-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
DF - Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart PS5 - The Digital Foundry Tech Review
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
LMAO. You know that reminded me that Alex went on and on about how Aloy looked so good in the trailer last year because she was using hero quality assets and hero lighting, and how she wont look that good in regular gameplay. Well, GG literally gave her her own hero lighting.
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Is this some sort of gotcha? What are you trying to do here, downplay some pretty neat tech?
Dr Bass
Member
There were plenty of video reviews that showed insane texture detail, what they claimed were industry leading PBR shaders, and certain levels of rendering quality on things like fur, that looked better than anything I've yet to see on another game.I mean come on this is some low poly rocks with low resolution texture on a stylized mesh. Look at the ground and the tree trunk.
Like come on. We know texture data is like 70-80% of game data. A stylized/cartoon game makes things so easier to load data because there's less texture complexity.
I hazard to guess that these rocks are not even 1,000 triangles. Now compare them to what people expect next gen...(cough UE5 demos, Quixel Demos, etc)
That doesn't mean Rift Apart isn't a great looking game. It is. The baked static GI, art style and particles are great.
But its made up of low poly environment and simple texture complexity. This makes it easy to push data because you don't have to push 4k-8k textures that a photorealistic game is aiming for.
We all know if we saw a game with those kind textures on rocks, we would make alot of noise about it and this is worse, a stylized rock which hides low resolution texture.
The bottom line is this game is industry leading right now in terms of the overall visual package, irrespective of style choices.
How people find ways to denigrate this effort is kinda dumb. If this approach were so easy and simple to figure out ("It's just simple textures and geometry!"), how come no one in the history of humanity has done anything even close to this? Clearly other game companies should have hired you since you know how to achieve this level of quality with no problem. Simple as 1-2-3!
And the reaction I described is present in a lot of reviews. I think it might have been SkillUp that said he just feels sorry for other game makers right now, since he doesn't know how anyone else is going to measure up to this. Multiple reviews have compared it to looking as good as a CG movie. Multiple. Reviews. This is just what Insomniac has achieved with this title, and this is where we are right now in the gaming world, and no ones complaining or living in denial is going to change that.
It's just pissing off a lot of people that hate that this game is out on PS5 for whatever reason. It wouldn't matter if this was PC, or XSX, or, miraculously, the Switch. It would be the same awesome high water mark we are seeing and I would still be excited to play it. Anyone downplaying this game is a hater, pure and simple. This is as close as we have ever seen to the promise of the "Toy Story" level game we have been hearing about since Ken Kutaragi talked through his arse about it in regards to the PS2.
I have a strong feeling that most of the people trying to tear this game down are going to be singing the praises of the next XSX game that looks amazing and trying to explain why THAT particular game is great. But they can all be great. This isn't a zero sum hobby thankfully. I personally can't wait to see the next high water mark of a game, no matter where it lands.
MacReady13
Member
Friday cannot here quick enough!
HAL-01
Member
i stopped reading at the "stylized game means lower resolution textures" bit lmao, that guy is completely full of shit
James Sawyer Ford
Member
SlimySnake
I think Ratchet is our Killzone Shadowfall moment for this gen (in terms of visuals), but im even more impressed with the leap we are seeing here
This generation is going to have mind blowing visuals…it will only go up from here. Remember that Ratchet 2016 wasn’t even in the same conversation as this gen’s best looking games
ZywyPL
Banned
Yeah, IG currently holds the candle when it comes to texture resolution among Sony studios, back in the PS3 times it was GG>ND>IG, but now IG games are the ones who have those super crisp, super detailed textures, even on the base PS4/Pro in Spider-Man/Miles Morales, GG is alright in that field too, but they make open-world games now so some sacrifices obviously have to be there, while ND's games for whatever the reasons have blurry, washed out textures everywhere which kills the entire presentation.
But I'll say tho the environments in R&C are rather empty and simple, they're not as dense as even some PS4 games, even recent HFW which is a cross-gen is much, much more pack with the foliage, trees, building ruins etc. But maybe that's the reason individual objects in R&C are so damn detailed, whereas in HFW all those objects are lacking in geometry details.
Luipadre
Member
I mean come on this is some low poly rocks with low resolution texture on a stylized mesh. Look at the ground and the tree trunk.
Like come on. We know texture data is like 70-80% of game data. A stylized/cartoon game makes things so easier to load data because there's less texture complexity.
I hazard to guess that these rocks are not even 1,000 triangles. Now compare them to what people expect next gen...(cough UE5 demos, Quixel Demos, etc)
That doesn't mean Rift Apart isn't a great looking game. It is. The baked static GI, art style and particles are great.
But its made up of low poly environment and simple texture complexity. This makes it easy to push data because you don't have to push 4k-8k textures that a photorealistic game is aiming for.
We all know if we saw a game with those kind textures on rocks, we would make alot of noise about it and this is worse, a stylized rock which hides low resolution texture.
Holy shit looks fucking insane. This on my OLED with HDR Kreygasm
True but I'm talking in terms of game design possibilities. I'm currently LTTP and playing God of War at the moment think I'm near the end and I can already see the limitations of that game in terms of game design. While the game looks beautiful, there is a lack of massive setpeices from the older games but with the new detail and camera angle. Areas are segmented into smaller areas to hide loading times. You can tell the developers were restricted building a game around 2012 laptop CPU and the slow HDD and it's a shame the sequel will have those same limitations. It will basically be a prettier version of the previous game instead of a proper evolution.
It's a shame but I'm not fussed I'm guess as im LTTTP for alot of PS4 games, as soon as I finish my PS4 game backlog we will eventually see next gen only games.
Between this and the insanely impressive GI in Metro Exodus, I'm starting to think that RT can be a significant part of next gen visuals, and not just a bit of a gimmick. It even seems possible at 60fps with a few compromises.
Azurro
Banned
You do not understand what is being talked about. Your example games do exactly the same as every single other piece of gaming software has ever done: load data into ram and then go.
You could have portals in the N64 and PSOne, the difference is that the more environments you have, the less amount of detail each environment is allowed to have.
The big difference here is that the I/O is so fast that it allows streaming such a large amount of data relative to the past, that you can stream in entire levels in less than a couple of seconds without having to sacrifice detail and can even make it part of your gameplay without resorting to hacks.
I know this is not as fun as "buT tHe EvIl LyInG CorpoRationss BrO!!", but it's good to know something new every day.
Last edited:
Hmm, after Dishonored 2 did it with its time travelling level this doesn't look so next gen.
You could pull out the device at any time and seamlessly see what's going on in the level from another point in time without any loadings and go back and forth between levels. Anyone who played it knows what i'm talking about
You could pull out the device at any time and seamlessly see what's going on in the level from another point in time without any loadings and go back and forth between levels. Anyone who played it knows what i'm talking about
Guilty_AI
Member
I perfectly understand whats being talked about mate. Thats why i know any discussion about this allowing for "new types of games!" or "level design that was impossible before!" is 100% bullshit. It may make devs life easier, and at best allow for some visual improvements, but thats about it. And thats the same thing for almost every other hardware upgrade.
People here are even drooling about wipe transition effects and praising next gen for it, while completely ignoring Fallen Order had those too. The truth is, most people here are just being blinded by next gen hype or corporate PR crap, thats really all there is to it. We ain't seeing nothing new besides better visuals.
Last edited:
Negotiator101
Member
No, twice as much is probably more accurate.
FunkMiller
Banned
I guess John from DF is full of shit then? Because he certainly says that this is the kind of stuff that couldn't be done last gen. Why should we listen to you and not him?
Guilty_AI
Member
Last edited:
FunkMiller
Banned
The Star Wars one is just a cut scene. And the other one is a simple transition from one simplistic track to another, both very similar, easily loadable from RAM. Ratchet swaps one entire real time environment out for another more or less instantly.
Last edited:
Guilty_AI
Member
The star wars one is rendered in real time, put it there because people were all praising the wipe transition effect in R&C as next gen.
And as i mentioned before, if all you have to say is that "it doesn't look as good" we go back to the original point that in the end we're only getting better visuals for the same games.
Besides, the racing game i showed allows for custom user made tracks, you can have far more complex scene transitions if you so wish.
Last edited:
THE:MILKMAN
Member
That isn't proof and you still seem to misunderstand. Those two games almost certainly have the those alternative wipes "parked" in RAM and the whole point of the PS5's IO ( and next-gen generally with SSD/IO) is that it is now possible to grab GB's of data from storage, loaded into RAM and shown on screen while playing. It is the way this is achieved that is new and couldn't be done before. This has huge knock-on effects for creative freedom, simplifying dev and no doubt many other benefits for both production and graphics etc.
HAL-01
Member
You’ll notice that as soon as the wipe starts, the ship in the first shot suddenly stops moving. It becomes a still shot because the game can’t handle rendering 2 viewports at once. The game tries to hide it by making the wipe really quick.
Glad to be of help!
Guilty_AI
Member
I'm not misundersterstanding anything mate. If we're gonna talk about the ways creative freedom is limited by hardware, then about every piece of hardware that isn't up to par will limit it.
And the difficulty of the wipe effect is having to render two screens at once, not about swapping assets. So in the end it isn't even related to SSDs or whatever.
Last edited:
Guilty_AI
Member
Wrong, devs said in an interview they actually tried what you said but it didn't work.
They had to actually render two scenes at once, the stillness could be explained by animations/camera having stopped rather than just a still shot, maybe to save CPU power on the console versions or just an overlook.
HAL-01
Member
Really? It was easier for them to do it the much harder way? And it just happens to look like the cheap easy way anyways. Wow, would love to hear this interview
NikuNashi
Member
Respect for even showing your face on here today, let's see if 343 pickup the baton and run with it next week on 'the more powerful' console.
Guilty_AI
Member
Last edited:
THE:MILKMAN
Member
I genuinely don't understand your problem with this!? Not needing to waste a lot of resources rendering two scenes seems like a perfect example of just one way the huge uplift with IO benefits things. There will be many others I don't doubt.
Is there anything specific that John says in his video you believe is erroneous?
S
Shodan09
Unconfirmed Member
Woah there! This is NEOGAF. You're only allowed to complain about poor geometry in the background of games like Halo Infinite. How dare you suggest that any element of this games visual presentation isn't best in class?
Guilty_AI
Member
Why are you even talking about IO here? Didn't i just said you have to render two scenes at once to get that effect? Its a problem that'd need to rely on GPU power, not IO or SSDs.
Talking about that, it actually reminded me of this game
Last edited:
Azurro
Banned
Again, you don't understand. It's a matter of practicality and feasibility, you are not going to make a game that looks like a PS2 game on purpose just to have different portals or bigger levels.
You know why this can only be done on something with the I/O capabilities of the PS5?
Let's say you want to load a scene and the normal way to do it is to load it with as much detail as you can and the either restrict the player movement or add bottlenecks as the rest of the level gets very slowly loaded up.
Now, if you want, say, a portal or multiple scenes, you need to load all of them in RAM. You might think "marketing gimmick?! Waah Wash! Sony sucks!!", but it really isn't that, as you have a very finite amount of RAM that needs to not only load the scene in front of you, but the patches of the scene you might go to and now multiply it by however many scenes you'd like to have. Long story short, the game will look like shit.
However, with the new I/O capabilities, you can have a relatively arbitrary amount of scenes loaded up in less than a couple of seconds, so you can get the incredibly detailed scenes and multiple of them. Not only that, it also frees up RAM as you don't need to store as much in RAM for the adjacent areas as you can stream them in WAY faster than before.
It is not PR crap, you simply don't understand it much.
ripeavocado
Banned
Yes, he is.
He doesn't know what he is talking about, he's not a developer, he's not able to properly test the impact of the SSD or the amount of contented streamed but he talks about it like he knows.
They are armchair experts that should be imbarassed of posting their opinions even on obscure internet forums.
HAL-01
Member
So, reading the article, aptly titled “the Star Wars transition was a pain in the ass to recreate”, the devs spent several months trying to make it work.
And evidently they didn’t manage to make it seamless due to what I already pointed out.
This is your evidence that it’s totally not noteworthy that insomniac could pull it off seamlessly?
Guilty_AI
Member
Do you think they just slapped together a solution in three days? How would you know they pulled it off easily? I said it before, but this isn't something a magical SSD would help much with. Maybe they had loads of trouble with it like the devs of Fallen Order did, maybe its something they worked on months until they finally pulled it off, thats what common sense would dictate.
I don't know if you realize, but attributting all this possible work to a piece of hardware can be extremely disrespectful to the devs who had to figure everuthing out to do this.
Last edited:
thebigmanjosh
Member
I’m going to go out on a limb and say you’re both right but you’re misunderstanding the point. I think
Fake
was referring to the fact that because of the RT hardware in consoles (and PC Cards), third parties are more likely to make RT a baseline and fundamental piece of their engines moving forward à la Metro Exodus EE.Obviously, the original game made compromises to accommodate last gen hardware and older PC Cards, and it’s hard to argue games won’t look better when designed to a RTX 2060/6700 XT min spec.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
But surely what they say about having to do it that way was within the context of last gen limitations? Now they shouldn't have to do it that way (and possibly be far easier to boot!) with the massively upgraded IO/SSDs in consoles and DirectStorage and RTX IO on PC.
Unless the R&C "swipe" shown at 2:42 in the DF video would still be too jarring for Respawn? It looks at least as good as the example from FO you posted IMO.
HAL-01
Member
I haven’t said shit about hardware, perhaps you’re arguing with a strawman
I do know that the dual viewport tech they use for the transition is the same they developed for the portals. Nevertheless, that has nothing to do with your argument that “fallen order did it first!! Nothing new!!!” Which has already been settled
staticshock
Member
If I'm so "full of shit" why wouldn't that be so easy to disprove?
This is a tech thread after all right? Its always the un-informed that claims someone else doesn't know what they are talking about because they can't come up with facts to disprove the other individual.
Me on the other hand....
"On the technical side, as a 3D modeler, you will find that working with stylized models to be a lot simpler and more efficient than photorealistic models. Due to the simple nature of the models and the fact that stylized models rarely tend to strain the CPU compared to photorealistic models, you would find modeling stylized objects to be fun and enjoyable. Your models will also use up less storage space giving you the ability to fit more models in one scene." - Thilakanathan Studios
Stylized vs Photorealistic Modeling: Which One is Better?
Learn the difference between stylistic and photorealistic modeling in this post! Also, find out which one you should use for your own projects and why!
thilakanathanstudios.com
Here is a comparison of a stylized rock model versus a designed photoreal rock model.
Comparing their ~1024x1024 normal textures. The photoreal comes in at 525kb versus stylized 312kb. Almost double.
This balloons exponentially when you compare them to photogrammetry models.
Your photorealistic rocks ends up being more than 10x geometry and texture more immense than a stylized rock.
Even then stylized rocks require less resolution textures to look good (so 512 and 1024 will suffice) while photorealistic and photogrammetry needs 4-8k textures.
While photorealistic photogrammetry does. Why? The higher the polygon and geometric density, the greater the detail the textures have to have. It needs micro details!
Rift Apart is easily 10x less data complex than a photorealistic game using photogrammetry assets that have highly complex models and highly accurate photographic textures with microdetails.
Last edited:
MadchesterManc
Member
If I'm so "full of shit" why wouldn't that be so easy to disprove?
This is a tech thread after all right? Its always the un-informed that claims someone else doesn't know what they are talking about because they can't come up with facts to disprove the other individual.
Me on the other hand....
"On the technical side, as a 3D modeler, you will find that working with stylized models to be a lot simpler and more efficient than photorealistic models. Due to the simple nature of the models and the fact that stylized models rarely tend to strain the CPU compared to photorealistic models, you would find modeling stylized objects to be fun and enjoyable. Your models will also use up less storage space giving you the ability to fit more models in one scene." - Thilakanathan Studios
Stylized vs Photorealistic Modeling: Which One is Better?
Learn the difference between stylistic and photorealistic modeling in this post! Also, find out which one you should use for your own projects and why!
Here is a comparison of a stylized rock model versus a designed photoreal rock model.
Comparing their ~1024x1024 normal textures. The photoreal comes in at 525kb versus stylized 312kb. Almost double.
This balloons exponentially when you compare them to photogrammetry models.
Your photorealistic rocks ends up being more than 10x geometry and texture more immense than a stylized rock.
Even then stylized rocks require less resolution textures to look good (so 512 and 1024 will suffice) while photorealistic and photogrammetry needs 4-8k textures.
While photorealistic photogrammetry does. Why? The higher the polygon and geometric density, the greater the detail the textures have to have. It needs micro details!
Rift Apart is easily 10x less data complex than a photorealistic game using photogrammetry assets that have highly complex models and highly accurate photographic textures with microdetails.
Who's to say a stylised game can't use the model on the left instead? micro detail isn't the exclusive province of photorealistic graphics design.
Guilty_AI
Member
No, as i said, rendering two screens is something that taxes the GPU. If they had any easier time to do this in the new gen it was because of the hardware improvements in that area.
What the SSD, IO, whatever helps is streaming assets, aka moving about in the world or transfering from one area to the other (do NOT mix this with the wipe effect, whose challenge is having to render 2 scenes at once). But as i said before, it helps, just like having a more powerful GPU also helps. None of this stuff is new in any way as i clearly showed with plenty of real life examples already. Thats my whole beef here.
Last edited:
You’re still talking about this game?! Damn.
Last edited:
Fake
Member
I’m going to go out on a limb and say you’re both right but you’re misunderstanding the point. I think
Obviously, the original game made compromises to accommodate last gen hardware and older PC Cards, and it’s hard to argue games won’t look better when designed to a RTX 2060/6700 XT min spec.
Yeap, and making RT for ultra high end PCs don't push anything foward. Consoles are affordable machines, with modest fixed hardware, so adaptation is the right choise here.
Lets remind the importance of DLSS, the target are not High End PCs, and the Nvidia got this ideia from the countless of checkerboard solutions/temporal injection/reconstruct tech find on video game, not only exclusive, but third parties like Rainbow Six.
If the rumor about the Nintendo Switch PRO indeed support DLSS this prove my point even futher.
Last edited:
Guilty_AI
Member
i'm a tech nerd, what can i do.
HAL-01
Member
First of all guy, that’s not a rock. That’s what folks in the business call a “tree stump”If I'm so "full of shit" why wouldn't that be so easy to disprove?
This is a tech thread after all right? Its always the un-informed that claims someone else doesn't know what they are talking about because they can't come up with facts to disprove the other individual.
Me on the other hand....
"On the technical side, as a 3D modeler, you will find that working with stylized models to be a lot simpler and more efficient than photorealistic models. Due to the simple nature of the models and the fact that stylized models rarely tend to strain the CPU compared to photorealistic models, you would find modeling stylized objects to be fun and enjoyable. Your models will also use up less storage space giving you the ability to fit more models in one scene." - Thilakanathan Studios
Stylized vs Photorealistic Modeling: Which One is Better?
Learn the difference between stylistic and photorealistic modeling in this post! Also, find out which one you should use for your own projects and why!
Here is a comparison of a stylized rock model versus a designed photoreal rock model.
Comparing their ~1024x1024 normal textures. The photoreal comes in at 525kb versus stylized 312kb. Almost double.
This balloons exponentially when you compare them to photogrammetry models.
Your photorealistic rocks ends up being more than 10x geometry and texture more immense than a stylized rock.
Even then stylized rocks require less resolution textures to look good (so 512 and 1024 will suffice) while photorealistic and photogrammetry needs 4-8k textures.
While photorealistic photogrammetry does. Why? The higher the polygon and geometric density, the greater the detail the textures have to have. It needs micro details!
Rift Apart is easily 10x less data complex than a photorealistic game using photogrammetry assets that have highly complex models and highly accurate photographic textures with microdetails.
Second of all, neither raw photogrammetry data nor your photorealistic “rock” have ever been used in videogames. All currently used meshes are vastly simplified compared to what you’re showing me. UE5 may change that in the future.
Last, “stylized” can mean anything from Wind Waker to Doom Eternal, to Pixar’s Soul. You cannot make any sweeping claims about all “stylized” 3D content. Either bring damning evidence of the quality of the games assets, or go
THE:MILKMAN
Member
You keep stating none of this is new stuff but I don't read anyone in this thread claiming that the techniques are new and nor do I hear that in the DF video.
staticshock
Member
I referred to that as rock because it has the same geometric complexity.
I never said raw photogrammetry. Games have been using game version of photogrammetry for years. Where have you been? The game ready versions have 10x more geometric and texture complexity than stylized meshes.
I gave you irrefutable evidence from quote from a studio talking about and referencing their stylized and photorealistic scenes if you bothered to read the article. Which I know you didn’t because you are not interested in the truth. This is the experience of 3D modelers.
And it makes logical sense. Stylized meshes have less polygon. You can easily see it. It’s obvious. 1+1 will always be 2. This is basic logic. Not matter what plastic you champion.
I also showed you two game ready assets and compared their data size.
You dismiss them because you are not interested in Facts, Logic and Reason. Just like the people who are still making claims about the UE5 demos even when the creator of Nanite and UE5 team tell them they are wrong.
I think I’m done here. I will however make another post comparing size of Game Ready Photogrammetry asset and textures compared to stylized meshes.
Last edited:
HAL-01
Member
No need to go full Ben Shapiro guy, go quote more cgi studios to make arguments about game graphics
Similar threads
- Locked