[video=youtube;bI1_quVr_3w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bI1_quVr_3w[/video]
Will be out later this month apparently.
[QUOTE]System Requirements
A New Dawn demo was developed to showcase the performance of the GeForce GTX 690. As such, two GeForce GTX 600 series GPUs are recommended for the best experience.
GPU: GTX 670 SLI or higher
CPU: 2.5GHz dual-core or higher
System Memory: 4GB
Disk Space: 1GB
Operating System: Windows 7/Vista
[/QUOTE]
If anyone is wondering about the old one from 2002:
[video=youtube;4D2meIv08rQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4D2meIv08rQ[/video]
[table="width: 500, align: center, class: grid"]
[tr]
[td][/td]
[td]Dawn (2002)[/td]
[td]A New Dawn (2012)[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Environment[/td]
[td]Environment cube map[/td]
[td]Full 3D environment with undergrowth, trees and living vines[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Environment Complexity[/td]
[td]7,000 triangles[/td]
[td]4 million triangles[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Skin[/td]
[td]Texture map
Detail maps
Rim based lighting [/td]
[td]Texture map
Detail maps
Skin oil reflectance maps
Multi-Layered Subsurface scattering[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Hair[/td]
[td]1,700 strands, static[/td]
[td]40,000 tessellated strands, physically animated[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Lighting[/td]
[td]Environment-based lighting[/td]
[td]Environment-based lighting
Local dynamic lights
[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Shadows[/td]
[td]None[/td]
[td]Perspective shadow maps
Screen space ambient occlusion
[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Post Processing[/td]
[td]None[/td]
[td]Depth-of-field rendering
Hexagonal bokeh filter
Filmic post processing[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Antialiasing[/td]
[td]None[/td]
[td]FXAA[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Default Resolution[/td]
[td]1024 x 768[/td]
[td]1920 x 1080[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Target Hardware[/td]
[td]GeForce FX 5800 Ultra[/td]
[td]GeForce GTX 670 SLI[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]
Oh how graphics have changed.
Her hair looks like it's underwater haha. But this is all rendered in real-time right? It looks amazing.
[QUOTE=Tetsmega;36212169]Her hair looks like it's underwater haha. But this is all rendered in real-time right? It looks amazing.[/QUOTE]
Yeah it's in real time they should have a download out later this month to run it real time on your PC if you have a machine good enough for it.
I doubt "40,000 tessellated strands, physically animated" will be seen in games this year.
[QUOTE=FPtje;36212283]I doubt "40,000 tessellated strands, physically animated" will be seen in games this year.[/QUOTE]
Well yeah it's a tech demo.. I wouldn't expect to start seeing stuff like this in games for 5+ years.
And this is why I don't bother with consoles.
[QUOTE=inconspicious;36212336]And this is why I don't bother with consoles.[/QUOTE]
because games are only good with tech demo graphics
you know, eventually if consoles are continually made they will have this technology
Lets not turn this into a PC v Console thread..
FUCKING CONSOLE SCU
[QUOTE=Morgen;36212539]Lets not turn this into a PC v Console thread..[/QUOTE]
alright
holy fuck
those shadows
and those hair physics
hurhhsuhdadsad
Unless you actually do Graphic rendering and moedeling and shit, I don't see why you'd need anything better than maybe a 600GTX card. Anything else is kinda exentric. I have 560ti and it runs every game that I play at 50-60 fps
nVIDIA sure made me hot
in the pants
I gotta say, I'm still really impressed with the 2002 tech demo. I mean shit, in 2002 we were playing games like No One Lives Forever 2:
[img]http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/2002/pc/act/nolf2/nolf2_790screen005.jpg[/img]
I know it's just a tech demo but Nvidia (and ATI) has really done some great stuff in presenting visuals ahead of their time. Hell, the Dawn from 2002 STILL has better hair modelling and shaders than 99.5% of modern games.
[QUOTE=SatansSin;36216199]nVIDIA sure made me hot
in the pants[/QUOTE]0/10 ears too pointy would not fuck
Not sure if it was true but i remember a facepuncher explaining that making such a high detailed objects, NPC's or levels would cost fuck loads of money and also killed the idea of releasing it on the PS3/360 since they can't handle it.
Honestly the character model for the actual fairy hasn't improved all that much since 2002. Obviously the demo is vastly superior because the whole environment is 3d/real time, but the old one is pretty impressive for 10 years ago
And still half games on the market still looks worse or like the demo from 2002 because of console priority.
[QUOTE=RudeMcRude;36212898]Unless you actually do Graphic rendering and moedeling and shit, I don't see why you'd need anything better than maybe a 600GTX card. Anything else is kinda exentric. I have 560ti and it runs every game that I play at 50-60 fps[/QUOTE]
And if you do, you wouldn't buy a Geforce. You'd buy a Quadro.
[QUOTE=RudeMcRude;36212898]Unless you actually do Graphic rendering and moedeling and shit, I don't see why you'd need anything better than maybe a 600GTX card. Anything else is kinda exentric. I have 560ti and it runs every game that I play at 50-60 fps[/QUOTE]
It depends on the types of games you play, and also If you do 3d model rendering it is imperative to have an extremely powerful card and equally powerful parts.
[QUOTE=DesolateGrun;36212438]because games are only good with tech demo graphics
you know, eventually if consoles are continually made they will have this technology[/QUOTE]
Maybe 10 years later.
Nah seriously, consoles are and will be always outdated, no matter what.
[QUOTE=darth-veger;36221093]Not sure if it was true but i remember a facepuncher explaining that making such a high detailed objects, NPC's or levels would cost fuck loads of money and also killed the idea of releasing it on the PS3/360 since they can't handle it.[/QUOTE]
Creating good graphics for a game is always very expensive, especially when you're developing for consoles!
[editline]6th June 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=DesolateGrun;36212438]you know, eventually if consoles are continually made they will have this technology[/QUOTE]
Ha-ha, no.
I really expected better from a pair of GTX 670s.
This is actually not very impressive at all. The technology is there but this particular scene just doesn't present it very well. I feel like something very similar could have been done a few years ago.
The recent Square Enix tech demo is much better looking.
If they really wanted to show off their tech, they should've used liquid effects and refraction, like this.
[video=youtube;h5mRRElXy-w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5mRRElXy-w[/video]
[QUOTE=StackOfPoo;36224130]This is actually not very impressive at all. The technology is there but this particular scene just doesn't present it very well. I feel like something very similar could have been done a few years ago.
The recent Square Enix tech demo is much better looking.[/QUOTE]
The only tech demo that really blew me away was this one
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgVYA1z49Os[/media]
Pretty amazing considering it came out in 2008.
[QUOTE=BenJammin';36225044]The only tech demo that really blew me away was this one
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgVYA1z49Os[/media]
Pretty amazing considering it came out in 2008.[/QUOTE]
I really like the faces in CryEngine 3.
[video=youtube;nMwk2Zi0c3o]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMwk2Zi0c3o[/video]
And on the topic of consoles yes the PS3 / 360 can't handle stuff like this and you might start seeing stuff like this in games in the generation after next if the rumours are true about the next gen consoles using the last gen series of PC hardware (AMD 6000 series) and as graphics improve it takes more time to create models and textures for them. But consoles are allot cheaper so it's more suitable for more people.
Bigger market base = more money.
Time = money. However Tesselation doesn't take that long to do.
Consoles make more money than MOST PC games will so it's not that odd for most graphics to be at the level for those machines.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
