Next gen visuals - suck this BF4 !

[Gelmir]

I dunno, this kinda freaks me out. Watch the video and tell me that's not TOO realistic ?

Activision shows off next-gen visuals - GameSpot.com

 

[Sickman]

Thats fooking amazing i tell you. Just the teeth is till a bit dos......

 

[Ron Burgundy]

I've seen other pics from designer that also made it hard to tell the difference between real and computer generated, but I'm afraid hardware performance is still way off before we will be able to generate 60 fps of that sort of detail

 

[Orihalcon]

Your thread title and the opening statement of the article...does not compute.

First off - R&D...and what COULD be. I've seen models and CGI renders that looked that good years back and they still have not made it into gaming.

Suck it BF4? I think not.

 

[Courage]

Now try render that in real-time

 

[wizardofid]

I've seen other pics from designer that also made it hard to tell the difference between real and computer generated, but I'm afraid hardware performance is still way off before we will be able to generate 60 fps of that sort of detail

actually it's got a less to do with hardware, it's got more to do with software and shaders than brute power, the realism isn't done by hardware but by shader usage. You could do exactly the same with current Gen hardware, and will handle it no problem. And to top it off, they are using current gen tech, to do this.

They haven't per say increased increased the polygon limit on the model, but rather uses the same amount of polygons they models use now, and since there is no in game screenshots, it's rather stupid to speculate that this will kill BF4, hardly, in fact the new UDK will give BF4 and crysis 3 a run for it's money....

all this is, is character development, with tweaked shaders, and proper flesh tone texture baking, nothing particular spectacular.

I will bet you that they will even have to turn down the realism a notch, so as to allow, the characters to fit in with the environment, as that is what has been happening all around the movie world and gaming world, as much as it griefs me, the likely hood that you will see similar flesh tones characters in game, is little to none, even cry engine, was able to handle flesh tones back in the day, if you don't believe, go google, cry engine 1 tech demo, too much realism, in this case is a bad thing, as it will never fit into an environment, that predominately makes use of at least one cartoon shader at it's core.....

 

[Ron Burgundy]

actually it's got a less to do with hardware, it's got more to do with software and shaders than brute power, the realism isn't done by hardware but by shader usage. You could do exactly the same with current Gen hardware, and will handle it no problem. And to top it off, they are using current gen tech, to do this.

They haven't per say increased increased the polygon limit on the model, but rather uses the same amount of polygons they models use now, and since there is no in game screenshots, it's rather stupid to speculate that this will kill BF4, hardly, in fact the new UDK will give BF4 and crysis 3 a run for it's money....

all this is, is character development, with tweaked shaders, and proper flesh tone texture baking, nothing particular spectacular.

I will bet you that they will even have to turn down the realism a notch, so as to allow, the characters to fit in with the environment, as that is what has been happening all around the movie world and gaming world, as much as it griefs me, the likely hood that you will see similar flesh tones characters in game, is little to none, even cry engine, was able to handle flesh tones back in the day, if you don't believe, go google, cry engine 1 tech demo, too much realism, in this case is a bad thing, as it will never fit into an environment, that predominately makes use of at least one cartoon shader at it's core.....

Yes, I was revering more to stuff like this
Photorealistic 3D Images - Business Insider
the environments look real too

 

[Bakerman]

It is realtime. Your current upper mid-range graphics card can render a face like that, the face and nothing else mind you. The sheer polygon count isn't extreme. The texture maps and shaders do the real magic.

It looks so real because it is "real". The method for creating faces like these are as follows. They capture a real face in a light sphere filled with dozens of cameras. These then render a 3d image of the skin and hair. They then place that texture onto a facial skeleton resembling your shape. The next step is to record 30 different emotions, so you stand their and smile in the dome etc. They then use those 30 emotions to animate the face in any way they want. The real work starts when they have to add shaders and lightmaps to make the face appear as natural as possible.

Watch this great video from 2010 by the creator ICT.
LabTV Light Stage - YouTube

Image from 2011.

"Property of Activision"

It's funny that Activision used the exact same face that Nvidia used a week earlier at their "Face Works" presentation and Nvidia in turn received the face from USC ICT that created this technique.

[video=youtube;CvaGd4KqlvQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvaGd4KqlvQ[/video]

 

[wizardofid]

Yes, I was revering more to stuff like this
Photorealistic 3D Images - Business Insider
the environments look real too

No, I was pointing out that, current hardware is more than capable to deal with it, you said

but I'm afraid hardware performance is still way off before we will be able to generate 60 fps of that sort of detail

it is less about the hardware and more about the software, Oj0 will chip in here
Don't for one second think that this is super high polygon models, textures baking was used here and per pixel lighting mapping that as a surface smooths out the object Which means they basically rendered the face, at full detail, and reduce the the model detail, and applied the high detailed map on a low detailed model, and creates the illusion of a super high detail model...

 

[Sag3R]

Well why does BLOPS 2 look like crap? They capable of that yet MW3=BLOPS 2 , same thing with EA. FIFA 12 = FIFA 13 literally... Makes you wonder

 

[Pyro]

Well why does BLOPS 2 look like crap? They capable of that yet MW3=BLOPS 2 , same thing with EA. FIFA 12 = FIFA 13 literally... Makes you wonder

It has to run on very aged consoles though, so you have to fall back to old tech limitations.

 

[Oj0]

This kind of detail can be easily achieved using today's hardware by using a lot of software optimizations, but they're time consuming and expensive. It's cheaper, quicker and easier to throw more hardware at a problem.

 

[Esea]

kids kids
Just gimmie a game that plays well
has minimal bugs
and hackers cant hack
Pritty pictures ooooooh gaga
more playability less Eye Candy