• 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.

Immortals of Aveum™: UE5.1, PC Optimization, & More

Learn how Ascendant Studios is using the flexibility of Unreal Engine 5.1 to put power in PC players’ hands.

The day is almost here. The release of Immortals of Aveum™ is just around the corner, and we here at Ascendant Studios are so incredibly excited for players to get to experience what we’ve been building all this time. As we inch closer to August 22nd, we wanted to take a moment to talk a bit more about the technology that’s powering our game, and what that means for PC players in particular.

Earlier this year, we talked about some of the amazing tools we’ve had at our disposal as one of the first studios to release a AAA game using Unreal Engine 5.1. There’s Nanite, for example, which automatically adjusts the details the player sees based on distance, letting us build huge, detailed 3D objects that look every bit as good up close as they do from virtual miles away. The additional surface detail of our objects provide significantly more places for lighting to bounce off of.



No “pop-in” here! No matter the player’s distance from an object, Nanite ensures it’ll always be there, looking great.



We also make extensive use of Lumen, which lets us add incredibly realistic-looking dynamic lighting to those more detailed Nanite objects, which interacts with lighting far better than before, resulting in prettier environments. And it lets us do so dramatically more quickly than before: In Unreal 4, we’d have to balance dynamic lights with “baked in” lighting for any area, a process that would take literal hours to complete. Lumen lets us light things pretty much instantly—with lighting effects that look fantastic.



This is how quickly Lumen lets us enable and disable lighting. And that lighting looks better than what hours of work would have done in the past.

There’s also Niagara, which lets us easily implement and modify graphical effects like fire, smoke and magic. Thanks to Niagara, we don’t have to build each and every effect separately; we can take an existing effect that’s used widely across the game world and modify it for different scenarios so it looks different each time – something that wasn’t possible before.



Niagara lets us tweak effects rather than having to build new ones each time.

And these are just some of the more visually noticeable features; Unreal 5.1 also features tools that make things work more smoothly behind the scenes. Streaming Virtual Texturing, for example, essentially reduces the memory required to show large, detailed textures to the player. The One File Per Actor system lets our team all work in a single environment simultaneously, rather than requiring us to “check out” a whole level to make the smallest of tweaks. And World Partition intelligently loads and unloads bits of the world as needed, allowing us to create enormous environments that don't slow the game to a crawl, make load screens necessary, and/or incinerate anyone’s video cards.

The thing about all these different tools, though, is that no single one of them is responsible for making Immortals of Aveum look as good as it does while running as well as it does. The magic isn’t just in any single part of Unreal Engine 5.1, but in how these tools all work together, and how the whole engine provides a degree of flexibility and modularity that hasn’t been possible before now. It’s given us the ability to create a huge game in a vast world with a relatively small team, and make it all look great and run well—on a wide variety of platforms.

And the really neat thing is, it lets us pass that flexibility on to players.

WHAT’S UNDER THE HOOD


Speaking of hardware variables, our team at Ascendant has been rigorously testing the game’s performance for PC players and feels great about 60fps performance on the following combinations of resolution and hardware:


b57235c9c69e155937f61c310565beca17f1b44a.jpg



Additionally, the studio is continuing to optimize the game to play well on lower hardware to make the game accessible to even more players. While we aren't ready to confirm anything just yet, we intend to announce new low end specs soon targeting a 1080p/30fps experience. To give you an example, the team currently has the game running well in the 40fps range on an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 and Intel Core i7-8700K configuration. With Unreal Engine 5.1 being so new, we want to see just how far down we can optimize and thoroughly test as many lower-end set-ups as possible.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, we’ve added specs for the current cutting edge of GPUs and CPUs. So if you have the machine that is the envy of all around you, you can run our game in 4K at 120 frames per second.

Note: Immortals supports both AMD FSR 2.2 and NVIDIA’s DLSS3 upscaling technology.


PLAYING TO YOUR STRENGTHS



And console players, don’t feel left out here! You may not be able to tweak your settings as much, seeing how consoles have much more specific and uniform specs. That means that we were able to use all this flexibility and modularity to tune the game very carefully to each console’s particular strengths. As a result, every console version will run at 60fps at your TV’s maximum resolution thanks to the upscaling magic of FSR2. So whatever system you’re using, you’ll be getting the best performance you possibly can.

That’s really one of the biggest benefits of working with Unreal Engine 5.1. All these tools that make things run more smoothly behind the scenes end up being incredibly scalable, letting us meet players wherever they are—now and in the future. We won’t claim that was easy; after all, you may remember that we delayed the game by about a month in order to spend more time polishing, bug-hunting, and optimizing. But Ascendant is a brand-new studio, and this is our first game, so we wanted to make every possible effort to ensure that Immortals of Aveum is an amazing experience no matter what machine it’s running on. And we’re so excited for you all to finally have the chance to see that for yourselves.

Immortals of Aveum releases 22 August 2023.
More at:

 

mrqs

Member
That's the new standard. GPUs will take a few years to catchup and get "acceptable framerates" without upscaling.

It's a new gen with a whole new package of technologies, it's fine.
 

Kataploom

Gold Member
So devs are giving up on optimizations in favor of cutting development resources. I kinda could agree with that, but I would like to know:
- How much did this game cost
- How long has it been on development

If UE5 is really helping devs not going bankrupt by spending 6 years making a single game, then I could be ok with it.

We also have to see how other engines perform.

I'm of the opinion that PS4 graphics at high resolution and at least 60 fps is more than enough for me though.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
So devs are giving up on optimizations in favor of cutting development resources. I kinda could agree with that, but I would like to know:
- How much did this game cost
- How long has it been on development

If UE5 is really helping devs not going bankrupt by spending 6 years making a single game, then I could be ok with it.

We also have to see how other engines perform.

I'm of the opinion that PS4 graphics at high resolution and at least 60 fps is more than enough for me though.

You won't be saying this in 3 years.
 

Kataploom

Gold Member
You won't be saying this in 3 years.
No, I don't care as long as art style is solid... It bothers me a little in games that tend to be hyper realistic tho, I think they many times look worse than previous generations due to uncanny valley (H:FW comes to mind). But as long as the game art is good I'm ok.

Edit: Hell, I'm ok with 7th gen graphics if game is good, 6th gen graphics is when I start to think about it but even then most Nintendo graphics from that era are great anyway.
 
Last edited:

Kataploom

Gold Member
In this video showing Nanite compared to traditional rendering pipeline I can still see WAY MORE polygons from Nanite, like one single object feels like having more polygons than the all the traditional method side:



I was thinking that this is probably the reason why it's so heavy, since it just handles LOD but models still seem to be way more complex than they should.

I know devs can save a lot of CPU cycles by not having to count each vertex before sending them to GPU since geometry shader might handle that task, and alongside current I/O pipeline allowing the GPU to directly fetch the assets from storage the CPU might probably be completely free from it... But GPU still has to render that many numbers of polygons.

My assumption is that Nanite isn't worth it if the model is not high poly enough since the dynamic LOD changes can be easily noticed by players on simpler meshes so they'll just throw high poly meshes to overcome this problem, which leaves them with higher than appropriate polygon count in the scene.

Can be wrong though...

BTW, Daniel Owens posted a video analyzing specs again:

 

Fbh

Member
You won't be saying this in 3 years.

I'll be glad to be proven wrong but I think we are reaching this point where the whole "you think it looks great now but in 5-10 years you'll think it looks terrible" logic doesn't ring as true anymore.
It did when 10 years took us from OG FF7 graphics to Crysis, or Tomb Raider Legends to Uncharted 4.

9-10 years old games now look like this
AliveDefenselessHeterodontosaurus-size_restricted.gif



V1RvLvF.gif


ActiveRichFish-size_restricted.gif
 
Last edited:

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
You won't be saying this in 3 years.
PS4 graphics in question:

uIGM4egd

The-Order-1886-Taipei-Game-Show-Screenshot-1.jpg

tf2_07.jpg

l1ed15xodwb51.png


Call me crazy but even with the worse rendering techniques and less advanced lighting these 4 games look better than a great majority of stuff we get today. Yet another reason why people complain about the lack of 'next gen', the standards have been raised so damn high.

PS4 graphics are still very good graphics, the IQ more often than not was holding these games back.
 
Last edited:

Kataploom

Gold Member
Does this game need dynamic lighting?
Is it an open world or does it have dynamic time of day?
If not, they might as well just bake it.
It's a more time consuming technique, that's why I think this generation is not so much about improving graphics than improving production pipeline at the cost of optimization.

Hope it pays off at least... Games cost have raised so much in the last generation I started to worry about publishers just going into mobile f2p cash grabs since they can iterate and fail quicker with way less risk.
 

Whitecrow

Banned
Baked lighting can look as amazing as you want.
But at the moment you put dynamic lighting and particle effects that casts glow and shadow, old backed techniques fall apart.

Thats where new teqniques like ray-tracing and new lighting models come into place.
The thing is, those you dont usually pick up on those details because

1: you are playing the game, not looking for how lighting reacts to different things,
and 2, devs make tricks aaaaaall the fkn time to hide the flaws.

Believe me, the jump in quality is there, and it's big, but one cant just put the finger on where it is unless you start scrutinizing the image or making comparisons, which are not that easy.
 
Last edited:
PS4 graphics in question:

uIGM4egd

The-Order-1886-Taipei-Game-Show-Screenshot-1.jpg

tf2_07.jpg

l1ed15xodwb51.png


Call me crazy but even with the worse rendering techniques and less advanced lighting these 4 games look better than a great majority of stuff we get today. Yet another reason why people complain about the lack of 'next gen', the standards have been raised so damn high.

PS4 graphics are still very good graphics, the IQ more often than not was holding these games back.
Ray tracing and path tracing have spoiled me. In screenshots 1 and 3 I'm just thinking of ways either method would have helped the lighting in those screenshots because now that I've seen the other side of things, PS4 lighting just feels so much more flat in comparison.

From a big picture standpoint though, everything that is being done with engines like UE 5.1 and ray/path tracing is with the intent to make the games that you and Fbh Fbh are posting, much less of a hassle to reach those higher highs. If you read dev interviews or see behind the scenes, any time a game looks like the above pics and gifs, it's a ton of time and a bit of engine trickery just to imitate 'correct' lighting and detail. If we keep pushing forward, then they won't have to put so much into imitations anymore and those annoyances makins sure something doesn't look low detail next to something high detail, and instead they can already focus on other artistic aspects and ideas.

Think about how much time it would have taken to whip up something like these demos during PS4 gen and make sure that it always looked good no matter where you swung your camera or how close you walked to something:




Whereas now it can be whipped up much faster, by way less people. That in itself is game changing.
 

Skifi28

Member
I wonder if consoles will also have lumen at 60fps, that'd be quite the feat.
 
Last edited:

SABRE220

Member
While I am happy we have a game that is actually trying to utilize the latest tech, I cant help but notice they are producing a very underwhelming visual result as the end product. Kind of feels like you gave an amateur pilot a f22 raptor and he ends up getting punked by a pro in a f16 in performance.
 
Last edited:

UnNamed

Banned
doesn't matter what engine it is running on. looks like an average game from a visual standpoint
This.
The reason is they show models with ton of polygons, but they're just normal but very tessellated assets, not heavy detailed assets. And also the Lumens video is just "we add more lights" without stripping the previous lighting model.

This game looks like a normal UE4 games with -some- UE5 feature added at the last minute to say "Hey, this is the first UE5 game!!!".
 

winjer

Gold Member
This.
The reason is they show models with ton of polygons, but they're just normal but very tessellated assets, not heavy detailed assets. And also the Lumens video is just "we add more lights" without stripping the previous lighting model.

This game looks like a normal UE4 games with -some- UE5 feature added at the last minute to say "Hey, this is the first UE5 game!!!".

Indeed. Seems like they just imported the project from UE4 into UE5 and were done with it.
 
Last edited:

supernova8

Banned
PS4 graphics in question:

uIGM4egd

The-Order-1886-Taipei-Game-Show-Screenshot-1.jpg

tf2_07.jpg

l1ed15xodwb51.png


Call me crazy but even with the worse rendering techniques and less advanced lighting these 4 games look better than a great majority of stuff we get today. Yet another reason why people complain about the lack of 'next gen', the standards have been raised so damn high.

PS4 graphics are still very good graphics, the IQ more often than not was holding these games back.
TAOAYjT.jpg

Weird I didn't know PS4 had the buttons "Mouse 4" and "Q"

Dave Chappelle Gotcha GIF
 
I'll be glad to be proven wrong but I think we are reaching this point where the whole "you think it looks great now but in 5-10 years you'll think it looks terrible" logic doesn't ring as true anymore.
It did when 10 years took us from OG FF7 graphics to Crysis, or Tomb Raider Legends to Uncharted 4.

9-10 years old games now look like this
AliveDefenselessHeterodontosaurus-size_restricted.gif



V1RvLvF.gif


ActiveRichFish-size_restricted.gif
Exception to the rule. Boot up ac syndicate on the ps5 and feast your eyes on the blurry low res texture of london, even at 1440p.
 

OverHeat

« generous god »
My friend with a 5800x3d and a regular 3080 think is going to play this a 1440p more then medium at 100fps + 😂😂😂
 
Last edited:

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
Ray tracing and path tracing have spoiled me. In screenshots 1 and 3 I'm just thinking of ways either method would have helped the lighting in those screenshots because now that I've seen the other side of things, PS4 lighting just feels so much more flat in comparison.
If you're saying "it could look better" rather than "it looks bad" then that says it all really...
 

Fbh

Member
Exception to the rule. Boot up ac syndicate on the ps5 and feast your eyes on the blurry low res texture of london, even at 1440p.

Disagree about it being an exception to the rule. At least to me there isn't a single last gen game that I thought looked great at the time and which I now think looks bad, and that goes all the way back to the launch of the Ps4 not just the more recent titles like TLOU2.

I mean even AC4 Black Flag still looks pretty good and that wasn't even a proper "next gen game" since it was essentially just an enhanced port of a Ps3/360 game

32c5ab9504de26fad3e79be56a890c86775fb5e5.gif

f5ef23bf57b5c69eaa76b7c04ef92e662357fc0a.gif



Like someone else above said, I think 30fps and sometimes sub 1080p resolutions (at least on base consoles) was one of the big factors holding back last gen games visually.
We now have consoles that can run those visuals at around 1440p (native, not upscaled) and 60fps. And personally I've yet to see a next game offering graphics and/or gameplay that make it seem worth it to go back to sub 1080p and sub 60fps.
 
Top Bottom