The coolest demo since Epic Games' 'Samaritan' demo: Infiltrator just seems to fully fleshed not to be at least a glimmer of some upcoming game. Amazing stuff.
Unreal Engine 4 'Infiltrator' Tech Demo
- Thread starter hal
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
![[GU]elmur_fud](/data/avatars/s/47/47919.jpg?1425583194){kind=avatar}
[GU]elmur_fud
I have balls of Depleted Uranium
Whatever they are up to, it could be good. I refuse to judge till I play whatever they are making for myself. I wouldn't say confidence is high. The graphics are pretty slick and that is a nifty cinematic, but if gameplay was like that I would get bored quick.
I had the same reaction. It was, hmmm haven't I been teased like this before?? Fool me once...
Indeed amazing . Any chance of trying to find out what it was running on? Not the HW, that's known, the SW environment. Because the fact it was running on desktop PC HW might be where the similarities with a typical desktop PC end.
"As a PC guy who knows hardware to the metal, I spend most of my days in frustration knowing damn well what I could do with the hardware, but what I cannot do because Microsoft and IHVs wont provide low-level GPU access in PC APIs. One simple example, drawcalls on PC have easily 10x to 100x the overhead of a console with a libGCM style API.” Nvidia Programmer and creator of FXAA Timothy Lottes.
In other words, low level access would explain why similar rigs to the Infiltrator/Samaritan 680 rig, struggle like hell with some recent titles(Crysis 3 and Bioshock Infinite),games that look far worse than the Infiltrator and Samaritan demos.
Basically, are these demos running on some libGCM style API that Nvidia provided? Because if so, they are pretty meaningless to what's likely to be seen in actual games. Although , they show what the engine is capable of and frustratingly, what's possible with low-level GPU access on a single GTX680.
Last edited:
Low level access is impractical though because there lots of different GPUs out there. You can't really rewrite the engine for each one of them.
More to the point, Samaritan and Infiltrator aren't games, they're demos. They're tailoured cinematics without all the overhead of running an actual game.
Many devs are pressing for it , Crytek, Dice for sure and maybe Epic too? Because Tim Sweeney is always talking about wanting low level access to GPU resources. Between them, they provide the bulk of the middleware game engines used in the game industry today. It would involve more work, but there are only two major players Nvidia and AMD and they need only support 3 GPU architectural generations back each. Why should someone expect to run the latest PC game on a GPU from 2003?
The big issue is that DirectX API adds hundreds/thousands of cycles of wait time for even simple draw operations. PC is effectively using brute force to render anything fast. We are using incredibly advanced GPUs that give us unecessarily choppy game performance because of a poor , wasteful SW environment.
As for Infiltrator, if it wasn't running through the performance wrecking DirectX, what was the point of boasting that it was running on desktop hardware that you can quote "buy today?".
Hold the phone there slippy. Nvidia have used three different architectures in the latest generation of cards alone...
Each gen's range are just variations on the same underlying architecture. And it's leading figures in the industry calling for this.
In the words of Johan Andersson of DICE, the lead graphics architect on BF3, responding to an Bit-tech piece on the performance cost of DirectX here:
Of course, having a standardised abstraction layer makes sense. But what most seem to want at the very least, a thinner API layer with greater low-level access to the HW.
Anyway. back to Infiltrator and Samaritan. The point was, about whether it's simply a glimpse of the (currently) unobtainable.
Last edited:
The current series use Fermi (initial 600 series cards), Kepler (majority of 600 series cards) and Kepler-Refresh (Titan GTX and current 700 series cards). That's three different architectures. Maxwell is on it's way in around 12 months and Volta in 2-3 years.
By Volta, cards will have gone through six different architectures in 3 years.
By Volta, cards will have gone through six different architectures in 3 years.
"Epic" "Games"
Nice tech demo. Now start making games with it. Y'know, ones that don't suck.
I'm starting to view Epic with the vague contempt that I now hold for BioWare. It'll take a fairly monumental effort to build bridges with the PC gaming community.
Nice tech demo. Now start making games with it. Y'know, ones that don't suck.
I'm starting to view Epic with the vague contempt that I now hold for BioWare. It'll take a fairly monumental effort to build bridges with the PC gaming community.
Not just the PC community. Look at Gears Judgement, compare it with recent games like Bioshock Infinite (all three platforms score over 90% according to gamerankings). There is a gap of design capability.
Epic needs to wake up and check what the other brilliant studios are doing. And no more platform exclusive.
Epic had their day as game devs, but that seems to be a thing of the past. We still entertain fantasies that they have another Unreal or UT up their sleeves, but I am not so sure. UT will probably be farmed out to someone, just as U2 was orphaned on Legend's crumbling doorstep.
As I have said before, I play Skyrim and I think about what Unreal could have become if it weren't for greed and ego. Yep, pretty harsh assessment, but that is what I think happened; Epic got too big, too muddled in navel gazing and bank bookery and totally lost their way. If ever a studio completely and utterly wasted a franchise, it was Epic with Unreal. Not the Tournament series; Epic did well there, but Unreal was just dumped and hasn't been picked out of the trash yet.
The tech demo is outstanding, but don't expect much from Epic in the way of a game. This is a sales pitch, not a game pitch and it isn't aimed at us.
Epic are like a first love who is now a cheap tart; you can't help but care for her still, but in the end you know there is nothing really there anymore. It is a fantasy to think you can go back in time and any future is looking bleak.
I wish I were wrong because I would absolutely die for a true sequel to Unreal or another UT from Epic, but it is so freaking hard not to be skeptical.
Anyhow, pretty movie.
As I have said before, I play Skyrim and I think about what Unreal could have become if it weren't for greed and ego. Yep, pretty harsh assessment, but that is what I think happened; Epic got too big, too muddled in navel gazing and bank bookery and totally lost their way. If ever a studio completely and utterly wasted a franchise, it was Epic with Unreal. Not the Tournament series; Epic did well there, but Unreal was just dumped and hasn't been picked out of the trash yet.
The tech demo is outstanding, but don't expect much from Epic in the way of a game. This is a sales pitch, not a game pitch and it isn't aimed at us.
Epic are like a first love who is now a cheap tart; you can't help but care for her still, but in the end you know there is nothing really there anymore. It is a fantasy to think you can go back in time and any future is looking bleak.
I wish I were wrong because I would absolutely die for a true sequel to Unreal or another UT from Epic, but it is so freaking hard not to be skeptical.
Anyhow, pretty movie.
Last edited: