Gears Developer The Coalition Worked On The Matrix Awakens UE5 Demo

It’s cool but the day I see and play a game like that fully functional say a GTA6 type game then I will go wow. For now it’s just nice.
Just imagine the time and cost to create a fully operational GTA6 looking like that.
It’s take around 5 years for very good AAA game as it is.

@Dezzy70 we are already seeing the start of that now. Just look at the entire in game Hellblade 2 reveal from the other night.

Goes to show the untapped potential for these next-gen consoles.
Still ALOT of work to do to optimize UE5 for consoles though. The performance across PS5 and Series X/S ranges from 20-30FPS, which obviously isn't acceptable.
Based on the DF interview, Epic know this and are still working on further optimizations, so things should improve.

@uptownsoul Probably not.

But this and Hellblade 2 seriously made me super excited for the next batch of this gen only series X games. Guess we will get out first true taste with STALKER.

@blinx01 Gears of war is going to blow minds. So is Hellblade 2.

Its OK but its not necessarily the 'best' gaming experience. It shows some potential and I can't wait to see what a big team of experienced developers could do given the time & Budget to optimise the experience specifically for a Gaming project.

I'm sure a team of talented developers could get a lot better performance than a relatively small team within a relatively short time frame as this experience was created so it does bode well for the future. I'd be 'disappointed' if Gears 6 looked and Ran like this because at times, the drop in resolution is very apparent and frame rate isn't good enough. I'd prefer another UE4 4k/60 Gears 6 than a sub 1080p (albeit with excellent temporal reconstruction to 4k) and an unstable frame rate capped to 30fps.

Its all well and good having 'next' gen Visuals but you also need the 'next-gen' performance too - not 360/PS3 era performance or worse...

Of course, this is a quickly put together Experience so I am optimistic that we will see some incredible looking and performing games in the future. Right now, I don't think we have seen anything running at more than 30fps on the most powerful consoles so there are still concerns for the consoles...

@BAMozzy Hellblade 2 showed what unreal engine 5 is capable of more than the !matrix demo did. Which was purely a marketing play therefore won't have the full optimisation of an actual game. I think critiquing what is essentially a playable advert is pointless dude

Next Gears is gonna be nutz !

I was kind of impressed at how stable the Series S was in terms of frames with this demo The breakdown I watched showed both the X & PS5 all over the place frame rate wise but the S had one dip and then solid 30 FPS doing the same sequence.

Yes the resolution, draw distance and so on are lower but personally I prefer a stable frame rate over higher resolution and the other shiny bits.

It's an impressive demo overall and show a lot of potential for the future of games. However, stable frame rate is king for me preferably 60 FPS and I would always willingly take less shiny or fancy graphics if that is what it takes.

@Scenes
Have seen it of course and looks good.
I shall wait until release and see true full interaction gameplay.
Don’t get me wrong but I like to see full control the HUD etc in real time gameplay.
Don’t care what any company shows until I see actual gameplay.

@Ihavenomouthandimust I disagree. We don't know how Hellblade actually looks and runs on a Console. For all you know, that could be running on a top end PC and how much of what we saw was actual player controlled too. We have no idea of how it looks and runs on console at all and whether or not that will 'drop' resolution in 'battle', struggle to hold 30fps etc.

I am NOT saying HBII looked 'bad' but it also didn't have anywhere near the number of 'AI' controlled meta human characters and Vehicles. Nowhere near the same degree of physics interaction (which at times was 'poor' - the spears 'disappearing'), nowhere near the same degree of reflections etc. That's 'not' a criticism at all - the vast majority of that is down to the choice of setting. That 'modern' setting with so many reflective materials is going to be a LOT more taxing.

It does look 'impressive' - especially compared to the visuals we have had so far this gen but we have no idea on what hardware its running on and certainly not seen anything as 'complex' as the Matrix experience yet from Hellblade II.

@BAMozzy
Totally agree, everyone gets carried away.
Imagine the time and cost to develop a fully running game like that. It will be 8 to 10 years per AAA game.

@Dezzy70 I don't think it will take that long as a lot of the workflow becomes 'obsolete'. You don't have to bake in shadows, make lower quality assets, have to worry about point lighting, shadow maps, cube maps etc etc.

The Coalition have already helped a LOT with optimising and certain FX now costing a lot less in frame time. Hardware Acceleration is now enabled and they are finding ways to use Nanite which couldn't be animated so who knows what a dedicated team with enough time/resources and experience could achieve, how much more 'optimised' can UE5 become over time.

As more and more creators use UE5 too, you will build up a massive library of photogrammetry and Nanite models, things that 'other' developers can use and 'tweak' as well..

Genuinely surprised at how a lot a people are reacting to this.

All I’ve read for the past year is - when is next-gen going to get here - and now we have something that’s very clearly next level and reactions are split between - “meh, it’s not all that” and “it’s not a REAL game though”.

I really don’t know what gamers expect at this point. I think a lot of people just want something to complain about.

Hellblade 2 could release tomorrow with photoreal graphics and the reaction would still be -“but it’s not GTA. Give me a REAL game”

For most game trailers that look amazing they are running on a pc with optimized graphics and will not look as good on console, the amount of times I've seen trailers at E3 or other gaming events that looks amazing but when the game actually comes it it doesn't look as good.

This tech demo looked good though but to get those graphics consistently on say an open world game with a huge map will be pretty demanding and near impossible on current consoles, maybe next gen though. I remember at one of the E3 shows square enix showed a tech demo for something that looked like a final fantasy game and it looked amazing, yet nothing came that looked that good

@UltimateOtaku91 Cool story bro. I still think Hellblade will look better than anything the other consoles are offering. peace and love

@Scenes I suspect the complaints derive from those who reluctantly own a series S for Xbox exclusives only. I have a mate who prefers ps5, he got a series s for Bethesda games etc. He can't quite being himself around to the fact Xbox is making amazing games. some people are just stuck in the mud

@BAMozzy Yeaaaah, well, you're wrong lol.

@Ihavenomouthandimust I never said the other consoles would have better looking games, I'm just saying tech demos always look better than the proper games.

The 30fps turned me off a bit. If the demo was at 60fps or higher, I would feel a lot better about The Matrix demo being a next gen showcase.

Gears 6 is being made on the same engine.

@Ihavenomouthandimust Wrong? How??

Hellblade 2 wasn't as 'impressive' as just walking/driving around the Matrix Demo. The Physics on display is far superior, the lighting with all those reflective surfaces due to a LOT of metallic and glass materials is more impressive, the amount of AI controlled Characters/vehicles was far more impressive and even the 'geometry' of the world - All those different Cars, People, Buildings etc...

That's also running right now on a Series S/X console. All you have seen is a trailer that you don't know what platform is being used to run that 'constructed' sequence that you have no idea how much was actual 'game-play' and what was 'cinematic'. For all you know, the only player controlled part was the walk into the cave and occasionally aiming a spear to throw. The interaction with your fellows could well be 'scripted' and not player controlled. It could take control of Senua as you 'flee' to grab another spear off someone to throw and certain points looked very 'scripted' like jumping through the Fire, the hand smashing some of the wooden barriers, lifting the chunk of wood off a fallen comrade...

The amount of 'actual' game-play could be just Walking through the cave (interrupted by a few scripted events), then running away, with occasional scripted points of throwing spears.

As I also said, it could be running on a very high end PC just to get a stable 30fps to keep the resolution high. If you haven't got a great deal of glass/metal, then RT reflections aren't as expensive to do, Less AI on screen, more resources to boost res, less 'physics' simulations, more resources. Also another few years of experience, co-operation from other UE5 devs and 'updates' to the Engine could make it even easier to optimise.

I do think that Hellblade will ultimately be a 'better' gaming experience because its being designed as a 'Game' rather than an impressive 'tech' demo and advert. They are making a 'Game' and have total control over the look and design of it. If they know 10 complex AI characters is the most they can have, then no encounter will be designed with 'more' (or will be reduced down to 10 before it goes Gold). Therefore they can design the game specifically for the Hardware.

All I am saying now though is that Hellblade 2 looked amazing but we don't yet know if that was Series X, how much was actually player controlled etc. We do know that Matrix is running on a Series X and how it 'runs' too. We also see far more geometric complexity, far more variety, far more AI, far more Physics simulation, far more ray traced reflections etc (and more impressive than Spider-Mans Reflections). I must admit, I did like the Fire and the reflection of Torches in that one area of the Cave but it really isn't on that level. The one thing I think was more impressive, was the consistency of the faces - at times, the res drops too much in the Matrix and the faces become very 'soft' and Hellblade looked far more 'consistent' - but again, that may well be down to the Hardware its running on, the fact that the game is not using anywhere near as much Physics, AI, RT etc so can use the resources to render a sharper, more consistent image.

I really like how The Coalition is helping to shape Unreal Engine 5. Microsoft Studios as a whole are heavily invested in the engine - probably more so than Sony as Sony studios prefer to use proprietary engines - so I am very excited at future first-party projects.

I know there is still a lot of work to do; but from the stuff I have seen between this Matrix Experience and the recent Hellblade II footage, the future is looking very bright!

It's crazy to think that, with all that graphical detail, Nanite really only needed about 10MB/sec per frame of streaming IO for this Matrix demo (so 300MB/sec for a 30fps title).

Even if you wanted a 60fps target title - which would probably be less demanding than what's on display on this demo, that's 600MB/s sec of IO. 120fps would be 1200MB/s of streaming IO. My point is that the Series X|S have plenty of IO overhead for all kinds of games thanks to Nanite.

I can not wait for UE5 games - no matter how graphically demanding they may be thanks to the available technology the engine provides.

@BAMozzy er, I was joking. "Yeaaaah, well you're wrong lol" but um...why the essay? Even if I did think you're wrong which I mostly do, why does that bother you? I disagree with what you're saying. I think you're just being pedantic but that's cool, don't have to write me a story about it

@uptownsoul
I think Epic themselves optimized for PS5 since they have experience with the console after doing that 'Lumen in the the land of nanite' tech demo for Sony.
The only Sony 1st party studio to actually use Unreal Engine has been 'Bend Studio' with Days Gone, so none of them would have any real expertise.

MS on the other hand already have various games in development using UE5.

@Ihavenomouthandimust Because I am NOT wrong and can justify why I am correct. Its not pedantic at all as they are all significant aspects of a Game. I am not putting any 'personal' preference for the setting or franchise, personal taste - I am quantifying why Hellblade 2 is not as technically impressive or demanding. What I see from Hellblade 2 is a step-up from Hellblade and many other games we have seen, but its NOT a leap like Matrix is (albeit a tech demo so should be impressive).

Nothing about HB2 looked like it couldn't run on last gen with some concessions - Maybe Cube map or SSR water reflections, maybe noticeable LoD management even if it looks 'better' than Games still yet to release.

I can justify why its not technically superior from that tiny 'slice' of Video running on who knows what System. Who knows how it will actually look and run on Series X so how you can say 'I'm wrong' without actually providing a 'reason' and/or evidence to back up your statement is ridiculous. And as for 'Essay', not even close - when you get to big boys school, then you'll know what 'Essays' are. I prefer to explain my reasoning and if people are too ignorant or put off by 'text', that's a reflection on them!

@Rural-Bandit
Hurry up bring on Gears 6

@BAMozzy Dude you really need to chill. I still disagree with you. I think you're wrong and that's my opinion. End of story

@blinx01 I didn't know that about Sony. Huh. I love that Xbox has games using unreal engine 5 pending

@uptownsoul Unreal 5 is the future of gaming. Hopefully Sony can keep up lol

I’ve seen and played it. I understand why it’s blown people away but let’s be realistic it’s hardly even a game and it runs like dog *****.

It’s a nice look into the future but there’s zero chance of getting actual games looking like that @60fps on current gen hardware.

It was fantastic. The challenge for AAA games involve simplifying the creation pipeline — for Epic their vision is not making devs have to spend as much time on lighting or LOD. And in this iteration, making generative worlds and modifying as needed. Epic still has some issues to solve (locked 30fps, demo something at 60fps running Lumen&Nanite, animated/deformable meshes). But even with all that, they just showed off something that looks like a movie on a $500 gaming box. And it’s not a precanned animation: it’s a game with sound, physics, animation, interactivity and you can play it. Good show.

In a couple of years when a true game fiully optimized and build from the ground up with this engine ,with the next gen in mind we will see fantastic looking games but what I saw on my series s disapointed me but it’s only a démo so waiting for a true game .

@GamingFan4Lyf remember an article from last year where Epic said they’d worked for quite some time with Sony to develop UE5. I know they’ve also invested some serious money in the company. Think they have a closer relationship with them than you think.

@Ihavenomouthandimust pretty sure Epic worked closely with Epic during the development of UE5, so I think they’ll be fine.

@Jayphex Oh I am aware; but Sony's contribution feels like it's more...financial...more high-level - it's less transparent and mostly seems to come from a place of "how does it solely benefit Sony".

I am not a Microsoft fanboy or anything, I have a PS5 as well as a Series X, and I really like Sony's first-party content; but I do feel like The Coalition is genuinely trying to make the engine better for all console and PC development. The developers are finding the bottlenecks, noting where improvements can be made...and aren't hiding it one bit. Maybe it's all just for good PR, or maybe the developers actually care!

Plus, there are like...what...5 maybe 6 studios within Microsoft Studios that have confirmed that their next game is running on UE5?

The public perception definitely swings more in Microsoft's favor than Sony's when it comes to UE5 support. And after that Hellblade II showing, there is excitement what UE5 will bring to the table for Microsoft Studios titles.

Sony's support, to me, just feels like it simply threw money at Epic to ensure UE5 premiered on PS5 first to generate the narrative that, thanks to the fast SSD, PlayStation is the only place for UE5 (and it worked for a while until this Matrix demo).

Perception is reality.

@GamingFan4Lyf pretty sure we’ll see great-looking games on both / all platforms. Would imagine Sony’s input is more than merely financial - can’t see them doing this in order to try and limit UE5’s use elsewhere, given the nature of its eventual availability on pretty much every system.
Also have both PS5 and Series X - although I am more of a Sony person, having had every system of theirs (with the exception of Vita).
Not sure about public perception to be honest - most people that aren’t super into games will not really know / care what engine a game’s running on. Also, Microsoft are a lot more communicative with stuff than the usually private Sony (which is not to criticise them on this - despite not finding too many games to get excited about on GamePass as yet, really think Microsoft have the right approach in terms of engaging with the public)

@Jayphex I never said Sony's limiting use elsewhere, simply using it as a "look at me" tactic. Plus, Sony has a minority stake in Epic as well. So, yes, it's more financial.

Yes, both systems will have great-looking games. I personally feel like Microsoft is more vested in the day-to-day development of UE5 as an engine across the board.

Sony just wants it working well on PS5. That comes down to business focus.

Sony is heavily invested in PlayStation consoles, so any and all decision Sony makes regarding games are going to solely be for the sake of bolstering PlayStation consoles. Microsoft is heavily vested in...everything at this point..so naturally it's casting it's influence with a broader brush.

I am not trying to bash Sony in any way. I just feel like Microsoft is more developer-focused on UE5 where as Sony is business-focused on UE5.

@Jayphex Don't care if they aren't to be honest lol. There's a reason I'm on here and not pushaquare lol

Personally I thought the demo was ridiculously overhyped. The car chase scene looked kinda cool, but it's honestly not anything amazing to me these days, I have seen better physics and the graphics were just okay after I beat the car chase scene. Like the city looks detailed but the NPC's looked really generic and the cars were low detail. I guess this kinda thing just doesn't impress me.

The graphics were great, but the driving and walking was rubbish.