Unreal Engine 3 Samaritan Real-Time Demo

Guiltyofbeingtrite

Guiltyofbeingtrite

Vault Dweller
Apparently this is just a tech demo and not related to an actual game in production.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgS67BwPfFY[/youtube]
 
can't really see much of a difference though. New graphic gets pretty dull fast. Which isn't beacause it would not be impressive. But the visuals have reached such a high standart today already that improvements are not always like the jump from the earth to the moon. Besides they add most of the time only very lidle to the actuall gameplay. Many times even abstract from it ending in slideshows or situations where you run from one cut-szene to the other.

I love what they do with the visuals though as said. It is impressive. But I just cant really see that HUGE differences in the newest unreal or cryengine3 now. There are differences without a doubt. But not really not so much in the quality. I mean really look at it. Is it even looking THAT different to the engines we have already now ?
 
While I was watching the CryEngine 3 trailer I was thinking that someone could/should use it for "low-budget" CGI movies, and there it is at the end. CryEngine for cinema.
 
Yeah, it feels like while the CryEngine was designed with cinematics in mind, the Unreal3Engine is more focused on gaming.

But I have no idea whether that's true and whether today's 'gamer hardware' could employ all those effects in real time without a significant drop in framerate.
 
The UE3's engine ran on 3 GF540 (or was it 570?). I don't suppose there's gonna be cheap gfx card of that power anytime soon ;)

This is just a tech-demo, that shows that "they can" but "they can"≠"they will". Just like with the nvidia's head tech-demo (they had AMAZING (as of realtime) effects, like SSS). Has anyone seen game models (and shaders) of this quality? I thought so :)
 
DarthBartus said:
Crni Vuk said:
Is it even looking THAT different to the engines we have already now ?
Click to expand...

Yes, it is. Running cinematic-quality animations in real time is a HUGE difference.
Click to expand...
I dont see that huge differences. Sure the visuals ARE better. No doubt about it. But it isnt really that incredible. THe lighting is very impressive. The faces in Crysis can look already quite convicing. Same for the enviroment and watter.

As said. The visuals today have already reached a extremly high standart. And of course to improve that is much harder then like it was 15 years ago.

Though I also assume that much we see now is a bit "cosmetic". The question is how it will look later in motion on your PC. Not in some pre-renders or pre-assambled trailers. I remember someone doing almost photorealistic images with the source-engine once HL2 was finished. But they have been ONLY picturs. Nothing was in motion. Though the visuals have been stuning!

new-crysis-dx10-screenshot-20061110001326035.jpg
 
First, dude, no forum-breaking pictures please.

Second, is that supposed to be the "almost photo-realistic" image from HL2's Source engine? Because it's not even close to photo-realistic and certainly doesn't compare with what some of the new engines can do.

And if they could do graphics akin to say, Square-Enix's CGI from FFXIII in real-time, that sure as hell would be a huge jump from what we have now. Yeah, some of today's engines can do impressive stuff, but we haven't even reached the quality of Toy Story (the first one) in real-time graphics yet.
 
no the picture is from Crysis. At least that was which came up from a random google search. The picture was smaller there as well.

And if they could do graphics akin to say, Square-Enix's CGI from FFXIII in real-time, that sure as hell would be a huge jump from what we have now. Yeah, some of today's engines can do impressive stuff, but we haven't even reached the quality of Toy Story (the first one) in real-time graphics yet

compared to what ? The engines we have now or what we had back when FFXIII was released ?

I am actualy more impressed by games which have other qualities. Like life like animations (something which many games seem to ignore ...) as artist I pay a lot of attention to the human body and the movements and I am always impressed how awkward those animations are presented in modern games sometimes when you see them on your PC. Particularly the physic regarding corpses is totally exagerated. But maybe I see it from the wrong angle here. No clue.
 
Problem with corpse physics is that calculating proper weight of certain body parts need lots of power. It is a choice - either a stunning realtime graphics or proper physics.

compared to what ? The engines we have now or what we had back when FFXIII was released ?
Click to expand...

Exactly NOTHING changed from that time. Just UDK got few updates and that's it! And we're still not even close to FF XIII's looks. Its cinematics are stunning. I'm considering if they're anathomicaly/physically valid (of course they're not :D ), but they look absolutely AMAZING. Currently used realtime rendering is far behind in terms of quality.

Visual quality isn't the only thing that differs cinematics from real-time rendering. Other thing is TIME. Real time renderings from CE3 for cinema, or UE3 tech-demo run smoothly. About 30-40 FPS. It gives 1/40 of second to render one frame. Cinematics, on the other hand... Well, depending on scene complexity and used effects (volumetric fire, smoke and such) gave rendering time of one frame in Iron Man movie of 3-8 HOURS.

Yeah, Crysis in DX11 looks basolutely fantastic, but it's far from cinematic quality.
 
Well, to render a scene of all the same/similar textures (a jungle) does not take as much power as making a real feeling city street.

Every once in a while I see a tech demo that makes me think "this is the next big step"

While this vid shows us nothing new, It all comes together excellently. Sometimes It isnt about doing something new, but doing something better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top