*doublepromote

Double-Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Wednesday, November 24th, 2010 12:44pm PST - doublepromote requested by EDD.

Holy depth of field, Batman!

Too bad they'll only use it to build dark, all-grey environments.

Imagine with me a strange new future. A future were augmented reality replaces the normal. Were buildings are plane, with no wall paper and decorative niceties. Where all (much) fashion and art isn't physical, but displayed directly in your brain/retina. Why paint my wall when I can just change a setting in my AR homepage. Today, I want every display space of my path down to my work to be in the theme of Gothic, Classical, Newaged, or Blue! Reality is so yesterday, prepare for augmented reality.

And then imagine what will happen when every advertiser is competing for your attention by monetizing and infiltrating those interstitial spaces.>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

Imagine with me a strange new future. A future were augmented reality replaces the normal. Were buildings are plane, with no wall paper and decorative niceties. Where all (much) fashion and art isn't physical, but displayed directly in your brain/retina. Why paint my wall when I can just change a setting in my AR homepage. Today, I want every display space of my path down to my work to be in the theme of Gothic, Classical, Newaged, or Blue! Reality is so yesterday, prepare for augmented reality.

>> ^KnivesOut:

And then imagine what will happen when every advertiser is competing for your attention by monetizing and infiltrating those interstitial spaces.>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
Imagine with me a strange new future. A future were augmented reality replaces the normal. Were buildings are plane, with no wall paper and decorative niceties. Where all (much) fashion and art isn't physical, but displayed directly in your brain/retina. Why paint my wall when I can just change a setting in my AR homepage. Today, I want every display space of my path down to my work to be in the theme of Gothic, Classical, Newaged, or Blue! Reality is so yesterday, prepare for augmented reality.



Indeed, perhaps we wouldn't mind though...like google? But if I could litter my view with a list of great artwork and architecture that some website compiled, perhaps an ad here or there would be worth it I am just imagineering here. "This wall brought to you be Sears"

Anyone else notice the raindrops in the sky (around 2:00)?

Four Frames per Second Theater presents . . .

Looks amazing... why don't games look anywhere near this good?

>> ^Xax:

Looks amazing... why don't games look anywhere near this good?


Because consoles are holding us back. Not much you can do with 512mb of ram and 5 year old technology.

Relevant.
>> ^mentality:

>> ^Xax:
Looks amazing... why don't games look anywhere near this good?

Because consoles are holding us back. Not much you can do with 512mb of ram and 5 year old technology.

Also bear in mind that all the processing power is being spent on the graphics in these sort of videos. In a full game, you've obviously got expensive physics, AI, gameplay etc all going on at the same time using up some of the available power.>> ^Xax:

Looks amazing... why don't games look anywhere near this good?

Games will look this good real soon. The games i play now would have made for videos like this just a couple years ago.

Oh man, this looks freakin' sweet.

>> ^mentality:

>> ^Xax:
Looks amazing... why don't games look anywhere near this good?

Because consoles are holding us back. Not much you can do with 512mb of ram and 5 year old technology.


Funny, as I was watching this video, I was thinking that I'm just about ready for the next gen. Anyone else? Unfortunately I'm pretty sure we have another 4-5 years wait.

>> ^Matthu:

>> ^mentality:
>> ^Xax:
Looks amazing... why don't games look anywhere near this good?

Because consoles are holding us back. Not much you can do with 512mb of ram and 5 year old technology.

Funny, as I was watching this video, I was thinking that I'm just about ready for the next gen. Anyone else? Unfortunately I'm pretty sure we have another 4-5 years wait.


I'm getting there, but all the major players are talking about a 7-10 year lifecycle on the current gen, and depending on when you want to start the clock we're on year 3 or 4.

>> ^EDD:

Relevant.
>> ^mentality:
>> ^Xax:
Looks amazing... why don't games look anywhere near this good?

Because consoles are holding us back. Not much you can do with 512mb of ram and 5 year old technology.



Saying cutting edge technology from 5 years ago is not cutting edge anymore is not console vs pc flamebait.

Also accurate.
>> ^EDD:

Relevant.
>> ^mentality:
>> ^Xax:
Looks amazing... why don't games look anywhere near this good?

Because consoles are holding us back. Not much you can do with 512mb of ram and 5 year old technology.

Hell it'd be cool if you could have a program that would let you drag and drop stuff onto a field, doesn't even have to be particularly pretty. But it needs to effect the sound, so you could create a beach with waves.....a windy day....a gentle shower.....raging storm...stream that's steady, stream that has a waterfall or two in it. Those sound generators and recorded nature sounds are cool and all, but they all have something that is not quite right about them.

I think overall I'd prefer some awesome sound fields associated with games, awesome gameplay, tolerable graphics, but massive real time and realistic reactions both visually and via sound. It's neat to shoot fireballs at stuff, but what if you could whip up a tornado and unleash it on the enemy? I'd like to be able to watch that thing do it's damage in real time instead of scripted everything we have now. Big earthquakes, avalanches, volcanic eruptions.....without scripts....it does what it does based on the factors present in the game which can be changed via player involvement.

Graphics are great and all, but.......great graphics aren't really creating virtual worlds you can believe in. One day they might make a virtual world still frames might look "right", but everything else will be "You can't do this because ...".

The Unreal Engine is perhaps the easiest engine to create levels in, at least for me. I never got the hang of making levels in Source or any of the id Tech engines. Of course I am just talking the base level design. After that I don't know which would be easiest to add the effects and like to as I never got that far with the other two major ones. I like the looks of this, but agree that it is hard to judge it until we see it in action with AI and character animation. I love Rage and what id is doing with id Tech 5, but the character's look like they are deep in the uncanny valley at the moment.

I also agree that consoles really need a good midterm refresh. Not a full new system, more like a 360.5 and a PS3.5. For the 360 upgrade it to XBox 360 Blue.
This hypothetical 360 features not just a Blu-Ray drive, but one ups it by going for Blu-Ray XL compatible. Controllers/remote etc. upgrade to bluetooth, though the old controllers would still have to work for now, the idea is more to setup for the next generation. Tie in with Win 7 mobile devices so you can pick plays on sport games from them, have a remote control in them, and some other games may tie to them as an option as well in whatever form developers feel like they can do. If possible without breaking compatibility with old 360 games (360 Blue exclusive games would be available so they wouldn't work on the old 360 as they come on Blu-Ray) a mild refresh to the graphics, more memory mostly, but if possible a Direct X 11 compatible chip, of course at that point you are nearly at a full refresh and not just a mid-generation refresh. I would say make Live free so you can do Netflix and online play for free, and user replaceable hard drives, but I doubt Microsoft sees that as part of their plans.
The PS3 would be much the same, upgrade to XL and if possible more memory and a slight graphics increase...
With both you can't really do too much for a mid-term refresh without moving to what is essentially a new machine.
Computers are always ahead of consoles on what they can do, but this new 7-10 year cycle is starting to show its age more than usual. I sure hope they don't go 10 years, 2 more years would be more than enough...though if they were 2 years out I would think there would be more rumors of what they are doing by now, so we probably do have more than that.

>> ^Kevlar:

Holy depth of field, Batman!


No kidding. Makes for some really excellent trailers, but DOF really interferes with gameplay.

There are better engines available already (except for the higher poly/shader/texture attributes). Hell this OLD pic of Crysis with crappy settings does almost everything the Unreal engine does and then it ups the ante by having FULL physics (killing an enemy by shooting out a leaning tree and watch it fall on him never gets old), a "stuck-in-a-box" solution (go where you want; also as a side note, limiting the playing area allows developers to throttle everything up since they render a one-block area vs. a metropolis).

The only problem I have with the Unreal engine is that it forsook many strides it made on the PC and then they pushed HARD to make themselves console friendly. That's another reason why their tools are great. Deathspank is a good example of what can be done with that engine when you think outside the pantomime of shooter console mimic.

But, in the end as was said above, it comes down to hardware.

These tech demos look beautiful, but do not represent what's known as real-time performance.

When you add in all the code for things like AI and all the other stuff, you end up being unable to render scenes like this.

I for one am tired of UE3 and want UE4 to come out. I know it won't, though, because Epic is probably focused on the console market.

LONG LIVE THE PC!

As others have said there are several reasons that games don't look this good (but will in just a few short years). One major being that consoles are holding things back simply because they can barely handle what is out there today, let alone stuff like this. But largely because these tech demos only feature high polygon static scenes (beyond a little running water or wind fx) were a game needs to use most those polygons for characters, enemies and most that texture memory for those things as well. If all they needed to do was make some pretty scenery and that was their game, it would look this good on the PC version.

Frankly Id Tech 5 surpasses what we see here in every single way. Hopefully Id will put the work in making their next game, Rage, take full advantage of the power the engine has for the PC version and not hold it back simply to make sure it gets 20fps on the consoles with a field of view set at 60. I mean think about it, Crysis was absolutely beautiful because it was a PC only game, with Crysis 2 looking significantly less good simply because it's made with consoles in mind. But it's also old compared to what todays tech can accomplish on the PC. I hope consoles catch up soon really, but considering they all just put tens of millions into pretending to be the Wii, I don't see another console for at least 3 more years. So games simply will not look this good until a PC focused company creatures another Crysis type game.

Take a look into how low rez current games are running on consoles. Most all of them are being upscaled if you run at 1080p

Is this the new Minecraft?