It will be BS a plenty for all parties. Typical PR, that is to be expected.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Next-gen PS5 and next Xbox speculation launch thread - MY ANACONDA DON'T WANT NONE
- Thread starter Phoenix Splash
- Start date
- Status
It will be BS a plenty for all parties. Typical PR, that is to be expected.
Digital Foundry initially thought Anthem on Pro was native. Just think about that.
The difference between the native 4K XBX game and CB 4K PS4Pro game was so small they couldn't initially tell any difference. Except the PS4Pro version ran better on hardware a third less powerful.
If Digital Foundry can barely tell any difference you can't really argue that average joe at a normal viewing distance, in normal viewing conditions and playing a moving game is going to be able to discern any meaningful difference. They will notice that the CB games both look and run significantly better though.
This is why CB rendering is smart. Just like filling your RAM with compressed, but decent bitrate, MP3 rather than lossless audio is smart. Yes there is a technical better quality with native 4K and losses audio. That better quality isn't worth the resources used to achieve it when those resources can be used in other ways which generate a much better overall end product.
That's because the general public don't pick an arbitrary aspect of visual fidelity and obsessively fetishise it as the be-all and end-all when it comes to graphics.
They look at how good a game looks, and then decide that better looking games look better. Revolutionary I know. They don't decide a better looking game is "cheating" because they use reconstruction techniques to achieve the 4K image.
But as other posters have pointed out it actually won't matter.
If cb4K PS5 games are way better looking than native 4K Xbox Two games nobody will care about the fact the PS5 games are "cheating".
And if the two consoles are close on specs then the CB games will look and/or run miles better than the native games.
All Sony has to do is simply show off games that look drastically better than MS games. Job done.
Basically what bcatwilly said. :D
It's how Lockhart can still be a "4K machine" without having the same GPU TF as the Xbox One X. It's also why I think Anaconda will have more power in regards to things like raytracing performance (or even the amount of rays a developer can use) as it will have the power for native 4K image...all of which are a guess, but that's how it comes off to me.
What I will say in regards to cbr vs. this technique is depending on how it is implemented (aka making devs create a model for each of their games...which I think would be necessary or somehow make an automated process of that...I don't have enough information about its implementation to make a reasonable prediction) is that it would require less work on the developer because all you need is a model (i'm dumbing that down) vs. a specific rendering pipeline for cbr. So basically you will use the same rendering technique that one did for Anaconda to achieve 4K (if that's what the developer wants to do) and then create a model for Lockhart but have the game render at 1080p natively and then use the super resolution technique to get a 4K image. You wouldn't need to do cbr on Lockhart to achieve 4K (if that was even an option) and then a different pipeline for "native 4K' for Anaconda. It would be a simpler thing to do. I would assume devs that are also targeting PCs would benefit from this as well since you would use the same model (and DirectML code) that you use on Lockhart for PC as an option (like how DLSS is an option in games now).
Last edited:
Desperation <> need here. I do not know any other fanbase/community that wants all stuff be leaked beforehand the official announcement and then picks it apart because they over hyped it itself or blame the platform holder/publisher for having a boring show/presser just because it leaked before and the info that should have been the high point is already out in the public. Man I would like to see this thread when nothing leaks and we can play the guessing game until announcements.
Problem is CBR is not always the best choice for every game like some people here are insinuating. Yes we'll see great implementations like in Anthem but then we also see how the technique is not a good fit for the pipeline like in RDR2.
I doubt anyone gives a shit about who is cheating or not. Instead most seem to have an issue with the notion that CBR is always the best route when that really is not the case.
No leaks is better for everyone. People go off assumptions (without realizing they can be wrong) too much and then spread misinformation. It's fun to dissect stuff and analyze on the possibilities. But a lot of people here aren't reasonable...
It's not about some console war thing, it's about just informing the consumer and having a consistent message.
I don't see the point in doing 4kcb for first party and then having "4k" as a big marketing piller.
It's just inconsistent and confusing.
Imagine if the X1X did just 4kcb in first party games, there would be an outrage.
(what I'm saying applies to both ms +Sony)
This is likely simply because the tech is new, not because certain games somehow don't work with it. They are simply using a worse solution for their image output (in terms of the CB and/or injection technique and how it works with their implementation of anti-aliasing).
We have concrete examples that show that CB rendering when done well is almost indistinguishable from native 4K even by digital foundry as was the case with Anthem. It's therefore more logical to conclude that games like RDR2 or other games that don't have good CB images are more due to their solution and technology, rather than some inherent flaw in the concept or the potential of CB rendering.
Ultimately the techniques will only get better over time and CB rendering is very new. The fact that solutions used in PS4 first party games like Horizon or third part games like Anthem are so good only means that they will likely be even better next generation. The better the solutions get the less rationale there is behind pushing for native 4K, which is already arguably not worth it.
Developers are completely free to choose - you're right. But the best looking games next generation will use reconstruction techniques to hit their 4K resolution. The PS4Pro can do native 4K, but ultimately the CB4K Horizon looks better than a native 4K version would have, and the same for all the PS4Pro games. It will be no different next gen, on the same hardware CB4K games will look better than native 4K games.
Last edited:
You're under the assumption that consumers care about some number on the back of the box rather than how good a game looks.
The only thing consumers will care about is how good the game looks. Which honestly is the right attitude, because at the end of the day that is what matters.
Given the option between a native 4K Horizon, which looks significantly worse than the game we got, or the CB4K one released most people will choose the latter. Most people don't want worse looking games just so they can tick some arbitrary box in their head.
All Sony, or anyone, has to do to avoid controversy is show amazing looking games and not mention resolution as a selling point. Ultimately if a company shows a "amazing 4k native game" and it looks like garbage compared to another company that released a CB game but doesn't mention resolution, nobody will care. They will want the CB game, and just because it doesn't have some PR nonsense "native 4K" seal on it will not make the game look less amazing compared to the native 4K game.
This is top tier funniest things ever put in these threads lol
Agreed.
How the game looks is far more important to people than resolution. Resolution is something people on forums argue about.
Awesome to hear. I want to hear these 3 buzzzwords:
Physics
AI
Raytracing
Right? It's very similar to criticisms like world being empty or side quests aren't meaningful. All of those are big gamer criticisms and other folks are just like "Assassin's Creed took me to Greece!"
[EDIT] Gah, accidently posted before finished. Gotta Go Fast!
Lots of points, so I'll reply appropriately.
- Which Anthem DF comparison are you referring to? When they got the demo they observed that both the XB1 and PS4PRo were running at least 1800p and exhibiting CB artefacts:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdr1DWvt31c
- There's no doubt that not rendering everything at a full 4K will give you power to use elsewhere, but just switching to CB is one of many solutions.
- You can also use a combination of different resolution buffers to get you performance back without still maintaining a higher level or detail. And there is also dynamic resolution as well.
- I wouldn't be surprised if devs move a VR technique to the big screen and render parts of the view at full res, and other parts at lower resolutions.
- And there is also the fact that different visual effects scale different. Developers will make informed calls based on their internal performance stats. You have no idea what savings are worth to any given technical feature within any moment of any given project.
- Now, regarding compression. It's an easy comparison to make, but it doesn't reflect with what's actually occurring at developers, where extra memory is being used to reduce the levels of compression we used to see on animations and textures over the past few generations.
- The general public is not the general console audience, let alone the first wave of console buyers.
There's lots of great tech out there and it's easy to both get excited about it and be weary of how it can be used to lead projects astray for the sake of having big numbers to win marketing wars. But the industry is full of many, many talented people that know their craft inside out who will make the right calls.
Relax!
just to make sure, this is speculation right?
in any case, i agree, there are much more interesting things to talk about. i am interested in seeing the draw distances possible with such fast SSD's the potential optimization done in ray tracing for consoles, the density of NPCs etc.
Next gen, I want every game in the universe to have screen space contact shadows like Days Gone. God dammit this looks insane.
And your under the assumption that negitive pr does not trickle down to the wider audiences.
Your 4th paragraph is what I'm talking about, because if they don't really talk about 4k, then there is no contradiction.
It will be hard for Microsoft not to offer 4K games on Anaconda seeing what they have accomplished on XB1X.
I cannot see Sony not doing 4K either. I doubt we will be getting 10-12 or>12TFLOP consoles where first party developers are not gunning for games on 4K resolution.
I cannot see Sony not doing 4K either. I doubt we will be getting 10-12 or>12TFLOP consoles where first party developers are not gunning for games on 4K resolution.
every picture i see of days gone absolutely blows me away. the texture work is nuts.
i wonder if this is because of VASG (specialized sony art group) assisting the development, could mean really good news for next gen visuals for the smaller/mid sized studios within sony.
Here is a question to all you native 4K true believers who firmly believe it is better than reconstruction.
How many of you would have preferred native 4K versions of Uncharted, Horizon or God of War be released on the PS4Pro?
Ones that look significantly worse, and I mean significantly worse, but are native 4K?
I don't think anyone would prefer that, even the people who claim native 4K is the holy grail. Yet that is what they are asking for in this thread.
Because that is the trade off here, we aren't comparing the Xbox One X to the Pro. We're talking about the games running on the same hardware. Which means the native ones will look worse compared to the same game made using reconstruction. A lot worse.
The only reason the X gets native 4K games is because the games are designed to run on much worse hardware than the X and it's far easier to bump the resolution than actually improve the effects, assets etc. But again, if you made a game with the X in mind, then a CB game would look far better than a native game.
So I guess the question is, why focus on one aspect of visual quality to the detriment to the overall visual quality of the game? Why want worse looking games, overall, just so you can say you have native 4K?
Nobody is saying Horizon or GoW look bad because they aren't native 4K. But if you released native 4K versions with far worse assets, draw distance and effects then they would certainly look worse than the versions we got.
How many of you would have preferred native 4K versions of Uncharted, Horizon or God of War be released on the PS4Pro?
Ones that look significantly worse, and I mean significantly worse, but are native 4K?
I don't think anyone would prefer that, even the people who claim native 4K is the holy grail. Yet that is what they are asking for in this thread.
Because that is the trade off here, we aren't comparing the Xbox One X to the Pro. We're talking about the games running on the same hardware. Which means the native ones will look worse compared to the same game made using reconstruction. A lot worse.
The only reason the X gets native 4K games is because the games are designed to run on much worse hardware than the X and it's far easier to bump the resolution than actually improve the effects, assets etc. But again, if you made a game with the X in mind, then a CB game would look far better than a native game.
So I guess the question is, why focus on one aspect of visual quality to the detriment to the overall visual quality of the game? Why want worse looking games, overall, just so you can say you have native 4K?
Nobody is saying Horizon or GoW look bad because they aren't native 4K. But if you released native 4K versions with far worse assets, draw distance and effects then they would certainly look worse than the versions we got.
Yeah 4K already marketed this gen enough, key aspect of next gen marketing gonna be ultra fast/no loading times!
What will be?
I wonder if Sony will continue there "for the gamers" and "greatest awaits"
These are better soundbites then Xbox ones.
Give it up, there is no point arguing, these are the same people who would claim that lossless audio is way better than a high quality mp3.
no loading, Ray tracing, density, Physics, AI is my bet.
I've said this before in past threads discussing Sony use of the term "4K" and I see nothing wrong with it as long as they don't use the term native 4K. If we're keeping things in very general terms, how they reach the output resolution shouldn't be that big of a deal.
No, the more likely reason is because rendering pipelines are complex beasts with multiple aspects and techniques running at various resolutions and introducing a reconstruction technique just doesn't always work. Yes reconstruction techniques will continue to evolve and improve but let's not act like these developers are some amateurs that are just learning about reconstruction.
Just like this gen, how good a game looks next gen will largely depend on the quality of the art assets and how well the renderer compliments these assets, not specifically the output method used. Just like anything else we see in these games, there is not a one size fits all solution.
The fact that Cerny cited "8K support" in the first public words of the next gen PlayStation should be concerning somewhat for those who are annoyed with pushes for resolution.
That seems more like covering their bases. There won't be any meaningful 8K content.
I agree about content, but mentioning that and no mention even generally about frame rate was odd. Remember that Sony may try to push 8K TVs, which is one factor that could make them care more about that type of thing next gen IMO even if useless as noted on here for a very long time at least.
I don't think we can speak in such absolutes at this point in time. I'm personally anticipating more than a few games that have the capability of using CB rendering to upscale to 8K for example. Native 8K? Yeah, not sure about that, but CB 8K seems like it could be on the table.
Just so there no confusion I actually think 4kcb is the better for overall visuals.
As I said here, I am just discussing marketing strategy and how either platform could be inconsistent.
As I said here, I am just discussing marketing strategy and how either platform could be inconsistent.
OP
OP
Thanks for pointing this out! She's mentioned the "secret sauce" multiple times now so I wonder if it's some kind of feature we still don't know about by name.
Gimme some secret sauce. We are thirsty
Regarding next-gen visuals, I think I'd take a clean and smooth look but only if the textures look really good. After a generation taken over by TAA and some games looking blurry because of it, I wanna enjoy those next-gen textures and models. I don't really know how clean games using TAA look at 4K compared to 1080p, which is my current resolution. I think there'll be a mix of both at the beginning but SMAA will become the more popular solution.
The Unity tech demo looks good as a teaser for next-gen visuals but I wouldn't really want that amount of noise and CA showing up in every AAA game forward.
This reminds me, I wonder what will happen to upcoming announced third party AAA games like Cyberpunk 2077. Are PS4, Xbox One and PCs with current Ryzen CPUs still the target platform?
supporting 8k could be more related to media or backwards compatible updates.
Thinking of Samsungs AI upscaling on their 8K TVs. I can imagine Sony doing something like that with content that you play from the PS5.
Or, I would love some heavily upscaled PS2 games. Like an 8k Valkyrie Profile 2.
There is a lot of art hidden under the low rez of those games.
Did Cerny really say "8K"? I though it was the journalist who assumed PS5 would obviously supported. It doesn't seem to be a well written article. Even if he said "8K" that's not bad. It could mean PS5 would support 8k streaming, the VVC codec and 8K 2D games.
You must be an economist to think people are perfectly rational
It'll be for other stuff as mentioned above. I don't think it is anything to read into.
That is what I meant. It won't be native and it will probably just be a handful of games.
It's easier to dismiss great looking games by just saying "its not even 4k" or some dumb shit like that.
I can't stress enough how much I hate this 4k nonsense....... Like has anyone seen games like GOW, Horizon, Spiderman, BoTW, U4....etc? They are not 4k!!!
Even if cerny wasnt quoted directly saying it, the fact it is still up there and sony didnt demand changing that information means that this is likely information they want to be known and is true. Then again this does not mean that sony games will run anywhere near that resolution or almost every AAA game for that matter.
8K support has to be there because it is part of HDMI 2.1, and because regular users need to know that their new 8K TV will support the PS5.
As for gaming content, even though that resolution is too big for PS5 hardware, older games and indie games will probably support it. I would very much like to see Resogun on 100" 8K screen. :D
As for gaming content, even though that resolution is too big for PS5 hardware, older games and indie games will probably support it. I would very much like to see Resogun on 100" 8K screen. :D
Thx yes and I even feel that the game is better than god of war which is not an open world .. even if the textures of GOW are beautiful and sometimes of an impressing finness some old screens of gow ^^
All that would have been revealed if the game was rendered in 1080p.
Yeah but 1080p still is too low to cover aliasing edges.
Thx yes and I even feel that the game is better than god of war which is not an open world .. even if the textures of GOW are beautiful and sometimes of an impressing finness some old screens of gow ^^
Thanks for the screens. Yeah I agree while it looks absolutely insane, it lacks the depth of the clutter that Days Gone has.
Last edited:
Yes I agree.
However native 4k is still pretty sweet playing gears 4 and fh4 in 4k is rather enjoyable how prestine the image is.
But I would prefer graphics resources go into polycounty.
No.... you are talking about straight ports where nothing is done t the game other than being at a higher resolution. 1080p with better AA would fix what you are saying, but better AA would mean devs have to patch the game to support it as opposed to just enable the game to be output at higher native rez.
But you are right though if devs aren't going to patch the game then running at a higher re and outputting at a lower one (aka supersampling) serves the same purpose of better AA. But that's just better AA, not that 1080p isn't good enough.
No doubt. There is an obvious difference between 1080p and 4k. And in the case of Gears 4 on the XB1s its not even a locked 1080p rez so the benefits of 4k native will be even more apparent.
That difference is not as apparent though if we are looking at a well-done 4k.cb vs native 4k.
I mean its kinda crazy when you think about it. Do you know that if we took the exact same hardware eg. PS5 with 8CCPU+12TF GPU + 20GB RAM and XB4 with the exact same spec. But one of them ran say cyberpunk at native 4k and the other at 4k.cb, the one running it at 4k.cb would look and perform significantly better than the one running it at native 4k?
Last edited:
This is me with DMC5 and FFXV, I am so fucking done with my PS4 once PS5 arrived lmao.
So, Adored's 2nd Navi video should be out sometime today. Very curious to see what info it'll contain.
Also on another note I saw at least one site pick up on the speculation that Microsoft might not use Navi, but instead might use 7nm Vega since Navi's supposedly positioned lower than Vega on the PC market, and might allow them to take a more brute force approach for more power. I know the subject's been discussed, but AFAIK I don't think any of the leaks we've gotten from the Microsoft side of things so far have included Navi yet, have they? And yeah, I had to wince a bit when the article writer made a mistake claiming the PS4 was less powerful than the Xbone... I'm not taking his speculation as proof of anything since he most likely picked it up in places like Era, but wanted to see if it was worth discussing any further.
I know it's hard to say given we have very little info on Navi, but is there the potential for a Vega based chipset to offer more raw power than Navi?
Also on another note I saw at least one site pick up on the speculation that Microsoft might not use Navi, but instead might use 7nm Vega since Navi's supposedly positioned lower than Vega on the PC market, and might allow them to take a more brute force approach for more power. I know the subject's been discussed, but AFAIK I don't think any of the leaks we've gotten from the Microsoft side of things so far have included Navi yet, have they? And yeah, I had to wince a bit when the article writer made a mistake claiming the PS4 was less powerful than the Xbone... I'm not taking his speculation as proof of anything since he most likely picked it up in places like Era, but wanted to see if it was worth discussing any further.
I know it's hard to say given we have very little info on Navi, but is there the potential for a Vega based chipset to offer more raw power than Navi?
- Status