what graphics to you expect fo the ps3

[cthellis42]

I have a feeling artists and modellers are going to go insane and companies will start bankrupting themselves before they can fully test all the limits of the next systems. We'll likely need a few years for them to get used to it, replace worn out ones, and clean up all the blood stains.

 

[_phil_]

I recall a poster on another forum who works on CGs remark that hair textures alone can run up to a hundred MB...

And then there's the skin... if we consider how many CGs we have seen where CG-rendered humans can't shake that "waxy" look, we can appreciate how difficult it is to get skin to look like that. Besides hugh demand for computational resources, skin textures may well run to several hundred MB...

Hair texture a hundred of MB ? please that's overkill.... A 256*512 +alpha+aniso specular should be more than enough to achieve the hair effect in that picture it's mostly polygons +physics on exoskeleton to make them move.
And for the Skin,2-3 layers of blended procedurals texture should do the trick.

Art is above tech.

 

[London Geezer]

I recall a poster on another forum who works on CGs remark that hair textures alone can run up to a hundred MB...

And then there's the skin... if we consider how many CGs we have seen where CG-rendered humans can't shake that "waxy" look, we can appreciate how difficult it is to get skin to look like that. Besides hugh demand for computational resources, skin textures may well run to several hundred MB...

Hair texture a hundred of MB ? please that's overkill.... A 256*512 +alpha+aniso specular should be more than enough to achieve the hair effect in that picture it's mostly polygons +physics on exoskeleton to make them move.
And for the Skin,2-3 layers of blended procedurals texture should do the trick.

Art is above tech.

Agreed, i was wondering about the "hundreds of megs of textures for the hair" comment too.. in the end, real hair has no "texture"... it has a colour, then what could be described as a "environ-reflection" component... all the rest is overkill... of course that is only valid when trying to render hair by single-strands.... which is not the case here...

 

[passerby]

My opinion remains pessimistic. We are asking about PS2-generation CGs, when we still have not been able to well replicate PS-generation CGs in game. Just dig out some old titles from the PS-generation and watch the FMVs. We can go "...this can be done just by doing this and this etc...", but the fact remains that we see precious little of such things being replicated in-game successfully with similar quality with current hardware. And I'm counting out CGs that are "unreasonably complex". Let's just aim for "PS-generation CG quality" first.

PS: I'm too lazy to search for screens, so I won't do that.

PPS: The poster(s) who made the "hair" comment post on these forums, under another... forum(duh) - under 3D Tech and Hardware I think. They are actual CG devs who, in a similar thread long ago, express confidence that we won't see Toy Story grapics in-game even in 2005. In response to the disbelief expressed by most posters at such a claim, one pointed out that he is confident enough to happily bring up the topic again when 2005 comes along. And as a side note, in that thread the "pessimistic" people always consist of the actual devs, and the "optimistic" people always consist of the non-devs. Go figure.

 

[_phil_]

you don't approach CG like realtime graphics.

 

[chapback]

What passerby said.
True exact high quality CG replication in realtime PS3 in a true game = dreamy dreams. even as a demo... hmm..

tell me which consoles today can do these ingame or even demo:

aside from lower resolution since psx fmv run at 320, nothing this gen has got on ff8. yes you can post your tiny fancy static screenshots, but those who seen them all in motion, will agree that ff8 fmv > xbox > gc > ps2, easily.

all this hohoha has to stop. maybe you can say you "hope" to see true cg nextgen, it be better. BUT to say all but confirm and some more...
look for, hope for, somewhat ff8 fmv quality chap sayz.


AND

This is the topic passerby is speaking off if i ain wrong :
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7991&highlight=toy+story

AND

can we like get actual console devs to speak on this much-believed-much-taken-as-facts, that, game for game, graphics for graphics, ps2 has the ability to create real-er physics/animations/effects whacaca idea?

 

[zidane1strife]

look for, hope for, somewhat ff8 fmv quality chap sayz.

Well, it's true that those've not been outdone, I mean ff8 still looks as good or better than many modern games' fmvs.

Still, when I see characters like those from sh3, and I imagine what could be done with several 100times the resources, and a gig or more of ram... It might not technically be up to par, but it will look better in the eyes of casual gamers.

The IQ is my only concern for next gen, but I'm hopeful and I believe they'll deal with it, I wouldn't be surprised if ps3 is as good at it as ps2 is with particles.

 

[London Geezer]

it's another case of "let's sit back and see" really...

current generation can "fake it" in order to appear similar to ps1 FMV. Of course it will never be equal if only for the reason that those FMVs use a completely different rendering mode than realtime graphics. The approach is different, like phil said...

Some things will be better, some things will be worse. just the fact that next gen games are bound to have lighting/shadows similar to Doom3 will help a lot to "fake" the CGI look...

It's all down to who fakes it better really... Even CGI is "faking" reality...

 

[Fafalada]

can we like get actual console devs to speak on this much-believed-much-taken-as-facts, that, game for game, graphics for graphics, ps2 has the ability to create real-er physics/animations/effects whacaca idea?

Can you translate this to english first, if you actually want an answer? Because I have no idea what you just said.

Anyway, rather then arguing about what level of pixel perfect replication of offline CG will be done (which is not the target anyway)... we can always do a simple projection that can't be too far off.
Take something like stalker (minus the hideous character models) which in certain panoramic shots at high AA settings already looks nigh-photoreal, and extend that illusion to much more then just chosen few panoramic angles.
Knowing the market obsession with photorealism - that's where we'll be mostly trying to get anyhow.

 

[kaching]

I agree with that method of extrapolation. Better than trying to base it off of what was done in lastgen/thisgen CG.

 

[pcostabel]

I hope that next generation the photorealistic fad will be over and cel shading will become the standard.

 

[phed]

I don't think achieving "FMV-Like" graphics is not a goal really.

All you got to do to achieve that is to stream the deformed models directly from the cd and get the FPU to render them. It is a completely new ballgame when you have realtime skeletons and other (even cooler) deformations. The PC's are still crappy at doing this. And, the thing that set games apart from FMVs is that you're able to make them interactive.

Eg. the ICO engine shows that you can have pretty spiffy special effects which todays hardware that FMV never has.

So, this is like the saying "Not more cinematik games, make them more like games".

 

[pcostabel]

I don't think achieving "FMV-Like" graphics is not a goal really.

All you got to do to achieve that is to stream the deformed models directly from the cd and get the FPU to render them. It is a completely new ballgame when you have realtime skeletons and other (even cooler) deformations. The PC's are still crappy at doing this. And, the thing that set games apart from FMVs is that you're able to make them interactive.

Eg. the ICO engine shows that you can have pretty spiffy special effects which todays hardware that FMV never has.

So, this is like the saying "Not more cinematik games, make them more like games".

I think you misunderstood the concept. We are arguing whether next gen hw will be able to render in real time pictures with quality resembling that of prerendered CG. Streaming models from disk is silly when you can just play a movie file.

 

[qwerty2000]

Hey chap I expect than the ps3 will do much better than ff8 fmv's easily I expect toy story 2 quality maybe more or better looking

 

[Fox5]

Hey chap I expect than the ps3 will do much better than ff8 fmv's easily I expect toy story 2 quality maybe more or better looking

Lol, even with 1 teraflops and the best PC 3d accelerator available at the time, I doubt the ps3 could come anywhere close to rendering toy story 2's graphics, though it could probably do toy story 1.

 

[qwerty2000]

I have been waiting to ask this question what is the differnce between toy story 1 , toy story 2, and monsters inc. They all look the same

 

[phed]

[quote="pcostabel"I think you misunderstood the concept. We are arguing whether next gen hw will be able to render in real time pictures with quality resembling that of prerendered CG. Streaming models from disk is silly when you can just play a movie file.[/quote]Yes, but if they stream them directly from disk it is more possible to render such scenes, since you don't need to simulate physics etc. It is just not in the interest of a gamemaker to make graphics CGI-like since they do not play by the same rules. A lot of time is consumed in other processes than pushing polygons in FMV like post-rendering composition and such stuff.
It is also fully possible to render realtime very realistic static images. As long as they are static.

Also, note that FMV is artwork, not a 3d-engine. Lot of the stuff are tricks to make things look nicer. Like painting on light, or using advanced lightningmodels which can't be used realtime due to the sheer amount of data. One thing is short up-to-face shoot, when you want to render a scene with the size of quake 3

It was mentioned that sony is wrong going the "push many polygons"-route. As with the PS2, I think the PS3 will do image-based techniques very well.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

And for the Skin,2-3 layers of blended procedurals texture should do the trick.

It's actually quite a little bit more complicated than that. especially if your not going for some idealized super-smooth fashion model look. Just take a look at the first Animatrix movie or FF, those textures were all hand-painted. No procedural texture can get that good... and it would take hideous amounts of processing power... no, bitmaps are the way, with some better shading models. Subsurface scattering might be too much, even for PS3, but there are possibilities to fake it to some extent.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

As for new directions... Full screen bloom filters are starting to show up, for example in Prince of Persia and Deus Ex 2. Their softening effect would be a welcome change from the sterile oldschool CG look of today's games, but I'm afraid that it'll become fashionable and overdone...

 

[chapback]

Can you translate this to english first, if you actually want an answer? Because I have no idea what you just said.

Anyway, rather then arguing about what level of pixel perfect replication of offline CG will be done (which is not the target anyway)... we can always do a simple projection that can't be too far off.
Take something like stalker (minus the hideous character models) which in certain panoramic shots at high AA settings already looks nigh-photoreal, and extend that illusion to much more then just chosen few panoramic angles.
Knowing the market obsession with photorealism - that's where we'll be mostly trying to get anyhow.

its just that faf. somehow why do the psdudes feel that ps2 can create more realistic lively environments that the others, of which i ain seeing so..? coz iirc, several devs here have spoken that the only clear advantage of ps2 is the ability to create/destroy quads with lesser amount of codes than the others......whatever that means!

ANYWAY

from all i seen, don think STALKER looks photorealistic or CGish. 8)
apart from the nicey skies, everything looks pretty much a like 2004 3D game. i dunno, mayB its the lighting or the insufficient poly details or the lack of cinematic blur or no shiney shine hires textures...or something...
lookie no more wow-wow than HL2 or D3 or DX9 games....

ANYHOW

is Fafracer really 30fps + slowdowns + not so nice textures...?
i hope you workie more on that for the international release. i be FAFfan since sooooo long ago, do it for chappie!