-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Graphical Fidelity I Expect This Gen
- Thread starter ResetEraVetVIP
- Start date
Lethal01
Member
Now seems like a good time to have a fresh round of discussions. Not bad for PS5 running 60fps in real time, no?
For a game running on PS5 it does look good.
But it is of course no where near as technically impressive as actual Offline rendered CGI.
Let's not ruin how nice the PS5 game looks by reminding ourselves how good it could look if they had 100x more power
And again, What about Last of us part 1 Do you think is a huge leap Over part 2? What about the shadows or the specular rendering?
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
vs
Horizon wins. Fatality.
ChiefDada
Gold Member
They are more accurate and realistic... What are you asking for a technical whitepaper comparing the two games? If you don't agree then so be it.
That's the problem, I'm analyzing the results while you're focusing on the power of the machines that are rendering them. The only reason you're \ championing the fidelity of the CG shot vs the PS5 is because you favor the power differential of whatever hardware generated the CG. I guarantee you most others would choose the PS5 shot.
OOHH YEAH SO STUNNING! You should post a video so we can all see that awesome fidelity pop in and out of the scene
Lol but seriously Horizon is a gorgeous game and I think you prefer it's art direction over TLOU. I totally understand as I do too. TLOU art style is definitely polarizing film grain is excessive and general scene is overly drab with muted colors.
CamHostage
Member
(*Pulling in a conversation from the Avatar delay thread rather than push off on a tangent over there...)
I think at some point, we're going to have to face that the gen we are have is the gen that we're here for...
Matrix Awakens is a nice taste of some really amazing new tech that's nearly ready for production use, but it's also an exploitation of the limitations of that technology right now (flat buildings and static objects with limited interaction). It's not so next-gen that it makes everything else obsolete or makes you wonder why everybody else hasn't been releasing games of that caliber since Nov 2020 next-gen console launch. You can see how it pulls off what it's capable of, and you can see the seams of how it's still working with in-progress technology. It also packages 30GBs of assets into a product with practically no gameplay or rich audio material. When developers actually use UE5, they will have to package a product that can actually be shipped on discs and a download, thus they will need to compromise and work within limitations.
For sure Nanite and Mesh Shaders and cool stuff like that (plus some of the ML-trained techniques being pioneered, some of which have already been delivered in small doses) will be a step above the first games of this generation, but those technologies are still not ready for prime time; PS5 / Xbox Series might be the first gen to not launch with bleeding-edge experimental technology attempts the way Ryse and Killzone Shadow Fall, or Peter Jackson's King Kong and MotorStorm, or Tekken Tag Tournament and Luigi's Mansion and Halo did way back when, but technology is different now, and the advancements of these consoles are not front-and-center leaps the way they were in the past. It's taking time to use them in practical applications. (And perhaps the proliferation of cross-gen is hindering the jump-into-the-fire rapid adoption of these new techniques unlike previous gens, but I'm a doubter that this is actually holding next-gen tech usage back, partly because fallback approaches are generally still available depending on how the game is built, also because even the "true next-gen" games still aren't using these new technologies so something else must be holding them up?) UE5 gave the impression that the future was ready to be delivered in 2020, yet still in 2022, it's still a little out of reach when we're talking full production efforts, especially ones built for the ground up with these new approaches.
So you saying that everything "looks cross gen", that's striking me as disingenuous. This is what games this gen look like and will look like. New techniques will come along that improve things (and already have come along and already have improved things,) but this so-called "true next-gen" you're expecting to overwhelm you once developers forget that PS4 and Xbox One exist, I don't think that's coming. You can do a lot with cross-gen products (and with PC in the mix, you generally have to,) and the evolution of this gen will likely remain on pace whether or not past-gen consoles hang around.
What I do think cross-gen (or "past-gen thinking") is holding back is in game design. That also is a thing that will take time, but we had R&C Rift Apart as a near-launch game, yet we've been through an E3-type announcement cycle and still it's hard to point to any 2022/2023/2024 games (maybe Avatar, if it lives up to its promises) which actually use the power of these consoles in ways not done before. The SSDs do not seem to be tapped for anything but erasing level load times, and the physics capabilities of these machines have yet to enjoy a showcase killer-app game. We have indie designers with radical rapid deployment opportunities, and professional game studios with funding like never before, but neither side has really provided the software examples to point to as "THIS IS NEXT-GEN!", regardless of the enjoyability of the games themselves. Nobody has anything close to the 2019 Robo Recall Chaos demo (and frustratingly, Epic has never released this demo/project file to see how it was made or what tricks it uses for its realtime effects.) Those are the boundaries which need pushing. We can argue about what "looks cross gen" or doesn't, but if only new-gen consoles could start showing things never seen before or depth of complexity in levels never so detailed out before, the graphic quality would be a minor manner of taste and technical analysis.
I think at some point, we're going to have to face that the gen we are have is the gen that we're here for...
Matrix Awakens is a nice taste of some really amazing new tech that's nearly ready for production use, but it's also an exploitation of the limitations of that technology right now (flat buildings and static objects with limited interaction). It's not so next-gen that it makes everything else obsolete or makes you wonder why everybody else hasn't been releasing games of that caliber since Nov 2020 next-gen console launch. You can see how it pulls off what it's capable of, and you can see the seams of how it's still working with in-progress technology. It also packages 30GBs of assets into a product with practically no gameplay or rich audio material. When developers actually use UE5, they will have to package a product that can actually be shipped on discs and a download, thus they will need to compromise and work within limitations.
For sure Nanite and Mesh Shaders and cool stuff like that (plus some of the ML-trained techniques being pioneered, some of which have already been delivered in small doses) will be a step above the first games of this generation, but those technologies are still not ready for prime time; PS5 / Xbox Series might be the first gen to not launch with bleeding-edge experimental technology attempts the way Ryse and Killzone Shadow Fall, or Peter Jackson's King Kong and MotorStorm, or Tekken Tag Tournament and Luigi's Mansion and Halo did way back when, but technology is different now, and the advancements of these consoles are not front-and-center leaps the way they were in the past. It's taking time to use them in practical applications. (And perhaps the proliferation of cross-gen is hindering the jump-into-the-fire rapid adoption of these new techniques unlike previous gens, but I'm a doubter that this is actually holding next-gen tech usage back, partly because fallback approaches are generally still available depending on how the game is built, also because even the "true next-gen" games still aren't using these new technologies so something else must be holding them up?) UE5 gave the impression that the future was ready to be delivered in 2020, yet still in 2022, it's still a little out of reach when we're talking full production efforts, especially ones built for the ground up with these new approaches.
So you saying that everything "looks cross gen", that's striking me as disingenuous. This is what games this gen look like and will look like. New techniques will come along that improve things (and already have come along and already have improved things,) but this so-called "true next-gen" you're expecting to overwhelm you once developers forget that PS4 and Xbox One exist, I don't think that's coming. You can do a lot with cross-gen products (and with PC in the mix, you generally have to,) and the evolution of this gen will likely remain on pace whether or not past-gen consoles hang around.
What I do think cross-gen (or "past-gen thinking") is holding back is in game design. That also is a thing that will take time, but we had R&C Rift Apart as a near-launch game, yet we've been through an E3-type announcement cycle and still it's hard to point to any 2022/2023/2024 games (maybe Avatar, if it lives up to its promises) which actually use the power of these consoles in ways not done before. The SSDs do not seem to be tapped for anything but erasing level load times, and the physics capabilities of these machines have yet to enjoy a showcase killer-app game. We have indie designers with radical rapid deployment opportunities, and professional game studios with funding like never before, but neither side has really provided the software examples to point to as "THIS IS NEXT-GEN!", regardless of the enjoyability of the games themselves. Nobody has anything close to the 2019 Robo Recall Chaos demo (and frustratingly, Epic has never released this demo/project file to see how it was made or what tricks it uses for its realtime effects.) Those are the boundaries which need pushing. We can argue about what "looks cross gen" or doesn't, but if only new-gen consoles could start showing things never seen before or depth of complexity in levels never so detailed out before, the graphic quality would be a minor manner of taste and technical analysis.
Last edited:
Whitecrow
Banned
Horizon only have lots of fine grass. Everything else diesnt look particularly great. It has fog everywhere covering half of the screen.
vs
Horizon wins. Fatality.
The difference isnt as stark as you would like it to be.
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
The more I play Horizon the more I'm asking myself why it's bumming me out visually. I think there was a downgrade implemented post launch when they toned down the "sharpening filter". I think that hurt the visuals and there must have been some other cutback that I can't put my finger on. I'm talking about the 30 fps mode btw. I remember around launch being really impressed by the detail of the textures, of the ground, the rocks etc buy now I have to look harder to see that. Did they add a layer of AA or did they reduce the resolution? Not sure.
Everyone's probably playing the improved 60 fps mode but I was always playing the fidelity mode. Aside from this issue I think you're right about the cross gen limitations being there if you really think about it. The lods, the fog, etc. It's certainly not the most impressive ps5 game, thay would be Ratchet easily.
MidGenRefresh
*Refreshes biennially
Horizon has a huge, believable open world. TLOU has some of the most artificial feeling, linear level design. The scope is simply not the same. The shots that
SlimySnake
picked for Horizon are not even that impressive. The later jungle and forest section with ruins of downtown SF is the cream of the game.
ZywyPL
Banned
It's the high resolution of everything, the textures, reflections etc. that make Horizon look so damn clean and hence great, whereas TLOU remake looks like an upscalled PS4 game,especially the textures quality, for a PS5-only game I'd expect something on par with DS, HFW, R&C etc. Seriously, am I the only one who can't fight the feeling it looks like RDR2?
GymWolf
Member
Did someone kicked her pussy in the second pic?Now seems like a good time to have a fresh round of discussions. Not bad for PS5 running 60fps in real time, no?
GymWolf
Member
Not to mention how any single character is detailed enough to be a protagonist in 95% of other games, even charas with one line of dialogue.Horizon has a huge, believable open world. TLOU has some of the most artificial feeling, linear level design. The scope is simply not the same. The shots that
MidGenRefresh
*Refreshes biennially
Exactly. No stupid tricks. Forbidden West is mighty impressive. Add some Ray Tracing GI, swap SSR with RTR and finish with a pinch of DLSS and fuck, it would look like a fable.
Lethal01
Member
Is it so wrong to ask for a little more than just "the shadows" what about em, are they higher res, are their more sources of the shadows, did you notice some new method of softening them based on distance? Are there more objects casting them that were previously casting none? But okay, we can forget about it.
Totally untrue, I only care about the final result and the Trailer clearly has a much better final result than anything in game. There is a very obvious, drastic leap in quality from the game to the trailer. If you can't see it then okay, we can forget about it but I question why you are in a thread discussing what you hope for in terms of graphical fidelity when you don't see the obvious difference in graphical fidelity between the two.
I keep mentioning the difference in power to remind that the clear difference in visuals between the two is expected and it's a waste of time thinking the PS5 will catch up or come close like some have claimed.
Because they prefer the character design maybe? I would choose some shots from the PS3 version of the remake but that doesn't say anything about the graphics.
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
I played it launch with the sharpening maxed out and I was in shock at how bad the game looked after you left the first valley. Then you reach the jungle and the beach and it looks stunning again. The game is very shiczo in that regard. But trust me when I say it was like that since launch. the Sharpening only affects foliage filled areas which still look stunning. The desert and barren lands looked atrocious back then and still do today.
Technical side & extra processing of the simulation aside, doing this would really be a phenomenal amount of additional manpower. Just a ton of extra dev time setting up those systems, QA to make sure they're all robust, art time to modify and tweak assets so they work with each other better. This isn't just a question of throwing more power at it.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Lots to discuss here but I will try my best to keep it concise:
- COD is 250 GB right now. No one cares. TLOU2, FF7, Cyberpunk and RDR2 couldnt fit on one disc. They simply shipped with 2. Size has nothing to do with it. If anythign, I was surprised that the entire Matrix demo was just 30GB despite holding a massive city. Who cares if there is no gameplay? Gameplay files dont take up much size. Textures do.
- Sony devs dont have to use mesh shaders. They dont have to wait for UE5 to ship. They dont have to use nanite. Sony and MS devs had the tech back in 2018. We know this from the github leaks. They couldve implemented their own version of mesh shaders or nanite. They didnt even need to. UE4 demos like Rebirth and the Australia demo made by one guy dont use any UE5 features. They just use a more powerful GPU as the baseline. Sony and MS devs chose to limit themselves to a 1.8 Tflops GPU and a 1.6 Ghz CPU in 2018. That is it. There is nothing more to it than that. The games still look last gen because they are targeting last gen. Next gen games will simply look a gen ahead like Avatar and the Matrix as long as they treat the 10 tflops PS5 as the baseline.
- You bring up how last gen is holding back game design, destruction, physics and lament the fact that no game is doing things we saw in 2019 demos, and yet when I say the same thing about graphics, you disagree. Why? They are both being held back because of last gen specs. Stuff Avatar is promising to do... i.e., destruction, better AI simulations, faster flying are all tied to the SSD and CPU. I agree, thats whats so exciting to me because i know Ubisoft will downgrade the graphics anyway. But the fact that Sony, MS and Capcom studios are not leveraging the CPU, IO, SSD in their games is directly related to the fact that they are bound by last gen consoles. I kept telling Chief Dada that they will not remove the hidden loading sections aka ladder puzzles in TLOU because it was designed as a PS4 game. I kept asking for more destruction that lets me break walls like the bloater did. break chairs and have things catch fire. I got nothing. In fact, it doesnt even do the things TLOU2 does. Why? Because its held back by the PS4 no matter what Neil says.
Same will be true for RE4. I took one look at the graphics and I knew they were not going to do anything special with destruction, physics and IO. Because I knew they were handicapped by last gen hardware. I mean FF7 is reusing the same character models man. Same exact character models. They openly admitted to this and they are trying to sell it as a PS5 game telling us they need the SSD for an open world. Fuck off. These devs are all either greedy or lazy or both. They started dev on TLOU, RE4 and FF7 in 2020. ND took over the project in 2020 AFTER UE5 demo had already been revealed and couldve completely overhauled it. They just chose to limit themselves to the PS4 specs because they wanted to make yet another cross gen game to take advantage of the large userbase and because of the chip shortage. Now, they have found themselves in a situation where the shortage is almost over, and the PS4 userbase isnt interested in buying these games on their dated hardware so they are going to pretend these last gen games are actually next gen.
It's all lies. You and I are on the same page on this. I just dont buy that this the best they can do with graphics. And in two years when ND finally reveals their game that looks as good as Avatar and Matrix, if not better, you will see it too.
Last edited:
Polygonal_Sprite
Member
IMO the slew of UE5 games using Nanite and Lumen which are coming in a post pandemic World around late 2024 will blow people away more in terms of World detail and lighting. We already have amazing character models. The next Witcher, Stalker, Hellblade, Kingdom Hearts, Gears, GTA, Forza, Avatar, The Callisto Project, and Black Myth all / will all look a massive step above AAA PS4/XBO games.
People already have rose tinted glasses about the way last gen games on base machines (95% of the install base) looked and ran especially the late gen games like Cyberpunk and Avengers. Almost down to 720p and sub 30fps for large chunks of gameplay. PS5 and Series consoles are a momentous leap in resolution, framerate, sound and loading times.
CamHostage
Member
Yes, there is technology coming which will utilize these new platforms in ways to deliver astounding new levels of visual splendor (and hopefully new levels of gameplay dynamics, although unfortunately, not nearly enough of the games we know of to come in 2023 and 2024 are showing much promise in that department IMO...) No question, there are steps to leap as new technologies come onboard. Every generation ends better than it started, and we already have some incredible glimpses of where this generation will be going.
What I am saying is that there are reasons why the tech of the future is not here NOW.
It's a misjudgment IMO to assume that these technologies we know to be coming in 2023/2024 games (some even in 2022 games, although frustratingly for all of us, not as many as we maybe assumed back when PS5/Xbox Series and the UE5 were first unveiled in 2020, or even when Hellblade was first teased in 2019) are overdue today. Many are not mature yet for professional production, and compound that with the extended timelines of games made today (and the further delays of COVID) and the legacy-spaghetti that makes "upgrading" not nearly as beneficial as people assume.
Horizon FW PS5 / PS4... are we missing a "generation leap"?
...Particularly the notion that cross-gen is "holding back" all the games for PS5 and Xbox Series, I generally don't believe that, and I don't see developers (not even candidly on Twitter/forums) making that claim.
The idea that developers are making their games shittier because they have to consider the PS4 and Xbox One ports, that's easy to say when pointing to some kitbashed, hyper-lit, gameplay-devoid, limitless "What XX would look like in UE5" fan 'remake'. In reality, however, the process of downporting a game or even supporting a reasonable level of scaling (your basic levels of acceptable min/rec requirements) is not new and is likely not the culprit in why next-gen games are not leaving their predecessors in the dust.
Tomb Raider PS4 / PS3... are we missing a "generation leap"?
SlimySnake is saying developers are LYING to us, that they could make their games better today but instead they throttle all technology that threatens a certain TFLOP count so that they can still let their shit roll downhill onto the old consoles and make a quick buck on two boxes. (And that even games that are shipping new-gen-exclusive, the developers limit them as old-gen games just in case and then juiced up the tech as best they could with what was left over.) I don't agree with that assessment.
(*Sorry Slimy, I haven't had time to properly respond. Short version: I agree on some points, disagree on many of your conclusions, question some jumps of logic/assessment but can't offer many existing counter-arguments since new-gen-only is agonizingly rare, but overall am feeling your frustration from a different vantage point...)
Last edited:
Polygonal_Sprite
Member
95% of games we see on PS5 / Series run on engines completely designed around last gen hardware constraints especially the CPU and mechanical HDD. This will change in time as developers evolve their internal engines / get used to Unreal 5 and with it games will include things like many more NPC's, complex physics simulations, much better lighting, improved lod transitions and fast open World traversal that were all just not possible last gen.
Omega Supreme Holopsicon
Member
The problem is that many pcs still also have hdds.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
PCs have never held back console gaming.
SSDs will simply become a requirement like expensive GPUs as devs start targeting next gen specs. Not every game will needs to max out the ssd anyway.
Omega Supreme Holopsicon
Member
Expensive gpus are not the norm in the pc space. Developers need to target the minimum most common specs among pc gamers.
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
An SSD has been a common minimum spec for at least 5 years on PC.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
They never have been. PC specs will simply raise to match and then exceed PS5 GPU requirements just like they did last gen.
CamHostage
Member
It's a popular feature (especially for laptop owners, although laptop owners aren't usually high-spec gamers,) but I would not say that SSD is not a commonly listed minimum spec.
Here's a sampling of high-spec PC games. Of them, only one requires a SSD, one recommends it, and the rest make no mention.
I don't know if there are stats out there, but I would actually not say that most tower PC users, even PC gamers, go for SSDs in general. (Many low-spec PCs are on eMMC, sadly.) A fast SATA drive and a good chunk of RAM gets most of the technical matters that a SSD would solve out of the way, and then the vast storage capacity and low prices of HDDs make them more desirable in most cases. There are people who go hybrid, and maybe there's more percentage of SSDs in the PC market than I'm estimating off the top of my head, but my guess is that it's still not a commanding portion?
It could come on more commonly (Forspoken and CoD MW2 and other upcoming games I can think of don't have specs listed yet but that'll be interesting to check; Scorn is coming out and does require a SSD) but right now it's still a potential hurdle. (PC generally has RAM to spare and just loads in bulk that consoles can't handle, but the new way of fast-paging and dumping wouldn't work that way.) I could see more developers committing to SSD hardline requirements if the benefit of game design really warrants it, there's obviously a desire to see that technology maximized (it's mature and abundantly-available tech, but it's been a luxury feature until this gen,) but we're not living in that scenario just yet.
Last edited:
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
Sorry for the confusion. I meant that people who game regularly on PC have had an SSD for at least the last 5 years.
Omega Supreme Holopsicon
Member
one would hope. The hardcore definitely do. But I don't think steam surveys show ssd vs hdd stats. A lot seem to be on 1060 or weaker cards, also on 4 cores.
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
Yeah but I had an SSD 15 years ago. SSDs have also been said to be the single best easy PC upgrade for any PC. Low end pre builds have come with SSDs for years now as well.
Omega Supreme Holopsicon
Member
Maybe but even many $1000+ pcs can sometimes come with 128GB or 256GB SSD paired with an HDD. Clearly in such cases most games will be on the HDD. edit: or at least they did 1 or 2 years ago.
Last edited:
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
Yeah but the SSD is there and available. Doesn't matter if it's small. My first SSD was 60gb.
Here's a tidbit from 2015
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
MidGenRefresh
*Refreshes biennially
Unironically, every single game plays just fine running from HDD.
Last edited:
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
I had first ssd in 2011...I feel old
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
Yeah I was around 2010. It was 400$and 60gb. I didn't even game on PC.
Sosokrates
Report me if I continue to console war
Now seems like a good time to have a fresh round of discussions. Not bad for PS5 running 60fps in real time, no?
For a PS5 game its not doing anything special. The only visual aspect that the PS5 seems to be used for is 60fps.
Omega Supreme Holopsicon
Member
Problem is many newer games are 90 100 200+GB, with windows a 128GB or 256GB SSD may not even fit them.
I think star citizen has issues running without ssd
ChiefDada
Gold Member
The fact that this is PS5 and comparable if not better detailed than one generated by an offline render is impressive to me.
I would also welcome input as to how they are handling offscreen reflections here (the other thread I posted to has become an absolute mess, unfortunately):
GymWolf
Member
Is there any leaked gameplay (even old) in 4k? or they are only potato quality?The fact that this is PS5 and comparable if not better detailed than one generated by an offline render is impressive to me.
I would also welcome input as to how they are handling offscreen reflections here (the other thread I posted to has become an absolute mess, unfortunately):
ChiefDada
Gold Member
This is from the gameplay trailer.
GymWolf
Member
No no i was talking in general, i just wanted to know if i can watch some leak in high quality.
Sosokrates
Report me if I continue to console war
Its not comparable to the cgi advert at all. And that reflection could still be ssr or just a high quality cube map.The fact that this is PS5 and comparable if not better detailed than one generated by an offline render is impressive to me.
I would also welcome input as to how they are handling offscreen reflections here (the other thread I posted to has become an absolute mess, unfortunately):
But apart from that what else is TLOU remake doing better then TLOU2?, Geometric detail looks the same, lighting looks the same, destruction looks similar. Nothing really glares out as being current gen, visually speaking. (Just to make sure, im talking beyond resolution and fps improvements)
ChiefDada
Gold Member
The two shots aren't comparable? Explain why not, please.
By definition, the reflection is NOT SSR. And if by chance it is a take on cubemap implementation, then it is a generational leap in quality and then some.
Geometric detail for models is incremental improvement, Lighting is generational improvement, for destruction, I will take a wait and see approach for now.
Sosokrates
Report me if I continue to console war
I said the cgi advert, theres not much point in comparing still images. Games are in motion.
We can only see light reflecting on the puddle, that has been done a million times last gen without RT, is nothing special.
Is it? They look the same as TLOU2 models to me. Lighting is generational? No is not, it looks like pre calculated global illumination, the same that was used in TLOU2.
You can disagree but there comes a point where you have to accept reality.
I mean if you can show multiple light bounces and evidence of real time global illumination then please share, but a tiny puddle reflection could be anything and does not suggest ray tracing.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
That gif and screenshot just shows how poor the lighting and material quality really is. Forget next gen games like Ratchet and Demon Souls, other last gen games have far better lighting and materials.
vs
Ratchet and Demon Souls are in another league.
vs
Ratchet and Demon Souls are in another league.
ChiefDada
Gold Member
Lol, why not!? We do this all the time. You can compare the models.
Of course offscreen reflections have been done before but not to this degree of effectiveness and accuracy with and without RT, depending on the game. You can also see the window frame maintaing detail in reflection with ridiculous accuracy. It's comparable to cyberpunk pc reflections, not kidding.
ChiefDada
Gold Member
The nature/circumstances of the reflection does suggest RT, or an entirely new method that gives amazing results, which is equally great
Sosokrates
Report me if I continue to console war
This degree of effectiveness.. its a tiny puddle reflection, could just be a high res cube mape, what about this reflection makes it superior to a decent cube map or planer reflection?
Going by your logic, you must think TLOU remastered has rt reflections too because in this picture we can see offscreen reflections of the trees in the puddle
I mean u can cherry pick a cgi image which compares favourably but all that proves is that a still cherrypicked image compares well, the whole cgi advert has many orders of magnitude more polygons, higher res textures, full path traced lighting and suprior animation, it is worlds apart to the TLOU remake footage.
Last edited:
ChiefDada
Gold Member
The quality and accuracy, as I've said about a billion times here... Do you not see yourself falling into a continuous pattern of citing far fetched answers to try to disprove my hypothesis of RT use. It's like you're going out of your way to do so. RT is much more likely than what you're suggesting. Planar reflections are much more computationally expensive than SSR and at this quality, I would assume using the RT hardware would be more efficient.
Going by your logic, you must think TLOU remastered has rt reflections too because in this picture we can see offscreen reflections of the trees in the puddle
I will list out the fallacies of your comparison since you have failed to notice them:
1. Your example is a prerendered video, my example is real-time gameplay
2. We do not see the direct source of the reflection in your example; my example shows this.
3. The quality of the tree reflections in your example is akin to what you would expect with cubemaps; the reflections in my example are of objectively higher fidelity.
I chose the best like for like shot I could find. I made no comparison to the animations, simply the models; polygon count looks to be similar, but I find the ps5 shot to be using higher quality textures.
Sosokrates
Report me if I continue to console war
You say its me with the far fetched answers, when you're the one claiming a superior quality and accuracy of reflections thats based on a second of footage which is so small you cant make out any detail, its just a light reflection. What about is "higher quality and accuracy" then TLOU2?
Im just calling out your mistake. And ive explained why, you have not explained why, you have just said "its higher quality and accuracy" ok tell us why? Actually explain why u have this opinion and then I will leave you alone. Unless you say more wrong statement in which case I will correct you again. Not trying to be a dick. Just pointing out what the footage shows.
TLOU2 can reflect off screen light, this image is not the best quality because the wind is blowing ripples in the puddle so it looks a bit jank in a still.
Comparing a cgi trailer to a remake made on a 10tflop console, you do realise that to render 1 second of that clip will take like 10,000tflops an hour or something like that, they literally use computer farms to render that stuff.
ChiefDada
Gold Member
It's not just the light, it's how the reflection takes into account the light rays being absorbed into the reflective surface, which is why you can actually see detail of objects in the reflection better than you can looking directly at the window, such as the window frame.
You're blaming that monstrosity of a reflection on the wind?
