What will next gen graphics look like?

I think who is making a game plays a great role so what I expect is some first party games to look better than most PC games at the time. It would be a combination of great developers providing an art style, better engine, more time to make the best looking game while most multiplatforms are not as good even if PC are much more technically better they wouldn't be using all that power to make the best looking game.

If you want the best visuals I would buy a PC for multiplatforms and PC exclusives and a PS4 for Playstation exclusives.
 
I think current Cryengine stuff will give us a good idea of what to expect next gen:



crysis___game_environml26j.jpg


crysis___game_environmt2us.jpg
Click to expand...
http://madmaximus83.deviantart.com/gallery/

blade_runner1.jpg


blade_runner2.jpg
Click to expand...

http://www.incrysis.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=793

tumblr_m43g8n96MX1rnh1c7o4_1280.png
Click to expand...

http://titanic-lost-in-the-darkness.tumblr.com/

council_goldenforest12s95.jpg
Click to expand...
http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.php?showtopic=182962&view=findpost&p=1900666
 
You are deluding yourself. And that Star Wars game isn't anything that spectacular you people make it out to be...
Click to expand...

Yeah I don't get the amazement either. Plus it looks like yet another playable tech demo/interactive movie and not in a good sense. I really hope that the trend doesn't continue and people will finally prefer a decent looking game that allows freedom over an amazing looking one that is scripted from start to finish.

I'll be happy if next gen we finally get rid of framerate issues and stuff like tearing.
 
Ryoku said:
I see mid-range cards in the consoles up against tech-demos that were ran on high-end PC hardware (GTX680). The consoles will definitely boost the graphical details on most games, that's for sure, but out of the gate, PCs already outclass the next-gen systems. Whatever gets ported to PC on launch will run and look better on a PC. It won't be a 6 month wait or anything. It'll be instant since PCs already outlcass the rumored specs of the next gen systems.
Click to expand...

Well you will certainly get the usual high-end PC perks(AA, Resolution, AF). Consoles won't necessarily become the baseline instantly as I still don't think the majority of PCs have the same class GPUs. I doubt developers will go to far past what the next-gen consoles can do if at all. PC gamers will have to settle for those perks I listed above.

Im pretty certain you could always just beef up a computer to get a game to run better than on consoles but that doesn't really make it more advanced in my eyes.


Shikoro said:
You are deluding yourself. And that Star Wars game isn't anything that spectacular you people make it out to be...
Click to expand...

Um how?
 
Don't think we'll see as big of a jump as many seem to expect. Games with the level of detail on the scale of Samaritan/Luminosity will have insanely high development costs. You'll have some big titles that look fantastic, but most will look maybe slightly better than now. I think Watch Dogs level will be the common.
 
iamshadowlark said:
Um how?
Click to expand...
You will see when the PS4 comes out. I'll just say that it won't take till the end of the lifecycle to get games as good looking as Agnis. :)

iamshadowlark said:
I wonder what he means by "you people".
Click to expand...
The moment when they had showed the footage, everyone was talking about how they will have to upgrade their PCs to run the game. If it's an unoptimized POS, yeah, you will.

I can't be fooled by the looks of a game. Although I'm more like an amateur programmer, I know what's going on behind the scenes in games like this. ;)
 
_woLf said:
Don't think we'll see as big of a jump as many seem to expect. Games with the level of detail on the scale of Samaritan/Luminosity will have insanely high development costs. You'll have some big titles that look fantastic, but most will look maybe slightly better than now. I think Watch Dogs level will be the common.
Click to expand...

I don't think, they will need that much more money because mostly char models are modelled with a much higher amount of polygons and scaled down afterwards. The same goes for the amount of assets.
 
_woLf said:
Don't think we'll see as big of a jump as many seem to expect. Games with the level of detail on the scale of Samaritan/Luminosity will have insanely high development costs. You'll have some big titles that look fantastic, but most will look maybe slightly better than now. I think Watch Dogs level will be the common.
Click to expand...

This is simply untrue. Alot of the things you see in Samaritan are code-based effects. Those are relatively simple, especially if most developers license UE like last gen. Your implications don't really have any factual basis.

TurkishEmperor said:
Multiplatforms will catch up to PS3 exclusives like UC3 etc
Exclusives will look like Witcher 2 on 1080p Very High settings.
Click to expand...

Faceplam
 
The overall fidelity will look much better. Lightning and AA + higher resolutions can make a game look 10x better. Also the distance-lod will be increased. All this stuff is basically there but is reduced to run on consoles. Current pcs suffer from this due to they are simply ported from the console versions.
 
I hope more effort is placed on a consistent gaming experience on every level. I bunch of pretty lights and particle effects over what we already have isn't a worthy upgrade.

Much richer animation sets, consistent performance and image quality, a more convincing world simulation, things like that are what I'm really hoping for.

I didn't think Star Wars looked that impressive personally, but I expect that kind of thing.
 
I think Star Wars 1313 and Watch Dogs gives us a good general idea of what to expect. Still, I'm hoping more developers use some of that extra power for frame-rate, resolution and other IQ related things this time around.

People here say all the extra power in PC hardware is going to waste, in my system it's going towards SSAA, higher resolutions, AF and 60fps. It takes a lot of power to run games at that fidelity even if they're just console ports, nevermind enhancements like PhysX or DX11. Is all that extra power worth it for that? I can't say, but it's hard to go back. That clarity is extremely underrated, and I hope developers other than Carmack realize it come next gen.
 
Lots of people to really be expect games with top end visuals to also run at 1080p on consoles next cycle. That seems very unlikely to me.
 
New consoles won't match a good PC for power, but we'll see a lot of impressive new tech incorporated into games with the advent of new systems. And then those game will look sharper on PC.

Carmack said consoles run ~2x better than equivalent PC hardware because the API isn't in the way and also the focus on a single spec.
 
I'm curious how many people from the gaming business, that got their hands on the next gen consoles, are reading or even writing in this kind of threads. :o
 
I'm not sure what we'll have but as far as rendering specifically I know what I want to see.

-higher texel density
-higher polycount
-better shading models (multi-lobe unf unf)
-real-time GI solutions (we already have them, can't wait to see how they grow)
-better post-processing(full res, stencil, etc)
-more unique resources

On top of that i'd like to see
-more simulation, physics simulation etc.
 
SparkTR said:
I think Star Wars 1313 and Watch Dogs gives us a good general idea of what to expect. Still, I'm hoping more developers use some of that extra power for frame-rate, resolution and other IQ related things this time around.

People here say all the extra power in PC hardware is going to waste, in my system it's going towards SSAA, higher resolutions, AF and 60fps. It takes a lot of power to run games at that fidelity even if they're just console ports, nevermind enhancements like PhysX or DX11. Is all that extra power worth it for that? I can't say, but it's hard to go back. That clarity is extremely underrated, and I hope developers other than Carmack realize it come next gen.
Click to expand...

And just imagine: all that extra power will eventually be put to use towards hi-PPI 120Hz displays. At that point, SSAA might not even be necessary.
 
SparkTR said:
I think Star Wars 1313 and Watch Dogs gives us a good general idea of what to expect. Still, I'm hoping more developers use some of that extra power for frame-rate, resolution and other IQ related things this time around.

People here say all the extra power in PC hardware is going to waste, in my system it's going towards SSAA, higher resolutions, AF and 60fps. It takes a lot of power to run games at that fidelity even if they're just console ports, nevermind enhancements like PhysX or DX11. Is all that extra power worth it for that? I can't say, but it's hard to go back. That clarity is extremely underrated, and I hope developers other than Carmack realize it come next gen.
Click to expand...

That may be ok to you, but for the price you have to pay those perks areconsidered a waste. Me included.
 
iamshadowlark said:
That may be ok to you, but for the price you have to pay those perks areconsidered a waste. Me included.
Click to expand...

Maybe if I were only paying for those perks in multiplatform titles, I upgrade anyway for higher end titles like Total War and ArmA along with work related reasons. Regardless I don't consider that extra power to be wasted when playing those hamstrung titles at that fidelity.
 
iamshadowlark said:
That may be ok to you, but for the price you have to pay those perks areconsidered a waste. Me included.
Click to expand...

The way I see it is: I've got the money, so I might as well get the best experience possible. Everyone has different valuations of money and quality, that's one of the reasons PC gaming is great. You can make a choice in the tradeoff between cost and quality that suits you best.
 
RibbedHero said:
The way I see it is: I've got the money, so I might as well get the best experience possible. Everyone has different valuations of money and quality, that's one of the reasons PC gaming is great. You can make a choice in the tradeoff between cost and quality that suits you best.
Click to expand...

And it isn't as though you only use a PC for gaming, anyway. I mean, I guess some people have dedicated gaming PCs, but most buy one machine for everything they do.
 
Dictator93 said:
2004 produced really good looking games though that did a lot of new stuff graphically and "next-gen-like."
HL2 and far cry are good examples
Click to expand...
True.

But I don't know, I just personally thought the gap jumped further the moment the 360 came out.

shinobi602 said:
Beginning of next gen:

http://www.abload.de/img/watch_dog-1ak74j.gif


About a year into next gen:

http://www.abload.de/img/untitled-2pd9fz.gif


A few years into next gen:

http://www.abload.de/img/unrealtechnologydemogdu7mr.gif

http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg821/scaled.php?server=821&filename=2o9jml.jpg&res=landing


End of next gen:

http://www.abload.de/img/auodzo.gif
Click to expand...
Looks about right.

Having said that I honestly think 1313 is more impressive than either of the 2 Epic showings, although that could partially be down to art style.

Am I alone?
 
Xun said:
Having said that I honestly think 1313 is more impressive than either of the 2 Epic showings, although that could partially be down to art style.

Am I alone?
Click to expand...

Definitely not. The star wars technological art style has always been unique and it adds a lot to how great it looks. I have had massive cutesy star wars fatigue, I look forward to a gritty star wars game that is not jedi orientated.
 
You guys always argue this stuff wrong.

More powerful tech raises the baseline.

But it's still all left in the hands of the asset designers, programmers as to whether it looks good or not. This takes time and money. Considering asset production isn't going to change by leaps and bounds, variety of assets, and quality of each individual piece will be tantamount to whether you notice a big change or not.

And that's dependent on the time and budget of said product.

Between the last and current generations of hardware we went from painting simple textures onto a 5,000 polymodel, to taking speculars, normals, and depth information from million poly models, and baking it into a texture suitable for a 30,000 polygon model.

That isn't going to change much. Precision, resolution of effects. Less reliance on prebaked lighting. Those things raise the baseline. They make achieving parity without anywhere near the talent easier.

But as I said earlier. You're still under the confines of artists and programmers as to whether or not it flows.
 
What do you guys think of adaptive tessellation? Will that make popups disappear forever? Maximum details up close that subtly fades away as you move away?
 
iamshadowlark said:
That may be ok to you, but for the price you have to pay those perks areconsidered a waste. Me included.
Click to expand...

I've Paid under $100 for the last 10-12 games I've bought, including Just Cause 2, Dead Space 1 & 2, Warhammer 40k Space Marine, Syndicate, Aliens Vs Predator, FEAR 3, Borderlands GOTY, Metro 2033, Darksiders, Binary Domain, etc.

Not counting the amount of quality F2P titles, like Tribes and Blacklight.

There are some games I bought new, but Max Payne 3 came with MP 1 & 2 and now it's $30, and PC game prices go so low so fast, it's more than an even trade for a GPU that cost an extra $100-250 or a CPU that's an extra $40-60, or an extra $30 of Ram.

After about a month or two, if you're smart with how and where you buy games, you can easily make up the difference. If I was to count up how much those games all cost on console at major retailers, It would be well over $100. Not to mention, you get most new PC games for at least $10 off the console price and with so many sites trying to get better deals, that price decreases even more.
 
Spazznid said:
I've Paid under $100 for the last 10-12 games I've bought, including Just Cause 2, Dead Space 1 & 2, Warhammer 40k Space Marine, Syndicate, Aliens Vs Predator, FEAR 3, Borderlands GOTY, Metro 2033, Darksiders, Binary Domain, etc.

Not counting the amount of quality F2P titles, like Tribes and Blacklight.

There are some games I bought new, but Max Payne 3 came with MP 1 & 2 and now it's $30, and PC game prices go so low so fast, it's more than an even trade for a GPU that cost an extra $100-250 or a CPU that's an extra $40-60, or an extra $30 of Ram.

After about a month or two, if you're smart with how and where you buy games, you can easily make up the difference. If I was to count up how much those games all cost on console at major retailers, It would be well over $100. Not to mention, you get most new PC games for at least $10 off the console price and with so many sites trying to get better deals, that price decreases even more.
Click to expand...

I waste $1000 every six or so months on bullshit, I honestly could afford to upgrade a Rig semi-annually. Thats not my problem. I just don't see the value of buying $500+ GPUs just for the same games with more AA and resolution.
 
I care too much about being immersed in my games. While completely possible with consoles, it's nowhere near as clear and smooth an experience as PC gaming. I can understand why one wouldn't choose PC for the hassle of upgrading periodically, and fiddling with components, and dealing with easy to mess up file systems, but Not because of the price.

IMO, it's all about how much physical work you're willing to put into your gaming experience.
Then again, considering the sales of consoles and their domination of the gaming market, I suppose I'm not in line with public opinion.

When my nephew invites a friend over and they see my games in action, They don't notice that it's in 1080p 60fps, or that there's not a jaggy to be seen. All they seem to notice is how 'Bright' My TV is. WTF!? I suppose it takes a certain person to value IQ. If you don't notice the difference, then there's no point in arguing. You'll miss out on nothing if you don't notice it when it's there or not.
 
iamshadowlark said:
I waste $1000 every six or so months on bullshit, I honestly could afford to upgrade a Rig semi-annually. Thats not my problem. I just don't see the value of buying $500+ GPUs just for the same games with more AA and resolution.
Click to expand...
Then be happy! The shitty IQ in most current console games bugs the hell out of me.
 
For me the main question is 'how much?'

You could show me the best graphics ever I won't make my decision until I know the system's price.
I say that and I'm almost certain I'll end up buying PS4 but regarding the videogames market and the average consumer, price is certainly one of the main criteria if not the main... Both Sony and Microsoft know that and I'd be happy to have a price range just to have more elements in my hands to imagine the future of gaming.

For me, a 600$/€ system is a very risky choice. Even more than it was at PS3's launch.
Microsoft is more aggressive, Nintendo will have an installed base and HD graphics (we say in NeoGAF that WiiU is already old before being available but the average consumer will just be happy to finaly have every Nintendo franchise in HD plus the new ways of playing...) and devs won't have the cash to make several dozens of millions budget games.

I've already said that but for me it will depend on the support of small devs or independant devs who will make the real difference by taking the time to make great use of all this power (or new way of playing). I guess not being looked at for very beautiful, precise full HD 60fps graphics will be there strongest advantage this time. No expectations can easily lead to great surprises.

1/3 Nintendo games
1/3 small / indie devs
1/3 big franchise or high budget games

This is the library I imagine I'll have :D
 
mxgt said:
And framerate
And better controls
And mods

The value is absolutely worth it for me. 720p compared to 1440p is utterly laughable.
Click to expand...


I can't even tell the difference (resolution) when I switch from PS3 to PC. Especially since the HDTV isn't as close as the monitor. Same for the frame rate, 30 FPS is ok for a console game but 60 for PC.

I love my PS3 and PC, been spending more time with PS3 since my GPU fan broke down.

Mods are overhyped though, been ages since I installed one. Desert Combat was the shit back in the day but nothing like it today.
 
iamshadowlark said:
I waste $1000 every six or so months on bullshit, I honestly could afford to upgrade a Rig semi-annually. Thats not my problem. I just don't see the value of buying $500+ GPUs just for the same games with more AA and resolution.
Click to expand...

Semi-annually? I usually upgrade my rig every 1.5 years on average... generally spend $500 or so each time as well (and that's Canadian! I just upgrade to 2x7850 for $400 cad from my 2x5850 I've had for a year and a bit) and I'm playing my games maxed out at 1080p. Was playing high-end games like BF3/Metro close to maxed out on the 5850s.

Durante said:
Then be happy! The shitty IQ in most current console games bugs the hell out of me.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that too. lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom