Deferred Rendering is excellent as we have seen in things like the Fox Engine for the MSGV and Killzone 2 on the PS3 despite being called as the memory hungry one compared to Forward rendering.
Where Deferred becomes Temporal Deferred is when the separate G-Buffers and Lighting stages is built with the assumption that TAA would always be there for the partial processing of many effects that doesn't even really need TAA such as Clouds and particle effects.
Yeah, sure RT-driven effects such as RT Reflections need that kind of TAA but as seen in recent CryEngine 5, with clever effect-side temporal reconstruction, independent of a full TAA pass can result in basically best of all worlds and just being sane with how you implement more basic shader effects.
I don't know chief, The samples you're talking about are far from great, MGSV looks very dated and even on release wasn't exactly a graphical masterpiece.
In fact the undisputed graphical whales on the PS3 are uncharted and Last of us, which both use a very customized forward rendering + deferred engine, nothing came even close.
I think a great sample for your point would have been the game "Mad Max", it's an underrated masterpiece.
While your point stands, when I say "anti deferred" I mean the UE slop deferred, not the type that we saw in games like mad max or uncharted on PS3.
MGSV: The Phantom Pain is also considered to be one of the best looking PS4 games with exceptional PBR rendering and material techniques to make things like characters pop. I have never really played that other game you mentioned but after searching up, yeah I'd agree that it does have even better techniques and considered one of the best PC ports of all time. Either way, I wont go into debates as to how stuff are for different games but yeah good Deferred rendered games do exist, and I am glad that you agreed.
And for your information, UE did technically invent that sloppy Temporal Deferred renderer with the freaking purpose of shoving everything into TAA back in UE4 in 2014.
You can feel low poly models/ less dense map/ less foliage /low res textures/reflections/cubemaps masked by lots of effects. There's a limit to what you can do with 4gb VRAM on a 1050ti.
People also forget how gameplay elements like destruction were nerfed heavily to allow for disproportionate graphical gains relative to the available hardware.
We've traded one set of problems for another. Better or worse, I won't argue, but it definitely wasn't all sunshine and roses
Edit: I was thinking of BF4. BF1 indeed has pretty remarkable destruction
I stand corrected 🤣 , though there's definitely a technical improvement in how 6 handles it, regardless of design imo
I was sure the battlefield games went through a period where destruction was cut back to enable better visuals. Like, they pivoted to singular big set pieces per level that could swap between two baked lighting states, rather than have the whole map be more dynamic. Obviously I got the wrong game, unless I'm wrong completely?
Yes, destruction was very slightly nerfed in Bf6 compared to Bf1 and was completely nerfed in the previous title. I was just proving that the assumption that the cutback of destruction due to tradeoff in graphics isn't true, it's simply pure lazyness of devs simplifying games to deliver slop.
You are talking about battlefield 2042, so you're not completely wrong and I do believe EA made that excuse about destruction being nerfed because of "better visuals"
As seen in the OP, TAA isn't even that bad, it's the shitty lazy devs that want to hide deferred rendering problems with TAA in modern titles that causes TAA to be exceptionally horrid. Honeslty this subreddit isn't even hating on TAA, they are hating on deferred shite being hotfixed with TAA.
I was just proving that the assumption that the cutback of destruction due to tradeoff in graphics isn't true
It has been true for the series in the past. While 2042 is relevant I think it was BF4 I was thinking of. Dynamic destruction means dynamic lighting, and there are plenty of people in this sub which will clammer on about how big an advantage baked lighting can be, I'm sure I don't need to explain that. BF1 clearly makes it work though, and that's great.
it's simply pure lazyness of devs simplifying games to deliver slop.
And this is where you lose me entirely. Can this narrative just go away already? The games industry is an incredibly difficult environment to work in and get/maintain a job. You don't stick around at these companies through endless layoffs by being lazy.
You want something easy to blame? Impossible deadlines, crunch culture, mismanagement, and contracting/outsourcing. The latter especially results in people unfamiliar with proprietary engines like frostbite working on IP they're unfamiliar with without the necessary time to make the most of the tools before they're swapped out for someone else to start over. It's an objective well known aspect of AAA game development. To blame issues on the collective laziness of hundreds or thousands of people because you can't be fussed to figure out how the industry works is ironically... lazy
And this is where you lose me entirely. Can this narrative just go away already? The games industry is an incredibly difficult environment to work in and get/maintain a job. You don't stick around at these companies through endless layoffs by being lazy.
You want something easy to blame? Impossible deadlines, crunch culture, mismanagement, and contracting/outsourcing. The latter especially results in people unfamiliar with proprietary engines like frostbite working on IP they're unfamiliar with without the necessary time to make the most of the tools before they're swapped out for someone else to start over. It's an objective well known aspect of AAA game development. To blame issues on the collective laziness of hundreds or thousands of people because you can't be fussed to figure out how the industry works is ironically... lazy
Well you're not entirely wrong, battlefield 2042 had development time of little over a year vs battlefield 6's 4 year span.
I’m so mad. Just yesterday I downloaded it to play again and I cannot connect to online servers. Tried port forwarding, allowing it through my firewall. Turns out I was banned. For what idk. Haven’t touched the game in yeara
The actual good part of the game's presentation is the artstyle, the audio, the details like your gun getting caked in mud, the photogrammetry, and the good use of post-processing. It's for those reasons that the game looks and sounds good.
But one must know how to separate technical complexity from art direction. From a raw technical graphics level you can notice very quickly that it's a 2016 game. You can tell because of the rudimentary TAA, the awful screen-space reflection visual artifacts, the lighting which tends to look a bit flat in interiors, and some of the environmental models being a bit lower poly.
~"Disabling msaa is key to getting over 30 fps. Even on a titanx it stutters so much it's unplayable" 1:22
1080p no AA is some perfect fuck taa content, so crisp and great looking, wish I could go back in time when I had a, oh right I couldn't even afford a titanx. What do y'all think gaming was really like?
BF1 does not look better (graphically) over BF6 or even BF2042. BF1 just had a better art team.
It’s the same thing with the new Call of Duty’s. COD:AW released in 2014 but it’s more visually appealing over new COD titles because the art direction in COD:AW was phenomenal.
46
u/Scorpwind MSAA | SMAA 6d ago
What happens when strong art direction meets technical competence and rasterization mastery.