This is what Unreal Engine 4 looks like when hardware doesn't act as a limitation. Everything here is running in realtime. This is what the next generation of games could look like.
youtube.com
--SPECS--
>GPU: Dual Nvidia GeForce 1080 Ti in SLI
>CPU: Intel Core i7 5960X
>Motherboard: Asus X99-E WS
>RAM: Corsair 64GB DDR4 2400MHz
>Monitor: Acer 28" Predator XB281HK G-Sync 4K
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
>a small rock
WOW AMAZING GAMEPLAY
How many fps?
>GPU: Dual Nvidia GeForce 1080 Ti in SLI
This alone is 1500 - 2000€+
Thanks doc
for now
60fps all the way.
...
youd have to kill off 90% of pc users/ 100% of all console users on Sup Forums for us to achieve this as the set standard. too many favela monkeys shitting up gaming with their low budget 2gb ram machines
How long would it take to design all of those pebbles? I can't imagine all the effort it would take to do all the individual pebbles like that.
>says that likes good
60 fps isnt realistic. 144 is needed t0 make it indistinguishable from reality
Do you have any idea how much work it would take to achieve this level of graphics when stuff is actually happening on-screen and keeping it at 60 FPS? Plus that 90% of PC players wouldn't be able to actually run this?
We are not going to reach this level in games for a very long time.
there isn't actually enough precious metals and chemicals to mass produce really good computers, there is a sever shortage of resources.
>they fell for the fps meme
human eye cant see above 24 fps, why do you its they make movies in 24 fps
Oh boy I sure love no gameplay
Having a scene with nothing happening in it is fair enough, but try rendering effects and stuff. That'll tank the framerate.
>GPU: Dual Nvidia GeForce 1080 Ti in SLI
>CPU: Intel Core i7 5960X
>this shit
>just for graphics
I assume you think everything else from collision to effects, physics and levels that are lager than a few square feet doesn't require any computing power
I can't wait to play this on my PS8 in the year 2063.
>why do you its they make movies
>next generation
>2 1080s
Yeah, fuck that, I don't want to pay $3k for a console.
who fucking cares
when are we going to get some advanced AI
In pursuit of graphics, and by overblowing budgets, we lost most things which we used to love about vidya. Now it's mostly indie shit that looks like it came in late 80-early 90s, yet hogs shitton of processing power, or a AAA shit filled to the brim with garbage and microtransactions,
>a bunch of rocks doing nothing
wow
Wtf i hate 144 now
amazing gameplay
kek
thousands of dollars just for a few lifeless rocks
PC "gamers" everyone
obviously 1 frame
What about character models?
Thanks doc
How about you just fucking go outside if you want to see realism.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who saw that
Wow.
Photogrammetry.
Scan a scene in 3d and import it into an engine.
What a new and original idea.
It's not as if that's been done for years.
I just can't understand who cares so fucking much about graphics. It blows my mind. Just fucking go outside. Go for a hike. Buy a camera and take pictures of things.
You people do not care about games at all. All you want is something pretty to look at. Leave this hobby you fucking troglodytes.
GAMES are fun because of the GAMEPLAY. Sure, it's nice to look at the graphics and the artstyle and all that; but if the game isn't fun, who cares? The game should be fun even if everything was just singular colored flat textures. Graphics mean nothing to the overall experience.
Way too much effort for any one person. That's just way too much detail for an artist to do by hand, especially when there's a deadline to meet.
Look at photogrammetry.
Get a job fucking third worlder scum
If the future of gaming trying to render photo realistic rocks then gaming is dead.
VIDEO GAMES are fun because the VIDEO GAMEPLAY you retard
>I think those rocks were procedurally generated.
you think you know what that means, but you dont
>not playing Pebble Skimming Simulator 2018
How can a simple fact trigger you?
Are you autistic?
source?
Kinda wish I could be frozen for 100 years. I feel like the really good shit is on the horizon but I will be too old to enjoy it once it arrives
Can you not read you lamebrain? If you game is fun, even with wireframe only, or flat textures with singular colors (or even just completely gray all together), etc, than that is a good thing. Graphics and art style are only the icing on top.
Yeah, it's nice to have good looks graphics or a nice artstyle, and it can enhance the gameplay (even if ever so slightly) but they aren't what makes the game. Would you rather play a good game that has ok graphics/artstyle, or a "game" that had the best graphics ever but everything else was terrible?
Stop trying to make games all about graphics. Fucking stop, jesus christ. I just want games to be fun.
Thanks Doc
>I just can't understand who cares so fucking much about graphics.
You do realize a game can have good visuals and gameplay right? And does nothing for the experience? No, the visuals do a LOT for the experience. Bleeding edge visuals are not required but if you have the rig for it, why not? Is there a down side to the game having these features if it also has good gameplay?
They cost more than 2000$. So? What's your point?
Hey why not make a CGI scene while you're at it. Because this doesn't concern video games at all.
>Everything here is running in realtime
>GPU: Dual Nvidia GeForce 1080 Ti in SLI
that's pre-rendered for the average consumer
*Wahoos internally
it barely looks better than Battlefront
>60 fps with two 1080 Tis and a top of the line i7
So basically you showed what games are going to look like in 8 years when that kind of rig is commonplace
I said "€".
-> Euro
You can get them for 700€ cheapest.
What is even your point. I think you are retarded honestly.
M2
Graphical fidelity has been at such a high point that pushing it further has been giving us so little despite pushing hardware and software more and more.
I want better physics.
moneylet
Not surprising, the guy who made that scene worked for EA DICE.
So?
>1080 Ti SLI
I'm ready guiz.
>more than 2000$
Funny, I got mine launch week and I paid $1550 after tax & shipping.
You do realize you can have both, yes? Visual aspects of the games are just as important as story and music etc. Gameplay is the #1 thing in most cases but let's not pretend the rest doesn't matter. Hell, my favorite game this year so far has been Nier and that looks like it's an early Ps3 title. But it looks good enough while the rest of the game is so well made that I don't care it's not current gen visuals.
>GAMES are fun because of the GAMEPLAY.
Interactive dramas are a rising genre of video games. Narrative-based games like these can benefit highly from the ability to present immersive, groundbreaking graphical capabilities that can whisk the player off their feet and throw them into the captivating world of the game.
He's an unsung national treasure.
I want better art styles. There's just so much incestuous, cheap art design meme imagery that it's sickening. Give me some novelty, give me some vision.
i agree with this,they will also never try to make things look good like cgi fantasy scenes in real time,the industry only cares about realistic shit and it's not really evolving anymore,i get pissed off having to buy new hardware just to play the next new game when the graphics havent even evolved significantly
Look towards Nintendo then. Sony and Microsoft are too busy trying to make everything look hyperrealistic.
and nintendo is too busy downgrading everything for their shitty portable systems
And this is what it looks like with limitations (ps4/xbone)
WOW SMALL SCENES WITH EASILY CREATED/PHOTOSCANNED ROCK ASSETS WHICH NOT AFFECTED BY PHYSICS AND LIMITED AMOUNT OF HIGH DEF TEXTURES FOR THEM TO NOT AFFECT THE RAM MUCH HOLY SHIT
characters and still no gameplay, typical console exclusive experience
>better art design
>a mustached italian plumber
>a pink blob
>literally a fisher price dino
>bing bing wahoo
>good
and "hyperrealism" isn't a set art style, there's more to art style than cel shading or exaggerated proportions, you can have two games that look completely different while still being fully realistic. Just look at movies, the latest adam sandler flick doesn't look anything like the seventh seal or whatever. I want interesting design of architecture, items, monsters, etc.
>everything is completely static besides lighting
>devs would ever hand craft their meme open world games to look like this instead of copy pasting 100sqft of assets ad nauseum implying they don't already
might as well be looking at pictures, who cares?
so a $5000 PC can run static objects to look like PS4 dynamic models. wow!
Them are some purty rocks.
But what would really impress me is some damn fine physics simulations running in real time among all the other chaos a triple A title might throw at the player. Red Faction Guerilla was 8 years ago, and Crackdown 3 still requires server side calculations to run that supposed destructible co-op multiplayer they were talking up.
Give me some fucking TECHNOLOGY.
>copper, silicone and plastic
>shortage of resources
hmm
if the games didn't fucking suck then maybe...
There's the little game called Breath of the Wild...
If only such quality engine could render high definition loli cunny instead of those useless rocks.
alright but hows the gameplay?
I want to hug Saya. :)
Pedophiles plz go away
thanks doc
LIFELIKE TEXTURE
Well i mean they do have higher quality textures... But overall the amount of detail on display isn't that impressive.
>human eye cant see above 24 fps
Please don't. Just don't, not this argument again please.
Please.
I'll agree with you if it makes you never post this here again.
72 fps will suffice.
>In the pursuit of graphics
Videogames have ALWAYS been pushing increasingly advanced graphics as a main feature
Thanks doc.
wow
rocks!
they...
rock :D
This is the future r/pcmasterrace/ !
>lost bookmarks long ago
>can't find this on niconico anymore
fuck my life
Reminds me of UNLIMITED DETAIL WORKS.
Except this is in UE4, so it can have gameplay integrated immediately.
Physics would be hell, though.
This so fucking much, most AI is still such garbage it's unbelievable.
But no, keep staring at those pretty pebbles good goy and pay 2k for that new shiny computer.
It still looks fake. Like you can tell it's a CG render and not live action footage.
>photogrammetry
Discarded and ignored.
Also
>Not Voxel/froxel based materials
#NOTMYFUTUREGRAPHICS
Well it could, but first you would have to photograph a wet cunny from a lot of different angles, under different light conditions.
define advanced ai. the better the ai, the worse it is for a player. the key to balancing a game is tricking the player into thinking they're smart.
Where is the INFINITE DETAIL
This is
I N F I N I T E
N
F
I
N
I
T
E
>Graphics mean nothing to the overall experience.
Oh fuck off
Developers acknowledge that the aesthetics of a game can do wonders for the atmosphere. It's why Bloodborne doesn't look like a fucking Nintendo DS game.
Nah im talking about stuff like this.
>Making games have the minumum acceptible graphics in a time where real life graphics are possible is acknowledgement
Uh huh.
>why do you its they make movies in
Did you have a brain stroke?
>minumum acceptible graphics
wrong
>where real life graphics are possible
also wrong
Summerfags go and stay go