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

The Matrix Is Unreal

fxguide.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 237 posts

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#171

Post by bluescrn »

shock-value wrote: post #146
leshow wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it's really cool, the problem is it barely runs at 30fps and there is no way in hell it's going to run at 60fps on a console. I never had a ps4/xbone, skipped the last console cycle and stayed on PC then recently got a PS5 where every title has an option to play at 60fps. There is no way in hell the consoles are going to be able to push this fidelity at that frame rate. Let alone their promise of 120fps that has…

IMO 4k/60fps as a goal is overrated. 3k upscaled to 4k using a newer generation upscaler is not going to look much worse than native 4k, especially when viewed on a TV at a typical distance from one's couch. And 60fps, while crucial in some genres, is not altogether that important in others (particularly narrative-focused single-player titles, for which Unreal Engine is often used especially among non-major publisher…

60fps as a goal is vastly underrated. We should absolutely be aiming for decent framerates.

The 'golden age' arcade games of the early 80s mostly ran at 60fps. And this trend continued in the arcades, with the most impressive early-90s 3D games also choosing framerate over detail, which was absolutely the right decision for Daytona USA, Sega Rally, Ridge Racer, and more. A solid 60fps pretty much defined 'arcade quality'.

It's understandable that early 3D home consoles had to aim a bit lower. But we're now on the 5th generation of 3D home console, and we're still making excuses to run at lower framerates than games of the 80s/90s?

But 4K, that just game too soon. Every recent generation of console has struggled to keep up with the rate of screen resolution increase. And 4K was a huge jump, from the 2 million pixels of 1080p to around 8 million pixels.

We could have been happy with 1080p for a lot longer if we'd had solid 60fps gaming with a bit more antialiasing, and streaming services with higher bitrates.

High-DPI screens are great if you're reading text off them at close range. But not really needed at a normal TV-watching or gaming distance.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#172

Post by ricardobeat »

shock-value wrote: post #146
leshow wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it's really cool, the problem is it barely runs at 30fps and there is no way in hell it's going to run at 60fps on a console. I never had a ps4/xbone, skipped the last console cycle and stayed on PC then recently got a PS5 where every title has an option to play at 60fps. There is no way in hell the consoles are going to be able to push this fidelity at that frame rate. Let alone their promise of 120fps that has…

IMO 4k/60fps as a goal is overrated. 3k upscaled to 4k using a newer generation upscaler is not going to look much worse than native 4k, especially when viewed on a TV at a typical distance from one's couch. And 60fps, while crucial in some genres, is not altogether that important in others (particularly narrative-focused single-player titles, for which Unreal Engine is often used especially among non-major publisher…

I completely agree and don't get why you're being downvoted. With fast-paced games it's even hard to notice the difference between 1440 and 4k. I'll take 60/90/144 fps over "true 4k" any day.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#173

Post by ErneX »

I'm surprised at the amount of comments with a jaded tone. This is one the most impressive tech demos I've seen running on real time, and I watched Second Reality by Future Crew back in the early 90s when it came out.

The car chase sequence is mind blowing and then you get to free roam the city by foot, car or even drone. Nanite and lumen are something special.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#174

Post by sundvor »

ricardobeat wrote: post #168
leshow wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it's really cool, the problem is it barely runs at 30fps and there is no way in hell it's going to run at 60fps on a console. I never had a ps4/xbone, skipped the last console cycle and stayed on PC then recently got a PS5 where every title has an option to play at 60fps. There is no way in hell the consoles are going to be able to push this fidelity at that frame rate. Let alone their promise of 120fps that has…

"It's really cool" is severely downplaying the achievement here. It's like you got a 1st gen jetpack for christmas and you're complaining it doesn't have enough horsepower. The fact that this runs in real time, at 30fps, on a $400 console is mind blowing . It's even able to downscale to a smooth 1080p/30 on the Xbox S. You would not dream of achieving this level of fidelity 5 years ago, there is nothing out there tha…

I agree. What a Series X (what we've got, can't talk to PS5 as I haven't seen it) can output is just mind boggling when considering the price.

Sure my AUD $6K PC is faster (with a multi core overclocked Ryzen, and 3070, fast memory, PCIE4 NVME storage, premium case/mobo/power/cooling), but at $750 what you get blows my mind. You'll struggle to match it at 3x the price in a custom built PC, and that was with pre hike GPU prices.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#175

Post by globular-toast »

dash2 wrote: post #5

Meh, these guys are still stuck in the uncanny valley. Objects are often absolutely beautiful and realistic, but interactions between objects are ridiculous. Some of this is probably just "not enough processing power", but it is also due to where the rendering bumps up against the primitive controls. For example, you have a very realistic human. But then the human walks against an object, and she does this standard v…

I thought you were going to make a different point about interactions. On pretty much any CGI I've seen, contact with skin doesn't look real. It could be skin on skin, or skin against a surface like a wall. It always looks like two objects not really touching each other. A lot of CGI (like Pixar etc.) seem to prefer hairy animals or solid robots, presumably for this reason. It seems easy to get hair to look OK, maybe because there's enough noise in the interaction to distract us. But skin just never looks real.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#176

Post by satysin »

wincy wrote: post #114
cercatrova wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a console demo, not a PC demo (unfortunately or fortunately, however you want to look at it). It runs on the PS5 and Xbox Series X/S which cost 500 USD.

The PS5 is $500 if you can find it, there's been shortages for over a year, the effective price is $900 on Ebay where you can actually get one without waiting.

I managed to get two, a digital (€400) and a Blu-ray model (€500) a few weeks ago from Carrefour here in [redacted].

It is a bit of a pain having to monitor stock drops but most online stores have a queue system in place as well as purchase limits to try and make life harder for people that buy up every console they have to just put them on eBay at twice the price.

A colleague of my wife managed to get a PS5 in a fnac store a few weeks ago as well. Just went in randomly and asked and they had them in stock. Only a few and they sell out quick so was just luck in that instance but if you put in a little effort you can get one in a week or two (depending on stock allocation of course) without having to pay over the MRSP.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#177

Post by retox »

ErneX wrote: post #173

I'm surprised at the amount of comments with a jaded tone. This is one the most impressive tech demos I've seen running on real time, and I watched Second Reality by Future Crew back in the early 90s when it came out. The car chase sequence is mind blowing and then you get to free roam the city by foot, car or even drone. Nanite and lumen are something special.

Yes, the set piece is very impressive, but thats the upside of running on rails, the devs have complete control over almost everything. When you're dumped in the world on your own the environment is very high quality, but as soon as you start doing the kinds of things you would in a normal openworld game like this is presented the framerate quickly tanks to the low double digits. Try driving into a line of cars for instance.

The number of cars around the city is very impressive, until you realize a lot of them are non-interactive static props. It's a tech demo, and I doubt the game itself will reflect much of what you see here.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#178

Post by ErneX »

retox wrote: post #177
ErneX wrote: post #173

I'm surprised at the amount of comments with a jaded tone. This is one the most impressive tech demos I've seen running on real time, and I watched Second Reality by Future Crew back in the early 90s when it came out. The car chase sequence is mind blowing and then you get to free roam the city by foot, car or even drone. Nanite and lumen are something special.

Yes, the set piece is very impressive, but thats the upside of running on rails, the devs have complete control over almost everything. When you're dumped in the world on your own the environment is very high quality, but as soon as you start doing the kinds of things you would in a normal openworld game like this is presented the framerate quickly tanks to the low double digits. Try driving into a line of cars for i…

This isn't going to be a game. They wanted to show UE5 working on current gen consoles and showcase the tooling, for example the city was built procedurally with Houdini.

Even the free roaming is impressive, the whole scene is lit by the sun. They recognized there are still things to work out like the car collisions that you mentioned, all the cars are rendered with nanite until you collide with them, at that point they are being swapped to "traditional" models.

I mean for a tech demo it even has way more consistent pedestrian and vehicle simulation consistency even a way long distances than AAA games like Cyberpunk 2077.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#179

Post by ErneX »

Copenjin wrote: post #152

I wonder if one day there will be companies that will just sell iper realistic models of complete cities or popular zone to be used in games or other kind of applications. Like companies such as Tele Atlas did back in the days for map data (when they didn't have much more than that I guess).

There are already, and Epic has acquired multiple companies in that segment.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2019-11-12-epic-acqui...

Edit: well not of entire cities, more about 3D assets. The city itself was built procedurally using Houdini.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#180

Post by Cthulhu_ »

h0l0cube wrote: post #127
dougmwne wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that is the super exciting, mind blowing thing about this, this ran on the Xbox Series X/PS5! In fact, it even runs on then Xbox Series S with a small visual downgrade, which is the cheap version with 1/3 the GPU power of the Series X (at 4 tflops, it is perhaps very roughly equivalent to a GTX 1060 from 2016). This is a triumph of software, not hardware. I imagine you should be getting a lot of use still out of…

> This is a triumph of software, not hardware Purpose built gaming hardware has significant advantages over a typical PC. Modern consoles have SoC designs with incredible bandwidth between CPU/GPU/RAM that you simply can't have on upgradable form factors. The closest thing in the general purpose computing world are the M1 family of SoC MacBooks. UMA on the M1 in particular could be harnessed to have physics and graph…

> Modern consoles have SoC designs with incredible bandwidth between CPU/GPU/RAM that you simply can't have on upgradable form factors.

So where's the PC platform with these advantages? I mean, most PC players will replace their whole system instead of upgrade individual components (anecdotal / speaking for myself). Where's the PC-like-a-console?

I guess the Steam Deck will be the one to look out for. But I would also expect gaming laptops to have those advantages.

Post reply on HN