Gaming's problems right now.
Last edited:
Roughly 0.25 fps on a two grand GPU...
For 30fps, we'd need a 120x performance increase. We'd also need the price down at console levels, to a quarter, say (I know, retail price isn't production price, etc.). Roughly 500x reduction. That'd be a halving 9x...if we double performance every 1.5 years, that's 13+ years away. Okay, we can use reconstruction etc. to save rendering effort, but to scale up like this, the Cloud seems the only platform that can scale to that level of performance.
DavidGraham
Veteran
What why? What it's in that is taking so long to render? It runs fine in real time at native 4K, max settings, HWRT on any 3090 class hardware.
Poor cloud platform holders. Then they have to allocate 120 x RTX 4090 for each player.
But just saw UE5 in the cloud here, it seems:
DavidGraham
Veteran
Again, something is definitely wrong in that video, he is either rendering at an insane resolution (16K?), or using the UE5 path tracing mode with crazy amount of samples.
Here is the 5.1 demo running at 90fps max settings, native 4K on a 4090.
This is what Shifty said, it is above realtime rendering quality. The guy said it 2 hours and 35 minutes to render on a high end PC. There is nothing wrong he does RE reflection above realtime rendering quality. First it is render at 6k
In the comment he said he can reach nearly same quality in 5.3 and I suppose non native 4k
DavidGraham
Veteran
A game called Brickadia has integrated PhysX 5 in UE5.1 engine, instead of Chaos, citing huge performance uplifts with PhysX 5 over Chaos in large simulations.
brickadia.com
Devlog #1 - Upgrading Brickadia to Unreal Engine 5.1
Starting off our new dev blog series with a jump to the future - Brickadia will be using Unreal Engine 5.1 in Early Access. Read on for what it took to get there.
brickadia.com
That level of environment detail is what I'm hoping GTA 6 can come close to.
cheapchips
Veteran
Rage has great streaming. It'll be interesting to see how that, coupled with art megabucks, competes with Nanite. One of thr impressive things about the Matrix/City/Menace demos is how little in the way of art resources went into them, relatively speaking.
cheapchips
Veteran
Time flies when you're waiting for actual current gen games to turn up
D
Deleted member 2197
Guest
Frenetic Pony
Veteran
Yeah the Overdrive thing is hilarious, I love how over the top he is for Nvidia marketing. Functionally it's not really different from what UE5 is doing with "Lumen", in fact they're both limited to 2 bounces currently, and 99% of the time you can't tell them apart, but "Overdrive" runs ten times slower. Definitely needs a 20 minute video gushing over it.
As for his takes on most PC games, they have gotten terrible. He doesn't care about what it's like to actually play the game, evidenced by the "terrible port!!!" of Final Fantasy VII remake having "Very Positive" on Steam from 13k review, pretty much the same for the "super problematic" Resident Evil 4, Overwhelmingly Positive on Steam from 50k reviews. His reviews don't match up at all with people's experiences, and so aren't informative to anyone. All he does is gush over marketing material and whine about about things at such a high pitch you can't get any information at all.
Last edited:
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
FFVII, especially at launch, was a "disappointing" port, as it was actually described by DF. For one, atrocious shader stuttering that was only partially remedied by forcing it into DX11 mode (which breaks HDR & Vsync). It also had forced dynamic res that was only fixed via a mod, an utterly incomprehensible decision.
Secondly...Alex didn't even do the review.
As for bringing in Steam reviews to this (?):
For a technical review, I want to see opinions backed up with actual data, not the "I don't know what people are complaining about, I used Rivatuner and downloaded this replacement oodle.dll and it fixed everything" idiots. I don't go to Steam reviews/forums for accurate assessments of most things, let alone on a technical basis.
DF actually gives context as to what it's like to actually play the game, through visual comparisons and real frametime measurements, on properly maintained and configured systems. If you want a review of the actual game in terms of its gameplay/story, then read Eurogamer's review. DF is reviewing the game on its technical merits.
As for your offence that he dare take some issue with RE4 - it's a good port overall, but that's especially in the context of how awful most other ports have been lately. It shipped with a lot of real, concrete issues that anyone who's doing an accurate technical review at launch should mention, such as:
- Forcing a very subpar reconstruction method in FSR and not giving a choice for DLSS, especially when a mod reveals just how much of a visual downgrade that is. In 2023 that is ridiculous.
- Still not fixing the broken TAA.
- The game actually crashing to desktop when running out of vram.
- Ray tracing still at a very low resolution.
- Bizarre vram texture behavior when higher settings can actually lead to worse textures.
- And yes, the same awkward menu design as past RE's.
I want to know this stuff, considering the nature of this forum I would think most of here would too. Steam's review scores of the game as a whole are completely irrelevant to these being mentioned or not. If you purport to be giving a technical review of this game and don't mention these issues, you're doing a poor job.
The final conclusion to Alex's RE4 review btw, even with these issues, was "The PC version of RE4 is good enough, and fluid to play at the right settings, but Capcom still really needs to work on their PC porting efforts".
And yet your go-to example of 'information' is an aggregate of Steam review scores, please. You can go to Steam reviews to get a vague gauge if a game is worth your time, sure (or want to see a game being review bombed because it 'went woke' I guess). You sure as fuck don't go there if you want to actually learn about any technical shortcomings/advantages a game may have. We go to outlets like DF because unlike people pulling theories and fixes out of their ass or just think stuttering is 'fine', we don't - if you're not that sensitive to this kind of stuff, then sure, DF isn't for you I guess.
He's gushing over the tech that's implemented in an actual, shipping game. When we have examples of Lumen that give similar/better results in actual, shipping games, and they also run well, he'll probably gush over those too. You'll have to make due with his and John's nearly 35 minute review of Fortnite's UE5 upgrade in the meantime I guess.
Maybe every new Cyberpunk RT upgrade coverage doesn't need to be 20 minutes long, perhaps - but it's largely about covering a new rendering tech, the kind of thing you're complaining that Alex doesn't do enough. That raises the question as to the amount of time for a video dedicated to any potential improvements in TSR, as exhibited by graphic demos, should be then, surely?
Last edited:
