PS4 And Xbox One Not Ready For Photorealistic Visuals

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Wait, was there anyone that actually thought next-gen consoles were actually going to be bringing us photorealistic visuals?

“For pure rendering it might be true,” Masaki Kawase (pictured), lead software engineer and shader architect at Silicon Studio, told Develop when we asked him his view on Sweeney’s prediction. “The human eye might not distinguish the difference between still images like pictures compared side by side. However, as soon as humans interact with photorealistic graphics, they would look artificial rather quickly.”
 

Wshmaster0

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
3,510
Didn't you guys know.. console graphics are the standard to gaming and visual advancement! pwahahahah
 

mecra

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 7, 2006
Messages
173
I knew a guy that saw a game on console and said, "You won't get that good of graphics on PC!"

...

I wanted to smack him...
 

next-Jin

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
6,279
Are the new consoles still stuck at 720p ?
If developers feel that their games would be better at 720p/30 then yea. The PS3 and 360 could do full 1080p games but they obviously didn't go that route the vast majority of the time.
 

EvilWays

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 9, 2006
Messages
1,507
If developers feel that their games would be better at 720p/30 then yea. The PS3 and 360 could do full 1080p games but they obviously didn't go that route the vast majority of the time.
In part due to memory limitations of the PS3 and 360.
 

evilsofa

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
10,078
The XBox One and PS4 are comparable to a PC with a low-end CPU and a mid-range GPU. We're not seeing such things in PCs with high-end CPUs and multiple high-end GPUs, so why would anyone expect to see it in consoles?

Unless you're one of those tyros that think that 8GB of shared RAM on the consoles somehow makes all PCs suddenly obsolete.
 

Aluisious

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
2,189
I got a GTX 760 the other day for $260 that will completely smoke those consoles. And I was able to sell my 570 for $125 to get it.

Try upgrading a console for a bit more than $100.
 
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Messages
783
"On the other hand, however, video games pre-rendered animations and cinematics have, arguably, reached a point where they are comparable to CG films."

Arguably? I do not know how many times I have watched a "blockbuster" movie and thought,"I have games with pre-rendered cinematics that look way better than this."
 

Aluisious

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
2,189
Prerendered cinematics in games and movies (it's called CINEMATICS ffs) are the same thing. It's just the quality of the artist...
 

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,004
The new consoles can't do 1080p? Are you fucking kidding me.
 

Ashbringer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
5,522
While photo realistic games are great, some of the best games are the ones that aren't. When I mean unrealistic, I mean done on purpose. Take Mario or Sonic games, which you can tell aren't made to be realistic. Though when it comes to realistic games, it's usually the animation that kills it, and not the art.

I have some examples. Take Garrosh from World of Warcaft. Everyone who plays WoW knows that Blizzard has a certain art style they try to achieve, and it's far from realistic. If you pause the model, it looks cartoony and very unrealistic. Once you see the animations, it somehow comes to life. Yes the new model looks better, but it's the animations that really make it 10x better. Animation has always been a strength at Blizzard.

It certainly doesn't help that modern games pretend to have good physics, but don't. For example Half Life 2 vs Black Ops 2. It goes to show that while the game can be very photo realistic, it certainly isn't very realistic in motion. Kinda sad when a 2012 game has terrible physics compared to a game made in 2004.

Looks good as a photo, but plays in motion.


Where as Half Life 2 looks terrible as a still image, but plays more realistic in motion.
 

rudy

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
8,641
lol I thought they claimed photorealistic visuals last gen. They claim it every gen.
 

dremic

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
5,178
I got a GTX 760 the other day for $260 that will completely smoke those consoles. And I was able to sell my 570 for $125 to get it.

Try upgrading a console for a bit more than $100.
the shit is your point anyways?

thats not even close to the discussion here, also nobody cares.
 

Semantics

2[H]4U
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
2,820
While photo realistic games are great, some of the best games are the ones that aren't. When I mean unrealistic, I mean done on purpose. Take Mario or Sonic games, which you can tell aren't made to be realistic. Though when it comes to realistic games, it's usually the animation that kills it, and not the art.

I have some examples. Take Garrosh from World of Warcaft. Everyone who plays WoW knows that Blizzard has a certain art style they try to achieve, and it's far from realistic. If you pause the model, it looks cartoony and very unrealistic. Once you see the animations, it somehow comes to life. Yes the new model looks better, but it's the animations that really make it 10x better. Animation has always been a strength at Blizzard.

It certainly doesn't help that modern games pretend to have good physics, but don't. For example Half Life 2 vs Black Ops 2. It goes to show that while the game can be very photo realistic, it certainly isn't very realistic in motion. Kinda sad when a 2012 game has terrible physics compared to a game made in 2004.

Looks good as a photo, but plays in motion.


Where as Half Life 2 looks terrible as a still image, but plays more realistic in motion.
A photo of a drawing lol that is not photo-realistic.
 

Cecil

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
4,720
The PS4 runs 60FPS at 720p, 30FPS at 1080p and 60FPS at 1080i
WTH :rolleyes:

Please let that be a joke.


If a dev makes a game with pretty much no draw distance, super shitty textures, etc. they could technically make them run at 4K.

It depends on the game, and if the dev wants a higher res, higher frame rate, or better textures/shadows/more stuff at once/whatever. They have to balance it out over what performance is there.

I personally prefer res over the other stuff, so Id like to see all games made 1080P/60FPS first, then fit in whatever they can with that restriction. But then again, games like Ryse still look good at 900P.
 

nvgrim

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
1,700
Didnt cliffy b say that you dont need over 30fps anyways and that all his games would be at 30 fps?
 
Joined
May 13, 2002
Messages
524
If it takes massive renderfarms to produce (often)fake looking cg in movies then with all due respect no home hardware will ever be competitive when it comes to producing remotely good looking cg in motion. However good looking fantasy landscapes are already doable on old hardware thanks to massive improvements in software. Good to see someone doing a reality check occasionally.
 

EvilWays

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 9, 2006
Messages
1,507
meanmodda[H];1040229446 said:
If it takes massive renderfarms to produce (often)fake looking cg in movies then with all due respect no home hardware will ever be competitive when it comes to producing remotely good looking cg in motion. However good looking fantasy landscapes are already doable on old hardware thanks to massive improvements in software. Good to see someone doing a reality check occasionally.
You forget, the models used in cinematics where renderfarms are used are in the million plus polygon range (that per model). Subdivision does help a bit, but still isn't a very viable option for real-time interaction.
 

Revdarian

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 16, 2010
Messages
2,546
Well, X1 after the overclock is actually 1.31 Tflops but ~10% of the gpu horsepower is saved for OS operations, and depending on game complexity yeah it can do 1080p 60 (Forza), but for example Ryse is 900p30 and KI is 720p60

Still not close to the PS4's 1.84 Tflops number (with twice the rops), and as we know that isn't enough (roughly better than a 7850)
 

Wildace

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 16, 2004
Messages
6,721
Didnt cliffy b say that you dont need over 30fps anyways and that all his games would be at 30 fps?
Cliffy B is an idiot, i can tell the difference between 60fps and 90fps.

i prefer my first person shooters to be 90+ fps.
 

ZodaEX

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 17, 2004
Messages
3,728
Cliffy B is an idiot, i can tell the difference between 60fps and 90fps.

i prefer my first person shooters to be 90+ fps.
Agreed, cliffy b is an idiot. I will never buy a game that's capped at 30fps.
 
Top