Silicon Studio Shows Off Its Next-Gen Rendering Engine

Some bits of that remind me of the soft body physics engine and if either were used in a game, i'd be very interested. :cool:
 
These photo realistic demos have been around for years. Unless someone is making a game and it's in game footage it's becoming a bit "meh" for me.
 
Huge difference between rendering demo's and in game footage.

Imagine BF4 in this kind of quality - the download would be around 500TB!
 
We won't have games like that because they will require much higher resolution textures, which means many more work hours for the artists, and therefore higher costs for production.
Unless you want to pay £200 for a game, there will come a point at which production cost outweighs quality or fidelity is too good for texture quality and it starts to look more and more ****.
 
Yh it looks very good but that level of detail is the domain of CG animation, I doubt we'd ever see that in a real game. Like El_Watcher said the costs to produce that level of detail are prohibitive.
 
El_Watcher said:
We won't have games like that because they will require much higher resolution textures, which means many more work hours for the artists, and therefore higher costs for production.
Unless you want to pay £200 for a game, there will come a point at which production cost outweighs quality or fidelity is too good for texture quality and it starts to look more and more ****.
Click to expand...

Not really, you have 2k, 4 k and all sorts of textures made for different games by fans for a loooong tme. It's probably more costly to make an engine just by yourself for the game that you're doing, but considering the costs of UE 4 or CE to license, that should not be a problem as well. Lower textures were made because of consoles, not due to much more time required for the artists. Crysis 3 took and cost less to make than Crysis 2, although it's a way better looking game. :)

There is a lot of middle ware that you can use to lower production time and costs. One from the above video as well - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRTJERFZ4gg
 
I saw nothing that amazing there. No new techniques, just a high poly model with high detail textures, nice PBR and a decent DoF effect.

You could take UE4, put in an incredibly detailed model with super high res textures and have it in a game. Of course if you try to have 100 of them in the scene at the same time you'll have an issue but one? Sure.

If they show a video swooping across a scene and showing every piece of geometry as detailed as that then I'll be impressed. Until then rendering a high poly model is not impressive.
 
Resources shouldn't really be a problem. At the moment a company buys a game engine so that they don't have to spend time developing it. Who's to say in 10 years time they won't be buying photorealistic texture sets from specialist companies too?
 
I don't really see what the fuss is about? For some reason people (in the YT comments) were giving the impression is was being done in real-time and thinking it will work on consoles. Sure it's nice but there's been better already for years. For example this with more accurate lighting which is sometimes hard to believe it's all CGI. The hardest, and key part, of realism is achieving accurate lighting as even when it's slightly off it ruins the whole scene.

http://vimeo.com/7809605

There's some post-process tricks but then pretty much all CGI content is post processed these days.
 
86JR said:
Huge difference between rendering demo's and in game footage.

Imagine BF4 in this kind of quality - the download would be around 500TB!
Click to expand...

I know you're exaggerating, but a large increase in graphical quality doesn't necessarily mean an exponential increase in required space to store the content.

In fact, the increase in required storage wouldn't be that big at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom