Epic Games to show off Unreal Engine 5 engine today

It doesn't seem to you it's a bit crazy to speak about things like "Image quality" and "looking good" in absolute terms when in fact these things are
1) a moving target
2) thoroughly subjective
?

Also, when not seeing eye to eye with a multi-billion company, my instinct is to 2nd guess my reasoning. Not to conclude they "they're just shooting themselves in the foot"
Again YMMV

 

Nanite isnt about textures. It's about storing geometric assets in maps without the need to break down high quality 'master' meshes to game specific low resolution versions with normal maps and manual detail levels (LODs).
For a brief understanding here's this video:
Making low rez version meshes, baking maps etc are very work intensive and boring processes so if epic can really make this happen it will save a ton of time and money for devs to make better stuff.
Also, making low resolution versions in itself is a form of compression as well, without it they still need to figure out how to compress all that data, otherwise we're gonna download crazy huge, TB+ sized games.

Here's a more thorough analysis from last year:
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...eal-engine-5-playstation-5-tech-demo-analysis

 

Does it seem a bit crazy to you quoting me against things I never said or implied? Kind of ironic, since you're literally moving the target.
I never mentioned "image quality", and I spoke of "looking good" in a subjective manner. Being fooled into what is or isn't reality is an absolute term: you're either convinced something looks real or you don't.
Movies that pull off CGI where you don't know it's CGI accomplish their realism in large part because of raytracing.

Riiiiiight... because multi-billion dollar companies are totally infallible and never lose touch with their audiences...
You have all the proof you need I'm right about this just by reading further up this thread. People are questioning the value of realtime RT and have been for a while. @heffeque's opinion isn't some odd exception. Therefore, these companies are in fact making a mistake. I completely understand why so many people don't get it: most implementations of RT don't yield a noteworthy visual improvement (if any improvement at all) and yet it's very computationally expensive. There are amazing benefits to it, but we're not seeing examples to justify it. Using RT for shiny surfaces and shadows when classical rasterization could do it much more cheaply is just reinventing the wheel but with more steps and resources, when instead we could be inventing a new form of flight.

 

demo download for try and burn my pc? or is only video?

 

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/i...urt-fight-theres-one-clear-winner-11622030554

 

There's that misleading marketing notion that it's suddenly 'going to look like a rendered movie'. Offline rendering and realtime graphics are completely different animals although both are just smoke and mirrors. It's not just the lighting transport that makes a fully pathtraced image look good compared to real-time graphics. It's rasterization vs full pathtracing, a real time optimized approach vs optimized precision, plus the amount of data throughput per frame available.
It's not that they arent willing to do proper raytracing, it's that proper pathtracing at 4K 60fps would require multiple orders of magnitude more computation and data transfer than what's possible in the current raster-based manifestation of real-time raytracing effects on current gen hardware. While a game runs at 30 or 60 or whatever fps with the requirement of both static and dynamic objects needed to be fitting in the VRAM, a current full screen path-traced VFX shot (a single cut) from a similarly hyped-up movie require dozens of hours of computation on a hundred cpu threads per a single frame and shitton of data (think hundreds of gigabytes of data for textures and meshes, plus when needed, hundreds of gigabytes for baked effects simulations life water, fire and smoke, physics sims like destruction and such). Plus the character animations are melticulously pushed to look absolutely amazing. Also in VFX, they usually do not render full frames, instead they are rendering in passes and composite the rendered passes together, so to have more control on the final look and be able to use 2D trickery to boost image quality and content to the maximum that's feasible.

Anyhow, image rendering is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to desired (or marketed, or both) full immersive photorealism. Imagine a photorealistic environment where your physics simulations, collision detetion etc. are still low res (because that would also require a lot of computation and data storage and throughput), making the usual funky realtime physics bugs. Or a photorealistic static environment where water acts funky. Etc the list goes on. It's just completely different to do stuff in a realtime environment vs doing everything following a strict script within a given camera.

 

impressive when do we get games using this?

As much as i dont like EPIC Unreal and Unreal Engine are still great

 

Of course, but raytracing is the key ingredient missing. It still has a long way to go but at least the foot is in the door.

Actually I wasn't suggesting they go to that extent. I was referring to some of the more subtle effects that classical rasterizing can't really do, like the secondary illumination or refraction. That makes a big difference but isn't too terribly computationally expensive. Oddly enough, Minecraft is one of the best examples how current RT technology should be used.

Haha well... that was PhysX, and that died because Nvidia vendor-locked it.

 

Temporal Super Resolution

Comparison 4k vs 1080p (resolution scale 50%) 18 vs 43fps


edit: You know what is funny... UE5 Lumen global illumination looks way natural than Metro exodıs RTX implementation. Temporal Super Resolution also will work on all GPUs, consoles. Remember Mr.Jensen's Metro Exodus RTX introduction? "Everythings look darker, way more darker, pitch black, no global illumination, this is raytracing" . Now Metro Exodus have suddenly added RTX Global illumination... UE5 will be the main focus of most AAA titles in the near future, also smaller developers. Get ready for 4000/5000 series GPUs special features... No wonder AMD did not rush raytracing. Amd knew these things, and other company milked people really good, and will milk more.

 

Technical documentation. Lots of limitations ....
Support HW RT GI for all types of geometry via the low poly proxies is included. They also claim that HW RT GI is a better quality solution overall. Demo is fine but nothing to call home about - the original demo was much better, sharper and more detailed. Still no vegetation ...
Lumen Technical Details | Unreal Engine Documentation

 

Downloading. Too bad it is not yet possible to start producing.

 

Albeit it is mentioned that this isnt an intended optimized end use-case,
instead running only in the editor,
the Valley of the Ancient demo size is 100GB and

Minimum System Specs (50% Screen Percentage)
12-core CPU at 3.4 GHz
32 GB of system RAM
GeForce GTX 1080 / AMD RX Vega 64

Recommended System Specs (100% Screen Percentage)
12-core CPU at 3.4 GHz
64 GB of system RAM
GeForce RTX 2080 / AMD Radeon 5700 XT or higher

 

hmm 32gb min and 64 GB Recommended? That at kind rules out Consoles for this quality unless they do some magic optimising

Still intrested to see where this goes

 

What are you talking about? Metro Exodus shipped with RT Global Illumination...

https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/global-illumination-in-metro-exodus/

It was just improved on in the latest build.

From @pharma's link:

So much for:

 

I wonder how many people get this wrong

 

Yeah. TSR has nothing to do with AMD and according to Andrew Lauritzen (Epic Games)

 

I didn't expect UE5 to be released as Early Access today. I thought that there was going to be a video about UE5's new features.

 

Alright so I downloaded the 200TB of data to run that demo only to realize I have absolutely no idea how any of this works. And looking up instructions on how to simply do that results in squat.

 

hah I would saw 200TB and been like pass dont even have 2 tb drive in my pc