-
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.
The most technically-advanced game for each year
- Thread starter Phediuk
- Start date
NowhereFaded
Member
Absolutely
TheRedSnifit
Member
icecold1983
Member
crysis 1 was. the others not so much
TheRedSnifit
Member
It shouldn't be a surprise that a list of technologically advanced games focuses on games designed for technologically advanced hardware, as opposed to games designed for the lowest common denominator.
This is a pretty silly argument, because then the default winner every year would be the most "impressive" game running on the weakest hardware. So this year's "most advanced game" would be Super Mario Odyssey or something, not Horizon. Because who knows, maybe Nintendo devs would make games more impressive than Horizon if they "targeted equivelant specs."
zidanelucis
Banned
Horizon for 2017 and it's not even close.
It's absolutely not, it's using modded cvars, compared to default there are changes to lighting, gun model, higher foliage density to name a few..All these make for a very noticeable difference compared to vanilla base game. It's also a custom map built to excessively show heavy amount of detail and density, the base game comes nowhere near this sort of density.
You can make an argument that at the end of the day it's still using stock engine but I'm pretty sure if people had tools to make maps for other games those games too would end up with maps that are more detailed than base game. Still it does not discount the fact that it's using modded cvars.
Point being if you play Crysis on stock v.high it won't look like that.
TheRedSnifit
Member
icecold1983
Member
i dont see the problem with choosing a game at this point in time using available options
Ignoring RE4? 🤔
Looking at the upcoming games for 2017, it's got more than a good chance.
PhazonBlazer
Member
RDR2 could be a strong contender for this year.
And of course Battlefront 2
And of course Battlefront 2
Roberto Larcos
Member
Y'all are sleeping on racing games. Forza Motorsport 7 on Scorpio, Gran Turismo 7 on PS4 Pro, Project CARS 2 on everything - these games will probably be graphical beasts.
You disagree that Crysis 3 was more technically advanced than any game ND or GG put out on past gens?
Soulblighter31
Banned
That one is a poor choice, even if the graphics were among the years best visually. But the games you chose are equally poor. 2001 belongs to Max Payne and Aquanox.
They are making workflows and tools to produce content on system solar level. Everything they generate must be fully modular and scalable and needs to be able to blend with other assets and technology.
How they generate outpost and locate them on planets:
https://youtu.be/RQLRvB9LAlo?t=1187
How they produce space stations:
https://youtu.be/-c2DogQL95o?t=663
3Lateral tech for facial animation blending:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9R3klQqaR1s
LOD handling
Tracy continued:
"Our graphics programmer out in the UK was really the chief architect of rebuilding and refactoring the CryEngine LOD system, so it worked really well for the Crysis teams because the ranges and things. But like you saw, ranges here are way beyond what Crysis or whatever do. Some of the refactors he's made are making it based less on distance and more on how many polys per pixel you end up drawing at different distances. This has taken a lot of iteration and a lot of work on the asset side and on the programming side to just get that ratio perfect.
”Even still, there's a little extra popping on the trees that we're not happy with and things like this [...] but we take that super seriously, because it's jarring when you're flying into an area and everything comes in. We've got the dissolves between LODs, we've got per-pixel – how many polys are per pixel, anyway? You can't draw anything more than 4 – that's what nVidia is recommending. There are some pretty exciting things that had to change to make that possible."
http://www.gamersnexus.net/gg/2636-citizencon-parallax-occlusion-mapping-sean-tracy-interview
In that interview Sean Tracy also talks about their PADM like technique to blend props with ground.
Remember that they are making a planet that is almost fully covered by city. If thats not edge case for LOD handling, i dont know what is.
---
And this is pretty much dissection of every modern renderer and you know it.
SeeNoWeevil
Member
Some notables ones for me;
MGSV
Unity (PC)
Driveclub
Uncharted 4
GTAV
Virtua Racing
As much as I love DC etc, 30fps can't ever hold the graphics crown.
MGSV
Unity (PC)
Driveclub
Uncharted 4
GTAV
Virtua Racing
As much as I love DC etc, 30fps can't ever hold the graphics crown.
RDR 2 is going to be a technical marvel.
Even today GTA V still blows me away with it's immersion, attention to detail, graphical fidelity, and all it's interconnected systems.
Plus Euphoria physics never gets old! Seriously, it's a shame so few companies can afford it because physics based animation is the future IMO.
Even today GTA V still blows me away with it's immersion, attention to detail, graphical fidelity, and all it's interconnected systems.
Plus Euphoria physics never gets old! Seriously, it's a shame so few companies can afford it because physics based animation is the future IMO.
The polygon counts and particle effects in RL/MGS2 were light years beyond anything that anyone had seen at the time. The hilarious face textures alone disqualify MP1. I don't even know what Aquanox is, but looking at screenshots I'm not impressed.
Soulblighter31
Banned
They werent light years ahead of anything. Max's face dont really mean much at all. Max Payne's engine was so potent it was used in 3dMark 2001 to test video cards. Aquanox was the game used to showcase the new GeForce 3 cards and the engine was made to use its new capabilities. It was so powerful it also birthed a benchmark tool called Aquamark which had its fare share of use at the time whenever videocards were tested.
You really can. Even though it's got a few ini files etc tweaked to up some of the lighting etc, that is the game engine. That's a 2007 game engine which, with some very simple tweaks, which the end user can do, looks as good if not better than games released 10 years later.
There is 100% no way that you could get a UE3 engine game looking as good as Crysis unless you HEAVILY modded the engine itself. That screen I posted from Crysis is the stock Cryengine - it's just had some of its hidden settings unlocked.
For a game released in 2007, that is utterly mind blowing.
Well I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that. I happen to think fully modeled character faces matter quite a bit, when you're comparing them with a flat textured face of a guy who looks like he's taking a shit. I'd also be interested in seeing how the polygon counts of the games you mentioned stack up with the >300k per frame that Rogue Leader was pushing (all at 60 fps, mind you).
I can understand debating Star Citizen's eligibility being as it's complete yet... but if it is in consideration, then I'd say arguing Horizon over it is almost as bad as the argument against Elite in 1984.
Then why are you suggesting UC4? It's not holding any graphics crowns in its MP mode.
Then why are you suggesting UC4? It's not holding any graphics crowns in its MP mode.
MasterOfPastures
Banned
KKRT00, I'm with you, but I agree with others that it needs to release first. If SQ42 releases this year, it will be the indisputed bar of technical prowess for many years to come. And hopefully it will ignite the ambitions of others to push for grander challenges than the usual cinematic faberge corridors.
Here we go, Crysis 1 maxed out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMHgBplll8Q
That's what it looks like, unmodded, using the 1.2.1 patch. The only tweaks used have been to up the AF to 16X as this wasn't available in the in game settings and to force the res to 1900 X 1200.
The flower of 2007 technology. Absolutely insane that this is 10 years old - if it released now people would think it looked fairly decent. Not incredible and the IQ isn't as sharp as it could be but I bet if you forced some downsampling / MSAA onto it it would hold up extremely well. There aren't many other ten year old games which you can say that for.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMHgBplll8Q
That's what it looks like, unmodded, using the 1.2.1 patch. The only tweaks used have been to up the AF to 16X as this wasn't available in the in game settings and to force the res to 1900 X 1200.
The flower of 2007 technology. Absolutely insane that this is 10 years old - if it released now people would think it looked fairly decent. Not incredible and the IQ isn't as sharp as it could be but I bet if you forced some downsampling / MSAA onto it it would hold up extremely well. There aren't many other ten year old games which you can say that for.
SkylineRKR
Member
Sega Arcade was a quantum leap ahead of the rest. Those times where the Arcade experience was unaffordable to get at home.
VF3 came out in like 1996 and even Dreamcast from 1999 couldn't completely match it, despite technology advancing rapidly at that time. Or Daytona 2, its about 20 years old but still looks great.
VF3 came out in like 1996 and even Dreamcast from 1999 couldn't completely match it, despite technology advancing rapidly at that time. Or Daytona 2, its about 20 years old but still looks great.
TheRedSnifit
Member
Yeah, but is it Playstation exclusive? Checkmate.
Nah, whilst Virtua Fighter 3 was absolutely ridiculous for its time (I'd say only Crysis was a similar tier of leap for its time), the Dreamcast itself did produce more impressive games. The port for VF3 was rushed, and not handled by AM2 themselves. If you look at Soul Calibur and Dead or Alive 2, both are more impressive (especially the stages in DOA2), whilst being run at a higher resolution than Model 3 games.
Yeah, after 2009 it's pretty much "whatever action game looked the best on PC." AAA has gotten a lot less ambitious with game design I feel.
Anyway, procedurally-generated space games or games in general are an interesting discussion here. Do they actually really push hardware? Or are they just great feats of software engineering? If you mention Elite for 1984 you have to mention Elite II for 1992 (or 1993, I don't remember). Elite II doesn't look quite as nice as Virtua Racing but it accomplished A LOT of what Elite Dangerous and No Man's Sky are trying to do today.
And on that subject, does Space Engine count as a game? Graphically it's not the best-looking but its procedural generation in many ways is far more impressive than what's in Elite and NMS. It's the only one of those games that can handle seamless travel between star systems. It pushes systems pretty hard, but probably because it's not that highly optimized.
Anyway, procedurally-generated space games or games in general are an interesting discussion here. Do they actually really push hardware? Or are they just great feats of software engineering? If you mention Elite for 1984 you have to mention Elite II for 1992 (or 1993, I don't remember). Elite II doesn't look quite as nice as Virtua Racing but it accomplished A LOT of what Elite Dangerous and No Man's Sky are trying to do today.
And on that subject, does Space Engine count as a game? Graphically it's not the best-looking but its procedural generation in many ways is far more impressive than what's in Elite and NMS. It's the only one of those games that can handle seamless travel between star systems. It pushes systems pretty hard, but probably because it's not that highly optimized.
Or Crackdown 3. I don't think Crackdown 3 will be amazing graphically, but the destruction will be a huge leap for tech in video games. Not sure if that really fits the thread though but if we're talking tech and not graphics then CD3 has serious potential if it lives up to the hype.
BiGBoSSMk23
A company being excited for their new game is a huge slap in the face to all the fans that liked their old games.
I actually thought Killzone 2 was much more impressive.
Their rendering of metals and post processing effects were ridiculous.
I'd say a lot of it comes down to how much of a "solved" problem the technology was at the time. So in the case of the original Elite it was very much breaking new technological ground (or you could say was advancing games technology the most at that time). Incorporating similar procedural technology in future years is obviously not quite a comparable accomplishment comparatively, especially is new ground is being broken by other games in different areas. This is why for example few people suggest Elite Dangerous or No Man's Sky in comparison to Star Citizen, because for the most part the procedural generation is the alpha and omega of what they offer.
polyh3dron
Banned
Return To Castle Wolfenstein more advanced than Metal Gear Solid 2 in 2001?
ARMA 2 more advanced than Uncharted 2 in 2009 which doesn't even get a mention?
hmm.
ARMA 2 more advanced than Uncharted 2 in 2009 which doesn't even get a mention?
hmm.
Rodney McKay
Member
I certainly hope so.
It has been way to long since Red Faction Guerrilla came out and showed off just how awesome destructibility can be in open world games.
Only downside is it will be limited to MP or online only games and to be honest, outside of MS exclusives I'm not sure if other developers will use it. I mean it was using something like 16 azure servers just for the one multiplayer session, that will get expensive for publishers who don't have their own infrastructure.
But I do think it's gonna be impressive as hell and surprise most people. What we've seen so far looks amazing anyways.
RTCW was very impressive but yea MGS2 was pretty mind blowing for it's time considering the hardware.
But Arma 2 is way beyond Uncharted 2 technically.
Man youtube compression KILLS Crysis's awesome motion blur huh? The tree's look like blocks while turning lol.
I haven't looked at either game in a while but MAYBE you could have a discussion comparing the two in terms of raw graphics. Arma 2 kills it in regards to other tech things like AI, simulations, and the scale of the world while still looking pretty visually ambitious for its time. Arma 2 just has really bland art direction.
And from what I understand from this thread, Operation Flashpoint, a game that did a lot of the same things as Arma 2, came out in 2001 -- the same years as MGS2.
Amazing.
3Lateral is not Star Citizen, they work with other studios aswell + FACS is rapidly becoming a standard solution for the highend, since its been in games for awhile now. It was groundbreaking when it was introduced, yes.
So I think one of the "problems" with how people percieve Star Citizens comes from the fact that people are not used to being exposed to high-end development, so whenever they make a cool solution and say "this is so exciting and new" people go "yay, awesome tech development!" but alot of what they are doing is not new at all. Its just that most studios dont talk about it in videos aimed at gamers. Star Citizen do alot of new things, but the main thing they do is not that they make tons of NEW things, its the fact that they have to combine together so many existing things (most time in making games is not coming up with new shit, after all)
For example the LOD stuff. Dissolving between LODs (screen door fade as its commonly known) has been in games for quite some time. The first time I remember seeing it was when i was working on Far Cry 3 and they added it to the engine. I know UE3 also had it. Doing LOD based on triangle density automatically is also quite common, I have worked with various solutions of that in many games. Do they face challenges with Star Citizen? Yes. Is any of what they mentioned groundbreaking? No. As an example GTA 5 that I mentioned earlier do some very clever things in that regard (i read one tech article on it way back, that other one was the only one i found after a quick google)
Same thing with the generation of bases etc. This is not groundbreaking, building things modular is standard for many, many games. Generating things procedurally are also rapidly becoming more and more standard (see GDC talk about ghost recon wildlands for example) They would have to do alot more new things in order for it to be truly groundbreaking. They are talking about it, but until they actually ship a game that does something new and is functional in that regard, i dont think it counts
Other games might have already taken those technologies alot further, but just didnt talk about it yet (or ever, since most studios dont explain this stuff), and might ship before Star Citizen anyway.Most of heavy stuff releases with 3.0, which we'll be playable for everybody in about 3 months, so i think its completely viable to talk about it, like its launching this year.
---
CIG colaboration with 3lateral spawned this tech.
Yeah, disagree completely. Combing technologies is also making new ground, like Nvidia FLEX is groundbreaking even though it just combines several physics engines.
I mean your previous example with GTA V is exactly that.
I never heard about it before, are you sure its common? I would like to see some examples.
I also completely forgotten about their Mega Map and Object Container Tech.
Procedural generation and modular generation of assets is not new of course. Making it combined, with all the other systems they have in place, like whole Item system 2.0 and with procedural placement, connecting it missions systems, making it part of biomes generation etc is new, because it was not done in such a degree previously.
Most does thing to create assets that then are placed manually and they have gameplay systems individually setup etc, you cannot do it on planetary or solar system level.
And its launching in 3 months.
---
BTW are you even following development of Star Citizen?
The Janitor
Member
Not sure if I agree with putting Doom 3 above Half-Life 2. Sure the shadows may be more advanced, but the models and geometry are very blocky and simplistic. If you play them today, HL2 holds up much better.
Well, it will be interesting to see, I am looking forward to it. But still, I prefer to have a wait and see approach when it comes to how well tech will actually work.
It did? FACS has been around for some time. 3Lateral even used it in Ryse, for example. And other have been using it already in other games that have shipped quite some time ago.
Yeah I mean sure, it can be groundbreaking in how its combined. All i'm saying is that quite often when I read in star citizen threads people talk about quite common technologies as if they are something new, because they talk about them in some dev diary. Just goes to show how much happens under the radar
+ you can have the most amazing technical marvel in a game, and absolutely no one will care ^^Yeah, its pretty common. I have worked on several games myself that used it. You can download any old version of UDK and its right there in the material properties
http://www.cgchannel.com/2010/02/new-version-of-udk/
And scaling based on polygon size is also not very unusual. I have worked with different solutions for that too.
Well, thats the thing that I would like to see working before I buy it. And placing assets procedurally is already quite common (Horizon, Ghost Recon wildlands are recent examples of this. Wildlands even built villages procedurally) And making gameplaysystems work together with that has also been done before. To what degree they will get it to work in star citizen remains to be seen.
XgorreKrusadeX
Neo Member
i´d put Shenmue over outcast in 1999. World in outcast is bigger, but in shenmue is alive (with NPCs living it´s own routines), you can go inside various places, characters are MORE detailed than Outcast or everything else at the time, and even beyond that year....
In 2000 i´d add in other notable games Test Drive Le Mans DC, MSR DC, RE Code Verónica DC, Tekken Tag PS2 and Ridge Racer V PS2.
In 2001 how Return to Castle Wolfenstein that is ID Tech 3 (1999 technology) can be above Halo CE, DOA 3 and Star War Rogue Squadron II? Any of the 3 are way above of what ID Tech can do (normal mapping, volumetric lighting, higher polycounts). I´d add too in notable games in 2001 Rez on DC and Shenmue 2 DC.
In 2006 there´s no doubt Gears is above Oblivion. Oblivion world is bigger and more alive, but cannot match the quality of normal maps and lighting of Gears.
In 2008 i´d add to notable games Gears of War 2.
In 2009 i´d add to notable games Killzone 2, Uncharted 2.
In 2010 i´d add to notable games God of War 3 and Halo Reach.
2014 gotta be Driveclub or P.T (is a demo, but stands over lotta games, even on PC)
In 2000 i´d add in other notable games Test Drive Le Mans DC, MSR DC, RE Code Verónica DC, Tekken Tag PS2 and Ridge Racer V PS2.
In 2001 how Return to Castle Wolfenstein that is ID Tech 3 (1999 technology) can be above Halo CE, DOA 3 and Star War Rogue Squadron II? Any of the 3 are way above of what ID Tech can do (normal mapping, volumetric lighting, higher polycounts). I´d add too in notable games in 2001 Rez on DC and Shenmue 2 DC.
In 2006 there´s no doubt Gears is above Oblivion. Oblivion world is bigger and more alive, but cannot match the quality of normal maps and lighting of Gears.
In 2008 i´d add to notable games Gears of War 2.
In 2009 i´d add to notable games Killzone 2, Uncharted 2.
In 2010 i´d add to notable games God of War 3 and Halo Reach.
2014 gotta be Driveclub or P.T (is a demo, but stands over lotta games, even on PC)
Not the point of this thread?
HL2 has also been updated graphically, you can't even play the original version any more through steam IIRC. Not sure on the extent of the upgrades though, I know the textures are improved.
I feel like Supreme Commander at least deserves an honorable mention for 2007. I'm not an RTS pro so I don't know if this game was the first, but being able to zoom into tiny footsoldiers scaling up to giant experimental robots and zooming out to view a giant map was pretty impressive.
XgorreKrusadeX
Neo Member
It's utterly ridiculous how far ahead of its time Crysis was. 2007. This game is TEN YEARS OLD.
Crysis is a masterpiece. Not a fan of remasters, but i´d like to see PS4 and One running this game! In other hand, this show us how little have evolved game technology in the last ten years.
Chubzdoomer
Banned
It's utterly ridiculous how far ahead of its time Crysis was. 2007. This game is TEN YEARS OLD.
Hear, hear!
What's crazy is that the gameplay is arguably just as good as the graphics. Crysis did a lot of amazing things.