Live data from Hacker News

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

venturebeat.com

71–80 of 121 posts

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

#71
post #45

As beautiful as this demo is, I think the push for realism has harmed the game industry more than it has move it forward. One of the few developers in recent memory that has managed to focus on both visual fidelity and gameplay is Bioware with the Mass Effect series; for the most part most developers aren't this successful and end up producing beautiful but lifeless, dull games. Also consider that producing art asset…

I bet more of the art will be procedurally generated.

Can anyone in the game industry comment on this? Why type of problems are game companies paying for? I have seen at least one company that sells procedurally generated trees and am curious how good of an idea this is. Being customer oriented, what are the problems game companies have today?

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

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Final Fantasy 13's failings were mostly due to a horribly dysfunctional studio environment and a broken development process. They released a surprisingly honest postmortem of the project in a recent issue of Game Developer (you can find a summary of it at http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/30640/Exclusive_Behind_Th... ), and 'overambitious with the graphics' pales in comparison to the other things that went wrong. My…

Thanks for the link, interesting read. Reminds me of some similar comments made by Warren Spector after Deus Ex - that it was a big wakeup call to them once they had a single playable level, because you could suddenly see that some aspects of the game didn't work as they were. Possibly this suggests pg's minimum viable product + iteration strategy as being just as applicable to game development too, although I imagin…

For FF you have a number of different game "engines". The fighting engine for example can be a stand alone component, same goes for the running around in the world / track. There is always a minimum viable product.

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

#73
post #71
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet more of the art will be procedurally generated.

Can anyone in the game industry comment on this? Why type of problems are game companies paying for? I have seen at least one company that sells procedurally generated trees and am curious how good of an idea this is. Being customer oriented, what are the problems game companies have today?

I'm peripherally in the industry, but even I can say middleware is huge. Speedtree, as you mentioned, shows how niche the suites can be. You also have FMV players (especially on mobile) and of course physics engines are huge. Look for Havok and you'll see it powers most AAA games. I don't know specific pain points you can ease, but if you can generalize it, game companies will probably pay for it.

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

#74
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can anyone in the game industry comment on this? Why type of problems are game companies paying for? I have seen at least one company that sells procedurally generated trees and am curious how good of an idea this is. Being customer oriented, what are the problems game companies have today?

I'm peripherally in the industry, but even I can say middleware is huge. Speedtree, as you mentioned, shows how niche the suites can be. You also have FMV players (especially on mobile) and of course physics engines are huge. Look for Havok and you'll see it powers most AAA games. I don't know specific pain points you can ease, but if you can generalize it, game companies will probably pay for it.

potatolicious mentioned animation systems http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2303453 Is this an area that is just not very important (wont buy) or one that just is low on the list of todo items? speedtree begs the question of what about speedFOOBAR such as buildings, cities, caves, worlds, fish or how about speedanimal (generating animal + animation)? Is the big place to find a nitch in Art or are there better places to invest such as physics engines? What about audio? Is that an area that is uncharted or an area that is low on the list of items?

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

#75
post #45

As beautiful as this demo is, I think the push for realism has harmed the game industry more than it has move it forward. One of the few developers in recent memory that has managed to focus on both visual fidelity and gameplay is Bioware with the Mass Effect series; for the most part most developers aren't this successful and end up producing beautiful but lifeless, dull games. Also consider that producing art asset…

I bet more of the art will be procedurally generated.

How about scanning real-world locations? That should save loads of time.

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

#76
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's why Ray-casting would never pick up for real-time games (Unreal most definitely is not doing any ray-casting, I'm just giving it as a an extreme example). I'm not convinced that you are correct here. Although ray-tracing has not been a good option in the past due to processor limitations, we're reaching the point at which it may become feasible. Because ray-tracing scales linearly with the number of cores yo…

Just because it scales with the number of cores, it does not mean it would keep fps in reasonable range given random camera position and orientation. Take a look at Intel's raytracing demo, and when you go close to the lamps (shiny bulby spherical objects with lots of reflections) you get a lot of slowdown (using same amount of cpus). That's what I'm talking about. Yes you can tweak it, but it loses it's purpose.

That's easy to work around, you just stop computing once you hit your time limit on that pixel. It'll be good enough.

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

#77
post #71
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet more of the art will be procedurally generated.

Can anyone in the game industry comment on this? Why type of problems are game companies paying for? I have seen at least one company that sells procedurally generated trees and am curious how good of an idea this is. Being customer oriented, what are the problems game companies have today?

I'm not in the industry at all, but I've followed it for a long time and done a good deal of random game dev. The biggest pain point is how much it costs to produce a large world these days. As it stands, this is not a technical problem, but a business one: artists are expensive and art for modern games is insanely detailed.

Procedural generation is, IMO, the way to go here, but it's an unsolved problem. I've been thinking about this for a long time and I've had two specific ideas in mind for how to ease the cost of content development. Please, steal these!

Idea one is for the creation of individual assets. You start with what is, in effect, a block of clay. You (programmatically) cut away at it, apply materials to it (which could, in turn, do things like cut a wood grain into it), add on to it, etc. So let's say you want to build a sign generator for shops in your town. You'd start with a block of clay roughly the size of your sign, cut it into the (2d) shape you want, emboss the logo into it, then apply a wood material to the sign, and paint the raised areas. This allows you to quickly create unique assets in your world.

Idea two is for the high-level creation of a world. You have an editor where you can create a landscape. You start by setting the size of the area, drag points up and down to affect terrain, etc -- all stuff that's been done before. The key, though, is in world brushes. For instance, you select a 'forest' brush. This brush, when painted onto an area, creates trees, rocks, bushes, etc as appropriate based on elevation, angle of the ground, etc. So you paint part of your area with a forest brush, then go in and paint in a river, paint in paths, etc. Once you've created the high level look, you can go in and add features like signs to cities, unique quest/story-related assets, etc. This allows you to create large areas with completely unique geometry very quickly and cheaply, without sacrificing quality; after all, you're starting off with unique objects and then adding specific touches.

The latter idea has been implemented to a certain extent in the past, but it's been entirely via instanced geometry. The problem there? Everything looks the same. Procedural generation lets you get a unique world, then you can go in and actually make it feel real.

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

#78

Too bad all these beautiful effects will be covered up by the foreshortened perspective of a gun in one corner and a health bar in the other corner. I kid, but honestly, seeing this doesn't excite me anywhere near as much as a preview of whatever the team that made Mirror's Edge has in store next for current -generation consoles.

Interestingly, the studio that made Mirror's Edge has apparently been hard at work on their own jaw-dropping graphics tech:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi2tae2PmmU&feature=fvwkr...

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

#79
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DICE made Mirror's Edge, but it was a commercial flop, so we are unlikely to see a sequel anytime soon :( Personally I loved it. Slightly OT but interesting: from what I hear from people at EA, it was a huge internal political war that year between the people who wanted to build more sequels and licensed franchises, and the people who thought that EA would die if it didn't innovate on its own IP. The latter won and w…

The economics of the games industry mean that you can't turn a profit on AAA games without sequels. The new IP push was about reducing EA's dependence on sports titles and externally-licensed IP. (Also, to a degree, an attempt to reinvigorate EA's corporate culture) It was always in the game plan that the successful new IP games would receive plenty of sequels. I wouldn't say it was a total failure. Mass Effect and D…

This is very true. The first title establishes a buzz about the game, the second (and third, etc.) game often make more money because the brand has been established and demand created. There are a large number of people who don't want to spend the whole $60 when a new IP is released and will instead wait for it to be discounted, or buy it used.

EA circa 2003/2004 was pumping out sequels yearly for titles that should have long been put to pasture. This has changed quite a bit in the last 5 or 6 years with IP's like Skate, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Battlefield (and Bad Company), Dead Space, where the sequels aren't rushed out the door without much thought, not to mention other new projects like Dante's Inferno and Mirror's Edge.

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

#80
post #77
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can anyone in the game industry comment on this? Why type of problems are game companies paying for? I have seen at least one company that sells procedurally generated trees and am curious how good of an idea this is. Being customer oriented, what are the problems game companies have today?

I'm not in the industry at all, but I've followed it for a long time and done a good deal of random game dev. The biggest pain point is how much it costs to produce a large world these days. As it stands, this is not a technical problem, but a business one: artists are expensive and art for modern games is insanely detailed. Procedural generation is, IMO, the way to go here, but it's an unsolved problem. I've been th…

You bring good points, but you forget one things - artists love control. Take that away from them and they cry like babies who lost their candy.

Procedural art is really cool if you can think about your asset as a programmer - but you need to remember artists do not think like us. If you are willing to replace your artists with tech artists though, that's a different story (note: normally those people are rare, and stay in one field programming shaders).

"The problem there? Everything looks the same." -- Yes, that's exactly the desired consequence by artists, and as mentioned, will cry if their flexibility is revoked by tools they are not familiar with (in house model/texture generators).

While you as a programmer think of a texture of "noise and color", artists think about it as brush strokes, materials and emotions.

Post reply on HN