Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Jun 30, 2015.
It is real time it is a really small area too so it can be done real time.
looks like low fps when i see the waves, so should be real time...
this effect doesn't last much, after I see a more realistic render this one will look like a cartoon to me, I don't think we'll ever have "enough" graphics
Hmm,all good for quality yet only pre-rendered scenes..nothing in action really,still amazing however I think it's time to start show us something in action.
About the comment that rock texture looks bad...are you serious ? You've seen something better in a game 'till now ?
(though Ryse has very clean textures,even for rocks,still that video's textures are better ofc)
Me like this, too:
Blur Studio does awesome work. Pretty cool to see them doing a trailer for an Indie dev, in the engine the game is being built on. I guess we'll see if Adam Orth can redeem himself for his Xbox One DRM comments.
Great. Shame,there s no any animal to see ....yust rocks...
Aye, lest we not forget Blir studios did the space scenes for Avatar, remember that movie?
Don't think UE4 supports SLI. It didnt a few months ago, havent heard they added support.
It kinda does, but only under certain rendering setups. The deferred rendering process in UE uses data from previous frames to generate new ones. It isn't possible to do this in AFR. That being said, from what I've read on the forums, they are implementing their own versions of multi-GPU in the DX12 builds. I don't think Epic is going to be officially supporting it, but a dev will be able to leverage it to do "SLI" in a way.
Looks more like youtube compression to me. It's incredible how much their algorithm butchers textures. Whenever I want to see a game trailer or demo gameplay I always go to gamersyde and download the HQ file there and it's like comparing old school TV to HD.
I understand that it takes massive storage and bandwidth to serve all the videos youtube has, but they get huge amounts of taxpayer dollars through their shady dealings with the US Government and every now and then Youtube should do something nice for those of us who the corrupt politicians get their money from.
Once everyone agrees on which version of H265 is the right one, perhaps this will change and we'll see decent compression on YouTube.
Think they are using their own, incorporating VP9 and HTML5 to save $ from Adobe - I srsly don't mind someone correcting me on this...from memory the current compression uses H264/4:2:0 @ 8mbit @ 1080p, but upps this to 15 or 11 mbit for videos uploaded and watched @ 1440P.
I've tested this by uploading the same uncompressed/RAW file @ 1080P and 1440P, and can see quite clearly the artefacts of compression for the 1080P file, but not the 1440P, even though the 1440P is just upscaled from 1080P.
If a company wants to push a 1080P file onto YouTube, I believe their best choice is to upscale the file to 1440P/30 (not 60) and let YouTube give it more juice.
That is, until they upgrade their compression to H265/4:4:4 and then we can all rejoice.