Technology of games (newly created out of Killzone 3 discussion)

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Star Wars Force Unleashed II programmer has this information on custom anti-aliasing algorithm. He is comparing unified shader Xenos GPU and Cell processor with 5 SPU usage.

Typical execution times of DLAA in our current implementation are:

Xbox 360: 2.2 +/- 0.2ms @ 1280x720
PlayStation3 (5 SPUs): 1.6 +/- 0.3ms @ 1280x720

48x 500mhz unified shader GPU with GDDR3 takes almost 40% longer for same algorithm than 5x 3.2Ghz SPU with XDR. In this application, 1x SPU has double throughput per clock vs 1x unified shader unit.

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.p...&postcount=132

That's ALL available unified shaders the X360 GPU has working on the algorithm. That still leaves 2 more CPU cores (1 SPU and 1 PPU) AND the RSX available to the PS3 vs. just 3 cores available to the X360.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by Shin-Ra

More on God of War III Antialiasing

Sounds like their MLAA+ solution could be developed further and perhaps adjusted more in favour of speed or quality.

To add to your post, sometimes it helps to put this in terms of an end percentage. I found this on Beyond3D.

Removing MSAA from GPU (RSX) saves 5ms.
Cost: 5 SPU @ 4ms + scheduling overhead
Benefit: 17.6% extra performance available by RSX for other rendering task at 30hz.

http://www.realtimerendering.com/blo...od-of-war-iii/

[Shin-Ra]

To all the gamedev people who were savvy enough to get their company to pay for their plane ticket: come see me at GDC!

I’ll be introducing the new version of PhyreEngine – 3.0 – to the world. It has tools and everything. I’ll also be talking about the new rendering work we’ve done on PS3 lately. That includes:
-a particle system on SPU (which took a lot of ideas from the one ive presented on this blog which ran on GPU. but now on SPU.)
-a new take on MLAA on PS3
-deferred lighting on SPU and our rendering engine in general.

And then I get to talk about NGP. If you’re thinking of (or are currently) developing for the device, you might be interested in knowing what you can do on it graphics-wise and how it went adding NGP support for our engine. This I shall attempt to impart.

Plus, I’ll be giving out a free NGP devkit to the first 10 people through the door!* So come along! Thursday March 3rd, 3:00- 4:00, Room 302, South Hall.

GDC 2011

*lies

http://directtovideo.wordpress.com/2...k-at-gdc-2011/

Hmmm!

[Ascended_Saiyan]

This is an in-depth breakdown of the improved tech behind Killzone 3! Here are a few portions from the article:

"We've been doing a lot more stuff on SPUs this time around. One of the things we're very proud of is one that nobody sees: we're doing a full-depth rasterisation of tens of thousands of triangles in a software rasteriser on SPUs so we can do occlusion culling against it," van der Leeuw explains, revealing the process in which unnecessary polygons are removed from the equation, optimising the rendering process.

"This allows us to do much more aggressive culling, which in the end allows us to do more complex scenes and further draw distance. The work flow is also much nicer than what we had and it reduces the frame-rate spikes which were associated with the portal/occluder system we previously had."

"Compared to Killzone 2 I think we have 10 to 30 per cent less overdraw and primitives being wasted (so more of the stuff that we send to the RSX ends up on-screen and being drawn) but it depends on the circumstances."

The best graphical results we've seen on PlayStation 3 come about when RSX and Cell work together. Tasks that prove troublesome or computationally expensive for the graphics chip can be offloaded to Cell's phenomenally swift SPUs, and the precision of those effects is often superior too as the SPUs are capable of handling more complex code than a GPU's shader cores.

"With MLAA we reduced our load on the RSX quite a bit, we halved the size of the G-buffers and some depth/stencil re-primes between passes were no longer necessary, which gave us additional speed boosts," van der Leeuw observes.

"In the end it gave us quite a bit of RSX cycles and memory back, which we invested back into texture streaming, draw distance, texture sampling quality and - more indirectly - the variety in characters, environments and so on."

It's not just about making the game looking prettier, either. One of the most important elements of Killzone was the advanced AI. Similar to Halo, the quality of the AI scales dramatically between the difficulty settings, adding to the replay factor. Here, porting over the systems onto the SPUs had a direct and dramatic effect on the gameplay. Killzone 3 plays out across a series of more intense warzones than its predecessor, with more enemies exhibiting greater levels of intelligence.

As van der Leeuw explains, "We optimised more code to run on SPUs so we could do more AI and bigger battles, but the focus was really on the behaviours this time. We've spent a lot of time making them more diverse and recognisable for different enemy types, as well as improving their overall quality so they're more responsive, their animations look better, they're good in close combat and brutal melee and they're just more fun to play with."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/di...lzone-3?page=1

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Here are some GDC performance slides on DICE's Frostbite 2.0 engine.

SPU Translucency (Xenos vs. SPUs)


Culling (SPUs vs. Xenos and Top PC CPU)


SPUs and RSX Shading


Wow! It really took 3rd party a while to show some signs of life on the PS3 side of development, but it looks like it might pay off!

[linkgx1]

I think the problem with getting graphics like that is cost AND difficulty. People like Crytek can make inredible graphics....but that takes time AND money. And Crysis 2 doesn't even look that good on consoles because it wasn't optimized for 'em...if it did that would cost more money than they could recover. Remeber the GCN tech demos? It COULD run that, but it'd be a waste of time and money. The Zelda demo, we got Windwaker. I remeber seing this demo where this wooded guy was walking around in a incredibly detailed forest. The closest we got to it was RE4. And even most Wii games can't topple Rogue Squadron.

[linkgx1]

I have a question. Why is it that when a new console is released, they ALWAYS have the edge over PC...but you can upgrade a PC faster. I R CONFUSED!

[RiseDarthVader]

Originally Posted by linkgx1

I have a question. Why is it that when a new console is released, they ALWAYS have the edge over PC...but you can upgrade a PC faster. I R CONFUSED!

What are you confused about exactly? How PC hardware can be upgraded so quickly? In case you didn't know Intel, AMD and Nvidia release a new line of hardware every year and every 2 years they usually have a totally new architecture for their CPU's and GPU's. And I wouldn't say a new console always has an edge over the latest gaming PC hardware at the time of its release. For example when the PS3 came out in 2006 the Intel Core 2 architecture was available and Nvidia already had their 8000 series of GPU's which included the amazing 8800GT later in 2007.

[Toptube]

Originally Posted by linkgx1

I think the problem with getting graphics like that is cost AND difficulty. People like Crytek can make inredible graphics....but that takes time AND money. And Crysis 2 doesn't even look that good on consoles because it wasn't optimized for 'em...if it did that would cost more money than they could recover. Remeber the GCN tech demos? It COULD run that, but it'd be a waste of time and money. The Zelda demo, we got Windwaker. I remeber seing this demo where this wooded guy was walking around in a incredibly detailed forest. The closest we got to it was RE4. And even most Wii games can't topple Rogue Squadron.

Tech Demos are not games. They typically have much smaller memory requirements as they usually do not feature large maps and graphics demos usually do not run a lot of stuff under the hood like A.I. Its also a pre-determined demo, so optimization can be taken a step further, much like how the cinematics in MGS games look a bit better than the actual gameplay.

Rogue Squadron only fakes visually complexity. In reality, its assets are very simple. Really, it looks very dated now.

Later in a consoles life, we finally see games that nearly reach the quality of tech demos and target renders. Resident Evil 4 is probably the best looking console game of last generation. Its certainly in the top 3. It features Gamecube tech demo quality graphics in actual gameplay and still does not look dated, ignoring the resolution limiation. Another game that looks like a tech demo is DK Jungle Beat. Simple, but great looking game.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by linkgx1

I think the problem with getting graphics like that is cost AND difficulty. People like Crytek can make inredible graphics....but that takes time AND money. And Crysis 2 doesn't even look that good on consoles because it wasn't optimized for 'em...if it did that would cost more money than they could recover. Remeber the GCN tech demos? It COULD run that, but it'd be a waste of time and money. The Zelda demo, we got Windwaker. I remeber seing this demo where this wooded guy was walking around in a incredibly detailed forest. The closest we got to it was RE4. And even most Wii games can't topple Rogue Squadron.

The major cost is in R&D. Someone HAS to do the research and development part to get great results. Once that is done, the next game is WAY cheaper. Take Killzone 2, for instance. The R&D portion is what took most of the budget ($40+ million). This was to create the tech/engine. Now, Killzone 3 showed up within 2 years and a fraction of that cost. The same goes for Uncharted. UC2 was released only 18 months after UC1 and only cost around $20 (including advertising)! Halo 3 was around $60 million. Halo: ODST was significantly less (same engine).

Originally Posted by RiseDarthVader

And I wouldn't say a new console always has an edge over the latest gaming PC hardware at the time of its release. For example when the PS3 came out in 2006 the Intel Core 2 architecture was available and Nvidia already had their 8000 series of GPU's which included the amazing 8800GT later in 2007.

Do you think an Intel Core 2 CPU and Nvidia 8600 GPU in the wasteful, open platform environment can create a game like the first party Sony developers and DICE's latest project? Did you see the dev slide comparing Cell culling to an Intel Core i7 CPU? An Intel Core i7 is WAY better than a simple Core 2 processor.

[linkgx1]

Originally Posted by RiseDarthVader

What are you confused about exactly? How PC hardware can be upgraded so quickly? In case you didn't know Intel, AMD and Nvidia release a new line of hardware every year and every 2 years they usually have a totally new architecture for their CPU's and GPU's. And I wouldn't say a new console always has an edge over the latest gaming PC hardware at the time of its release. For example when the PS3 came out in 2006 the Intel Core 2 architecture was available and Nvidia already had their 8000 series of GPU's which included the amazing 8800GT later in 2007.

Well, I was more or less talking about the games themselves. I'll see beautiful game, but consoles seem to jump ahead for just a short bit.

[linkgx1]

Originally Posted by Toptube

Tech Demos are not games. They typically have much smaller memory requirements as they usually do not feature large maps and graphics demos usually do not run a lot of stuff under the hood like A.I. Its also a pre-determined demo, so optimization can be taken a step further, much like how the cinematics in MGS games look a bit better than the actual gameplay.

Rogue Squadron only fakes visually complexity. In reality, its assets are very simple. Really, it looks very dated now.

Later in a consoles life, we finally see games that nearly reach the quality of tech demos and target renders. Resident Evil 4 is probably the best looking console game of last generation. Its certainly in the top 3. It features Gamecube tech demo quality graphics in actual gameplay and still does not look dated, ignoring the resolution limiation. Another game that looks like a tech demo is DK Jungle Beat. Simple, but great looking game.

Okay, so since the Wii is theoretically nearly 2x the power of GCN, could it run the Zelda Space World demo? I'm thinking not, as I think some of it was rendered by computers for time constraints...

[truth411]

Originally Posted by linkgx1

Okay, so since the Wii is theoretically nearly 2x the power of GCN, could it run the Zelda Space World demo? I'm thinking not, as I think some of it was rendered by computers for time constraints...

Some Nintendo Devs and I are good friends and we go to the same church, they told me the Wii is closer to 1.5x the Gamecube.

[truth411]

Wow great thread and informative, Question:

1. It seems MLAA is shapeing up to be an Umbrella term for a type of Post Process algorithim and Thus not all Mlaa are created equal, Is this correct??

2. Currently the PS3 version of Mlaa in games is Better than AMD's GPU based Mlaa, I don't understand how this is possible considering how powerful todays GPUs are, any thoughts on why this is??

Not trying to take away from the PS3 hardware or the devs that work on it, just seeking clarification.

[Shin-Ra]

Originally Posted by truth411

Wow great thread and informative, Question:

1. It seems MLAA is shapeing up to be an Umbrella term for a type of Post Process algorithim and Thus not all Mlaa are created equal, Is this correct??

2. Currently the PS3 version of Mlaa in games is Better than AMD's GPU based Mlaa, I don't understand how this is possible considering how powerful todays GPUs are, any thoughts on why this is??

Not trying to take away from the PS3 hardware or the devs that work on it, just seeking clarification.

1. I think anything calling itself MLAA should strongly relate to Alexander Reshetov/Intel's original research.

2. Evidently adjustments can be made with SCE's extended MLAA implementation, probably more than the ThresholdFactor/Base options displayed in this LBP2 debug menu:


http://94.198.82.91/25ba5d33e2b57090..._h264v2_hd.mp4 [55:49]

As far as I know, AMD's graphics card driver just forces MLAA on or off. PC developers would need to support MLAA in their engine, for starters - just to be able to disable MLAA on portions of the picture like HUD/UI where it's not needed or wanted.

[linkgx1]

Originally Posted by truth411

Some Nintendo Devs and I are good friends and we go to the same church, they told me the Wii is closer to 1.5x the Gamecube.

From the games I played, I'm thinking its .75. However, Super Mario Galaxy1/2 blows those games away!

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by linkgx1

Well, I was more or less talking about the games themselves. I'll see beautiful game, but consoles seem to jump ahead for just a short bit.

Umm, they really haven't been. Look at crysis as an example of what pc gaming has been able to look like since this gen of consoles came out.

[truth411]

Originally Posted by linkgx1

From the games I played, I'm thinking its .75. However, Super Mario Galaxy1/2 blows those games away!

And donkey kong country looks even better. The guys did a great job with it.

[truth411]

Originally Posted by Shin-Ra

1. I think anything calling itself MLAA should strongly relate to Alexander Reshetov/Intel's original research.

2. Evidently adjustments can be made with SCE's extended MLAA implementation, probably more than the ThresholdFactor/Base options displayed in this LBP2 debug menu:


http://94.198.82.91/25ba5d33e2b57090..._h264v2_hd.mp4 [55:49]

As far as I know, AMD's graphics card driver just forces MLAA on or off. PC developers would need to support MLAA in their engine, for starters - just to be able to disable MLAA on portions of the picture like HUD/UI where it's not needed or wanted.

Oh ok, thanks.

[linkgx1]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

Umm, they really haven't been. Look at crysis as an example of what pc gaming has been able to look like since this gen of consoles came out.

I meant at launch.