4 ms·
I think Epic’s UE5 demo is really really close to reality in terms of lighting and geometry. Next 10-20 years will probably see the same technology being brough
by lwansbrough 6y ago
I think Epic’s UE5 demo is really really close to reality in terms of lighting and geometry. Next 10-20 years will probably see the same technology being brought into larger and larger environments with more moving parts.
Then there’s the more obvious stuff that isn’t done well even today: skeletal animation is still lacking and feels unnatural, physics systems are still very approximate and constrained - often times most things are indestructible in games, fluid dynamics are still very slow/limited. Human models still don’t look real though, and the voice acting never quite matches the mouth movement or body language.
I do really feel like we’ve crossed the uncanny valley when it comes to natural scenery rendering. But a lot of what makes things feel real are still missing from games.
- heipei 6y agoI agree, it's so close that it's actually being used as an interactive movie background with a big-ass 360-degree screen for dynamic scene and lighting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hjb-AqMD-a4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hjb-AqMD-a4
- formerly_proven 6y agoIMHO it looks fake. The lighting is way off, it quite literally looks like they're standing directly below a big diffuser - which they are. The background looks like a poster with one of these diffraction parallax effects. It's very cool tech. But it doesn't look real.
- jiggawatts 6y agoThe camera angles in that demo were off axis. Take a look at The Mandalorian series, almost all of the outdoor scenes were shot using the video wall technology. I've worked in computer graphics and I didn't realise the sets were fake until after I finished the whole series.
- manigandham 6y agoThe behind-the-scenes context is making it visible to you, but you've probably already seen films and TV using it without even noticing.