Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Epic Games shows jaw-dropping graphics for next-generation consoles

venturebeat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 121 posts

Re: Epic Games shows jaw-dropping graphics for next-generation consoles

#11

Post by tracer »

gamble wrote: post #3

It's going to be a while before there's another console generation. (In a sense, the Kinect and PS Move were an attempt to refresh the consoles without changing the base hardware) I haven't even heard rumors of new console development yet, so I'd guess they're at least 2-3 years out.

IIRC, Sony was banking on the PS3 being a 10+ year console. This could all change with the discovery of the PS3's private key however. Of course if that's the case, the PS4 might just be a PS3.5 with a new private key.

Re: Epic Games shows jaw-dropping graphics for next-generation consoles

#12

Post by barrkel »

aphyr wrote: post #6
barrkel wrote: post #4

I would like to know more about this "Core i9" of which they speak.

They probably mean the 6-core i7-9* series, distinguished from "regular old i7" by their Gulftown architecture and 50% higher transistor count. But yeah, I thought that term died a while back.

Oh, that's what I understood it to mean, but that kind of sloppiness makes me doubt the quality of the article.

Re: Epic Games shows jaw-dropping graphics for next-generation consoles

#13

Post by flashingleds »

I get the impression (albeit as somebody with nothing to do with the industry) that studios aren't very excited about another generation of hardware because it already takes a huge amount of resources to make a current-generation blockbuster, and profit is not alway guaranteed. The demo is completely amazing and I loved it, but if it "took about three months for 12 programmers and artists to build" this 2 minute scene, surely this is beyond the limit of what a studio will undertake for a full length production? Or am I underestimating the horsepower of the studios today?

Re: Epic Games shows jaw-dropping graphics for next-generation consoles

#14

Post by Dn_Ab »

malkia wrote: post #7

Problem is how to handle worst-case scenarios. With pre-rendered movies that might or might not be a problem, and even if it is - it's production one (e.g. you can't predict how many well for how many days you would render your movie) But for a game - this means dropping the frame rate, making it visually unappealing. That's why Ray-casting would never pick up for real-time games (Unreal most definitely is not doing…

I mean no offence but I think the term you are looking for is raytracing not raycasting. Raycasting is kind of a stilted version of raytracing and was used in Wolfenstein3D and those old 3D games from the DOS days.

Re: Epic Games shows jaw-dropping graphics for next-generation consoles

#15

Post by narrator »

Why do they always have to do these shots at night? Is it because the processing to render far away objects in the background is just too much for the engine and they have to compensate by making these things at night so the background behind the characters is black or something close to them?

Re: Epic Games shows jaw-dropping graphics for next-generation consoles

#16

Post by jacques_chester »

> The demo took about three months for 12 programmers and artists to build.

So using the new engine, the world-leading experts on Unreal Engine NG - Epic - had to spend 1 person-year per minute of video.

Like Hollywood, this can only make hit-driven game design more common on consoles and PCs.

Re: Epic Games shows jaw-dropping graphics for next-generation consoles

#17

Post by gamble »

flashingleds wrote: post #13

I get the impression (albeit as somebody with nothing to do with the industry) that studios aren't very excited about another generation of hardware because it already takes a huge amount of resources to make a current-generation blockbuster, and profit is not alway guaranteed. The demo is completely amazing and I loved it, but if it "took about three months for 12 programmers and artists to build" this 2 minute scen…

It's safe to say that there's little appetite for a new console generation right now.

As in the movie industry, the middle ground in the games industry has been disappearing. Your best shot at turning a profit is either to make small bets on mobile/indie games, or go full-bore for a AAA title with a budget in the double or triple digit millions. Indies don't need another generation of consoles; AAA developers don't want to rebuild all the tech they created for the 360/PS3.

The assumption at the start of the current generation was that if you invested in your tech fairly early on, you'd be able to get a trilogy out of it before the subsequent generation of consoles made the tech obsolete. (This is why so many 360/PS3 IPs were structured as trilogies) Now that it's obvious the current consoles aren't going away anytime soon, developers are looking to amortize their tech over a few more titles before the hardware changes again.

Re: Epic Games shows jaw-dropping graphics for next-generation consoles

#18

Post by Tycho »

flashingleds wrote: post #13

I get the impression (albeit as somebody with nothing to do with the industry) that studios aren't very excited about another generation of hardware because it already takes a huge amount of resources to make a current-generation blockbuster, and profit is not alway guaranteed. The demo is completely amazing and I loved it, but if it "took about three months for 12 programmers and artists to build" this 2 minute scen…

I think the best way to make sense of that stat is to compare how long previous tech demos took to produce. Anyone got the data? (like the Rage demo perhaps)

Re: Epic Games shows jaw-dropping graphics for next-generation consoles

#19

Post by malkia »

Dn_Ab wrote: post #14
malkia wrote: post #7

Problem is how to handle worst-case scenarios. With pre-rendered movies that might or might not be a problem, and even if it is - it's production one (e.g. you can't predict how many well for how many days you would render your movie) But for a game - this means dropping the frame rate, making it visually unappealing. That's why Ray-casting would never pick up for real-time games (Unreal most definitely is not doing…

I mean no offence but I think the term you are looking for is raytracing not raycasting. Raycasting is kind of a stilted version of raytracing and was used in Wolfenstein3D and those old 3D games from the DOS days.

Thanks for spotting that one! I meant ray-tracing really.

Re: Epic Games shows jaw-dropping graphics for next-generation consoles

#20

Post by Dn_Ab »

Wow I could actually read the emotions on the guy's face and it didn't feel too uncanny to me at least.

But calling this real-time I think is stretching things a bit, even if its using the game engine and not prerendered. The demo and assets were probably polished and optimized for that machine, angle, lighting and scenario. And it was heavily scripted. I think an engine flexible enough for more general gameplay - with more calculations, interactions, assets and erm unmasked NPCs would be a lot less smooth and certainly less realistic looking. This seems like one of those theoretical optimums with requirements that just don't line up for most practical purposes.

Not trying to downplay how cool this is though. It will still be and is a visually and computationally amazing feat.

Post reply on HN