Unreal Engine 5 - holy shit!

[Shin]

Amazing what all this technology can do, yeah, I'm still waiting to see this shit in-game.

 

[mkultra]

I'll wait till I see it ingame. Maybe HP Hogwarts Legacy is a better example of what we will be seeing: https://youtu.be/ecgrvh4kQRU

TLDW, don't get gyped over tech demos.

It's not Unreal Engine 5.

 

[AwesomeButton]

I'll wait till I see it ingame. Maybe HP Hogwarts Legacy is a better example of what we will be seeing: https://youtu.be/ecgrvh4kQRU

TLDW, don't get gyped over tech demos.

It's not Unreal Engine 5.

Quite! I'm looking for what I watched that got me confused over this. Thanks!

 

[SlamDunk]

 

[Shin]

The water in the last half minute of the video looks rather atrocious.

 

[tritosine2k]

The water in the last half minute of the video looks rather atrocious.

"Modern" rendering pipelines are built around the lack of transparency (unaffordable ) and storage on consoles (small).

Last time they did demo of that was the "froxel" stuff in frostbyte quite a few years ago ( no coincidence).

You can add it to "deferred shortcomings" , along with MSAA (still not replaced).

 

[Perkel]

Considering 5.1 update it feels like engine is still in effectively beta. I mean vegetation is huge thing that was missing from their premiere tech. From what i know there are still few other problems to solve.

 

[RobotSquirrel]

I mean vegetation is huge thing that was missing from their premiere tech

It wasn't missing so much as it was that when you tried to use Nanite on Vegetation in the past it'd eat the mesh and ruin it. Example:


The same still happens with Terrain which is the next thing they're supposed to be implementing.
I'm wondering how the tesselation affects alpha transparency and UVs because one would have to assume there would be issues. One trick developers use is to get trees and plants moving using UV movement and baking animation vectors onto a texture, I'm wondering how you pull something like that off in Nanite.
I'm thinking the limitation is going to be, you can't use Alpha transparency and you can't animate Nanite using UV shells but they're welcome to prove me wrong here. - its looking like Alpha is useable with varying results but not uv movement, I think most settled on that vegetation should be more polygon based now, however since Nanite prefers that.

I'm looking forward to seeing Nanite Terrain though.

 

[SlamDunk]

Fluid Ninja never fails to impress.



https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1596527919471419393/pu/vid/1280x720/DNrsWwbAGC6SB5DU.mp4?tag=12

 

[SlamDunk]

 

[gurugeorge]

Fluid Ninja never fails to impress.



https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1596527919471419393/pu/vid/1280x720/DNrsWwbAGC6SB5DU.mp4?tag=12

Now if we could only have some good games to go along with all the great simulation

 

[SlamDunk]

Any guesses on when we are able to play actual games with this amount of detail in them?



Editor video + lots of high-quality images: https://www.artstation.com/artwork/qeeX5z

 

[Modron]

Knock yourself out:
https://www.unrealengine.com/market...20&sortBy=effectiveDate&sortDir=DESC&start=20

 

[Zarniwoop]

Any guesses on when we are able to play actual games with this amount of detail in them?

'member the Twitcher 3 Totally Really Actual 100% legit Gameplay Screenshots, compared to how the final game looked?

'member the Max FX engine benchmarks in the original 3DMark, versus how Max Payne actually looked when it came out?

I member. And to answer your question... don't hold your breath.

 

[Perkel]

Any guesses on when we are able to play actual games with this amount of detail in them?

Not fast. The main issues is that game worlds got bigger and small tight games are dying breed of games. This means your budget for frametime is very tight that discourages such scenes. Then there is the lighting. The more detail the harder lighting has to work.

Cyberpunk2077 is pretty much at the limit of what is possible for big and small at the same time and that's game developement started before Twitcher3 was released.

GTA6 leaks also shown that they don't plan to go crazy on graphics.

 

[Morgoth]

I hate this photorealism shit.

 

[Konjad]

Any guesses on when we are able to play actual games with this amount of detail in them?

'member the Twitcher 3 Totally Really Actual 100% legit Gameplay Screenshots, compared to how the final game looked?

'member the Max FX engine benchmarks in the original 3DMark, versus how Max Payne actually looked when it came out?

I member. And to answer your question... don't hold your breath.

 

[Assisted Living Godzilla]

It should probably be remembered that Unreal is used for movies now too.

 

[mkultra]

not that amazing to be honest, if you use photo mode in e.g Horizon FW you can get similarly photo-like screenshots (with the DoF which like always makes any shot look impressive) with great detail. Like always it can depend a bit on the area, like most games it's a bit inconsistent with some areas being extremely detailed, and some less so..

So yeah we will have games looking like that in no-time, (auto)generating big landscapes has also improved and made easier now in UE5 so that will help a lot..

 

[thesecret1]

Any guesses on when we are able to play actual games with this amount of detail in them

about 15 years is my estimate

 

[gurugeorge]

Any guesses on when we are able to play actual games with this amount of detail in them?



Editor video + lots of high-quality images: https://www.artstation.com/artwork/qeeX5z

I mean, the counter is, "Why would we want to?"

It's a tricky thing because part of me has a hankering to wander through photorealistic landscapes - I still remember the thrill of cresting a hill to see a beautiful sunset vista in Oblivion (the closest to photorealistic at the time, especially in terms of distant views).

But on the other hand, I'm conscious that gameplay can often be hampered by photorealism. I've gone over this before, but the reason we can pick our way through a "photorealistic reality" (so to speak) is because we have binocular vision and can selectively focus on various distances, so it's relatively easy to pick out salient objects at various distances quickly. Our visual systems are designed for it.

But with photorealism on a flat surface, a 2-d image, your eyes are baulked of that faculty.

All of which means that for games, until that problem is solved (and Carmack said it's a really difficult problem even with VR sets, while "holotanks" still seem to be a long way off too) you still need an element of stylization, simplification and colour-coding.

The good thing is that if the stylization is arty, well-done and consistent you can still get a sense of "realism," enough to immerse yourself in the game world and get a sense of presence (CP2077 did it fairly well, you quickly get used to the "code" of what types of objects are interactibles and what types are just static furniture.)

 

[thesecret1]

It's like you guys see a tech demo and think "this is coming to every viodeogame nao, omg!!!!" not realizing that a tech demo means the whole team is working on that one thing. Just because Epic showcases something really doesn't mean that it's easy (or even worth the effort) to replicate it in an actual video game.

 

[mkultra]

It's like you guys see a tech demo and think "this is coming to every viodeogame nao, omg!!!!" not realizing that a tech demo means the whole team is working on that one thing. Just because Epic showcases something really doesn't mean that it's easy (or even worth the effort) to replicate it in an actual video game.

watch their videos of the actual editor... it's insanely fast to create vast areas, but of course, you still need to hand place things like houses etc, but in comparison to mostly placing trees, bushes, rocks etc etc etc by hand it's 1000 times faster... hand placing is very tiresome, i've made it for a few games and it can take many, many months.

And again, it's not really super impressive, you're acting like it's movie quality, it still very much looks like a modern game engine.. Horizon: FW can look similarly impressive (a bit depending on area/scene)..

Graphics alone doesn't mean too much for immersion always. 3D is where it's really at imo, 2D feels very outdated. I still use Nvidia 3D Vision for many games, using it in Witcher 3 was fantastic, actually seeing realistic distances, heights etc. I remember standing on a mountain and looking at the distance, thinking wow i can see all the way to approx where my parents house is in reality. That never happens in 2D because you can't really see distance in a realistic way.

 

[thesecret1]

but in comparison to mostly placing trees, bushes, rocks etc etc etc by hand it's 1000 times faster...

Nobody's been handplacing trees and shit like that in years. It's been done procedurally for ages now.

 

[mkultra]

but in comparison to mostly placing trees, bushes, rocks etc etc etc by hand it's 1000 times faster...

Nobody's been handplacing trees and shit like that in years. It's been done procedurally for ages now.

Yup, so don't act like we are still at that stage and that someone would have to work for years with just hand placement etc. open world games does not take the immense amount of time to make like they did in the past. above graphics is very realistic to make for a modern game.

 

[Nifft Batuff]

The more the graphics improves the less interactive the games become. If this trend continues...