I used to think the same, but noticed that I'm actually very picky about artstyle, whether it's cutting edge graphics or plain text win simple UI. artstyle that I don't like can be a dealbreaker for me.
@@jackantharia even Asmon reacted to video about that. Art style is what truly matters, that's why even old WoW doesn't look that dated for example cause it's art style is great
@@happyzombie270 Why is everyone slamming 30 fps? I grew up with pixal art games that were probably 2-5 fps. Then tons of games on NES, SNES and N64 would go down to maybe single digit fps when graphics got intense. I don't need all my games to look and run as smooth as butter.
That's not the phrase. It would be that not everybody can make good games, but a good game can come from anywhere "Not anyone can cook, but a good cook can come from anywhere."
I agree, games from before 2000 are sometimes really nice because the art style they went for is so nice that it being a lower resolution, or slightly pixelated can actually be a part of it looking good.
Except physics, AI and model/environment destruction can have a huge impact on gameplay. And guess what... most games and engines suck in that department because they're still focusing on textures, polygons and lighting lol. That's why voxels are the future imo...
Don't necessarily need photorealism, just good performance and art design, and of course good gameplay, preferably good UI. Lot of games lately lacking bits of it all.
Agree. Games made for photorealistic fall off so had after a couple of years graphics wise, while games made with good art style/design can hold up for decades.
@@WarbossGorkI disagree gta5 been out since 2012 nd it still looks good and play good … why tf do you ppl wanna choose .. a good game is a good game … red dead 2 looks amazing and plays amazing with an amazing story lol star field graphics r shit and the game is shit
Just when you thought you had enough storage capacity Unreal Engine updates and tells us we're gonna need 16x the storage space that we literally just got done upgrading to.
Yeah 100%. I feel like game visuals reached a very big "softcap" around the time of Witcher 3. Why should I care about even smoother animations and pixel perfect lighting effects when it only makes the game look slightly better than a 9 year old game? The advancement of game engines is generally good, because it reduces the time developers need to create visuals. They COULD focus more on the gameplay. But the reality is that gameplay is where companies will always cut cost in favor of a bigger marketing budget.
its still useful to know that tech like this is getting easier to produce, makes so that we can believe even less that its not their fault when companies releases a game that looks 2 generations old and it runs like ass, where the same console runs things much better looking even better.
That's the thing with the .4 update its more about the graphics but that's not the case with all updates some with be more performance and some will be more quality
@@M4Dbratthat not true. With this technology like nanite and lumen, a console is capable of running a game at better graphical fidelity than current games whilst also providing better performance. That’s the entire pint of UE5. Why else do you think indie games like Alan wake 2 can look as good as triple AAA games.
I work IT for various game companies. They aren't using 5.4. If someone decides to start making a game TODAY, they might decide to use it, but the existing projects are moving forward with 3rd party character model and environment creation engines that AREN'T built in to UE5 because they've been around for longer. Also, this 5.4 release is TERRIBLE NEWS. Most of these companies are buying assets, but they're still using different methods of capturing humanoid movement. With these default pre-built options, we will continue to see the further sameification of games- they're all going to look the exact same.
I agree with you. We already have this issue of sameish looking AA games. Once you have played one or two UE5 games you cann IMMEDIATELY tell when another game uses the engine, just by looking at the lighting. To me it is already a big drawback when a game uses UE5 because I'm getting tired of those visuals, no matter how good they look screenshotted.
Sad. I hate "sameification" so much. I see it so often in so many various games I watch on Twitch, and it is almost depressing. It is noticeable, and it is bad. This is something that turns me away from buying most games that I would be interested otherwise. At least we got older stuff.
No , this is a showcase for the engine advancement no bad news here. You have a project on using another engine/method that is cool they can still use it, but a new project can start using new technology
UE5 is just an engine... it doesn't dictate what art looks like. Also, high caliber studios do not buy all of their assets off a marketplace lmao. At most they're buying set dressing props or base materials. They outsource, but still dictate art direction and style. Hyper-realistic games will inevitably have similar levels of detail because their visual target is the same, but that has nothing to do with UE5 besides that it raises the floor AND ceiling for what's performant and achievable in realtime. Good art direction will always help differentiate between them e.g. Witcher 4 and Cyberpunk 2 will look worlds apart even if they're both aiming for the same visual fidelity.
This release includes ways to handle existing motion data, not default assets. Yes most game companies won't upgrade their version and especially not change engines after they get out of early development, but these releases exist for projects that start now. It's a reality that commercial engines have never been as attractive as they are now, when the cost of making games is the highest it's ever been if you do everything yourself, and the lowest it's ever been if you're using a commercial engine. The "sameification" of games is mainly seen in the median release. While the proportion is decreasing, there are still more non-samey games released than ever. If you play let's say 50 games a year, you're in your best years. It's a bad tendency to forget the good simply because you drown in the bad. I'm gonna pull number out of my ass as an example, if there were 500 bad games for every 10 good games before, there might be 5000 for every 50 good games now. The percentage decreased, the number increase. You could say there are 10 times more bad games, you could also say there are 5 times more good games. With the freedom and the avalanche of information we have nowadays, there's no reason why you should care about the bad games. They don't cost you money, they don't really cost you that much time, and you're not forced to play them either.
I spent 4 years at game development school and then another 2 years after working on small projects still learning as much as possible and what I came to realize is that the most important aspect of any game is its optimization and how smoothly it runs, no lag, small load times and immediate reactions in game which elevate any game to something that is polished and professional regardless how good the graphics are. It's so strange to me because game optimization is something they almost didn't even talk about at school and instead focused on more generic forms of game design. I'm never impressed anymore with game demos or trailers because I know that what they are showing isn't the game being played in real time, its always a pre rendered video with maxed out settings always trying to impress everyone with how incredible the graphics look, but all i want to see is how well the actual game plays because as a gamer I cannot stand loading screens and lag in games regardless how good the actual game looks. If a game runs badly it can also suggest that store bought assets are being used as their poly counts are very difficult to adjust as the polygons have been fractured resulting in a buggy laggy mess of a game.
What are you even talking about? "polygons have been fractured in store bought assets"? Why would someone do that to a mesh before selling it on the store? Or do you mean, you have to decimate the mesh for performance reasons? With nanite, you don't. I dont get what your point is, especially because the latest releases of unreal engine brought many performance upgrades.
I think the UE tools end up freeing up more time for developers to work on the gameplay instead of creating their own game engine from scratch. Developers are already well-versed in using the UE software so there is no time wasted learning a new set of tools of new custom game engine.
On one side, yes that's what I hope so too. On the other side, this will probably result in MORE games instead of BETTER games. Creating a well balanced game with decent gameplay is time-consuming. Why spend $1m on that if you can pump that million into marketing instead, after creating some cheap but impressive looking animations?
@@samuelgeaney7556 I think it very much depend on the user and its pc, not that i doesnt happens, how much it happens. 73h had 2 crashes (1 of it was because i tryed to enter the space map when a was running the game with the apu graphics instead of gpu without even having the laptop plugged in - was running at 20fps) and 2 bugs happen 1 time each, not possible to enter the plane and being stuck a little below the terrain because of a enemy.
@@seinfeldx I'm on PS5 and no exaggeration I get at least 1 crash to the home screen and at least 1-2 network disconnects EVERY session, considering it's online only it's pretty unacceptable how much the game crashes.
@@samuelgeaney7556 Sure i agree with you, i just have different experience since play it on pc but other people with different pc's might have that same bad experience. While i have ps5, i never liked the idea of being dependent on paying extra internet with ps plus so i bought on pc with 17% discount. Does it normally happen to you at random intervals, more in the beginning or end of a session?
If anything, this makes indie developers the ability to make amazing looking games without breaking the bank. Companies like EA will never change, but small studios that usually focus on a good game to play can now also have amazing AAA graphics as well. So it's mostly a good thing, with a mild bitter taste added. I'd love a BBC as well. It's a great idea. ;)
7:24 Your correct in Unreal 5.5 they are going to introduce Nanite Skeletal Meshes. (For characters with bones.) Which is already in the Unreal 5.5 beta. So far it's a straight 2x performance improvement over normal skeletal meshes. And it's still the early experimental version.
Remember when they first showed off unreal 5 and told us there was this amazing technology that would make it to where great graphics would be so much less taxing on your pc. Still waiting on that.
it is though. Try running a scene with 200mil polygons without nanite and then try with nanite. less taxing does not mean not taxing at all and you can run it on gtx 450. Its more like. this scene you can run on 4090 would need something like 6090 without this technology. as an example
@Toetech0 Nanite impacts performance heavily though, especially compared to manually made LODs. I think the problem with Unreal is that it's trying to be both a movie creation AND a games engine at the same time, so you get all these new fancy toys to play with that aren't suited or aren't the most optimal for real-time computing, and so you end up with those optimization messes we see frequently nowadays with modern UE5 games. Devs are relying too much on Unreal's own tech instead of manually optimizing the games.
@@ahassani but the quality difference is totally different. try making lods with the same level as nanite and keep the same performance. spoiler. you can't. and with how nanite works is at some point we will reach a certain threshold with hardware where the polycount does not matter at all. for example its pointless to go details beyond one pixel. so you could cap polygon size to be at minimum one pixel. this how ever is totally different without nanite or nanite -like methods. it all comes down to how nanite handles the memory usage of the said model.
"All I care about is story and game play, not graphics". For anything other than small studios, these three things are in separate development pipelines. They don't affect each other.
With how rapidly they are pushing out new versions of Unreal engine I suspect they are making a game in the background. Really hoping for the next chapter of 'Unreal'.
Also the game they are probably making in the background is most likely fortnite content. Each chapter comes with major changes like graphics and such. It's probable that they update the engine for their fortnite road map, release the fortnite seasons or chapter with said new content, and then publicly release the unreal update
@@itsdinkd1771 The original Unreal Tournament getting a proper Night Dive-style remaster and returning to GOG would be amazing. But any UT title seems unlikely, given that Epic nuked the franchise from orbit for no good reason.
Been in a game design course for the last 2 years, using UE5.2 both in group projects and my own, would have been nice to have some of this stuff earlier as I did see people struggle on character animation and rigging the most. I'm only 2 mins into the vid so will probably have to edit this comment, however, the chatter that said that you would need a 'nasa computer' is imo completely wrong, im not totally sure about other peoples' experience, but the course I took, we had access to computers with 32gb ram, 4050s in one of the rooms we were in and 3080s in my first year, don't really remember the cpus but they were like 13th gen intel cpus. Don't get me wrong these pcs are great and the 3080s were bought in the middle of the gpu price spike / shortage back in covid iirc, I myself have a 7600x, a 4070 and 32gb of ram, now don't get me wrong what I listed are absolutely great parts but nothing insanely high end that'll literally cost an arm and a leg like a 4090 lol, not to mention that in engine what youre working on runs worse, tho I've personally had 0 issues, anyway yapping over.
@@swiss_Otaku Yeah, iirc the chatters point was using UE5.4 for game development, not saying you need a nasa pc to play games made with it, as if I wasn't clear, the game engine is a LOT more intensive than if you packaged the game and took the time to optimise it / used lower settings etc etc. One more thing I'd like to add is DLSS in my experience is not anywhere close to being at a point where I'd use it when playing, everywhere I have tried / tested a bit with DLSS I would rather just lower my res, not sure how to articulate it but the performance to how the game looks compared to just lowering settings / res is very noticeable / significantly more blurry I guess. I also looked over the march 2024 hardware survey, and just looking at the video card description list, again taking into account that what I listed is to be fair, reasonably overkill even just for developing withing UE5, and experience with worse pcs - had a prebuilt i3 9100f, gtx 1650 that had no ssd and 8gb that i had to upgrade to 16gb and a decent ssd which honsetly reduced stuttering by an insane amount, all of this before i built my new pc about last year around summer, where now to build my exact PC it would be like a solid 20% cheaper than when I built it. Anyway I'm getting off topic, I'd say that according to March's steam hardware survey about a 3rd or half of the people can run this stuff perfectly fine just based on looking at the gpu stats alone, and honestly people think too deep into 2k and 4k gaming, that is BS, just like rtx was and still is imo. Most that look into buying a monitor like that don't understand something as basic as how PPI - pixels per inch - works TL;DR more like a 3rd or half according to steams hardware survey would have very little to no problem running either the packaged game made with UE5 or actually running UE5, my original post wasn't meant to be an arguement on pcs, just my thoughts on UE5 and game design currently and how suggesting that you need a 'nasa pc' to run this stuff is ridiculous and completely false, not to mention people that have old pcs, like me when I had a i3 9100f and 1650, allready couldn't run other highly demanding stuff allready. and yeah I yapped again and I'm too lazy to reread it to check for spelling mistakes etc so have fun with that.
There is not much need to go more "realistic" graphics wise. What we need is the realism and performance for the real time physics simulations. We are still using atleast over 20 years old technology for simulating physics in real time. That means that even the most powerful PCs have trouble simulating real cloth physics in real time. Example: You want wind affect your character hair, items, clothing and the gravity + uplift from the wings to affect the open cockpit plane flight simulation. What we need is that the plane stays in air because of the game engine physics are able to calculate the needed info (drag, resistance, gravity, speed, uplift and so on) while also simulating all possible moving parts in real time (hair, clothing, items, parts of the plane, particles and so on). What we have is fake non simulated flight and very limited physics for the simulation of the character/objects which are pre rendered mostly and still take hard toll on the performance. We need simple and powerful system to add collisions without them causing horrible amounts of data writing whenever objects collide. And simple way to make the objects react with each others. Example: Character is wearing a cape which collide with the body. If user adds pauldrons and chest item for the character, all they need to do is to add "collide with objects in group A" which includes almost every possible surface in the game. When they tab that feature then the new items collide correctly with the cape. If user adds hair and backpack then the cape again will collide correctly with those items in real time. Currently that would cause massive amounts of data taking all the memory and power from the users computer. We need "nanite" for the physics.
So what that the game will have "next gen graphics" if my eyes will be glued to the mini map/compas because the game world is just overflowing with shit but without any substance
Graphics are great and all but this is why I like jrpgs so much nowadays and indie games because it feels like they focus on the story they’re trying to tell or trying to make a good game without being carried by the graphics
I worked with 3DS4 in 1995 up to 3DSMax till around 2006 (render time 8h on a Athlon64 3800+ for ONE picture with V-Ray) - I had never thought we will get here so quickly... But then Epic = Demoscene, like Remedy and DICE, who else if not them.
Unreal Engine 5 is INCREDIBLY heavy to run, dont overstate the 'optimization' of it. it can do some awesome stuff with nanite and lumen, but you pay alot in gpu overhead for those features. (depending on implementation)
Doesn't matter if it looks good. If the game is 100 usd, has tons of microtransactions and has deluxe, ultimate, insert x tier version that doesn't even make sense, it's still s***.
I'm honestly more excited to see some LLM AI implementation in games over the next few years. We're talking about things like NPC dialogues and interactions. Imagine you feed an LLM the game's story and extensive lore of the default world-state. NPCs can then interact with you in a much more realistic manner, comparing the current world-state to the default, and comment on things you've done in game in real-time.
It depends on the game, most games are better with static dialog, dynamic dialog is usually better for random NPCs, so games like minecraft, GTA and others with tons of random NPCs could work with it, or dragons dogma pawns saying random stuff Now JRPGs with tons of named characters usually won't, it's hard to tell a well structured story when you don't even know what your characters will say half the time
I was already happy that they've fixed those damn shadows on the Orthographic camera, been waiting for that since UE4, now i can finally go back to some projects i had
I'm going to have to upgrade my pc to be able to run unreal 5.... one free asset underground cave was enough to stutter and crash my system to desktop. Unreal is an amazing tool, but gotta have the hardware to run it. Time to save up my cash while i plot out my game designs. 😅
cant wait to see all these amazing graphics and features in all my new AAAAAAAAA games in 2081 now we dont even have proper current gen games, most of them are still realeasing on past gen consoles or looks like they can work on past gen just fine
Let me think: Remnant 2, The Finals, Tekken 8, Fortnite, Palworld, Senua's Saga Hellblade 2, Stalker 2, Black Myth Wukong etc. What are you even talking about?
@@originalgameronline3457 Yeah, because the big games take 10 years to develop, genius. Good luck waiting for the witcher 4 and the next cyberpunk to release.
@TRONiX404 not at all video is the medium GAMES is the part that matters. Ugly games with great gameplay outshine beautiful "games" with 0 substance. Look at vanilla Minecraft as the best example
It's not just shader compilation, it's PSO creation and management. Read through the Vulkan shader object extension proposal. "Pipelines" have proven to not be the useful abstraction that The Kronos Group, Microsoft, and the greater industry thought they would be.
The control rig stuff is great, one thing they don't cover but should cover in this video is the mutable plugin. Mutable is gonna let me hopefully be able to make a huge more variety of characters in game as well as player customization with less effort. I've really been looking forward to a lot of this stuff.
It's crazy people only care about things when they are bad. Rather than celebrating that people are able to make beautiful games now, the old problem gets quickly forgotten so we can find a new issue that's not even that great. There was a time when awful-looking games was a complaint. Now people are complaining games look too good so graphics don't matter anymore. You shouldn't forget what you gained. There was a time when people complained about there not being enough games. Now people complain there are too many games. There are still as many good and great games, maybe even more, but that's not what they choose to focus on. Helldivers? Tekken? BG3? Manor Lords? Palworld? Lethal Company? Cyberpunk? Hades & now Hades 2? Naaah, let's focus on the suicide squad game to say games are worse than ever before, even if some of the best games were released in the past few years.
Cloud gaming unfortunately is limited by latency, involving ping and literally the speed of light. OnLive tried it in the 2000s, Stadia in the 2010s, and they have learned the same lesson: the latency is just too much for most people. If Google can't make it work, i don't see anyone making it working.
People missing the point. The powerful tools and advanced adaptability is now available to the home user not just the multi-billion $ company. Small indie projects no longer need hugely expensive hardware and eternally long development time, making profitability more likely. The issue we have had is large publishers controlling prices and schedules, this sort of advance removes some of that.
Let me think: Remnant 2, The Finals, Tekken 8, Fortnite, Palworld, Senua's Saga Hellblade 2, Stalker 2, Black Myth Wukong etc. That's all Unreal Engine 5. What are you talking about?
it's a shame unreal engine is a shinier unity engine and everything in it still bombs. Physics and interactions never look good or convincing. It's just 20 billion polygons of paint cans on unreal engine 3.
One thing you rarelly see mentioned is that tech like DLSS significantly increases input lag, something in didn't have with old games. Even with Reflex you still get some. The argument that games will run on any device doesn't really apply, just look at Alan Wake 2.
Seeing how impressed he is with the latest graphics maybe asmon can upgrade to a quality hd webcam someday instead of just sticking with the 480p walmart cam he found in a box labeled "free" on the side of the road ten years ago...
Can manage a low end that will play mid to high end games on low/medium settings for around $600-800, a high end business dell(dell is just one of the more common and cheap, HP might also work) that's being recycled plus budget for a dedicated graphics card. If you're looking you can find an older machine for cheap. Ram, and cpu will be slower, but it'll house, and support newer graphic cards. Its a decent foot in the door, they can go for anywhere between $100-600 but I'd stay looking around the $400 range. Usually gets 32gb ram, 1tb ssd, and an I7, I'd just double check you aren't getting shafted paying 10th gen pricing, for a 4th gen machine. If StarForge wanted to go down the route of useable machines for around $1000, not sure whom to ask, but I'd try to get some partnerships, or contracts will dell, or electronic recycling factories that repurpose older machines.
I visited Abertay University last week and spoke to some devs in person (Dundee, Scotland, the home of DMA Design, Lemmings, Rockstar North) One was really excited for 5.4. One was skeptical. Frame rates are the problem. 5.4 promises to fix this but devs have to implement it correctly or it will still be bad. They also have an Nvidia Blackwell machine there. Absolutely incredible to see. The guy I was talking to, Alessandro, says it cost £100K lol. So UE5.4 will run well on that at least. Oh, and we around 5 years away from seeing the benefits of 5.4
Everyone who says you need a "NASA computer" to run these games. It's not you, it's them. Game devs don't know how to properly use this tool. So they create so many memory leaks and unstable areas.
I sell 4080 Supers for 1k USD, 1550 Dollary Doos. A 4080 Super is overkill for the top tier. The GTX series still runs most games on Ultra. A 1080 is like 100 - 300 bucks.
problem is that 1st most of the Devs/Publishers aren't using it yet and those who are using it are using it the wrong way by focusing on Visuals than making the game faster with better performance
Since we r reaching the physical limitation on hardware size, until a major breakthrough, optimization on the the way the computer reads and reproduce the graphs is our best near future
In the past art direction was limited by graphics technology. But nowadays if a studio wants a photorealistic look it can go for it. And so in a way graphic improvements reached a meaning plateau, in which it is still improving but with diminishing returns to the audience. Meanwhile you have indie games, cartoonish 3D games that do just as well without the photorealism. It is a tool in art direction.
5:50 Its not just focus. Its COMPENSATION for the real camera you are using to shoot a scene where you PROJECT the unreal 3D ambient on a screen behind the actor. It makes it look right under the circumstances you want it to (viewed from the real camera, not on your monitor)
My main problem with most games i've played that were made in UE5 recently is that they have CRAZY performance problems ( usually heavy stutters ), if they fix that i will be glad
20 years ago, great graphics were the hallmark of a developer who really put effort in the game, and even if the game had some problems, the graphics quality could cover for it. Today, graphics tech is so advanced and easy to use that people can easily see the flaws in other areas because they can't be wowed by the visuals.
I used to care about graphics when it was about moving from 2d to 3d, and then making models not look like origami figures. I still do care about graphics, but I could not care less if they are photorealistic or not. Give me a good art direction, sound design, use of color and light. Give me a presentation that was thought through, not a playable version of google earth street view. I'd take Valheim over any AAA slopppa any day of the week as far as graphics are concerned.
To the people saying they don't care about graphics improvements in the comments, UE 5.4 is adding functional tools not graphics improvements. I'll list off the actual features and what they do to empower developers to simplify it for you guys. Motion Matching - Smoother animation blending, for example backwards and forwards are different 'assets' and we blend them together in the engine to make our player character 'animate' however this was the old way of doing things. Now we can simply supply a file with all of our animation assets and it will blend the most logical ones. Ultimately this will save time when creating functional animation systems and in the long run your animations will look smoother. Look at the recent Fortnite movement rework as an example, it had a rocky start due to the animations themselves not being liked but after fixes players now love the new movement locomotion. Animation Tools - Animation tools always existed in-engine but they were kind of janky, this update fleshes it out meaning if you need to make small animations or quick adjustments to animations you can do it in-engine instead of in a 3rd party app like Maya or Blender, which again massively saves development time and costs(annual Maya licenses cost over 2k LMAO) Easier Rigging Tools - Basically they made rigging a character(skeleton) as simple as snapping a lego minifgure together with preset pieces, this is going to massively boost development time. Nanite Tessellation - Nanite which itself is a game changer that basically means assets and models don't have to worry about polygon limits - Polygons are how 3D games are rendered, everything you see in a game is made up of Triangles. More triangles = more resources need to render, basically it came down to developers optimizing their assets and making sure they did not exceed polygon budgets. Now with Nanite Its less of an issue and gives games a lot performance back in high cost scenes/levels. (basically we cant expect to see more ambitious games soon as nanite gets added to more areas of the engine, think like 200v200 battlefield style games) - Tessellation is a way of saying "more detail on simple assets with less resources needed" (so improved performance and visuals basically) So with the new Nanite Tessellation we can add lots of detail to our level without a big cost on system resources, for example we can create a snow effect that is extremally performant as seen in the Marvel Captain America game in the release notes video. These are some of the main features displayed in the video, but the update includes so much more to increase production speeds across the board, which means you should see changes faster that still look as good. Now I will state the tools and engine are only as good as the developers and studios that use them. The developers create the bugs and unoptimized gameplay, that will always be a thing. Also on Asmongolds point that we have almost peaked in graphical fidelity, he's dead on and now its about making the tools we have optimized to run better. Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk, I hope I shared something that might help you understand game dev a little better!
I hate that Bethesda sticks to their own engine. Starfield was my wakeup to not preorder even though every creator with credibility said to stop doing that. The next Elder Scrolls is going to be a game in current day for diversity and no care to realism in the world. Thinking of Bethesda as I watch this bums me out.
I don't necessarily think that bad games are all just bad ideas. They are often just good ideas that are executed poorly. That's kind of the downside to having such powerful creative tools: they fool you into thinking you're done working. Restrictions that stand in the way of your ideas can help you reshape and reforge your ideas into something better. But being let loose with no restrictions on your creativity can actually work stifle it and result in something lackluster and poorly considered.
I use UE5 for film production, my computer cost around $2,300 for me to run Unreal Flawlessly and thats only with a 4070 ti. But you dont need a top of the line machine to run the engine or make something good looking. Incredible tool, takes time to learn but it's all worth it in the end
That's one way they could force game streaming services. Make games that you need a computer no one can afford then make a cheapish streaming of that game that gives amazing graphics to any POS hardware that can accept high speed internet. Then once the market is made increase prices. As soon as internet is fast enough to do it smoothly you can say good bye to single purchase games and hello to monthly services with higher tiers for the premium games. Games streaming will become the new Netflix and may even merge together as one full service. The next shitvolution in gaming.
I think hes not wrong. As a matter of fact it's the same with monitors and resolutions. We are continuously reaching a point in resolution, graphics and physics simulations, where all the steps ahead will have certainly higher levels of "realism and quality", but it will be increasingly harder to notice significant changes, the consumer will see as valuable additions to the product. I mean we have seen what modder's can do to cyberpunk 2077... So I think game development will increasingly shift towards ray tracing and similar technologies sure, but it will also drastically shift towards more realistic physics and AI. So I'm not so optimistic about PC's getting smaller and cheaper - although it has to happen, because it's really getting out of hand. But, what good is a character in a game, that you almost can't visually distinguish from a real person, if it still can't interact naturally with its environment, or even worse, reacts like an NPC from Skyrim to the player? So I think it will steadily shift in those directions, redirecting the increasing performance away from graphics alone, as they did in the past. Unfortunately that still doesn't fix bad quests and game play mechanics or a bland story.
Ideally, this should reduce the time needed to be dedicated on graphics considering how quick it is to generate models etc, and increase the time dedicated to storyboarding and gameplay. Here's hoping.
Bad and good books have been made for years. Everyone can write a book. The amazing point with unreal is that it creates a massive ease of access for new game creators to create games. Not all games will be good or bad
Mobile games today have the quality of a PS4 and run at 60 fps, which is just insane to think that your phone can do that. Performance improvements are happening so quickly, it won't be long until we have photorealism on mobile too.
Some of the optimizaitons here are ridiculous, if you have tried to make anything before. That control rig is going to make GAMEPLAY mechanics, like the animations for a sword swing, or a block, WAAAAY easier to make good. Plus, GPU culling for raytracing is... just fantastic. SO much memory saved.
Staying below $1k is really easy if you just live a generation or two behind. Mid-range and up from the previous generation and top-end stuff from 2 generations ago are all typically capable of keeping up with whatever is out at the time.
consumer PCs right now are vastly more powerful than what we used to refer to as "NASA PCs" back when that comparison actually made sense. The things we can do with current hardware is incredible, but with so much power, it allows for laziness, less urge for clever problem solving and optimization because the hardware just runs it decently enough, even if it's not nearly as smooth as it *could* be.
Insanely impressive visulas so far, but it's still just a bunch of hard materials like rocks and metal. I don't think their engine can render things like foliage quite yet, hence why they only showcase these barren environments. Once they achieve that though it's going to be craaaazy
Unity can produce very good graphics, not latest UE levels, but the gap isn't as wide as you think. Also ganeplay is really what matters at the end of the day
@dest5218 the last time i saw a latest game using ue 5, it not that impressive. Or like it just another game that could release for ps4 and would be just fine. It more like not a single game that tries to push for something similar quality and gameplay as the demo.
Brother. The game engine doesn’t give the ”graphics” but rather can help it to be implemented in a more painless way. Ofc Nanite and custom shader stuff but Nanite is for polygon count and custom shaders can be achieved in any other software too. They just try to make it for artists to set things up more user friendly.
I agree with Asmon here, but for the prices: 4000 euro = 4090, if you need a good case or want the best parts you prob pay 4.5 or even 5K. 3.300-3.500= 7900XTX or 4080 super. 2500 = 3080. Below 2300 euro you basically can't get an actual good gaming pc that isn't 2nd hand. If you get better than that for those prices you get a really good deal pc's are expensive it is what it is.
I don’t give a single shit about graphics . If the game is trash, why would you want to play it just because it looks good? I mean it’s impressive . No doubt . But who cares . Some of the best games ever were n64 games , and they are still the best games ever .
When I was younger, graphics used to matter a lot for me. Now I just care about good gameplay and sometimes a good enough story
I’m always looking for the trifecta. Performance, graphics, and story
If the other two are sacrificed for great graphics, then it's more of a movie than a game.
I used to think the same, but noticed that I'm actually very picky about artstyle, whether it's cutting edge graphics or plain text win simple UI. artstyle that I don't like can be a dealbreaker for me.
@@jackantharia even Asmon reacted to video about that.
Art style is what truly matters, that's why even old WoW doesn't look that dated for example cause it's art style is great
I hated that Manga was black and white when I was a kid and know I don't care either way just make a good story with clean lines.
It's all brilliant until game developers create modern games that look like ass
You mean until game developers create ugly as fuck characters like fable and call it 'photorealistic'.
50% less gameplay. 100% more propaganda.
30 fps in the future
Or when they create great looking game with UE5, but it looks like other 100 UE5 games with no soul and hollow gameplay
@@happyzombie270 Why is everyone slamming 30 fps? I grew up with pixal art games that were probably 2-5 fps. Then tons of games on NES, SNES and N64 would go down to maybe single digit fps when graphics got intense.
I don't need all my games to look and run as smooth as butter.
Ratatouille now also apply to games: everybody can cook, but not everybody should cook (make games)
wow, that is deep.
I will go further, it's like internet access...
Well that isnt the message of Ratatouille. But alright
That's not the phrase. It would be that not everybody can make good games, but a good game can come from anywhere "Not anyone can cook, but a good cook can come from anywhere."
everybody can KUK forsenKUKLE
Art style > graphical fidelity
Game play > graphical fidelity
Sadly if you use predefined model like this you cannot define your own art style. I guess. Or you get very restricted.
@@Karollenart fix it by working on art direction instead then. just as important!
I agree, games from before 2000 are sometimes really nice because the art style they went for is so nice that it being a lower resolution, or slightly pixelated can actually be a part of it looking good.
@@Karollenartsort of but not really. That can be said about all the other unreal engine games. You can make the games incredibly unique.
Except physics, AI and model/environment destruction can have a huge impact on gameplay. And guess what... most games and engines suck in that department because they're still focusing on textures, polygons and lighting lol. That's why voxels are the future imo...
Don't necessarily need photorealism, just good performance and art design, and of course good gameplay, preferably good UI. Lot of games lately lacking bits of it all.
Agree. Games made for photorealistic fall off so had after a couple of years graphics wise, while games made with good art style/design can hold up for decades.
UI is very overlooked. A bad UI can ruin the whole game for me.
good performance, something you never really see with unreal
reminds me of Stray Souls, a once-promising realistic SH-type game that is sadly underdelivered
@@WarbossGorkI disagree gta5 been out since 2012 nd it still looks good and play good … why tf do you ppl wanna choose .. a good game is a good game … red dead 2 looks amazing and plays amazing with an amazing story lol star field graphics r shit and the game is shit
But does it have 16 times the detail?
It does - and it *just* works.
Thank you
Thank you
You see these mountains over there?
You can walk there
thank you todd howard!
Just when you thought you had enough storage capacity Unreal Engine updates and tells us we're gonna need 16x the storage space that we literally just got done upgrading to.
Perfect timing to pay them for their newly released cloud storage! I'm sure there will be no issues there. /s
Sixteen times the storage!
wait wrong company
it just works
Dont worry companies like Ubisoft will delete the games of your hard drive for more space
But it's for 16x the detail
I no longer care about companies improving graphics, I only care about companies improving gameplay and stories
Yeah 100%. I feel like game visuals reached a very big "softcap" around the time of Witcher 3. Why should I care about even smoother animations and pixel perfect lighting effects when it only makes the game look slightly better than a 9 year old game?
The advancement of game engines is generally good, because it reduces the time developers need to create visuals. They COULD focus more on the gameplay. But the reality is that gameplay is where companies will always cut cost in favor of a bigger marketing budget.
Also, people forget about AI... where are improvements of that?
its still useful to know that tech like this is getting easier to produce, makes so that we can believe even less that its not their fault when companies releases a game that looks 2 generations old and it runs like ass, where the same console runs things much better looking even better.
@@Karollenart True, the most important one along with gameplay
That's the thing with the .4 update its more about the graphics but that's not the case with all updates some with be more performance and some will be more quality
Coming to a console near you in "cinematic" 30fps
And upscaled from 576p
@@M4Dbratthat not true. With this technology like nanite and lumen, a console is capable of running a game at better graphical fidelity than current games whilst also providing better performance. That’s the entire pint of UE5. Why else do you think indie games like Alan wake 2 can look as good as triple AAA games.
funny enough real cinema is filmed in 24 fps (USA) and 25 (EUR), 30 looks way off,
That literally has not been the case for a single ue5 game. @@balloonb0y677
I work IT for various game companies. They aren't using 5.4. If someone decides to start making a game TODAY, they might decide to use it, but the existing projects are moving forward with 3rd party character model and environment creation engines that AREN'T built in to UE5 because they've been around for longer.
Also, this 5.4 release is TERRIBLE NEWS. Most of these companies are buying assets, but they're still using different methods of capturing humanoid movement. With these default pre-built options, we will continue to see the further sameification of games- they're all going to look the exact same.
I agree with you. We already have this issue of sameish looking AA games. Once you have played one or two UE5 games you cann IMMEDIATELY tell when another game uses the engine, just by looking at the lighting. To me it is already a big drawback when a game uses UE5 because I'm getting tired of those visuals, no matter how good they look screenshotted.
Sad. I hate "sameification" so much. I see it so often in so many various games I watch on Twitch, and it is almost depressing. It is noticeable, and it is bad.
This is something that turns me away from buying most games that I would be interested otherwise.
At least we got older stuff.
No , this is a showcase for the engine advancement no bad news here. You have a project on using another engine/method that is cool they can still use it, but a new project can start using new technology
UE5 is just an engine... it doesn't dictate what art looks like. Also, high caliber studios do not buy all of their assets off a marketplace lmao. At most they're buying set dressing props or base materials. They outsource, but still dictate art direction and style. Hyper-realistic games will inevitably have similar levels of detail because their visual target is the same, but that has nothing to do with UE5 besides that it raises the floor AND ceiling for what's performant and achievable in realtime. Good art direction will always help differentiate between them e.g. Witcher 4 and Cyberpunk 2 will look worlds apart even if they're both aiming for the same visual fidelity.
This release includes ways to handle existing motion data, not default assets. Yes most game companies won't upgrade their version and especially not change engines after they get out of early development, but these releases exist for projects that start now.
It's a reality that commercial engines have never been as attractive as they are now, when the cost of making games is the highest it's ever been if you do everything yourself, and the lowest it's ever been if you're using a commercial engine.
The "sameification" of games is mainly seen in the median release. While the proportion is decreasing, there are still more non-samey games released than ever. If you play let's say 50 games a year, you're in your best years. It's a bad tendency to forget the good simply because you drown in the bad. I'm gonna pull number out of my ass as an example, if there were 500 bad games for every 10 good games before, there might be 5000 for every 50 good games now. The percentage decreased, the number increase. You could say there are 10 times more bad games, you could also say there are 5 times more good games. With the freedom and the avalanche of information we have nowadays, there's no reason why you should care about the bad games. They don't cost you money, they don't really cost you that much time, and you're not forced to play them either.
"stutter struggle" is still real tho
Yes Yep Uh-huh.
So many games fallen to the OP Stutter
Somewhere Alex felt a disturbance in the force.
What does that mean?
@@Gr00tStellar blade is a UE game that doesn't have stutter. Don't let Alex know though.
no?
I spent 4 years at game development school and then another 2 years after working on small projects still learning as much as possible and what I came to realize is that the most important aspect of any game is its optimization and how smoothly it runs, no lag, small load times and immediate reactions in game which elevate any game to something that is polished and professional regardless how good the graphics are.
It's so strange to me because game optimization is something they almost didn't even talk about at school and instead focused on more generic forms of game design. I'm never impressed anymore with game demos or trailers because I know that what they are showing isn't the game being played in real time, its always a pre rendered video with maxed out settings always trying to impress everyone with how incredible the graphics look, but all i want to see is how well the actual game plays because as a gamer I cannot stand loading screens and lag in games regardless how good the actual game looks.
If a game runs badly it can also suggest that store bought assets are being used as their poly counts are very difficult to adjust as the polygons have been fractured resulting in a buggy laggy mess of a game.
What are you even talking about? "polygons have been fractured in store bought assets"? Why would someone do that to a mesh before selling it on the store? Or do you mean, you have to decimate the mesh for performance reasons? With nanite, you don't. I dont get what your point is, especially because the latest releases of unreal engine brought many performance upgrades.
I think the UE tools end up freeing up more time for developers to work on the gameplay instead of creating their own game engine from scratch. Developers are already well-versed in using the UE software so there is no time wasted learning a new set of tools of new custom game engine.
On one side, yes that's what I hope so too. On the other side, this will probably result in MORE games instead of BETTER games. Creating a well balanced game with decent gameplay is time-consuming. Why spend $1m on that if you can pump that million into marketing instead, after creating some cheap but impressive looking animations?
The problem with gameplay in modern games isn't a matter of time or skill, it's a matter of philosophy. They just have all the wrong ideas.
reminder that helldivers 2 works on an engine that's been discontinued like 7 years ago
And it's a buggy mess that crashes constantly 🤣 I love the game but fuck me dead it's got some issues
@@samuelgeaney7556 I think it very much depend on the user and its pc, not that i doesnt happens, how much it happens.
73h had 2 crashes (1 of it was because i tryed to enter the space map when a was running the game with the apu graphics instead of gpu without even having the laptop plugged in - was running at 20fps) and 2 bugs happen 1 time each, not possible to enter the plane and being stuck a little below the terrain because of a enemy.
@@seinfeldx I'm on PS5 and no exaggeration I get at least 1 crash to the home screen and at least 1-2 network disconnects EVERY session, considering it's online only it's pretty unacceptable how much the game crashes.
@@samuelgeaney7556 Sure i agree with you, i just have different experience since play it on pc but other people with different pc's might have that same bad experience.
While i have ps5, i never liked the idea of being dependent on paying extra internet with ps plus so i bought on pc with 17% discount.
Does it normally happen to you at random intervals, more in the beginning or end of a session?
If anything, this makes indie developers the ability to make amazing looking games without breaking the bank. Companies like EA will never change, but small studios that usually focus on a good game to play can now also have amazing AAA graphics as well. So it's mostly a good thing, with a mild bitter taste added.
I'd love a BBC as well. It's a great idea. ;)
7:24 Your correct in Unreal 5.5 they are going to introduce Nanite Skeletal Meshes. (For characters with bones.)
Which is already in the Unreal 5.5 beta.
So far it's a straight 2x performance improvement over normal skeletal meshes.
And it's still the early experimental version.
Remember when they first showed off unreal 5 and told us there was this amazing technology that would make it to where great graphics would be so much less taxing on your pc. Still waiting on that.
Lol true
it is though. Try running a scene with 200mil polygons without nanite and then try with nanite. less taxing does not mean not taxing at all and you can run it on gtx 450. Its more like. this scene you can run on 4090 would need something like 6090 without this technology. as an example
@Toetech0 Nanite impacts performance heavily though, especially compared to manually made LODs. I think the problem with Unreal is that it's trying to be both a movie creation AND a games engine at the same time, so you get all these new fancy toys to play with that aren't suited or aren't the most optimal for real-time computing, and so you end up with those optimization messes we see frequently nowadays with modern UE5 games. Devs are relying too much on Unreal's own tech instead of manually optimizing the games.
@@ahassani but the quality difference is totally different. try making lods with the same level as nanite and keep the same performance. spoiler. you can't. and with how nanite works is at some point we will reach a certain threshold with hardware where the polycount does not matter at all. for example its pointless to go details beyond one pixel. so you could cap polygon size to be at minimum one pixel. this how ever is totally different without nanite or nanite -like methods. it all comes down to how nanite handles the memory usage of the said model.
Already happening with DLSS
"All I care about is story and game play, not graphics". For anything other than small studios, these three things are in separate development pipelines. They don't affect each other.
With how rapidly they are pushing out new versions of Unreal engine I suspect they are making a game in the background. Really hoping for the next chapter of 'Unreal'.
Oh man, Unreal 3 should be pretty amazing! (no not UT3). I would love to fight the Skaarj again.
Unreal tournament would be fucking amazing.
Also the game they are probably making in the background is most likely fortnite content. Each chapter comes with major changes like graphics and such. It's probable that they update the engine for their fortnite road map, release the fortnite seasons or chapter with said new content, and then publicly release the unreal update
they are not, the only thing they care about at this moment is Fortnite, until that game starts dying out don't expect anything
@@itsdinkd1771 The original Unreal Tournament getting a proper Night Dive-style remaster and returning to GOG would be amazing. But any UT title seems unlikely, given that Epic nuked the franchise from orbit for no good reason.
Been in a game design course for the last 2 years, using UE5.2 both in group projects and my own, would have been nice to have some of this stuff earlier as I did see people struggle on character animation and rigging the most.
I'm only 2 mins into the vid so will probably have to edit this comment, however, the chatter that said that you would need a 'nasa computer' is imo completely wrong, im not totally sure about other peoples' experience, but the course I took, we had access to computers with 32gb ram, 4050s in one of the rooms we were in and 3080s in my first year, don't really remember the cpus but they were like 13th gen intel cpus. Don't get me wrong these pcs are great and the 3080s were bought in the middle of the gpu price spike / shortage back in covid iirc, I myself have a 7600x, a 4070 and 32gb of ram, now don't get me wrong what I listed are absolutely great parts but nothing insanely high end that'll literally cost an arm and a leg like a 4090 lol, not to mention that in engine what youre working on runs worse, tho I've personally had 0 issues, anyway yapping over.
These PCs that you have named are still probably not affordable for +90% of pc players.
Just look at statistics of what most steam players are using
@@swiss_Otaku Yeah, iirc the chatters point was using UE5.4 for game development, not saying you need a nasa pc to play games made with it, as if I wasn't clear, the game engine is a LOT more intensive than if you packaged the game and took the time to optimise it / used lower settings etc etc.
One more thing I'd like to add is DLSS in my experience is not anywhere close to being at a point where I'd use it when playing, everywhere I have tried / tested a bit with DLSS I would rather just lower my res, not sure how to articulate it but the performance to how the game looks compared to just lowering settings / res is very noticeable / significantly more blurry I guess.
I also looked over the march 2024 hardware survey, and just looking at the video card description list, again taking into account that what I listed is to be fair, reasonably overkill even just for developing withing UE5, and experience with worse pcs - had a prebuilt i3 9100f, gtx 1650 that had no ssd and 8gb that i had to upgrade to 16gb and a decent ssd which honsetly reduced stuttering by an insane amount, all of this before i built my new pc about last year around summer, where now to build my exact PC it would be like a solid 20% cheaper than when I built it.
Anyway I'm getting off topic, I'd say that according to March's steam hardware survey about a 3rd or half of the people can run this stuff perfectly fine just based on looking at the gpu stats alone, and honestly people think too deep into 2k and 4k gaming, that is BS, just like rtx was and still is imo. Most that look into buying a monitor like that don't understand something as basic as how PPI - pixels per inch - works
TL;DR more like a 3rd or half according to steams hardware survey would have very little to no problem running either the packaged game made with UE5 or actually running UE5, my original post wasn't meant to be an arguement on pcs, just my thoughts on UE5 and game design currently and how suggesting that you need a 'nasa pc' to run this stuff is ridiculous and completely false, not to mention people that have old pcs, like me when I had a i3 9100f and 1650, allready couldn't run other highly demanding stuff allready.
and yeah I yapped again and I'm too lazy to reread it to check for spelling mistakes etc so have fun with that.
@@swiss_Otaku Running the editor is 10 times more expensive than playing the game
There is not much need to go more "realistic" graphics wise. What we need is the realism and performance for the real time physics simulations. We are still using atleast over 20 years old technology for simulating physics in real time. That means that even the most powerful PCs have trouble simulating real cloth physics in real time.
Example: You want wind affect your character hair, items, clothing and the gravity + uplift from the wings to affect the open cockpit plane flight simulation. What we need is that the plane stays in air because of the game engine physics are able to calculate the needed info (drag, resistance, gravity, speed, uplift and so on) while also simulating all possible moving parts in real time (hair, clothing, items, parts of the plane, particles and so on).
What we have is fake non simulated flight and very limited physics for the simulation of the character/objects which are pre rendered mostly and still take hard toll on the performance.
We need simple and powerful system to add collisions without them causing horrible amounts of data writing whenever objects collide. And simple way to make the objects react with each others.
Example: Character is wearing a cape which collide with the body. If user adds pauldrons and chest item for the character, all they need to do is to add "collide with objects in group A" which includes almost every possible surface in the game. When they tab that feature then the new items collide correctly with the cape. If user adds hair and backpack then the cape again will collide correctly with those items in real time.
Currently that would cause massive amounts of data taking all the memory and power from the users computer. We need "nanite" for the physics.
Refining all the software to run on lower end tech is the real challenge.
So what that the game will have "next gen graphics" if my eyes will be glued to the mini map/compas because the game world is just overflowing with shit but without any substance
Not looking forward to the next 2 far cries and assassin's creeds? 😅
not only games but also anime like chinese anime and they are really good.
like Throne of Seal is made in Unlreal Engine
@@alexmiller6955 Last Far cry i played was 3 and AC was black flag
They'll use a crappy ubisoft engine...@@alexmiller6955
@@xinlou6707 Good game enjoyer (I still want a Modern Ac4 Black flag successor, Skull & bones was a Utter disappointment, Live service is a plague)
It is also developed for "The Volume" filming environment, as used on The Mandolorian, and Star Trek : Strange New Worlds.
That’s 2 more reasons that it sucks
@@originalgameronline3457 You OK? Are you having a mental health moment? You should seek Help ASAP.
Storage UN5:😮
Storage UN6:☠️
Wait.. UN?? wonder what that stands for...
United Nations? Anyway UE5.4 is looking great!
Bro said United Nations 5 storage 😂😂🤣
Graphics are great and all but this is why I like jrpgs so much nowadays and indie games because it feels like they focus on the story they’re trying to tell or trying to make a good game without being carried by the graphics
Stardew Valley and Factorio still take up the vast majority of my gaming time. That's when I'm not playing N64 or PS2.
The Day Before's Devs will always think about the day before they decided to release their game at it's current status!
don't worry about making VR games, we can just use UEVR to automatically get full VR
Blur everything around your character view and fuckin upscale from 480p image .. future of gaming :D cannot wait
^ found the console gamer
@@Doggo-frencton noup .. I'm making fun of consoles .. I had PS2 as my last one .. PC 4ever ..
@@hunterzone4846 YEP ..
these and aswell as TAA anti-aliasing (or some form of it) makes the game even more blurry.
I worked with 3DS4 in 1995 up to 3DSMax till around 2006 (render time 8h on a Athlon64 3800+ for ONE picture with V-Ray) - I had never thought we will get here so quickly... But then Epic = Demoscene, like Remedy and DICE, who else if not them.
Kids money being put to advance humanity’s computational capability is wholesome
Unreal Engine 5 is INCREDIBLY heavy to run, dont overstate the 'optimization' of it. it can do some awesome stuff with nanite and lumen, but you pay alot in gpu overhead for those features. (depending on implementation)
Doesn't matter if it looks good. If the game is 100 usd, has tons of microtransactions and has deluxe, ultimate, insert x tier version that doesn't even make sense, it's still s***.
Or you just buy a key at the game's release and save atleast $20
I'm honestly more excited to see some LLM AI implementation in games over the next few years. We're talking about things like NPC dialogues and interactions. Imagine you feed an LLM the game's story and extensive lore of the default world-state. NPCs can then interact with you in a much more realistic manner, comparing the current world-state to the default, and comment on things you've done in game in real-time.
That's should be the next step...
It depends on the game, most games are better with static dialog, dynamic dialog is usually better for random NPCs, so games like minecraft, GTA and others with tons of random NPCs could work with it, or dragons dogma pawns saying random stuff
Now JRPGs with tons of named characters usually won't, it's hard to tell a well structured story when you don't even know what your characters will say half the time
All that achievements in graphics but once the end boss is triggered he makes his scripted move even if you don't stand in front of him.
Performance is more important to me than graphics. If you game isn't hitting at least 60, I don't even care about it.
That’s the point of this technology. It allows for better graphics with zero loss of performance and even better performance at a certain point.
I was already happy that they've fixed those damn shadows on the Orthographic camera, been waiting for that since UE4, now i can finally go back to some projects i had
All this to make crappy 45+ hour long boring AAA campaigns with little to no storytelling.
5h*
Like all other AAA games in the last decade? Nothing to do with unreal.
Once they release Real Engine 1.0 it's all over
I'm going to have to upgrade my pc to be able to run unreal 5.... one free asset underground cave was enough to stutter and crash my system to desktop. Unreal is an amazing tool, but gotta have the hardware to run it. Time to save up my cash while i plot out my game designs. 😅
cant wait to see all these amazing graphics and features in all my new AAAAAAAAA games in 2081
now we dont even have proper current gen games, most of them are still realeasing on past gen consoles or looks like they can work on past gen just fine
graphics are cool but I would prefer it if they made a good game first
Let me think: Remnant 2, The Finals, Tekken 8, Fortnite, Palworld, Senua's Saga Hellblade 2, Stalker 2, Black Myth Wukong etc.
What are you even talking about?
@@DBTHEPLUG Ah yes, a handful of good games. Great counterpoint!
@@DBTHEPLUGlmao , none of those games are ground breaking or push technical boundaries at all. Little games on an overhyped game engine
@@originalgameronline3457 Yeah, because the big games take 10 years to develop, genius. Good luck waiting for the witcher 4 and the next cyberpunk to release.
Imma just wait for ready player one in 20 years
And the next Madden will still use Frostbite and will still suck.
Setting up a leg IN A FEW STEPS!
GET IT?!?!
This will help the indie market. The end of AAA is nigh.
I thought Asmon and friends "don't give a F* about Graphics"
nice thing to have but not necessary.
@@johndank2209 of course kinda the whole point of Video Games
@TRONiX404 not at all video is the medium GAMES is the part that matters. Ugly games with great gameplay outshine beautiful "games" with 0 substance. Look at vanilla Minecraft as the best example
@@IDirtyMangoItrue, I'll play old school Resident Evil 2 over chore driven AC Valhalla any day.
@@TRONiX404Pro rogue-like games barely has graphics but loved by so many people this day. my recommendation is Caves of Qud
You could fake a Mars landing with this.
💀
@@turtleez7086 You could. Since they are in their space suits the whole time, you would not to graphic any human skin or faces.
They're still not fixing the shader compilation issues and traversal stutters though..
It's not just shader compilation, it's PSO creation and management. Read through the Vulkan shader object extension proposal. "Pipelines" have proven to not be the useful abstraction that The Kronos Group, Microsoft, and the greater industry thought they would be.
The control rig stuff is great, one thing they don't cover but should cover in this video is the mutable plugin. Mutable is gonna let me hopefully be able to make a huge more variety of characters in game as well as player customization with less effort. I've really been looking forward to a lot of this stuff.
Graphics peaked at the PS3.
bubsy 3d
Yep, Last Of Us on PS3 still looks good. PS3 had 8 GPUs in it. PS4->PS5 really just marketing.
So did the creativity 😂
Bullshit
@@flyingplantwhale545 Nope, progress in graphics peaked PS3. No point in getting console anymore if you can afford PC
It's crazy people only care about things when they are bad. Rather than celebrating that people are able to make beautiful games now, the old problem gets quickly forgotten so we can find a new issue that's not even that great.
There was a time when awful-looking games was a complaint. Now people are complaining games look too good so graphics don't matter anymore. You shouldn't forget what you gained.
There was a time when people complained about there not being enough games. Now people complain there are too many games. There are still as many good and great games, maybe even more, but that's not what they choose to focus on. Helldivers? Tekken? BG3? Manor Lords? Palworld? Lethal Company? Cyberpunk? Hades & now Hades 2? Naaah, let's focus on the suicide squad game to say games are worse than ever before, even if some of the best games were released in the past few years.
Cloud gaming unfortunately is limited by latency, involving ping and literally the speed of light. OnLive tried it in the 2000s, Stadia in the 2010s, and they have learned the same lesson: the latency is just too much for most people. If Google can't make it work, i don't see anyone making it working.
meanwhile we have GeforceNow with
People missing the point. The powerful tools and advanced adaptability is now available to the home user not just the multi-billion $ company. Small indie projects no longer need hugely expensive hardware and eternally long development time, making profitability more likely. The issue we have had is large publishers controlling prices and schedules, this sort of advance removes some of that.
some chinese animators use Unreal Engine for their anime and they're really good
Artstyle > Graphics.
That's why arkham city still looks amazing 13 years later
I keep seeing these cool graphics in demos. Where are the games already?
Let me think: Remnant 2, The Finals, Tekken 8, Fortnite, Palworld, Senua's Saga Hellblade 2, Stalker 2, Black Myth Wukong etc.
That's all Unreal Engine 5. What are you talking about?
Yup
@DBTHEPLUG and which of them have released to critical acclaim or have been released at all? 🤡
@@SWOTHDRA ?
@@DBTHEPLUGnone of those games have mind blowing graphics tho
Technology is getting better, but games are getting worse. Except for some few.
it's a shame unreal engine is a shinier unity engine and everything in it still bombs. Physics and interactions never look good or convincing. It's just 20 billion polygons of paint cans on unreal engine 3.
One thing you rarelly see mentioned is that tech like DLSS significantly increases input lag, something in didn't have with old games.
Even with Reflex you still get some.
The argument that games will run on any device doesn't really apply, just look at Alan Wake 2.
Seeing how impressed he is with the latest graphics maybe asmon can upgrade to a quality hd webcam someday instead of just sticking with the 480p walmart cam he found in a box labeled "free" on the side of the road ten years ago...
Can manage a low end that will play mid to high end games on low/medium settings for around $600-800, a high end business dell(dell is just one of the more common and cheap, HP might also work) that's being recycled plus budget for a dedicated graphics card. If you're looking you can find an older machine for cheap. Ram, and cpu will be slower, but it'll house, and support newer graphic cards. Its a decent foot in the door, they can go for anywhere between $100-600 but I'd stay looking around the $400 range. Usually gets 32gb ram, 1tb ssd, and an I7, I'd just double check you aren't getting shafted paying 10th gen pricing, for a 4th gen machine. If StarForge wanted to go down the route of useable machines for around $1000, not sure whom to ask, but I'd try to get some partnerships, or contracts will dell, or electronic recycling factories that repurpose older machines.
Damn, this engine looks Unre-
Game Companies watching this video like this engine looks like it would be great for gaining monetary value and offering nothing to players in return
sick cant wait for whats in store for the future of gaming
good graphics doesnt make good games; you'll still get the mtx, p2w, and paywalls dont you worry
@SputniksArmy 100% true but we might get 10 maybe 20% of over the top good games and that should be enough
@@MrAbcdeg we can hope!
the future of gaming is stylized graphics and pixel art games
We have been waiting for 4 years now
I visited Abertay University last week and spoke to some devs in person (Dundee, Scotland, the home of DMA Design, Lemmings, Rockstar North)
One was really excited for 5.4. One was skeptical.
Frame rates are the problem. 5.4 promises to fix this but devs have to implement it correctly or it will still be bad.
They also have an Nvidia Blackwell machine there. Absolutely incredible to see. The guy I was talking to, Alessandro, says it cost £100K lol. So UE5.4 will run well on that at least.
Oh, and we around 5 years away from seeing the benefits of 5.4
Combine this with that Ai girlfriend demo and then make it all fast enough to reduce input voice latency to almost zero and there ya go, haha.
The graphical jump in games over the next 3-5 years is going to be insane.
UE5 is honestly fantastic for AA/Indie game devs since epic games only takes a 5% cut of the game revenue AFTER it makes 1 million in sales.
Everyone who says you need a "NASA computer" to run these games. It's not you, it's them. Game devs don't know how to properly use this tool. So they create so many memory leaks and unstable areas.
I sell 4080 Supers for 1k USD, 1550 Dollary Doos.
A 4080 Super is overkill for the top tier. The GTX series still runs most games on Ultra. A 1080 is like 100 - 300 bucks.
problem is that 1st most of the Devs/Publishers aren't using it yet and those who are using it are using it the wrong way by focusing on Visuals than making the game faster with better performance
Since we r reaching the physical limitation on hardware size, until a major breakthrough, optimization on the the way the computer reads and reproduce the graphs is our best near future
Koreans can finally make game where characters run like humans.
In the past art direction was limited by graphics technology. But nowadays if a studio wants a photorealistic look it can go for it. And so in a way graphic improvements reached a meaning plateau, in which it is still improving but with diminishing returns to the audience. Meanwhile you have indie games, cartoonish 3D games that do just as well without the photorealism. It is a tool in art direction.
5:50 Its not just focus.
Its COMPENSATION for the real camera you are using to shoot a scene where you PROJECT the unreal 3D ambient on a screen behind the actor.
It makes it look right under the circumstances you want it to (viewed from the real camera, not on your monitor)
I been hearing a lot of unreal engine 5 for so long but don’t even know what games actually use it rn
My main problem with most games i've played that were made in UE5 recently is that they have CRAZY performance problems ( usually heavy stutters ), if they fix that i will be glad
20 years ago, great graphics were the hallmark of a developer who really put effort in the game, and even if the game had some problems, the graphics quality could cover for it. Today, graphics tech is so advanced and easy to use that people can easily see the flaws in other areas because they can't be wowed by the visuals.
The 4090 PCB is small. It's cooler is so big to be able to cool 450-600wats of drawn power. Place a water block and it's a small factor card now.
I used to care about graphics when it was about moving from 2d to 3d, and then making models not look like origami figures.
I still do care about graphics, but I could not care less if they are photorealistic or not. Give me a good art direction, sound design, use of color and light. Give me a presentation that was thought through, not a playable version of google earth street view. I'd take Valheim over any AAA slopppa any day of the week as far as graphics are concerned.
1:47 for reference, this is the same movement software that naughty dawg used to develop last of us 2. Looks amazing
To the people saying they don't care about graphics improvements in the comments, UE 5.4 is adding functional tools not graphics improvements. I'll list off the actual features and what they do to empower developers to simplify it for you guys.
Motion Matching - Smoother animation blending, for example backwards and forwards are different 'assets' and we blend them together in the engine to make our player character 'animate' however this was the old way of doing things. Now we can simply supply a file with all of our animation assets and it will blend the most logical ones. Ultimately this will save time when creating functional animation systems and in the long run your animations will look smoother. Look at the recent Fortnite movement rework as an example, it had a rocky start due to the animations themselves not being liked but after fixes players now love the new movement locomotion.
Animation Tools - Animation tools always existed in-engine but they were kind of janky, this update fleshes it out meaning if you need to make small animations or quick adjustments to animations you can do it in-engine instead of in a 3rd party app like Maya or Blender, which again massively saves development time and costs(annual Maya licenses cost over 2k LMAO)
Easier Rigging Tools - Basically they made rigging a character(skeleton) as simple as snapping a lego minifgure together with preset pieces, this is going to massively boost development time.
Nanite Tessellation - Nanite which itself is a game changer that basically means assets and models don't have to worry about polygon limits
- Polygons are how 3D games are rendered, everything you see in a game is made up of Triangles. More triangles = more resources need to render, basically it came down to developers optimizing their assets and making sure they did not exceed polygon budgets. Now with Nanite Its less of an issue and gives games a lot performance back in high cost scenes/levels. (basically we cant expect to see more ambitious games soon as nanite gets added to more areas of the engine, think like 200v200 battlefield style games)
- Tessellation is a way of saying "more detail on simple assets with less resources needed" (so improved performance and visuals basically)
So with the new Nanite Tessellation we can add lots of detail to our level without a big cost on system resources, for example we can create a snow effect that is extremally performant as seen in the Marvel Captain America game in the release notes video.
These are some of the main features displayed in the video, but the update includes so much more to increase production speeds across the board, which means you should see changes faster that still look as good. Now I will state the tools and engine are only as good as the developers and studios that use them. The developers create the bugs and unoptimized gameplay, that will always be a thing.
Also on Asmongolds point that we have almost peaked in graphical fidelity, he's dead on and now its about making the tools we have optimized to run better. Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk, I hope I shared something that might help you understand game dev a little better!
I hate that Bethesda sticks to their own engine. Starfield was my wakeup to not preorder even though every creator with credibility said to stop doing that. The next Elder Scrolls is going to be a game in current day for diversity and no care to realism in the world. Thinking of Bethesda as I watch this bums me out.
ControlRig may be sufficient for Game developer, but more polishing is needed for pure animation purpose.
I don't necessarily think that bad games are all just bad ideas. They are often just good ideas that are executed poorly.
That's kind of the downside to having such powerful creative tools: they fool you into thinking you're done working.
Restrictions that stand in the way of your ideas can help you reshape and reforge your ideas into something better. But being let loose with no restrictions on your creativity can actually work stifle it and result in something lackluster and poorly considered.
I use UE5 for film production, my computer cost around $2,300 for me to run Unreal Flawlessly and thats only with a 4070 ti. But you dont need a top of the line machine to run the engine or make something good looking. Incredible tool, takes time to learn but it's all worth it in the end
That's one way they could force game streaming services. Make games that you need a computer no one can afford then make a cheapish streaming of that game that gives amazing graphics to any POS hardware that can accept high speed internet. Then once the market is made increase prices. As soon as internet is fast enough to do it smoothly you can say good bye to single purchase games and hello to monthly services with higher tiers for the premium games. Games streaming will become the new Netflix and may even merge together as one full service. The next shitvolution in gaming.
I think hes not wrong. As a matter of fact it's the same with monitors and resolutions. We are continuously reaching a point in resolution, graphics and physics simulations,
where all the steps ahead will have certainly higher levels of "realism and quality", but it will be increasingly harder to notice significant changes,
the consumer will see as valuable additions to the product. I mean we have seen what modder's can do to cyberpunk 2077...
So I think game development will increasingly shift towards ray tracing and similar technologies sure, but it will also drastically shift towards
more realistic physics and AI. So I'm not so optimistic about PC's getting smaller and cheaper - although it has to happen, because it's really getting out of hand.
But, what good is a character in a game, that you almost can't visually distinguish from a real person, if it still can't interact naturally
with its environment, or even worse, reacts like an NPC from Skyrim to the player? So I think it will steadily shift in those directions,
redirecting the increasing performance away from graphics alone, as they did in the past.
Unfortunately that still doesn't fix bad quests and game play mechanics or a bland story.
I have always loved seeing that UE logo at the start of a game. Have been a huge fan of how the games have looked/performed.
Ideally, this should reduce the time needed to be dedicated on graphics considering how quick it is to generate models etc, and increase the time dedicated to storyboarding and gameplay. Here's hoping.
Bad and good books have been made for years. Everyone can write a book. The amazing point with unreal is that it creates a massive ease of access for new game creators to create games. Not all games will be good or bad
Mobile games today have the quality of a PS4 and run at 60 fps, which is just insane to think that your phone can do that. Performance improvements are happening so quickly, it won't be long until we have photorealism on mobile too.
Some of the optimizaitons here are ridiculous, if you have tried to make anything before. That control rig is going to make GAMEPLAY mechanics, like the animations for a sword swing, or a block, WAAAAY easier to make good. Plus, GPU culling for raytracing is... just fantastic. SO much memory saved.
Staying below $1k is really easy if you just live a generation or two behind.
Mid-range and up from the previous generation and top-end stuff from 2 generations ago are all typically capable of keeping up with whatever is out at the time.
consumer PCs right now are vastly more powerful than what we used to refer to as "NASA PCs" back when that comparison actually made sense. The things we can do with current hardware is incredible, but with so much power, it allows for laziness, less urge for clever problem solving and optimization because the hardware just runs it decently enough, even if it's not nearly as smooth as it *could* be.
Insanely impressive visulas so far, but it's still just a bunch of hard materials like rocks and metal. I don't think their engine can render things like foliage quite yet, hence why they only showcase these barren environments. Once they achieve that though it's going to be craaaazy
whut, most game haven't even reached unreal engine 5.0 quality yet, i think we only just reached the unreal engine 4 quality
Unity can produce very good graphics, not latest UE levels, but the gap isn't as wide as you think.
Also ganeplay is really what matters at the end of the day
@dest5218 the last time i saw a latest game using ue 5, it not that impressive. Or like it just another game that could release for ps4 and would be just fine. It more like not a single game that tries to push for something similar quality and gameplay as the demo.
Brother. The game engine doesn’t give the ”graphics” but rather can help it to be implemented in a more painless way. Ofc Nanite and custom shader stuff but Nanite is for polygon count and custom shaders can be achieved in any other software too.
They just try to make it for artists to set things up more user friendly.
I agree with Asmon here, but for the prices:
4000 euro = 4090, if you need a good case or want the best parts you prob pay 4.5 or even 5K.
3.300-3.500= 7900XTX or 4080 super.
2500 = 3080.
Below 2300 euro you basically can't get an actual good gaming pc that isn't 2nd hand.
If you get better than that for those prices you get a really good deal pc's are expensive it is what it is.
I don’t give a single shit about graphics . If the game is trash, why would you want to play it just because it looks good?
I mean it’s impressive . No doubt . But who cares . Some of the best games ever were n64 games , and they are still the best games ever .