PDA

View Full Version : Unreal running realtime on PS3


noisewar
05-18-2005, 07:21 AM
http://media.ps3.ign.com/media/748/748505/vids_1.html

Watch the first, then the second. I doubt the other PS3 demos are real-time, but I don't doubt Epic.

Kwe
05-18-2005, 07:39 AM
Nice find...but c'mon dude....this could've gone under the PS3 or E3 threads.

noisewar
05-18-2005, 07:42 AM
Nice find...but c'mon dude....this could've gone under the PS3 or E3 threads.

oops sorry, haven't been paying much attention to these boards last few days, didn't know things were being all consolidated. Can a mod please move this thread as necessary?

apologies again!

Moonblood
05-18-2005, 11:28 AM
the pc version should have more image quality....thats why its not realy surprising

noisewar
05-18-2005, 06:08 PM
the pc version should have more image quality....thats why its not realy surprising

I have no clue what you are talking about..... :hmm:

nineinchneil
05-18-2005, 06:12 PM
for the sake of my sanity, i hope that the killzone demo wasn't realtime. it looks absolutely amazing.
GAAAAAHHHHH, what will happen to us low-poly artists?!

Lordiego01
05-18-2005, 06:25 PM
for the sake of my sanity, i hope that the killzone demo wasn't realtime. it looks absolutely amazing.
GAAAAAHHHHH, what will happen to us low-poly artists?!

Low_poly??...

There's always games for cell-phones and wrist watches.

Zeicon
05-18-2005, 06:39 PM
"GAAAAAHHHHH, what will happen to us low-poly artists?!"

Guess it's time for you to evole into high-poly artists. You have to keep up with the evolutionary process or you will eventually become extinct. Survival of the fittest, ya kno'? Muhahah

SpiralFace
05-18-2005, 06:45 PM
for the sake of my sanity, i hope that the killzone demo wasn't realtime. it looks absolutely amazing.
GAAAAAHHHHH, what will happen to us low-poly artists?!

Low poly or high poly, its still all just modeling. The only differance between high and low poly models is that they just have more polys to throw around. stuff like topology and edgeloops should just be a concept your familiar with just by being a modeler. If you don't know about that stuff though, I guess now is the time that your going to have to learn. If not you'll be back doing PSP, DS and cell phone games for the next 5 years till they get the tech thats in these systems right now. (If a standard PSP is like a PS 1.5, I don't want to imagine what a PSP2 whould be like.)

Titan
05-18-2005, 07:37 PM
so what exactly does per pixel lighting and shadowing mean?

pthomas72
05-18-2005, 07:52 PM
The killzone teaser is rendered.. there is a composite mistake in the begining.

rakmaya
05-18-2005, 08:32 PM
"GAAAAAHHHHH, what will happen to us low-poly artists?!"

Guess it's time for you to evole into high-poly artists. You have to keep up with the evolutionary process or you will eventually become extinct. Survival of the fittest, ya kno'? Muhahah

That is totally misinterpretation. We require low poly modelers MORE than ever. Even though the polygonal count has been upped by significant amount, it is still low-five-digits. The porblem now is that the modeling has two phases, low-poly AND High-poly. You extract Normals from the High-poly and use those normal maps on Low-Poly.

Per-pixel Lighting relates to lighting the model during the pixel pipeline stage. Remember that a Model only contains 7 to 15K polygons in most cases. Lighiting calculations in Current generation is done on Per-Vertex basis. Due to power of Next generation, you will be doing this Per-Pixel basis. So For example, it a Model is using a Normal Map that is taken out from a 5 million polygonal version of the low poly model, then during per-pixel lighting you will see the same effect as lighting the 5 million poly model, but only in reality you are using the low poly model. There are many other things that can be done on per-pixel basis that is not possible in Per-vertex basis. However, remember that these are something things that became popular when Nvidia FX series came out long time ago. But in next generation, you can do more sophisticated per-pixel effects on large levels and data. More over we have the CPU to match up with our GPU power as well in the next gen consoles.

Virum
05-18-2005, 08:41 PM
I don't suppose any other sites are hosting the hi-resolution quicktime versions for a free download?

Regardless....That was stunning. :drool:

Edit: Here is hi-rez quicktime version: Clicky. (http://media.ps2.gamespy.com/media/748/748505/vids_1.html?fromint=1)

noisewar
05-18-2005, 09:23 PM
Low-poly artist? Ugh.

I assume if you're a modeler, you have a background in anatomy, sculpting, traditional art, etc. If anything, the next generation of games, combined with the next generation of interfaces, will empower artists to make their art with less baggage than ever before. Low-poly modeling is borne out of a technological limitation on art. It'll be soon when Z-Brush type apps and desktop 3D scanning becomes commonplace.

Modeling in Maya is like telling a blind man where to move his fingers to sculpt clay. There's no such thing as low-poly modeling imho.

rakmaya
05-18-2005, 10:38 PM
Low-poly artist? Ugh.

I assume if you're a modeler, you have a background in anatomy, sculpting, traditional art, etc. If anything, the next generation of games, combined with the next generation of interfaces, will empower artists to make their art with less baggage than ever before. Low-poly modeling is borne out of a technological limitation on art. It'll be soon when Z-Brush type apps and desktop 3D scanning becomes commonplace.

Modeling in Maya is like telling a blind man where to move his fingers to sculpt clay. There's no such thing as low-poly modeling imho.

If you don't know anything about the technological aspect of computer graphics, then it is better not to talk such stupidity. In real time environment we do not have scenes that contains millions of polygons. The way we achieve the same looks are by using our brains to come up with ideas such as Normal Mapping, HDR and many things that will become the standard for almost all models in next gen, NOT algorithms used inside zbrush. ZBrush uses pixel based techniques that cannot be deployed real time for games. However ZBrush is becoming industry standard in creating high poly version to create those normal maps.

If you apply to a game development studio now for modeling with a demo of high poly model, the evaluator will either put your demo in the recyling bin or will ask you in the face to provide him with a low poly demonstration of you skills. Low poly does not mean 3K models, it means your ability to add polygons where necessary and needed. It is a skill on its own in which very few modelers can master. High poly modeling is of demand as you should also have those as well. Low poly models could go anywhere from 3 to 50K polygons depending on the overall detail and gameplay of the scene. A Scene could contain any where around 500K polys as well.

noisewar
05-19-2005, 06:37 AM
If you don't know anything about the technological aspect of computer graphics, then it is better not to talk such stupidity. In real time environment we do not have scenes that contains millions of polygons. The way we achieve the same looks are by using our brains to come up with ideas such as Normal Mapping, HDR and many things that will become the standard for almost all models in next gen, NOT algorithms used inside zbrush. ZBrush uses pixel based techniques that cannot be deployed real time for games. However ZBrush is becoming industry standard in creating high poly version to create those normal maps.

If you apply to a game development studio now for modeling with a demo of high poly model, the evaluator will either put your demo in the recyling bin or will ask you in the face to provide him with a low poly demonstration of you skills. Low poly does not mean 3K models, it means your ability to add polygons where necessary and needed. It is a skill on its own in which very few modelers can master. High poly modeling is of demand as you should also have those as well. Low poly models could go anywhere from 3 to 50K polygons depending on the overall detail and gameplay of the scene. A Scene could contain any where around 500K polys as well.


I didn't bring up Zbrush as a panacea for the extreme technical complexities of computer graphics, of which I am well aware of. My point is that as technology progresses, it strives to separate the artist from the technical details of his medium so that his expression reaches us in a purely and unaltered as possible. I am not attacking low-poly modeling, I am merely pointing out the fact that the skill required to put polys where and when it matters is a direct consequence of an immature industry. Movie directors no longer need to stich up celluloid themselves, and the military doesn't need to drop a bomb on your town to calculate its AOE. And no one I know uses punchcards to play Halo. You think you know how games are made now, wait and see as each next-gen throws each studio a fast one.

Where you got this information that game developers will throw a well created high-poly model into the trash, I'd like to know. The developers I know seek better artists. A 500k poly scene today is a 5 million poly scene tomorrow. I would expect someone who understands anatomy and motion to be able to create great work regardless if it's 3k or 300k polys. If you disagree, perhaps Pixar was better off without Brad.

We don't use our brains to come up with normal mapping and HDR, we use those tools to reach what our brains WANT to achieve. To worship the means as if they WERE the ends in an industry producing entertainment for the masses, that is stupidity.

orvski
05-19-2005, 07:01 AM
I am merely pointing out the fact that the skill required to put polys where and when it matters is a direct consequence of an immature industry.

We don't use our brains to come up with normal mapping and HDR.

Hmm so OK, its a direct consequence of an immature industry? I guess youre calling all these people who are working hard trying to make the next gen consoles immature because they havent made a console that can render millions of polys in real time. Sure its not there yet, but i wouldnt call it immature.. Would you call AMD or Intel immature because they havent made a processor as fast as our brain?

And youre saying we dont use our brains when we create normal maps and HDR? :rolleyes:

Swizzle
05-19-2005, 07:19 AM
Wow, this is such a fascinating conversation about Unreal running realtime on a PS3. I'd sure like to see some screenshots since I'm on a cruddy connection right now; anybody got some?


...Enough with the stupid argument, people. Can we get back on topic?

noisewar
05-19-2005, 11:57 AM
Hmm so OK, its a direct consequence of an immature industry? I guess youre calling all these people who are working hard trying to make the next gen consoles immature because they havent made a console that can render millions of polys in real time. Sure its not there yet, but i wouldnt call it immature.. Would you call AMD or Intel immature because they havent made a processor as fast as our brain?

And youre saying we dont use our brains when we create normal maps and HDR? :rolleyes:

By immature I don't mean childish, I mean where the medium is fairly stable. Do you think there's been no paradigm shift in game development every few years? I must be really picking the wrong words or something because I didn't think they were THAT easy to twist. If it sounds like a blame game, I retract that statement. Processors don't need to be as fast as our brain, they just can't be changing the fundamental ways software is written and developed every 5 seconds. I'd uneducatedly offhandedly and politely compare the games 5 years ago with the games now to movies before and after color. Regardless, I think you're taking one word way out of context of my point. I'm going to rest my case before it gets ugly.

rakmaya
05-19-2005, 12:12 PM
By immature I don't mean childish, I mean where the medium is fairly stable. Do you think there's been no paradigm shift in game development every few years? I must be really picking the wrong words or something because I didn't think they were THAT easy to twist. If it sounds like a blame game, I retract that statement. Processors don't need to be as fast as our brain, they just can't be changing the fundamental ways software is written and developed every 5 seconds. I'd uneducatedly offhandedly and politely compare the games 5 years ago with the games now to movies before and after color. Regardless, I think you're taking one word way out of context of my point. I'm going to rest my case before it gets ugly.


I am sure it wasn't your intention. It wasn't my intention to insult you either. Sorry if I sounded that way. However, I was aiming at your thought that low polygon modeling is a thing of the past. The reason that is not the case is that if you know the underlying concepts of 3D and the Mathematics on which the GPUs are built, you will see that the concept of polygon has not changed since 10 years ago, not just games from 5 years ago.

The reason your arguement sounded primitive was that it seems you missed the final goal instead of the methods. In 3D and Real world, the actual molding necessary to create the overall hull is not at all critical when compared to rendering the effects and textural details of the material that form the hull. We can easily render a scene that is worth of 10s of millions in the next generation. However, it is the effects such as Skin, Water, Refractions/Reflections etc... that costs more than rendering millions of polygons. That is why Shaders exists and GPU providers research to speed up the execution. Even if you have a billion polygons, you can never acieve a Sub surface scattering of the skin. For that you need a different technology.

To sum up, the overall idea is that reality doesn't depend on the polygon numbers. So why add them when they are useless. That is why we have techniques to power and illustrate the effects. And that is why we need artists who understand the need for modeling objects with correct edge loops and low polyongs and creating them whereever necessary.

orvski
05-19-2005, 02:53 PM
Ah the sum of my post = Understanding between you two. YAYY! :applause:

Btw saw those videos, :eek: This is like the 3rd time this week, my friends kept sending me links of Xbox360 (with the new Ghost Recon, UT3 engine), PS3 and now I am gonna buy... ahh well.. decisions decisions :banghead:

sumpm1
05-26-2005, 02:26 PM
My god the Ps3 is insane with power. A 35Gb per second bandwidth between the GPU and CPU, and 2 of the most powerful processors ever dedicated to only graphics and gameplay. It's all coming together. No PC will outperform this baby in a long time. It has 128-bit precision and outputs to 1920x1080 at 60 frames per second....GET SOME.

BillSpradlin
05-26-2005, 02:39 PM
No PC will outperform this baby in a long time. It has 128-bit precision and outputs to 1920x1080 at 60 frames per second....GET SOME.

A long time being about a year or less after it's released heh. People said the same thing when PS2 came out.

archerx
05-26-2005, 04:00 PM
Yet they never learn...

CGTalk Moderation
05-26-2005, 04:00 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.