Current gen vs Next gen

[Ryuzakimorgoth]

So,I may have an unpopular opinion,at least when it comes to consoles enthusiasts.  But from what I have seen so far,the coming gen doesn't add much to console visuals or new impressive feats. Sure its going to have a beast of a GPU and the Zen 2 CPU sounds absolutely fantastic,but besides adding Ray Tracing(from what they said at least),there doesn't seem to be a huge leap in visuals. Not like the PS3 to PS4 era or even worse,the PS2 to PS3 era.

Maybe I'm the only one thinking so,but I feel like we are peaking in term of visual fidelity in gaming in general.

[.Apex.]

27 minutes ago, Ryuzakimorgoth said:

the coming gen doesn't add much to console visuals or new impressive feats. Sure its going to have a beast of a GPU and the Zen 2 CPU sounds absolutely fantastic,but besides adding Ray Tracing(from what they said at least),there doesn't seem to be a huge leap in visuals. Not like the PS3 to PS4 era or even worse,the PS2 to PS3 era.

Maybe I'm the only one thinking so,but I feel like we are peaking in term of visual fidelity in gaming in general.

the new consoles are not going to be taken advantage of until a few years later, maybe the visual change won't be as big but in terms of physics and mechanics I would expect there would be a massive improvement to realism especially for open worlds.

 

though we are definitely not peaking, not even close.

[Ryuzakimorgoth]

16 minutes ago, Syn. said:

the new consoles are not going to be taken advantage of until a few years later, maybe the visual change won't be as big but in terms of physics and mechanics I would expect there would be a massive improvement to realism especially for open worlds.

 

though we are definitely not peaking, not even close.

I can definitely see open world games getting better with some things,like grass or leaves textures. But I'm not sure just how far it can be taken anymore

[.Apex.]

31 minutes ago, Ryuzakimorgoth said:

I can definitely see open world games getting better with some things,like grass or leaves textures. But I'm not sure just how far it can be taken anymore

It's not about the textures, the biggest change from previous Gen is the CPU, it's over 6 times faster and can be way more than that in certain scenarios, that's how they would be able to make an open world game more realistic, by having better AI, better physics (like destructible objects/buildings and many more), denser populations, more intricate game mechanics, it opens a world of possibilities for developers, it could change the standard beaten down formula of games today.

[Ryuzakimorgoth]

That is all well and good,but that wasn't the point of what I was saying though. I was specifically talking about a leap in visuals. Not technical prowess. Obviously there are more things that can be done on a more technical level,but when it comes to visuals? I do not think much can be done to make games look better in general,and that was my point.

[.Apex.]

1 minute ago, Ryuzakimorgoth said:

That is all well and good,but that wasn't the point of what I was saying though. I was specifically talking about a leap in visuals. Not technical prowess. Obviously there are more things that can be done on a more technical level,but when it comes to visuals? I do not think much can be done to make games look better in general,and that was my point.

Again maybe not as much for the new consoles because they threw away all the GPU power by switching to native 4K, but there is always room for better GPUs and in-game textures can be scaled way up which are very taxing on the GPU, we are nowhere near the peak for visuals, until it is impossible to differentiate game from reality then it's fair to say that we have peaked.

[Ryuzakimorgoth]

1 minute ago, Syn. said:

Again maybe not as much for the new consoles because they threw away all the GPU power by switching to native 4K, but there is always room for better GPUs and in-game textures can be scaled way up which are very taxing on the GPU, we are nowhere near the peak for visuals, until it is impossible to differentiate game from reality then it's fair to say that we have peaked.

I definitely can see the argument here,however I think its debatable on if we really need games to look like actual real life though. I think its more a question of opinions on that front. But yeah I don't think that 4k is really the way to go,yet.

[.Apex.]

1 minute ago, Ryuzakimorgoth said:

I definitely can see the argument here,however I think its debatable on if we really need games to look like actual real life though. I think its more a question of opinions on that front. But yeah I don't think that 4k is really the way to go,yet.

that's true that not all games fit that requirement but graphical advancements have always been focused on making games more realistic, artistic expressions that distances itself from reality will always be there though

[Ryuzakimorgoth]

Just now, Syn. said:

that's true that not all games fit that requirement but graphical advancements have always been focused on making games more realistic, artistic expressions that distances itself from reality will always be there though

I definitely love seeing some manner of realism,I just don't want to feel like I am going to the park next to my house lol. I think that's taking it a bit too far.

[.Apex.]

2 minutes ago, Ryuzakimorgoth said:

I definitely love seeing some manner of realism,I just don't want to feel like I am going to the park next to my house lol. I think that's taking it a bit too far.

like movies, it might be an interesting well directed park experience XD

[Ryuzakimorgoth]

Oh god,can we also get some kinda virtual reality sensory thing where if in the game a bird takes a shit on our head,we feel the warmth of it while we're at it lmao,how is that for realism!

[gloop]

2 hours ago, Ryuzakimorgoth said:

But from what I have seen so far,the coming gen doesn't add much to console visuals

That’s what PS and XBOX have been saying since the beginning. Current gen has extremely good graphics, and improving them would have next-to-no impact on actually enjoyment. 
 

This gen is for quality of life improvements, like reduced loading times, quieter systems, multiple suspended games, etc. 

[Ryuzakimorgoth]

31 minutes ago, gloop said:

That’s what PS and XBOX have been saying since the beginning. Current gen has extremely good graphics, and improving them would have next-to-no impact on actually enjoyment. 
 

This gen is for quality of life improvements, like reduced loading times, quieter systems, multiple suspended games, etc. 

Pretty much. Yet I have seen a lot of people getting mad because Ratchet and Clank apparently won't do 4k 60 FPS. Like my dudes,you clearly don't have PCs that can do Ray Tracing,because you'd know that Ray Tracing is extremely performance heavy,especially when trying to push 4K with it.

[PlayStation 2]

I strongly believe that this coming generation will be the generation of pushing dynamic rendering to its limits, namely with resolution and assets that can be adjusted based on load, basically like how the Forza games function. 

And I say this because that's about the smartest way you can utilize specific hardware. Why waste it just pushing pixel counts only when you can ramp up everything else, especially if you're going to be using a form of temporal anti-aliasing, where things are blurry already? A little bit of a resolution drop wouldn't kill the image, especially in a filmic context. 

 

I look forward to how this coming generation plays out.

[JZStudios]

Two things.

1. You have no idea how absolutely fucking mind boggling it is that a home console will now do real time ray tracing. If that's not a generational leap, then I can't help you.

2. Diminishing returns. Many games already have a pretty close to photorealistic look while running at 4k, which is also pretty mind boggling considering how shit PS360 games looked at 720.

 

Think of it like this;

PS1:

1. Tomb Raider main character poly count ~250 on the high end.
2. Textures basically non existent. Max tex size: 256x256
3. Highest resolution output: 640x240p. Most games were interlaced.

PS2:

1. Kratos poly count ~5,700. Uses 5 textures.
2. Textures still seem around 256. Maybe 512 on the higher end.
3. Most common output resolution: 480i. A handful of games could do 480p

PS3:

1. Kratos poly count ~64,000.
2. Can't find an easily identifiable texture resolution. I'd still say 512 was pretty common, with maybe 1024 on the high end, or near end of life.
3. Most common output resolution: 720p. Some games might hit 1080.

PS4:

1. Kratos poly count ~80,000 Uses over 140 textures.
2. Again, can't find an easy count. I'd say in the ballpark of 2048 on the high end.
3. Most common res: 1080, up to 4k.

Now next gen consoles once again have a leap in output resolution, texture size, poly count, and freaking ray tracing that didn't even exist 20 years ago. You people need to go back and play some older games, because holy hell. I'm tired of hearing "This new game looks like PS2!" You need to be slapped. The poly count as it continually increases gives less and less visual effect.

links to check:

Playstation games

Character poly counts

[Ryuzakimorgoth]

If nothing else,the fact that the coming gen is going to be significantly more powerful,means that the overall quality of game performance/visuasl will improve. Since devs have to make games that everything can run.

[Ryuzakimorgoth]

10 minutes ago, JZStudios said:

Two things.

1. You have no idea how absolutely fucking mind boggling it is that a home console will now do real time ray tracing. If that's not a generational leap, then I can't help you.

2. Diminishing returns. Many games already have a pretty close to photorealistic look while running at 4k, which is also pretty mind boggling considering how shit PS360 games looked at 720.

 

Think of it like this;

PS1:

1. Tomb Raider main character poly count ~250 on the high end.
2. Textures basically non existent. Max tex size: 256x256
3. Highest resolution output: 640x240p. Most games were interlaced.

PS2:

1. Kratos poly count ~5,700. Uses 5 textures.
2. Textures still seem around 256. Maybe 512 on the higher end.
3. Most common output resolution: 480i. A handful of games could do 480p

PS3:

1. Kratos poly count ~64,000.
2. Can't find an easily identifiable texture resolution. I'd still say 512 was pretty common, with maybe 1024 on the high end, or near end of life.
3. Most common output resolution: 720p. Some games might hit 1080.

PS4:

1. Kratos poly count ~80,000 Uses over 140 textures.
2. Again, can't find an easy count. I'd say in the ballpark of 2048 on the high end.
3. Most common res: 1080, up to 4k.

Now next gen consoles once again have a leap in output resolution, texture size, poly count, and freaking ray tracing that didn't even exist 20 years ago. You people need to go back and play some older games, because holy hell. I'm tired of hearing "This new game looks like PS2!" You need to be slapped. The poly count as it continually increases gives less and less visual effect.

links to check:

Playstation games

Character poly counts

I never once said the games looks like PS2 games,do you even read? Like for real? 

And I KNOW that its impressive that Ray Tracing is even a thing on consoles. Holy hell do you need to read and stop  assuming random things about people you know nothing about. 

I said that there isn't a massive leap in VISUALS. Which is actually true. Yes Ray Tracing is great and all,but its frankly not like they were revamping the entire visuals like they did from the PS2/PS3 era for example. Please,if you want to discuss,come and discuss without throwing some stupid assumptions and implying things I never even said.

Oh and just because I actually can do that,I'm going to tell you right now. I literally played Final Fantasy 6,2 weeks ago. I played Budokai Tenkaichi 3,5 days ago. 
People like YOU need to stop talking out of their ass because that is beyond ridiculous and laughable. All I am seeing in your reply is you being angry over absolutely nothing and frankly,there are other means to relax than come on a thread ans be aggressive. Peace out,not going to bother replying to you anymore. I don't have any more time to give to someone so clearly angry/annoyed or whatever else you might be.

[JZStudios]

5 hours ago, Ryuzakimorgoth said:

I never once said the games looks like PS2 games,do you even read? Like for real? 

And I KNOW that its impressive that Ray Tracing is even a thing on consoles. Holy hell do you need to read and stop  assuming random things about people you know nothing about. 

Did I insinuate that you claimed it looked like PS2 games? No. Maybe you should check your reading comprehension. I said "I'm tired of hearing "This new game looks like PS2!""

I never claimed you said that. So get off your high horse.

 

Ray tracing is also a massive visual boon, it's not my fault you can't tell that. It's literally overhauling the entire lighting engine, which in turn effects every material on screen and the light interplay between them. It effects the entire image. The draw distances and minor objects should also be much more enhanced with significantly better audio. This whole argument is dumb and no one knows what they're talking about when they claim it. They said the same shit at the launch of PS4 and XB1. Shit, they probably said the same at the launch of the PS3.

[Rick80]

In terms of visual, there seems to be minor changes, but the more powerful console will allow game creators to make better, more detailed games. Some of the graphics I have seen in PS5 games seem really good, although, they do make the games look better than they actually are visually in E3 and other gaming events. 

[soxsure]

You named it. Ray Tracing it is. If you read into what it actually does then you will notice that this is a big ass step up for visuals. I'd say it's just as important, if not more, as HDR.

Tho I'm not sure how much rt horse power the next gen actually got.

[Ertman]

On 8/30/2020 at 9:18 AM, Ryuzakimorgoth said:

....there doesn't seem to be a huge leap in visuals. Not like the PS3 to PS4 era or even worse,the PS2 to PS3 era.

Maybe I'm the only one thinking so,but I feel like we are peaking in term of visual fidelity in gaming in general.

I agree, but it’s diminishing returns and you see the same problem in PC gaming too, it’s just that consoles have generations so it’s easier to compare.

 

It requires significantly greater amount of processing power to to achieve a the same noticeable visual impact. It could probably be represented by an exponential curve. This decreasing visual jump is nothing new and it was discussed last Gen as even though the graphics had improved quite a bit it wasn’t the same experience as going from ps2/Xbox to ps3/360 and that wasn’t the same as ps1 to ps2.
 

Overall I don’t think it’s a bad thing developers will have the ability to prioritize other gameplay factors without necessarily risking the apparent visual fidelity.

 

Like I said at the beginning,  this is happening in pc gaming too, just it’s less obvious in comparison. The hardware just can’t keep up and you kind of hit a wall and need to focus on other design elements.

[Lord Vile]

17 hours ago, Ertman said:

I agree, but it’s diminishing returns and you see the same problem in PC gaming too, it’s just that consoles have generations so it’s easier to compare.

 

It requires significantly greater amount of processing power to to achieve a the same noticeable visual impact. It could probably be represented by an exponential curve. This decreasing visual jump is nothing new and it was discussed last Gen as even though the graphics had improved quite a bit it wasn’t the same experience as going from ps2/Xbox to ps3/360 and that wasn’t the same as ps1 to ps2.
 

Overall I don’t think it’s a bad thing developers will have the ability to prioritize other gameplay factors without necessarily risking the apparent visual fidelity.

 

Like I said at the beginning,  this is happening in pc gaming too, just it’s less obvious in comparison. The hardware just can’t keep up and you kind of hit a wall and need to focus on other design elements.

Remember though AAA games come out on console and have to run on them so devs have had to make games run on 8GB system RAM/VRAM, jaguar CPUs and ancient GPUs. Will take a while for next gen games that were developed solely for next gen to come out. 

[JZStudios]

On 9/5/2020 at 7:34 PM, Ertman said:

I agree, but it’s diminishing returns and you see the same problem in PC gaming too, it’s just that consoles have generations so it’s easier to compare.

It's more that adding poly counts now by the same magnitude of 10x creates little to no visual difference. At best it would be like in the UE5 demo Epic showed with dynamic subdivision so each pixel/group of pixels is a polygon. Going any smaller than that you literally will not ever see that detail. The next leap in visuals is lighting, which is less immediately noticeable, but also far more demanding. Thus people that don't understand or don't know what they're talking about say the visual leap is basically nothing.

Here's a Reddit thread from 6 years ago talking about the same thing for current gen consoles: 

The top comment is from a claimed Guerilla Games artist, and what he says makes sense.

Quote

Hi, video game artist from Guerrilla Games here! You may know us from the Killzone series.

While the picture OP posted is accurate in the sense of downres/upres methodologies, there is a very important point to be made here.

It's true that subdividing a 2k poly model will not result in a more detailed model. And that downscaling a 20k model will result in a more accurate 2k representation.

But this is not what game graphics are about. We have almost stopped caring about polygon counts in the last couple of years. Increasing the poly count beyond 5k for the bust that is shown in the example picture will add almost nothing. The contour may look a little better, but that's it.

What actually happens in current AND next gen games is that the detail contained in the hipoly model is baked into a "normal map". It's a texture that defines the surface angle for every pixel. That way, even though the model may be relatively low poly, the lighting on it looks like the full high res model.

The guys over at Epic games did a great demonstration of this back in 2006, but it looks like they removed that part of their website by now. It was a great demonstration of how a 4 million poly character model was downressed to 9000 polies and effectively looked the same because of normal maps.

So anyways - about the actual issue at hand; there really is a diminishing returns issue in games. Every time you double the amount of polygons, the subject will only look marginally better than the previous generation did. The difference between PS1 and PS2 was enormous. The difference between PS2 and PS3 was smaller, although still very significant. The difference between PS3 and PS4 is clearly noticeable, but it's not as big a leap as previous generations were. Future generations will no doubt offer smaller changes in graphical fidelity, and put more focus on added features.

#edit: Wow! So many responses. I'd love to answer them all but don't have the time. Some clarification:

1. Poly counts still matter! When I said "stopped caring" I meant that we don't design objects with the intent of saving on polygons. We still do crazy amounts of optimization once the object is made. And of course we use Level of Detail models to reduce poly counts of objects that are further away from the camera.

2. There are still great improvements to be made in graphics technology. We're moving away from static pre-baked lighting and that means we want to simulate light bouncing around in real time. That's ridiculously demanding on the hardware. And you wouldn't see the difference in a screenshot, but you will see it when objects and lights move around.

Game graphics can still get loads better, but the improvements won't come in the form of higher poly counts. At least not by much. Look forward to stuff like realtime global illumination, particles, dynamics, fluids, cloth and hair, etc. It's not necessarily stuff that will make screenshots look better, but it will definitely make game worlds feel more alive.

 

[Ertman]

21 hours ago, JZStudios said:

It's more that adding poly counts now by the same magnitude of 10x creates little to no visual difference. At best it would be like in the UE5 demo Epic showed with dynamic subdivision so each pixel/group of pixels is a polygon. Going any smaller than that you literally will not ever see that detail. The next leap in visuals is lighting, which is less immediately noticeable, but also far more demanding. Thus people that don't understand or don't know what they're talking about say the visual leap is basically nothing.

Here's a Reddit thread from 6 years ago talking about the same thing for current gen consoles: 

The top comment is from a claimed Guerilla Games artist, and what he says makes sense.

 

Neat bit. However diminishing returns doesn’t just apply to poly counts. The concept I am talking about is after a certain point improvements become a bit more nuanced and less dramatic. Then of course you run into hardware limitations when introducing or utilizing techniques to   Improve visuals.

 

Of course your post details much more of what I vaguely mentioned in the post you quoted.

 

As it is right now There is still plenty of room for visual improvements, it’s that the expectations of seeing those dramatic differences as seen in other console upgrades is unrealistic.

 

[Ertman]

On 9/6/2020 at 4:09 PM, Lord Vile said:

Remember though AAA games come out on console and have to run on them so devs have had to make games run on 8GB system RAM/VRAM, jaguar CPUs and ancient GPUs. Will take a while for next gen games that were developed solely for next gen to come out. 

Yes, this has been true with every gen. Many Next Gen games coming out soon most likely started off as a project on the current Gen. This occurred when going from PS to PS2 to PS3 to PS4. Development time plays a factor to limiting how easily games can be upgraded to the next platform, but even a fully matured game will not have the dramatic improvements that came before it.
 

Developers have had access to computers with similar capabilities for years so it’s not like the games are just being ported over. Many games are in fact being ported backwards with the reduction in features to meet the old hardware.
 

Either way you’re still Not going to see the dramatic visual improvements as seen in previous gens transitions. JZStudios posted some information detailing why.