Old Console Tech Demos v. "An entire machine struggling to render a single head" - General

[QUOTE=BrickInHead;39700635]uhhhhh there's actually a massive difference between those two, the ps4 render looks significantly more realistic. watch the video and it becomes even more obvious.[/QUOTE] anyone who disagrees with me must spend more time playing videogames than talking to real people

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;39707996]You've all seen this before, but this still remains one of the most impressive tech demos for it's time I've ever seen. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ddJ1OKV63Q[/media][/QUOTE] I actually was going to say Half-Life 2 was more impressive than the PS4 demo.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;39707996]You've all seen this before, but this still remains one of the most impressive tech demos for it's time I've ever seen. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ddJ1OKV63Q[/media][/QUOTE] I still remember the first time I watched the tech demo I was still pretty young when the demo came out and the new half life 2 zombies used to scare the fuck out of me I actually had to get someone else to finish Ravenholm when I first played I wish games still felt like that for me :(

[QUOTE=Durrsly;39708430]I actually was going to say Half-Life 2 was more impressive than the PS4 demo.[/QUOTE] Obviously. You're not going to get a leap in graphics today that you could in those days.

[QUOTE=Robber;39700852]IMO the Nvidia one looks much better. The only improvement is that the Quantic Dream head is animated.[/QUOTE] that's the lighting you're seeing. the big big difference here and what quantic dream's tech was really showing was the hair. finally we're going to have something resembling actual real hair instead of shitty textures on the top of round heads or hats plopped on top of them resembling hair

[QUOTE=RoadOfGirl;39709073]that's the lighting you're seeing. the big big difference here and what quantic dream's tech was really showing was the hair. finally we're going to have something resembling actual real hair instead of shitty textures on the top of round heads or hats plopped on top of them resembling hair[/QUOTE] But the hair was really shitty, It's better looking even in Crysis 3 (though not technically as good) Not to mention Nvidias much more advanced hair demo in 2010, running on a 200 series card (according to the title): [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l5dCkWd4Wo[/media] And their newer tech demo, using a modified version of the 2010 tech: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3IjR7heZGk[/media]

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;39707996]HL2 tech demo[/QUOTE] It's really kinda sad how some games still haven't caught up to some of this stuff from HL2. So many video game chars with these really uncanny mouth edges. Chars not looking at you or not having animated eyes outside of the eyeball rotation. Seriously, eyes are really friggin important for body language and we'll notice if there's something weird about them fairly quickly. And just general interaction with the world is what I'm missing a lot. Even if it's just picking up stuff to see if it swims or can be thrown at someone's head. Or turning faucets on and off. That's all the little things that make me feel part of the world rather than in some cinematic experience.

[QUOTE=paul simon;39709453][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l5dCkWd4Wo[/media][/QUOTE] To me, it looks like the hair doesn't have any weight to it.

With tech comes an issue of limitless detail. Like someone spending too much time on creating a character that in the end it has too much detail to get proper view of from a further distance. Or too much budget spent on making a world look technically good but forgetting about making it live and able for interaction. The best designs are usually born out of limits.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;39707996]You've all seen this before, but this still remains one of the most impressive tech demos for it's time I've ever seen. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ddJ1OKV63Q[/media][/QUOTE] I remember getting a disc containing all the HL2 E3 with Condition Zero. My face was blown off the planet when I watched them.

[QUOTE=paul simon;39709453]But the hair was really shitty, It's better looking even in Crysis 3 (though not technically as good) Not to mention Nvidias much more advanced hair demo in 2010, running on a 200 series card (according to the title): [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l5dCkWd4Wo[/media] And their newer tech demo, using a modified version of the 2010 tech: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3IjR7heZGk[/media][/QUOTE] It's using tesselation to do the stuff, which is only in DX11 (I'm aware of that OpenGL had something similar long before, though) and therefore only usable on GTX 400 series cards or later. He also mentions that it's a 400 series feature so there you have it.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;39709697]It's using tesselation to do the stuff, which is only in DX11 (I'm aware of that OpenGL had something similar long before, though) and therefore only usable on GTX 400 series cards or later. He also mentions that it's a 400 series feature so there you have it.[/QUOTE] thought it was a bit strange that it said GT 200 and tesselation in the title, but i didn't bother looking it up so i just wrote "according to the title".

Wow I remember having that dinosaur tech demo on my playstation when I was young. :v:

[QUOTE=paul simon;39711467]thought it was a bit strange that it said GT 200 and tesselation in the title, but i didn't bother looking it up so i just wrote "according to the title".[/QUOTE] Yeah looking at the comments I think the GT200 thing was bullshit, that emo was released to show off the GTX480.

I watched the fairy hair tech demo and the first thing I noticed was the tit physics :v: For a teeny fairy she's got fantastic hooters

[QUOTE=megafat;39709561]To me, it looks like the hair doesn't have any weight to it.[/QUOTE] This is more a fine tuning aspect than anything else; the demo proves that we have the raw compute power to simulate that hair so having it behave slightly more realistically shouldn't introduce too much additional overhead. Keep in mind that that's a tech demo, the express purpose of which is to show that they have the power to render it - it would be less easy to show if the hair behaved just like normal well kept long hair which generally keeps together, hangs down and doesn't move too much unless it's shook around a fuckload. [editline]25th February 2013[/editline] Same thing with the fairy demo. Someone with short hair does not have it move like that, at least not unless they're in a force 10 gale. But it illustrates how good the simulation is because the hair's constantly interacting with itself.

Ohh shit I remember finding the Dinosaur tech demo on one of the old PS1 demo discs as a 5-6 year old. Being a kid without knowing much English I interpreted the repetitive sequence as some sort of cool loading screen. I sat for like 15 minutes assuring my cousins that the demo would start at any minute.

[QUOTE=latin_geek;39700786]There's actually a big difference, it's hard to notice because it's a compressed as fuck screenshot and because of this: [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ChsSwUE.png[/IMG] And of course because that's a computer tech demo running on the best 2007 hardware while the PS4 tech demo is running on hardware that's cheap enough to keep the console's price reasonable. Expensive gaming PCs will always have better graphics, that's a known fact.[/QUOTE] This is good, by the way. Since soon we'll reach the logical maximum of raw texture/geometry quality (at least until the next big resolution increase since they'll need to be upped because you can see more raw detail with higher resolutions, though I'd wager that screen resolutions will stop increasing at some point due to it being utterly pointless adding more pixels that the human eye could never concievably see) we'll first start upping every other object in the game world to this massive level of detail then we'll be able to use all this GPU power for even more exciting things like anabling physics on everything or having clothes that realistically hang off characters etc. My personal holy grail of graphics is having fully physically simulated characters, i.e. when someone is pressed against a wall or something, the fleshy parts of their character will realistically deform - clipping issues are one of the most prevalent little immersion killers that take you out of the game momentarily. [editline]25th February 2013[/editline] Annoyingly this diminishing returns law applies to pretty much the whole of graphics, so expect a rise in people saying 'it looks nice, but not nice enough to warrant it bringing my rig to its knees' in the near future.

[QUOTE=BrickInHead;39708337]anyone who disagrees with me must spend more time playing videogames than talking to real people[/QUOTE] how are people not taking in the skin sag and the hair when you see his face move they compensate the looser skin for a more realistic outcome i mean, why do you think they used an old dude in the first place?

I remember that FF VII Tech Demo for the PS3 that had us crying because it was NOT going to happen. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cv8cYrGG220[/media]

I really fucking dislike... how the presentation is trying to make it come off like this is something new?! "Feel emotions you've never felt before", "PS4 has images previously reserved to CGI film". That's all bullshit, the PC has had tech demos like this for ages as shown above. Ofcourse they want to plug their new little console, but starting by telling blatant lies pisses me off, especially since every single technofobic friend I have is going to start saying "When are you getting rid of your PC for a PS4. It's seriously got the best graphics ever". After seeing a tech demo in which hair doesn't even have physics computation applied to it. Sigh..

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj3dPyk7hPI[/media]

[QUOTE=Pr0fane;39712717]I really fucking dislike... how the presentation is trying to make it come off like this is something new?! "Feel emotions you've never felt before", "PS4 has images previously reserved to CGI film". That's all bullshit, the PC has had tech demos like this for ages as shown above. Ofcourse they want to plug their new little console, but starting by telling blatant lies pisses me off, especially since every single technofobic friend I have is going to start saying "When are you getting rid of your PC for a PS4. It's seriously got the best graphics ever". After seeing a tech demo in which hair doesn't even have physics computation applied to it. Sigh..[/QUOTE] Take your head out of your arse, we know PC is more advanced than console, you don't need to brag about it every time we can appreciate something like this. It's a reasonably priced console made for the mainstream gaming market, whereas PCs are usually for people with a wider budget.

[QUOTE=Dead Madman;39713017]Take your head out of your arse, we know PC is more advanced than console, you don't need to brag about it every time we can appreciate something like this. It's a reasonably priced console made for the mainstream gaming market, whereas PCs are usually for people with a wider budget.[/QUOTE] You've completely misunderstood what I was trying to convey. Everyone with half an understanding of what a console is knows they're behind on technology by definition. I'm saying I'm pissed off they're lying so badly in their promotional presentation. They're flatout stating false things which will cause people who're not technologically interested to go "PS4 IS LIEK BEST GRAPHICS EVER 4 SURE". This is why we have flamewars.... because 12 year olds are lied to by companies they trust... I'm not bragging about PC being more advanced? I never have bragged. I'm one of the first to acknowledge consoles are PC's have equal worth, but cater to different needs. You mistook what I said completely.

[QUOTE=latin_geek;39700786]And of course because that's a computer tech demo running on [B]the best 2007 hardware[/B] while the PS4 tech demo is running on hardware that's cheap enough to keep the console's price reasonable. Expensive gaming PCs will always have better graphics, that's a known fact.[/QUOTE] I switched my GT 8800 out a long ago. I expect the affordable 2013 hardware to be much, much better.

[QUOTE=Pr0fane;39713109] I'm saying I'm pissed off they're lying so badly in their promotional presentation. They're flatout stating false things which will cause people who're not technologically interested to go "PS4 IS LIEK BEST GRAPHICS EVER 4 SURE". This is why we have flamewars.... because 12 year olds are lied to by companies they trust... [/QUOTE] Well it's kind of right, you don't see that level of graphics in games yet and these next-gen consoles will do the job of making them mainstream. And of course they're going to big up their new console, its a fucking product launch. You're an idiot.

[QUOTE=megafat;39709561]To me, it looks like the hair doesn't have any weight to it.[/QUOTE] That's not really the point of the tech demo. The point is that the GPU can handle 18.000 different hairs. Adding weight to them is as simple as making it's weight value higher in the simulation. They've lowered it to make it move more, and really show that it's all individual hairs. [editline]25th February 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Generic.Monk;39713224]Well it's kind of right, you don't see that level of graphics in games yet and these next-gen consoles will do the job of making them mainstream. And of course they're going to big up their new console, its a fucking product launch. You're an idiot.[/QUOTE] Don't call me an idiot. Even though I disagree with what you're saying I still respect you and your opinion. Why does everyone feel it's so easy to insult one another over trivial things... You do see that level of graphics ingame? The demo showed me nothing to which I said "oh wow that's new". Furthermore, you're calling me an idiot for nothing. I never critisized Sony of trying to 'big up their new console'. If you would've read more carefully you would've seen I critisized them for, what I thought was, lying to promote their new console.

[QUOTE=Sunday_Roast;39709583]With tech comes an issue of limitless detail. Like someone spending too much time on creating a character that in the end it has too much detail to get proper view of from a further distance. Or too much budget spent on making a world look technically good but forgetting about making it live and able for interaction. The best designs are usually born out of limits.[/QUOTE] As a professional who works with 3D graphics (architectural and engineering rendering), one of the most damning things about increasing the realism and technical power, instead of providing stylized content, is that a client (IE the person playing the game) will notice much finer details, and nitpick them to hell and back if they're wrong. Even if something is a concept and it's just to give you a general idea of, say, how the seating layout of a restaurant will look, and how the lighting will feel, they can get distracted and spend forever telling you a picture frame is too thick. For a real example, look at [url=http://daisura.tumblr.com/post/28152033468]this scene I did last year[/url]. You know what the client felt was so important that they wanted us to go back and spend several days re-rendering everything? [sp]the wine cabinet behind the bar wasn't well lit enough, despite setting it up to manufacturer specifications. Also they complained it was dark outside, despite wanting a night time render so no sunlight interferes with the interior lighting mood- we also had zero notes on what was even outside the location.[/sp] Just months before, the same clients were more than happy with some other company giving them un-lit perspective renders with no textures and generic models as placeholders for real furniture. As soon as people understand you can reach X limit, they become jaded and expect nothing less, for the same effort, price, and time they used to get. I think it was Nick Swardson who made the point in his stand-up skit about how people today could see transformers and just scoff, say "it sucked", and not even bat an eye, but if you showed the movie to someone from the 50's their heads would just explode. That's pretty much the state of the gaming industry as it stands, but as we gain new console hardware I predict this happening at points in the next 5 years- • 2013-2015:Graphic innovation will be a gimmick to jump on- many companies will make a visually amazing piece to say "HOLY WOW WE'RE THE BEST LOOKING THING USING THIS AWESOME TECH" to gain a few quick bucks and a foot in the door on the console, and the actual content will be forgettable or plain-out pathetic. • 201x: Michael Bay is laughed out of the movie industry for TMNT and goes on to become Call of Duty's storyline director. Nothing changes about the game except instead of having a squad of NPCs to back you up, it's just a Megan Fox terminator that continually delivers one-liners • 2015: after the graphics craze dies down, we'll see a few arfully stylized games come out that make use of the new tech in a way that doesn't "stand out" in a gimmicky way. Everything blends together and you spend your time focusing on what's important rather than oogling environmental damage caused by the Foxinator. • 2016: New game engines make better use of the hardware and we see a near impossible demo at E3, which utilizes an improved model of the Valve Steambox, which was revealed that year as a modular upgradeable unit aptly named the Steambox[sup]2[/sup]. People will bitch it was too soon, but it's advertised as a tuner version of the same hardware, just with a few minor upgrades out of the box and the ability to upgrade components for a long term lifespan. • 2016: Activision buys out the company who put out that demo, promising to make their vision an even better reality. • 2017: Activision shuts down that project a month before development is finished so that team can help make CoD 12: The Coddening • 2018: half a dozen sizes and franchise-themed editions of the consoles will have come out by now, and there will be people who will buy the newer versions every time, if only to have the latest and greatest amongst their friends. They will also likely go on the internet to laugh at PC gamers for spending so much money on computers and upgrades • 201x: PC gamers will also spend their time complaining and arguing the benefits of keyboard/mouse over gamepad, though for a while at least they will rejoice that consoles have lifted the DX9 development black hole • 2020: a dark room at E3 grows quiet. Gabe Newell wheels out on a kickass segway wheelchair thing, coming to center stage, balancing in the glow of the spotlight. White patterns start to expand and develop from points on the projection screen behind him- slowly the crowd realizes they're filling in a space, and that space is the number three. Everyone goes wild and a few people break their hips in the fit of joy. Gabe raises a hand and the crowd goes silent. "It is my greatest pride and joy to announce this feat of everything I have worked so long to create. Behold, [sp]the Steambox 3"[/sp] [sp]and the tech demo shown thereafter is half life 3: ep2[/sp]

[QUOTE=BCell;39708330]I remember when half Life 2 used to have the best graphics and physics for it's time. back then, my old computer couldn't even run it at max settings. Today, almost every computer can run Half life 2 or any source engine games at max settings.[/QUOTE] The funny part is that Source is now known for being one of the most efficient and easy to run engines out on the market at the moment. Knowing that, look at Dota 2. That shit is impressive. [QUOTE=Marik Bentusi;39709494]It's really kinda sad how some games still haven't caught up to some of this stuff from HL2. So many video game chars with these really uncanny mouth edges. Chars not looking at you or not having animated eyes outside of the eyeball rotation. Seriously, eyes are really friggin important for body language and we'll notice if there's something weird about them fairly quickly. And just general interaction with the world is what I'm missing a lot. Even if it's just picking up stuff to see if it swims or can be thrown at someone's head. Or turning faucets on and off. That's all the little things that make me feel part of the world rather than in some cinematic experience.[/QUOTE] Source's facial animation tech is probably it's most advanced feature. It's extremely well made and, as we can see from SFM movies, it still is on par with games being released nowadays. It's not really as much as other games being behind as much as Source was a huge advancement.

[QUOTE=daijitsu;39713386]Long post[/QUOTE] It's something that I've wondered about, whether we'll reach a point where it's just not feasible to make a game look any closer to reality simply because of artistic limitations rather than technical ones.