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

181–190 of 237 posts

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#181

Post by faeyanpiraat »

Pulcinella wrote: post #6
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…

Yeah having actually played it you run into this immediately. NPC cars will deform in a crash, but a street lamp will bring your car to an immediate stop. That’s far from an unsolvable problem though, and this is a graphical tech demo, not a full game with the associated staff, budget, time, etc. The Demon’s Souls remake (which I think actually looks nicer) has tons of destructible boxes, tables, stone work, etc (the…

Open worlds are disappointing me for that reason; they quickly collapse into an empty one.

Filling up a small map with “real” content by hand is hard, doing it on a huge scale is impossible.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#182

Post by faeyanpiraat »

mstade wrote: post #167
edgineer wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About pop in, at 3:10 in Real Civil Engineer's video you can see a car pop in directly in the line of fire. It's a shame to point out tiny flaws like this but they are nonzero. https://youtube.com/watch?v=aDD4nSlh2BM&t=185

This is probably individual and mileage varies by platform, planet alignment and what not, but I never noticed anything like this when playing the demo. Doesn't mean there wasn't any pop-in of course – well, certainly none as egregious as the linked video at least, pretty sure I would've noticed that – but I don't recall any whatsoever, either in the action sequence or subsequent city exploration.

It might’ve been because your attention were fully utilized.

Like in that video where you had to count how many times people passed the ball, but failed to notice a gorilla walked through the scene.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#183

Post by faeyanpiraat »

FractalParadigm wrote: post #87
bick_nyers wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's not a whole lot of good physics libraries to run on GPUs just yet, and lots of the physics you would want can absolutely eat up 16-64 cores of a CPU to get a somewhat decent frame rate with high realism. Similar to ray-tracing, where you get great realism, but it is just an absolute resource hog. The number of vertices in soft-body physics animations come to mind. The real world has curves and deformations, a…

> Walking through a city, you might have 100 NPCs on the screen at once, who all have hair. This is why I'm most excited for high-core counts leading to game development that allows these kinds of things to run in their own hardware threads. Imagine a world where each of those 100 NPCs has hair simulated on one thread, clothing simulated in another, world interaction on another, even AI generation on its own thread.…

The speedup is slowing down though.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#185

Post by [deleted] »

zokier wrote: post #34

I think the demo could have been more effective if the non-realtime elements were indicated more clearly; as-is people got confused what was realtime and what was just pre-recorded. I suppose that was kinda the point, but without any sort of reveal the effect gets lost. I don't know if the console demo had the option to switch to "nanite view" at any point, or just in the "gameplay" section, if it does then I guess t…

[deleted]

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#186

Post by native_samples »

unbanned wrote: post #129
dougmwne wrote: post #70

The people trying to point out that this falls short of photorealism are missing the point. This is a tech demo aiming to show off the next generation leap unreal engine 5 is making. There’s lots to be impressed about here and this was made using a ton of procedural generation using a team of just about 70 people. Here’s a great deep dive into some of the new technologies that highlights the strengths and weaknesses…

70 people is rather a lot.

For AAA quality? Not that many I think. Sure it's not a game but then production wasn't for as long either.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#187

Post by Jyaif »

vvanders wrote: post #112
winternett wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real excitement will come when it does not require a new $3000 graphics card to run on the home PC I already spent $1500 on... The price of keeping up with every new enhancement on PC is directly linked to each new engine update, but somehow game releases can be "optimized" for gameplay on ~3 year old consoles... Also why I haven't bought any new PC games since GTA5.

One of the advantages of fixed hardware is you can tune for that hardware directly. We used to bake content and design code with specific cache line sizes in mind. If you know you have a fixed memory budget for graphics/sound/etc you can make specific tradeoffs on where you spend that budget. PCs until recently did not have UMA and so you were bound by bus speeds(although this applied to some consoles too but you cou…

> One of the advantages of fixed hardware is you can tune for that hardware directly

With UE5, it's the engine that tunes the rendering quality for the HW available.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#188

Post by rightbyte »

edflsafoiewq wrote: post #57
rightbyte wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Part of the problem here is that real humans don't bash into walls. So how do you realistically represent that, when in fact it's just Johnny pressing forward on his controller? You could animate that as hugging the wall, leaning against it or something, instead of a 0mph walk.

Isn't that what Super Mario 64 does? At acute angles you hug the wall and shuffle along it, and at right angles, you push against the wall.

Hah, nice catch! Ye he does. If I remember correctly, he also like falls over if you run into a wall, or was it jump into it?

It is hard to stress how good and impressing that game was at the time.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#189

Post by avereveard »

ehnto wrote: post #139
winternett wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real excitement will come when it does not require a new $3000 graphics card to run on the home PC I already spent $1500 on... The price of keeping up with every new enhancement on PC is directly linked to each new engine update, but somehow game releases can be "optimized" for gameplay on ~3 year old consoles... Also why I haven't bought any new PC games since GTA5.

I have found I don't update my PC for years but the games just keep looking better. A lot of newer techniques, Raytracing excluded, seem to be much more efficient at making good looking models without much geometry. It's all shaders, decals and image maps. Running a 1080p monitor helped that alot. I recently upgraded to a 1440p, and it has cost me frames no doubt.

> Raytracing excluded

about that - screen space ray tracing has been around a while, and even if you miss little things (no diffusion from lights off screen or behind a shade) the resulting eyecandy is often enough to trick people mind even if it's not physically correct... and three generation older hardware is more than enough to run that.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#190

Post by native_samples »

saltyfamiliar wrote: post #166
pxc wrote: post #97

Does anyone else kinda feel like videogames look good enough at this point? This demo looks fantastic, but I don't think many visual improvements beyond it seem super exciting to me. I'll take them when they come, of course, and I'm sure that realistic 3D worlds in videogames will continue to look better and better as time goes on. But I dunno. I hope advances in videogame engines do more than just help the biggest A…

> Does anyone else kinda feel like videogames look good enough at this point? Yes, definitely. I kinda wish more resources would be diverted to improved physics, better procedural generation, and especially more realistic AI. When do we get to play a game against AI that is learning from the player and constantly changing its behavior in a truly dynamic way? Or how about a game where you can move and interact with ev…

You got your wish - a big part of the Matrix demo is the "Mass" AI system (some sort of new ECS system designed to optimize dcache hits), and the city is procedurally generated in Houdini which is a sort of visual node/graph based programming language.
Post reply on HN