By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Ex-Naughty Dog Dev Explains Why PS4/XB1 Will Never Achieve CGI Visuals, 4K Will Take Two Generations

DonFerrari on 19 May 2015

Well it is impossible for any machine to do real time what a farm process for pre-rendering. Don't need a dev to say it.

Now on 4k. It certainly will be achievable on ps5 but won't be a standard before ps6. Just need to look how many gens we took to achieve each standard (gt4 on ps2 could do 1080i).

Now if we think cgi graphic in console. Ps1 cgi turned real time on ps2 and cgi of it on ps3 (roughly speaking).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
SvennoJ on 19 May 2015
DonFerrari said:
Well it is impossible for any machine to do real time what a farm process for pre-rendering. Don't need a dev to say it.

Now on 4k. It certainly will be achievable on ps5 but won't be a standard before ps6. Just need to look how many gens we took to achieve each standard (gt4 on ps2 could do 1080i).

Now if we think cgi graphic in console. Ps1 cgi turned real time on ps2 and cgi of it on ps3 (roughly speaking).

Yeah and the 'problem' nowadays is that game developers like to use in engine rendering for cutscenes, so it seems we've reached gameplay equals cgi like The order. Which is ofcourse bullshit considering all the downgrades, and cutscenes that run sub par.
I would rather go back to the old days where cut scenes give you a glimpse of what gameplay could look like in the next generation of hardware. Show off all the art assets in the best possible way, don't restrict the imagination of the creators with hardware limitations. At least they would be interesting to look at again instead of mash x to skip. The 'oh I'm in control now?' gimmick wore off long ago.



SuperNova on 19 May 2015

Until we reach reality-like levels, both in CG and gaming, wont gaming always lag behind?
I mean, we've by now hit 90 style CG and left it behind us with gaming graphics, but in that time CG has advanced so dramatically that gaming still lags behind. CG just prophits from not being real time. And probably also from not being rendered on consoles.



AlfredoTurkey on 19 May 2015
Ka-pi96 said:
Guitarguy said:
Does anyone else see console gaming imploding simply due to the immense cost of keeping up with advancing technology? Hell companies like Konami have pretty much abandoned consoles for mobile because the games don't have to cost 50 million to make and we are seein developers leaving AAA studios more often now. Maybe HD did kill gaming....

Can't see it happening. The big games are pretty much guaranteed to make money so they will keep releasing. There are plenty of developers that can make games that are profitable at much lower sales as well, it's just a few that don't know how to budget properly who will either have to adapt or they will leave (many already have). Those that are left will be the ones who can consistently make a profit, whether that's due to big budget games with huge sales (COD, GTA etc) or good but low selling games made on a budget that fits with their sales expectations.


Imo, Indie games will save the industry. Hell, the biggest game last generation (and current) is Minecraft. As long as indie developers exist, gaming will as well. It's our insurance policy.



DonFerrari on 19 May 2015
SvennoJ said:
DonFerrari said:
Well it is impossible for any machine to do real time what a farm process for pre-rendering. Don't need a dev to say it.

Now on 4k. It certainly will be achievable on ps5 but won't be a standard before ps6. Just need to look how many gens we took to achieve each standard (gt4 on ps2 could do 1080i).

Now if we think cgi graphic in console. Ps1 cgi turned real time on ps2 and cgi of it on ps3 (roughly speaking).

Yeah and the 'problem' nowadays is that game developers like to use in engine rendering for cutscenes, so it seems we've reached gameplay equals cgi like The order. Which is ofcourse bullshit considering all the downgrades, and cutscenes that run sub par.
I would rather go back to the old days where cut scenes give you a glimpse of what gameplay could look like in the next generation of hardware. Show off all the art assets in the best possible way, don't restrict the imagination of the creators with hardware limitations. At least they would be interesting to look at again instead of mash x to skip. The 'oh I'm in control now?' gimmick wore off long ago.


I love cgi pre-rendered final fantasy and don't like qte cut scene. want the eye candies back.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
SamuelRSmith on 19 May 2015
deskpro2k3 said:

Well as it turns out, we're talking about separate things.

You know I'm talking about video games right? Video games with seamless cgi gameplay, which has already been achieved in The Order 1886, making the ex nd dev statement false. I just don't understand how you don't understand that.

Except what the other guy is talking about is correct in the context of the thread, as that's the context that everybody in the thread has been talking about.

"There has always been this pipe dream that in game visuals can look as good as pre-rendered graphics"

^ From the article in the OP

This thread is about ingame visuals looking as good as pre-rendered graphics (ie, like in Jurassic Park), not about "Video games with seamless cgi gameplay".



greenmedic88 on 19 May 2015

It is a realistic take on the progression of console processing capability given the amount of time it takes a $3000 workstation to render a single frame of pre-rendered animation.

Animation is rendered on network linked farms, and even with that level of processing power, cinema grade graphics can't be rendered in real time with current GPUs and CPUs, so it doesn't take any math to see that it will be quite a while before one can realistically expect a box that retails for $400 to do the work that hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of networked computer workstations currently cannot.