http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461 Just another bbPress community en-US Sun, 19 May 2013 21:08:06 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 q http://www.vg247.com/forum/search.php http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461#post-37131 Wed, 12 Sep 2012 21:25:18 +0000 fearmonkey 37131@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <p>I should have mentioned what I was meaning was a "fake" or approximation of avatar's CGI graphics. As phoenix noted, the render farms with racks of servers rendering frame by frame Avatar's CGI can not be replicated by a console, but by faking it using different rendering and lighting techniques, you can achieve that "CGI" look. </p> <p>A good example of that is Nvidias super sled demo, which reminds me of toy stories style of graphics and animation, which is almost several years old now - <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkFOa8hEiuw" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkFOa8hEiuw</a> </p> http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461#post-37124 Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:55:15 +0000 Phoenixblight 37124@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <p>@The BlackHole </p> <p>Fern Gully is older than that movie. </p> <p>I always thought Avatar was Dancing with wolves with smurfs. </p> http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461#post-37121 Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:44:56 +0000 TheBlackHole 37121@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <p>Actually G1GA, both those stories were rips of Pocahontas </p> <p><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/04/avatar-pocahontas-in-spac_n_410538.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/04/avatar-pocahontas-in-spac_n_410538.html</a> </p> http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461#post-37112 Wed, 12 Sep 2012 09:55:48 +0000 G1GAHURTZ 37112@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <p>1. Avatar's story is just a rip off of Ferngully, anyway: <a href="http://rosewest.hubpages.com/hub/Avatar-vs-FernGully" rel="nofollow">http://rosewest.hubpages.com/hub/Avatar-vs-FernGully</a></p> <p>2. There's a huge difference between film CG and in game graphics.</p> <p>Even if you tried to render a single frame from the original Toy Story now, it would probably still take hours. Film CG doesn't cut any corners. A light is supposed to act like a light and cast real shadows, and shiny/transparent materials are supposed to refract/reflect light as in real life.</p> <p>No game engine does that. Objects aren't even modelled most of the time, they're just simple flat polygons with textures on. In film CG, everything is actually modelled and given a material with it's own properties, rather than a texture. In a game engine, corners are cut to get something that looks realistic enough, but requires minimal processing power.</p> <p>You might get 100k polys on screen at one time with no effects and a short draw distance in a current gen game, but in film CG you might have millions in just a basic shot. Characters are also pretty basic in most games, but in film, they have a whole load of complex coding to handle simple things like 'tummy jiggle'.</p> <p>I'm sure millions of polys on screen with full shadows/anti aliasing/reflections/caustics/depth of field/motion blur/etc is capable of being rendered at upwards of 60fps, but probably not for the next 15-20 years, at least. </p> http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461#post-37110 Wed, 12 Sep 2012 09:41:13 +0000 Gadzooks! 37110@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <p>We're a million miles from Toy Story level graphics. That movie is nearly 20 years old. Avatar level visuals in real time? Not in our lifetime.</p> <p>As mentioned above, these films use render farms. They cannot do anything approaching realtime graphics and don't have game code hogging resources. </p> http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461#post-37108 Wed, 12 Sep 2012 09:14:02 +0000 DrDamn 37108@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <p>@silkvg247<br /> Though in a set and known platform a console will generally get more out of a GPU than it ever did in a PC at the time. I.e. the tech may be two generations back but the end result is not necessarily. It's easier to optimise for a set piece of hardware than it is for "PCs".</p> <p>The whole comparison to CGI movies is quite funny though. Not sure we've even hit Toy Story yet in some aspects but people are already moving on to Avatar. </p> http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461#post-37107 Wed, 12 Sep 2012 08:58:05 +0000 KrazyKraut 37107@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <p>Hyperbole. Good PC graphics, but nothing more. I enjoy the Wii atm more than PS3 and X360. </p> http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461#post-37096 Wed, 12 Sep 2012 00:42:30 +0000 OlderGamer 37096@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <p>"Considering top end pc's don't have games that can do that, do the math. Whatever the next gen console is, will still be 2 gens behind pc."</p> <p>^^This </p> http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461#post-37095 Tue, 11 Sep 2012 23:38:44 +0000 Phoenixblight 37095@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <p>"Considering top end pc's don't have games that can do that, do the math. Whatever the next gen console is, will still be 2 gens behind pc."</p> <p>No single PC can run games at avatar level. Each frame in Avatar took atleast an hour to render at a render farm. THat is not 30 fps or 60 fps that is 1 frame per hour. We have a long way to go to do that. We do however get to CGI level if you watch the newest engines like Unreal 4 demo or Squares engine. </p> http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461#post-37094 Tue, 11 Sep 2012 22:58:01 +0000 silkvg247 37094@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <p>Considering top end pc's don't have games that can do that, do the math. Whatever the next gen console is, will still be 2 gens behind pc.</p> <p>In theory pc could do it by now, but the dev / graphic work needed would be astronomical. </p> http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461#post-37093 Tue, 11 Sep 2012 21:46:52 +0000 zinc 37093@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <p>I was going to write something snarky about how Star Wars: 1313 is fantastic graphically, but gameplay wise reminds me of Uncharted 2.</p> <p>I may have then added a line or two bemoaning the lack of 'innovation' etc.</p> <p>But actually the idea of a Uncharted looking that good really excites me... :-)</p> <p>Please bring on the bright and shiny! Daddy needs new toys :-P </p> http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461#post-37091 Tue, 11 Sep 2012 21:33:24 +0000 SlayerGT 37091@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <p>I'm expecting Ground Zeros, Watch Dogs, BF3 (PC version) level of graphics. </p> http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461#post-37089 Tue, 11 Sep 2012 21:25:09 +0000 Ireland Michael 37089@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <p>Just as long as they don't have Avatar level storytelling...</p> <p>It's hyperbole. Hardware catches up, but nowhere near that fast. It'll be a good decade at least before we see the quality of CGI seen in Avatar running in real time on a console. </p> http://www.vg247.com/forum/topic.php?id=6461#post-37088 Tue, 11 Sep 2012 21:20:51 +0000 fearmonkey 37088@http://www.vg247.com/forum/ <p><a href="http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Xbox-720-PS4-Graphics-Could-Get-Close-Avatar-Quality-Says-Geomerics-46763.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Xbox-720-PS4-Graphics-Could-Get-Close-Avatar-Quality-Says-Geomerics-46763.html</a></p> <p>I remember during the pre-PS2 days it was "Toy Story graphics" and that never happened. Now we have Avatar as the example....</p> <p>I have no doubt the next gen can hit the "CGI" level graphics, as some of the GPU demos out now approach it, but Im skeptical that true Avatar level graphics will happen until the next next generation.</p> <p>Truth or Hyberbole?</p> <p>Note: The article is talking about Lighting near Avatar quality, should point that out before I get flamed.</p> <p><a href="http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Geomerics-Interview-Next-Gen-Consoles-Battlefield-4-Ray-Tracing-46541.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Geomerics-Interview-Next-Gen-Consoles-Battlefield-4-Ray-Tracing-46541.html</a> - full interview here. </p>