1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Graphics are stagnant.

Discussion in 'Games, Gaming & Game-demos' started by SerotoNiN, Jun 12, 2019.

  1. SerotoNiN

    SerotoNiN Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,246
    Likes Received:
    883
    GPU:
    EVGA RTX 2080
    The brief gameplay video of Halo Infinite ...really not gameplay, just...you got to see through master chiefs eyes, it was "in-engine", while only a few seconds...I saw this and that it was on the next console still over a year away and thought, "that's nothing I don't already see with an Xbox One X", the lacking hair effects were very odd to me, as I read an article claiming next gen would have more realistic hair.

    Now, it's early in the game, but, for a first showing, very underwhelming. I hope it gets better as development continues.

    And to the Guru who said imagination and story are also lacking these days, I agree. I was just in the E3 thread a few days ago and complained everything was a sequel or a HD remake of an old game. I assume there's too much financial risk with new IP's but damn, they better figure it out. Can't keep on this track forever and think sales will remain well.
     
  2. Yxskaft

    Yxskaft Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,273
    Likes Received:
    56
    GPU:
    GTX Titan Sli
    Lol at blaming consoles. If today's six year old consoles weren't the baseline, the studios would target six year old Intel IGPs instead. Consoles are what have forced engines to use eight threads and DX11 engines.
    Just look at the few PC exclusives we have, what games are more "high end" than AC Odyssey or Hitman 2 or Deus EX MD?

    Blizzard, a mainly PC centric studio, supports the HD 4800 series for Overwatch, a 2016 year release. Back during last-gen, CDPR released The Witcher 2 with DX9 support only, despite requiring an 8800GT (DX10 hw) to run. Blizzard also released SC2 and Diablo 3 with DX9 support only.
    The Total War series have also always suffered from bad multicore support.

    You can bet on that any game that's being released from now on, if it's extra ambitious with its visuals, it's because the studios are experimenting in order to be ready for the PS5.


    Except it didn't. It didn't scale above two cores and its DX10 support was a checkbox feature. The reason Crysis 1 still can't run at 144 FPS is because its too CPU limited, the optimal would have been if CPUs started pushing 10+ Ghz, instead clock speeds remained at 3-4 Ghz and got around 10% better single threaded performance each year.

    To Crytek's defense, Crysis 1 were extremely ambitious for 2007, and few other games at the time did utilize quad cores and DX10 hardware. But it's a poor example to use when talking about utilizing PC hardware to its full potential because it absolutely did not.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2019
  3. SerotoNiN

    SerotoNiN Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,246
    Likes Received:
    883
    GPU:
    EVGA RTX 2080
    I disagree. In the snes, psone, xbox/ps2 era, consoles did not dictate graphical limitations on PC. PC's were leaps and bounds ahead. Almost a full console generation ahead in terms of graphics. PS2 was the go to system for home console when FarCry, Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 were released. All dx9 titles that were HUGE differences to anything consoles could do. So I don't see how one can favor consoles for power. You sort of contradicted yourself. "
    You can bet on that any game that's being released from now on, if it's extra ambitious with its visuals, it's because the studios are experimenting in order to be ready for the PS5." Yeah, that's our point. Consoles are the focus. Not PC's where all this extra power lies. Onboard garbage gpu's...even dedicated cards like the MX440 existed back in the day, so claiming games would be directed to onboard graphics seems like an odd opinion to have. But to each his own.

    I think for the last decade, post-Crysis, PC was the bastard child of gaming because of the stigma given to it through "piracy". When in reality, developers were just lazy, sending broken ports and lacking any triple A exclusives to the platform. Now piracy is less of an excuse because it's being cut down with all these different delivery methods and PC STILL remains the bastard child of gaming. Even when it's been proven over the last three years PC brings in more money than consoles for most developers.

    Reading gamers make excuses for the lack of PC support/exclusives is confusing to me. Consoles are fine. But they limit what the PC can do. That's all there is to it. And it's confusing as to why when it's being proven piracy isn't the issue, money is there to be made on the platform, etc. So essentially, what I'm reading is, gamer's are expected to hand over $1,000 for a gpu, but completely be understanding to the fact that adding any extra effort to a PC version costs the developer too much money....
     
    TR2N likes this.
  4. cerebus23

    cerebus23 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,725
    Likes Received:
    411
    GPU:
    evga 8800gts
    yea file sizes are getting ridicilous also the more hd you get.and game sizes are already ballooning to 100 gig nm 8k video sizes and streaming that stuff. average ssd is what 500 gig now days they getting in the 1tb rage a bit more now and prices are getting a tad more reasonable there, but the sizes of stuff is getting silly. ps5 and xbone 720 being ssd based are going to run out of space quickly. your going to shuffling games around to play and reinstalling stuff a ton i guess.

    toss in any data caps on your plan at 80 to 100 gig per title over the course of a month.

    fiber optic lines which would be probably the ideal for this kinda stuff are still the exception not the norm across much of the usa despite plenty of ISPs taking tax breaks and stuff to do just that.
     

  5. SerotoNiN

    SerotoNiN Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,246
    Likes Received:
    883
    GPU:
    EVGA RTX 2080
    I still purchase discs for most console gaming. I downloaded a few digital purchases and learned the hard way.

    1.) Data caps. Here in the U.S at least, they're everywhere. And digital downloads kill my cap, since I'm a "cord cutter" that streams all the shows the household watches.

    2.) I tend to get bored with some purchases or just not like the game. Having the physical copy means I can sell it back to a shop or ebay or here, etc and at least make some money back, as opposed to downloading a game digitally and it just sit there unplayed.
     
    cerebus23 likes this.
  6. Cronik

    Cronik Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,165
    Likes Received:
    59
    GPU:
    Nvidia GTX 1080
    >graphics are stagnant

    Naaaah really? The games with the best graphics today are console games that are ported to PC. Nobody is truly pushing graphics on PC except for the people who are making Star Citizen. But I'm expecting that game to have a console release at this point. Seriously, it has Mark Hamill in it. They're not gonna sell that solely to PC gamers.

    We're never gonna get what happened in the 2000's back. We're never gonna get a Half Life 2, we're never get another Crysis, and we're never get another Doom 3.

    **EDIT**
    I forgot FEAR 1.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2019
  7. Yxskaft

    Yxskaft Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,273
    Likes Received:
    56
    GPU:
    GTX Titan Sli
    The big reason was that back then, it was still about single core systems and yearly big gains in clock speeds, and as far back as the SNES era, the games could still be coded by a few people. Going from Pentium 1 at a few hundred Mhz to Pentium IV 3 Ghz CPUs was easy to take advantage of, taking advantage of 8C/16T systems compared to 4C/8T systems is not.

    And even for those games you do mention that were considered high-end, you can still argue that they were held back by the low end hardware that they did support. HL2 supported DX7 hardware and DOOM 3 got specific code for the Geforce 4 MX. Both games did also get an Xbox version, although DOOM 3 did indeed have changed levels as well.

    The timeframe when most studios started letting consoles set the bar unsurprisingly coincides with the move from single core to multicore engines.

    Yes, if you want to really push it, you can say that PC gaming could go further if the consoles weren't there. But PC gamers need to realize that studios won't be spending much, if any, resources on high-end graphics/features that barely a few percent of the PC userbase could run, and that if they did that, they'd probably not even cover the development costs.
     
    SerotoNiN likes this.
  8. slick3

    slick3 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,732
    Likes Received:
    146
    GPU:
    ROG STRIX GTX 1070
    True. However when speaking of an evolution in graphics, the emphasis is placed on the GPU and not so much on the CPU. Crysis was, and is, an unoptimized mess but that's beyond the point. Once Crysis had set the benchmark; it was up to other games to try and live up to its standard, graphics wise. Plus there is also a reason why the game was used to benchmarks for years and years after its release; irregardless of its bad optimization, it stressed the heck out of any GPUs for years to come.
     
  9. Redemption80

    Redemption80 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    18,300
    Likes Received:
    174
    GPU:
    GALAX 970/ASUS 970
    Does the PC hardware even exist to push graphics any further?
    I doubt there are many high end gamers who are after a cinematic 1080/30 experience.

    The norm now is 1440/120, how long before it's 2160/240.
     
  10. Seaclean

    Seaclean Master Guru

    Messages:
    383
    Likes Received:
    48
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 980 4GB Gaming
    It's definitely diminishing returns ever since the seventh generation of consoles (PS3, Xbox360, Wii/Wii U).. I'm guessing the next huge revolution (like 2D to 3D was) is going to be about virtual or holographic gaming but that's some time off. Maybe in 20-30 years or so. Until then it's all about incorporating ray-tracing into mainstream AAA titles. Seeing what it does to Quake II only makes me dream of modern titles with fully implemented path-traced lighting, reflections, shadows etc.
     
    TR2N and SerotoNiN like this.

  11. MikeG

    MikeG Master Guru

    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    8
    GPU:
    Nvidia RTX 2080 Ti
    I wonder if user mods are on the verge of a breakthrough in visual atmosphere for any high end pc games that allow mods. Or maybe mods are limited by the graphics engine of the original games.
     
  12. Redemption80

    Redemption80 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    18,300
    Likes Received:
    174
    GPU:
    GALAX 970/ASUS 970
    Mods will be limited by PC hardware as well.

    We all know that many PC gamers can have a spoilt child mentality, release a high end mod for free then await the criticism for lack of optimisation.
     
  13. ramthegamer

    ramthegamer Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,479
    Likes Received:
    137
    GPU:
    Gigabyte GTX 970
    crysis 3 was dx 11
     
  14. Damien_Azreal

    Damien_Azreal Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,817
    Likes Received:
    1,006
    GPU:
    Gigabyte 1070 Ti
    Already said that.
    But... at this point... nobody cared.
     
  15. XenthorX

    XenthorX Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,572
    Likes Received:
    544
    GPU:
    EVGA XCUltra 2080Ti
    Regarding Cyberpunk 2077, got to keep in mind that large open world with day/night cycle are the hardest game graphically. We're always back to this global illumination issue.
    Massive Entetertainement did an awesome talk about how they handle it in The Division 2, i hope CDPR spent at least has much time figuring it out now that they have a sick verticality to their world.
     

  16. Cronik

    Cronik Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,165
    Likes Received:
    59
    GPU:
    Nvidia GTX 1080
    P2P matchmaking, less mod support, crap loads of 2D platformers and RPG's, scam tier indie games(World War 3), and no exclusive games that makes actual use of high-end hardware.

    Yep, PC gaming is better then ever.

    I don't even know why I bought a GTX 1080 with the lack of real big budget PC games.

    I hardly buy console games. Anthem, assassin's Creed, The Division, rainbow six seige, Destiny 2 etc. are all console games.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2019
  17. Carfax

    Carfax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,401
    Likes Received:
    223
    GPU:
    NVidia Titan Xp
    The reason why graphics are stagnant is because:

    1) Most developers are not targeting high end PC hardware, and if they did, it would be quite foolish of them as only a fairly small percentage of PC gamers have enthusiast level hardware.

    2) Diminishing returns. Increasing precision and accuracy makes sense only up until a certain point to where the human eye cannot resolve any further improvements in quality, but the performance hit is huge!

    3) Truly high end graphical features like ray tracing are too computationally expensive to be used liberally in any game for the near future.

    Take a look at Death Stranding. The skin and eye shaders are practically photorealistic. There is probably still room for improvement, but not much if I had to wager. Hair effects are probably going to be the next big graphical leap, when it comes to rendering humanoids at least.

    [​IMG]

    There is much more room for rapid improvement in other aspects of gaming, like animations, A.I and physics which were neglected in favor of graphics for current gen. I expect that this will change with the next generation of consoles, which will have far more powerful CPUs.
     
  18. RealNC

    RealNC Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,941
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX 980 Ti FTW
    I stopped caring about graphics some years time ago. I sometimes play 10 or 15 year old games that I didn't get around to play back then. The graphics don't bother me at all now.
     
  19. Clawedge

    Clawedge Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,432
    Likes Received:
    624
    GPU:
    Radeon 570
    @Carfax is spot on. Physics and ai will be much appreciated. Graphics plateaued some 5 years ago.

    I'll take graphics from back then with destructible environments and good ai anytime.
     
    TR2N likes this.
  20. Redemption80

    Redemption80 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    18,300
    Likes Received:
    174
    GPU:
    GALAX 970/ASUS 970
    That's pretty much how i see it as well.

    Could you imagine the backlash if a 2080ti could only get 1080/60 or even worse 1080/30.

    The reality is that most PC gamers don't want games that push PC hardware, it's an ego killer when you spend thousands on a PC and have to turn settings down.

    I keep mentioning it, but high resolutions and framerates are one of the main reasons too. We just don't have the hardware to push 2160/60 or 1440/144 and high end visual features.

    We might soon, but then there will be screens that do 2160/144 or 4320/60........
     

Share This Page