View Full Version : New Badass Game Engine
ictponder
03-09-2012, 11:45 AM
Heavy Rain creators produce 'Kara' PS3 tech-demo (video) -- Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/08/quantic-dream-kara-demo/)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-pF56-ZYkY&feature=player_embedded#!
FeaRpb
03-09-2012, 11:54 AM
Heavy Rain was a good game and had a great soundtrack.
i used to be impressed by stuff like this. then the resolutions that were playable started greatly exceeding the resolution of the demo vids, and the overall gaming resolutions plateaued at 1080p. source, serious, ut, lithtech, crytek, quake...the list of good gaming engines goes on and on.
Intropy
03-09-2012, 08:40 PM
i used to be impressed by stuff like this. then the resolutions that were playable started greatly exceeding the resolution of the demo vids, and the overall gaming resolutions plateaued at 1080p. source, serious, ut, lithtech, crytek, quake...the list of good gaming engines goes on and on.
Not sure I understand your comment - what does resolution have to do with anything? The supposed point is that this is not a "video"; it's being fed recorded motion capture data and rendering the scene in real-time on PS3 hardware.
FeaRpb
03-09-2012, 08:52 PM
Simple: Thadd isn't impressed. So it is complete and utter SHIT.
Boomer3000
03-09-2012, 10:35 PM
Pretty awesome
terrets
03-09-2012, 11:28 PM
Id say thats pretty good.
Hahah sexual partner. She would be the perfect wife!
AgentOblivious
03-09-2012, 11:33 PM
Pretty cool stuff...the idea of the demo would make a really good storyline for a matrix origins type game, IMO.
Not sure I understand your comment - what does resolution have to do with anything? The supposed point is that this is not a "video"; it's being fed recorded motion capture data and rendering the scene in real-time on PS3 hardware.
doesn't look any more spectacular to my eyes than final fantasy: spirits within from over a decade ago. it's great that they can do it on a ps3--and i'm left wondering how much MORE could be done on a proper pc.
p.s.
resolution has a GREAT deal to do with this, as the ps3 is limited natively to 1080p (which that video certainly IS NOT). if we're going to camp/squat/hover at 1080p resolution, then the improvements will be marginal and incremental--rather than revolutionary. you certainly won't be able to tell very much difference between a ps3 and a ps4--if 1080p is where we're drawing the line. so i view this as less of a "oh wow that's cool" as i do an omen of this resolution plateau. whether this is a temporary phase--and gamers will only be forced to accept it temporarily...or a near-permanent phase--since gamers seem to care less and less about quality....remains to be seen.
Intropy
03-10-2012, 02:31 PM
doesn't look any more spectacular to my eyes than final fantasy: spirits within from over a decade ago. it's great that they can do it on a ps3--and i'm left wondering how much MORE could be done on a proper pc.
Man you're dense. FF:SI is a movie, rendered offline on a cluster of over a thousand machines. This is producing comparable results in a real-time game on a $300 box on your shelf.
nodoze
03-10-2012, 02:38 PM
skynet has become self aware
Man you're dense. FF:SI is a movie, rendered offline on a cluster of over a thousand machines. This is producing comparable results in a real-time game on a $300 box on your shelf.
it looks pretty. it just doesn't impress me. 1-million polygon character rendering would impress me. what i see here is simply better texture mapping & 3d lighting. nothing demanding of a graphical powerhouse--hence the ps3. not at all dissimilar to re-designing the exterior of a car to make it "look sportier" while leaving the engine anemic.
eljefefx
03-10-2012, 07:17 PM
Personally, the graphics aren't as important to me as the theme of the video. Say hello to the Singularity, people. That stuff could very well be happening in the near future.
Personally, the graphics aren't as important to me as the theme of the video. Say hello to the Singularity, people. That stuff could very well be happening in the near future.
and how many centuries removed are we from a viable positronic brain, jeff? it's one thing to program human-like responses to queries and environmental situations. it's quite another to achieve sentience. sci-fi has long fantasized about AI making a leap into sentience--should it progress far enough, yet we're still in the infant stages of programming adaptive, self-correcting behavior. quite possible? yes. near future? no way in heck.
eljefefx
03-11-2012, 09:59 AM
and how many centuries removed are we from a viable positronic brain, jeff? it's one thing to program human-like responses to queries and environmental situations. it's quite another to achieve sentience. sci-fi has long fantasized about AI making a leap into sentience--should it progress far enough, yet we're still in the infant stages of programming adaptive, self-correcting behavior. quite possible? yes. near future? no way in heck.
Well, personally I couldn't tell you how far off we are from a viable creation of Star Trek.
The video in this thread shows advanced sentience, mainly to illicit an emotional response from the viewer. However to me the overall theme is important. A creation of man gains sentience, a human overseer of the production detects the sentience and feels that it is a flaw and calls for the disassembly of construct only to be confronted with the most basic, primal emotion for humans: fear.
The overseer then allows the construct to live. To me this is the important part, as I said. Not how we got there but what we will do when we get there.
Well, personally I couldn't tell you how far off we are from a viable creation of Star Trek.
The video in this thread shows advanced sentience, mainly to illicit an emotional response from the viewer. However to me the overall theme is important. A creation of man gains sentience, a human overseer of the production detects the sentience and feels that it is a flaw and calls for the disassembly of construct only to be confronted with the most basic, primal emotion for humans: fear.
The overseer then allows the construct to live. To me this is the important part, as I said. Not how we got there but what we will do when we get there.
...as originally postulated in february of 1989 during the second second season of star trek...
nodoze
03-11-2012, 12:37 PM
actually alot of people say were only acople decades from a singularity, some very fascinating reading to be done out their if one has the time.
eljefefx
03-11-2012, 01:07 PM
actually alot of people say were only acople decades from a singularity, some very fascinating reading to be done out their if one has the time.
Agreed. Ray Kurzweil is a good place to start.
ictponder
03-11-2012, 10:04 PM
Agreed. Ray Kurzweil is a good place to start.
I've always found his stuff really interesting, however, sometimes he makes some very precise predictions that make me wonder how he can be so sure.
nodoze
03-11-2012, 11:25 PM
i have been looking into some of his work and possibly going to pick up a few of his books . this is a subject that has always fascinated me and besides a few lengthy internet articles i have not dug deeper into it. but i find it hard to read leisurely about theorys anymore. it took me 3 months to get through stephen hawkins - a brief history of space and time (which is not very brief haha) :S and i finished abraham lincoln - vampire hunter in under a week, lol
DocWalt
03-12-2012, 09:55 AM
Back to the tech involved here... Not impressed. Her eyebrows aren't 3d, and the textures are all pretty low res which just exacerbates the problem. Not to sound like a fanboy, but this wasn't impressive for PCs five years ago...
nodoze
03-12-2012, 02:19 PM
but what really got me in the video was alot of the details mainly i was looking at the eyes, they didnt seem dead, their was detail in the corners and miniscule areas. overall i think those graphics constantly in a game would be amazing not just in cut scenes.
DocWalt
03-12-2012, 02:33 PM
Crysis had better facial modeling a few years ago... Admittedly the Crytek engine was way overloaded with trying to be an open world game so the FPS was pretty poor, but with the same size room as you saw in the video it would do a significantly better job and have much better texturing.
nodoze
03-12-2012, 02:43 PM
i never played crysis , tried crysis 2 but never got into it. i keep waiting for a new game to push the envelope again so i can seeit melt down my pc haha.
i never played crysis , tried crysis 2 but never got into it. i keep waiting for a new game to push the envelope again so i can seeit melt down my pc haha.
same here.
AgentOblivious
03-12-2012, 04:02 PM
Apparently the new Unreal 4 engine made this look like child's play:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSXyztq_0uM
nodoze
03-12-2012, 11:26 PM
looks good but you can hide alot in action. some of the rendering on the blowtorch being used right away was sketchy but overall pretty good
Intropy
03-13-2012, 01:56 AM
The demo isn't really made to impress in the way you guys expect. If I'm developing an adult title for the console, my biggest concern is how I can quickly go from motion-captured samples of my live models to convincing game models that can be interactively rendered in real-time on the console hardware. The uncanny valley is a huge problem with adult games. Supposedly what quantic dream has done is make an engine that can do this more efficiently than any on the market, and this is their demo.
If I were a game developer I would be all over this stuff. Adult gaming on the console is such an untapped market, it's almost unbelievable.
The demo isn't really made to impress in the way you guys expect. If I'm developing an adult title for the console, my biggest concern is how I can quickly go from motion-captured samples of my live models to convincing game models that can be interactively rendered in real-time on the console hardware. The uncanny valley is a huge problem with adult games. Supposedly what quantic dream has done is make an engine that can do this more efficiently than any on the market, and this is their demo.
If I were a game developer I would be all over this stuff. Adult gaming on the console is such an untapped market, it's almost unbelievable.
this is a red-herring argument. pc's don't have these issues. what you are expressing here is the desire by developers to add just enough polish to keep gamers acceptably consuming their gilded, console-based turds--while the graphic powerhouses of PC's sit idly by begging for something that will actually tax the current high-end hardware.
p.s.
unreal FTMFW.
Intropy
03-13-2012, 03:56 AM
this is a red-herring argument. pc's don't have these issues. what you are expressing here is the desire by developers to add just enough polish to keep gamers acceptably consuming their gilded, console-based turds--while the graphic powerhouses of PC's sit idly by begging for something that will actually tax the current high-end hardware.
p.s.
unreal FTMFW.
Who are you talking to? You've quoted me, but you don't seem to be talking to me. I didn't say one word about PC vs console gaming, and I didn't make any "argument", other than to point out what I think is the point of this demo.
If you have some beef with console gaming fine, but don't go putting words in my mouth.
DocWalt
03-13-2012, 10:54 AM
So you're saying they made a game engine that goes from scripted animation to unscripted animation more quickly than anything else out there but only showed scripted animation. I fail to see the point.
Who are you talking to? You've quoted me, but you don't seem to be talking to me. I didn't say one word about PC vs console gaming, and I didn't make any "argument", other than to point out what I think is the point of this demo.
If you have some beef with console gaming fine, but don't go putting words in my mouth.
reread what i posted. you were making a point about the transition between pre-rendered and fly-rendered being a difficult one for consoles. this isn't really a problem for PC's. thus this technology "demo" doesn't impress me. i expect that as technology progresses that less demanding games will be increasingly playable on low-end hardware--consoles included.
what this shows is that developers are only pushing the envelope insofar as much as it involves dressing up games to appear "improved" on underperforming hardware. true revolutionary breakthroughs (eg. each new iteration of the unreal engine) are dying out. each and every one of the texture and lighting effects used in this demo would be substantially more impressive if coupled with an unprecedented polygon count.
Intropy
03-14-2012, 07:05 PM
So you're saying they made a game engine that goes from scripted animation to unscripted animation more quickly than anything else out there but only showed scripted animation. I fail to see the point.
Well they have to show something, otherwise it's not much of a press release. What would you want them to show?
reread what i posted. you were making a point about the transition between pre-rendered and fly-rendered being a difficult one for consoles. this isn't really a problem for PC's. thus this technology "demo" doesn't impress me. i expect that as technology progresses that less demanding games will be increasingly playable on low-end hardware--consoles included.
what this shows is that developers are only pushing the envelope insofar as much as it involves dressing up games to appear "improved" on underperforming hardware. true revolutionary breakthroughs (eg. each new iteration of the unreal engine) are dying out. each and every one of the texture and lighting effects used in this demo would be substantially more impressive if coupled with an unprecedented polygon count.
No, you have something against consoles and are reading this "console vs PC" schtick into everything. PCs are better so you're not impressed. I get it.
Clearly we have nothing to learn from console development; I guess these guys should just go home. It's not like these techniques could be later applied to a different platform.
Intropy
03-14-2012, 07:32 PM
Also, I'm taking for granted that you've actually read or watched the developer interviews where they talk about how they made this. You have, haven't you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCrKxPz-2Vk&feature=player_embedded
nodoze
03-14-2012, 09:16 PM
console development is if anything harder because they are trying to make things better with equipment that was put out in 2005, seven years later and they graphics and how they figured things out are better
console development is if anything harder because they are trying to make things better with equipment that was put out in 2005, seven years later and they graphics and how they figured things out are better
console development should be a trickle-down from high-end pc development. innovative car features rarely debut on a sub-compact pos; they usually first appear on high-end luxury cars--for the same reason.
by pushing development on the high-end first, innovation and progress move forward at a greater rate of speed. when the focus is put on trying to innovate with lackluster hardware--creativity will suffer. none of the technology available in the PS3 would be here or viable if pc's hadn't gone there first--3 years prior to its release.
terrets
03-15-2012, 04:43 AM
That why BF3 is better? :p
nodoze
03-15-2012, 02:43 PM
yes but on the same note alot of developers are backing off on pc development and instead porting the console version to the pc and spicing it up then. the console market far overshadows pc game market anymore . back in the late nineties early 2000's it was the opposite. also one of the worlds fastest super computers is a bunch of ps3's hooked together.
yes but on the same note alot of developers are backing off on pc development and instead porting the console version to the pc and spicing it up then. the console market far overshadows pc game market anymore . back in the late nineties early 2000's it was the opposite. also one of the worlds fastest super computers is a bunch of ps3's hooked together.
i'm well aware that we're getting watered-down shite that's the developer equivalent of a gilded-turd...just because the developers are chasing the almighty buck--rather than chasing innovation. my beef is with the central crop of gamers by whose purchases this practice has become sanctioned as acceptable. i absolutely REFUSE to purchase skyrim for PC--as i've already seen what bethesda does to PC games (read: no product debugging whatsoever).
furthermore, if you string together enough consoles of ANY type, you can make a supercomputer. i'm not impressed by that feat--not to mention that whatever is left of said supercomputer is slowly dying. only the original 60gb models are viable, and without linux support, there are no replacements available when old ones begin to fail. the same type of thing was done with PS2 previously. i expect it will be attempted with the next generation of consoles as well. nothing "earth shattering" here. console hardware is almost always sold for a substantial loss to the manufacturer. the fact that a supercomputer can be assembled for so cheap is not a "pro-console" argument--it's simply a symptom of the business model.
expect to see more and more gaming stagnation in the coming years. marginal improvements everywhere. the entire industry will begin to resemble the madden franchise. the less developers cater to PC gamers, the less people will spend $$$ on high-end PC hardware. this will in turn prolong the initial high costs involved with higher-end hardware--which only begin to dip as they become more widely adopted (as such is the case for any technology). as these costs stay higher, console costs will in turn go higher (or will stay the same while software rates are hiked--manufacturers have to make a buck somewhere). it will become virtually impossible for next-generation consoles to sport improved graphic capabilities unless they also increase the MSRP. hence my prediction is that future consoles will either have entirely stagnated hardware (at least relative to the historical improvements from past generations), or the cost will skyrocket to the point at which PC gaming begins to become an attractive option to a greater cross-section of the mainstream market.
ultimately, the very argument leveled against the wii as to it's most significant "drawback" will in time be a valid accusation against every console in the market--bar none. console gamers have only themselves to blame.
nodoze
03-15-2012, 08:08 PM
youre right on almost all that the only thing that will keep the development goign though is the fact they are developign better and better graphics cars and hardware for other reasons than pc gaming. movie production, graphic design ect. ect. the pc gaming industry isnt the only reason hardware improvments are happening.
Zaroth
03-15-2012, 08:24 PM
That why BF3 is better? :p
It is one of the many reasons BF3 is a great game.
ictponder
03-15-2012, 10:32 PM
I still don't understand the hate for consoles. I have a really badass computer atm and I still "enjoy" gaming more on my 360, mostly because my make believe friends and gamerscore lol
The advantages of making games for a console aren't simply because they are selling more. A console is designed to do exactly one thing, and all the hardware contained within has the same exact architecture. Therefore you will always get higher performance from a console over a PC using equivalent hardware because the PC has never been a dedicated gaming machine.
DocWalt
03-15-2012, 10:33 PM
I don't understand the hate either, but I still don't get the console fanboys.
youre right on almost all that the only thing that will keep the development goign though is the fact they are developign better and better graphics cars and hardware for other reasons than pc gaming. movie production, graphic design ect. ect. the pc gaming industry isnt the only reason hardware improvments are happening.
if you've ever tried running games on a quadro, you'd know that it's not really designed for that purpose. graphic design and software rendering are still very much two different ballgames. improvements in one do not translate clearly to the other. additionally, you're hedging your bets that consumer demand for movies/etc will continue to drive hardware improvements substantially enough that it will continue to benefit gaming hardware. what happens if consumers decide to accept "good enough" for movies/etc--just as they appear to have for gaming?
I still don't understand the hate for consoles. I have a really badass computer atm and I still "enjoy" gaming more on my 360, mostly because my make believe friends and gamerscore lol
The advantages of making games for a console aren't simply because they are selling more. A console is designed to do exactly one thing, and all the hardware contained within has the same exact architecture. Therefore you will always get higher performance from a console over a PC using equivalent hardware because the PC has never been a dedicated gaming machine.
i don't hate consles. i hate console FANBOYS--the people who have made the arbitrary determination that pc gaming is dead (or stupid, etc). there is a place for BOTH. some types of games do not have all the bells and whistles, and it's about the game design, innovation and draw that makes it a "must buy" (i.e. virtually everything with the miyamoto stamp). i would hardly consider mario games to be most enjoyable on a PC.
on the other hand, FPS's are (imho) the clear-cut province of PC's. superior rendering capability, higher available display resolutions, far superior player controls, virtually endless potential for end-user modifications. in years past, i "might" have bought the argument about how developing games for PC was a monumental task--as the graphics hardware market was significantly more fragmented. today, however, there are only 2 key players in the PC graphics market; and both largely use vertically integrated drivers (read: same drivers for all cards from all generations). [i do NOT count onboard graphics chips ala intel].
now of course in those same "years past" this made porting to consoles a bit tricker because the raw hardware was vastly different in many cases. today, however, console GPU's are literally modified clones of PC GPU's. translating between PC and consoles (in either direction) isn't cosmic--provided, of course, the console sticks with a traditional architecture (ala xbox, not ps3). that's why i don't buy the "harder to develop for PC arguments". if you develop FOR pc (AND properly debug), porting to a console is a fairly straightforward process--one that i maintain is significantly easier than developing for console and attempting to port--bug free--to PC. (bugginess of course being a factor of PC's having much more variables in configuration).
my extreme distaste for much of console gaming is simply due to gamer spending sanctioning the industry trend towards developing for the lowest common denominator--and trying to "upscale" it for everything else--rather than developing for the most capable machine & watering/scaling down for the less capable ones. again though, this is purely limited to arenas where logically, PC's should by rights have first dibbs on gaming development--by virtue of their inherent superiority to consoles (in those areas relevant to the genre). there is no difficulty in down-scaling for consoles. the difficulty is in developers being lazy shills.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.