Graphic downgrade

[Vigilance.492]

So, u want to say, that semi-volumetric cloud will be only a few locations? Other one - what? Static clouds? What a nonsense!

Of course semi-volumetric clouds (Assuming they haven't been cut) will only have specific locations, certain parameters for its existence. What do you think they're just going to pop up everywhere in the world because they look good? There's not going to be clouds hovering around Novigrad, just because. Not to mention that if an effect like that just appeared 24/7 in its designated locations and didn't have some kind of randomness to it, or was there no matter the weather or TOD, not only would the effect eventually become lackluster and not 'special', but it wouldn't make a lick of sense.

What other one are you talking about? (Static Clouds? Huh?)

 

[bombeybox]

What do you think they're just going to pop up everywhere in the world because they look good?

Well, Yes! Everywhere, where there is a cloudy \ rain weather (and not in some designated areas, as u said early).What is the point of them, if we will not see this kind of clouds every time bad weather, but only "in some special places"!

 

[Vigilance.492]

Well, Yes! Everywhere, where there is a cloudy \ rain weather (and not in some designated areas, as u said early).What is the point of them, if we will not see this kind of clouds every time bad weather, but only "in some special places"!

Because that's not how those kind of clouds work. What we're talking about here is stuff similar to this. Generally you don't see that type of stuff except for at higher altitudes, so no, it wouldn't just "be everywhere".

Otherwise you're looking at the Skybox, which is always present and changes frequently based on the weather conditions (And the Skyboxes have never dropped in quality).

Also those kind of clouds aren't indicative of 'bad weather', the WEBM you posted is full on daylight. In-fact it's generally the opposite, when the wind and rain picks up, those kind of low-hanging clouds disperse and disappear. I dunno man, you've got some really weird ideas and expectations about these semi-volumetric clouds - I'm not really sure where your head is at about this kind of stuff, you just don't seem to understand the nature of it - but hey, I'm really trying hard here.

 

[bombeybox]

Because that's not how those kind of clouds work.

I see.. Thx for an explanation,

4k in itself is not "ubersampling".

May be, but it looks damn same (here my comparsion):

Spoiler

1080p+Ubersampling

Spoiler

2160p (Nvidia DSR 4x) without Ubersampling

Spoiler

2160p (Nvidia DSR 4x) + Ubersampling

 

[Kinley]

It looks the same to you because your screen probably isn't 4k. DSR is basically 4k downscaled to your screen's resolution.

But that doesn't mean 4k=ubersampling.

 

[Sken]

It's not only that image I'm referring to but most of them that have been released since January, including those with bright sunlight.

For example this early image has what I have been missing.

Just ever so slight haze/bloom. It is always present in The Witcher 2 for example no matter the weather conditions.

Exactly this. Atmosphere, its oozing with it.

The new screens look flat in comparison, even the ones released today.

They need to get back to this.

 

[bombeybox]

But that doesn't mean 4k=ubersampling.

So, you want to say, that Ubersampling - worse that natural 4k resolution?
And, in fact, that scene with Ubersamping will not look as good as it was on the 4k screenshot?

 

[GuyNwah]

I see.. Thx for an explanation,


May be, but it looks damn same (here my comparsion):

Spoiler

1080p+Ubersampling

Spoiler

2160p (Nvidia DSR 4x) without Ubersampling

Spoiler

2160p (Nvidia DSR 4x) + Ubersampling

In net effect, they're going to be very similar. 4K to 1080p is 4xFSAA (full-screen, 4:1). Ubersampling at any resolution is 2xSSAA (supersampling, 2:1). You'd have to compare it to a different AA technology, say MSAA, and look closely for features that are characteristically different to notice much of a difference at all.

Ubersampling will perform as well as downsampling and should be about half as costly. The one exception is where you have, say, monitor hardware that does excellent downsampling.

 

[bombeybox]

In net effect, they're going to be very similar.

It looks the same in my uncompressed .PNG's

4K to 1080p is 4xFSAA (full-screen, 4:1)

Not 2:1? I mean 2160p its exactly two times greater (larger) than the 1080p resolution. So why 4x FSAA? FSAA = SSAA?
I always though, that 4k upscale from 1080p - meant 4xSSAA form 1080p.

 

[GuyNwah]

It looks the same in my uncompressed .PNG's

Not 2:1? I mean 2160p its exactly two times greater (larger) than the 1080p resolution. So why 4x FSAA? FSAA = SSAA?
I always though, that 4k upscale from 1080p - meant SSAA 2x form 1080p.

No, it's the number of samples or pixels. 4K (3840x2160) is 4x as many pixels as 1080p (1920x1080). 4K to 1080p downsampling computes 1 pixel from 4 pixels.

2x SSAA or 2x MSAA computes 1 pixel from 2 samples. (You can do 4x, 8x, or 16x, but it gets more costly for less improvement.)

 

[stexman3]

So, u want to say, that semi-volumetric cloud will be only a few locations? Other one - what? Static clouds? What a nonsense!

So, those are static clouds in the latest SS, right ?

 

[misho8723]

Well, Yes! Everywhere, where there is a cloudy \ rain weather (and not in some designated areas, as u said early).What is the point of them, if we will not see this kind of clouds every time bad weather, but only "in some special places"!

Man, what are you talking about? Where is there a place in the 4K screen for semi-volumetric clouds? You can say that at the boat screen there could be around the mountains, but in the 4K ? Where should they be? Around houses? Around Geralt?..

 

[bombeybox]

So, those are static clouds in the latest SS, right ?

Man, what are you talking about? Where is there a place in the 4K screen for semi-volumetric clouds? You can say that at the boat screen there could be around the mountains, but in the 4K ? Where should they be? Around houses? Around Geralt?..

Nevermind, I just thought. that actually ALL clouds will use this Volumetric technology (well, u know. kind of next-gen i suppose) but its not, only few clouds in few places (mountains etc.). Others - usual cloud's method. as in all other games

 

[misho8723]

Nevermind, I just thought. that acually ALL clouds will use this Volumetric technology (well, u know. kind of next-gen i suppose) but its not, only few clouds in few places (mountains etc.). Others - usual cloud's method. as in all other games

So you wanted every cloud in the game to be volumetric? Yes, that is really something next-gen .. but for current-gen, that's a no-no ..we can be happy if atleast some clouds are going to be semi-volumetric

 

[Jeeers]

Nevermind, I just thought. that acually ALL clouds will use this Volumetric technology (well, u know. kind of next-gen i suppose) but its not, only few clouds in few places (mountains etc.). Others - usual cloud's method. as in all other games

But cloud shadows are still present. Just watch PAX 2015 latest video ("Royal" vivern hunt). After killing the damn thing, when Geralt gets on his horse there is a shadow passing over the scene. Not a big deal, but still effective and realistic approach. My guess is that it is a beforementioned semivolumetric cloud passing over landscape and casting shadow. Anyway I guess I am just wasting my time - two more months to go!

 

[MDUmairKhan]

I agree with @bombeyboxx. While first screenshot looks better than Pax demo, it still doesn't hold up against earlier builds but at least it looks better. While second image on ship, seems to be missing volumetric clouds that we saw every time on new renderer before E3 2014, whenever there were ice covered mountains. Seems like they completely removed them.

 

[Jeeers]

Seems like they completely removed them.

I don't think so. But we will see....
Knowing how REDs say they approach realism, my guess is - the weather conditions are just not right for them to be there at that time.

 

[bombeybox]

Knowing how REDs say they approach realism

Ohh.. you mean - totally unrealistic approach?
Where, in this picture, lightning looks more realistic?
Where in this picture, fire effect and particles looks more realistic?
Same in motion 1 \ 2

 

[arkhenon]

You read the part where it was explained that "that" type of clouds only appear in high altitudes right? So, a question: Can sea level be considered high altitude? It's probably too low of an altitude to create those clouds.

Also, I don't think the clouds in the skybox are "static" clouds. Jose said in an interview that they are making the weather conditions change slowly. As in clouds building up long before there is rain, and that you can see them coming. They just won't be volumetric - as in they won't be rendered with particles or voxels. The skybox can still be dynamic you know

 

[Jeeers]

Ohh.. you mean - totally unrealistic approach?
Where, in this picture, lightning looks more realistic?
Where in this picture, fire effect and particles looks more realistic?
Same in motion 1 \ 2

In the screenshots provided by you I mostly see less particle count. I also don't think we can judge lighting by comparing 2 screenshots. But we are doing that, right?
Anyway I am not trying to jump on downgrade discussion wagon - my statement (REDs statement to be precize) was about that everything (just parafrazing) has to make sense - in this case, speaking about clouds - there must be special conditions met for clouds to appear. I don't live in mountainous region, but I have been to Norway several times - I know what I am talking about. Just consider that they have special guy just responsible for vegetation (that is what REDs claim). And appropriate vegetation grows where it should in W3. So why not clouds?
There is big difference between static eyecandy environment (like in DA:I) or dinamic, everchanging weather system. That is what I ment by "realism".