What did /3/ think of the rendering and FX in "The Order: 1886 (2014)"?Reposting cause I sucked the first time with making a webm.I picked this up recently because the visuals fascinated me. I can't put my finger on what it is specifically, but I actually feel that this game mimics photo-realism in its real time rendering better than most modern games. Something about the way the game looks is soft and real, like an actual video camera recording. It feels a bit like the environmental equivalent of uncanny valley at times when in motion.I've taken some shots which I'm going to dump shortly, but damn this game is gorgeous.
From that short webm I'd say it's just really well done post-processing.If my time studying post-processing effects (read: fooling around with Reshade) doesn't fail me:>bloom>anamorphic lens flare>lens dirt and related lens effects>very gentle motion blurAs well as additional cinematic effects such as >letterboxing >capped framerates >slightly shaky cameraAll of these effectively simulate the way a real camera would operate and all the defects it would capture, leading to an incredibly cinematic experience. I'd say the additional mood effects like a muted colour palette and use of fog and smoke help to boost the illusion even more. This kind of cinematic "photorealism" boost to games is definitely possible, people have achieved wild stuff with post-processing injectors like Reshade/SweetFX & ENB. You just don't see it in traditional releases because they tend to ruin gameplay (see: all the constant complaints about games overusing bloom and motion blur). But in more cinematic titles like The Order: 1886 where graphics takes precedence over gameplay, I guess it's a free pass to just load the thing with all the post-processing effects.On the raw graphical side of things, a good control over your shaders, animations and particle effects contributes a lot too. But being an AAA production, you typically can't expect anything less than really well done.
>>657839I agree; if I stop the camera and screenshot with stuff like the filmgrain/moblur turned off, this is how it looks. It's still remarkably nice. The colours also feel 'right', and the AO in the scene definitely seems to add a lot. I'd just as easily imagine this is a screencap of Diagon Alley from a Harry Potter movie or something.
Taken with the games photomode. I do notice that the game seems to look even more real on a TV, but I think that's from potential resolution scaling softening the edges of everything even further?
From some of the train tunnels later on. I'd definitely love to also do a video break down of the way light falls in dark areas when they're using lanterns, as well as the clever use of spotlighting. This entire game reeks of well placed effects and effects
Turns out the red colour channel for the game is 'pinched' at the centre slightly and blurred. I don't know if this is part of the chromatic aberration effect or an attempt to create an early Friese-Green colour effect, but it looks interesting, and is slightly noticeable on greyscale or monochrome images.
One of the boilers from some dark area.
>>657845What is going on with the reflections in this pic?
>>657889Im a retard, meant to quote:>>657843
>>657890they're bad screen-space reflections and/or cubemapping. Remember that these are real-time renders.
>>657893Technically speaking, the player doesn't roam around in this area, but only the area beyond those stone huts/gates at the rear, but when I flew out this far, the screen-space reflections started to falter a bit.
Another screenshot, also happy Christmas y'all.
Gun on the floor next to a fallen enemy 
I'm just a /3/ lurker and don't do any work in the 3d space at all, but I had the good fortune to meet the project lead for this game and many of the team members. I spoke with him at length and he said they crunched 60-80 hour work weeks on this game, put tons of effort in and in his opinion produced the best looking games of that year. He said barely anybody purchased it.
>>657934I'm so sad to hear that! I've been spamming pictures to my friends since I got it and the really sad thing is that it usually gets a "huh, neat". Most game review sites were so critical of the gameplay (which wasn't necessarily flawed, buggy or bad, but just didn't innovate much) that they didn't seem to see the incredible technical hurdles.I'm gonna shoot some emails to the developers because this game is a massive damned step towards photorealism in games that I still haven't seen to date. The story and atmosphere was also really awesome.
>>657934Well it wasn't a good GAME as far as I remember.
>>657934One of the greatest looking game of its time, and still hold up today. Not a bad game, but it's very short.They're almost paying people to play it at this point, have seen it on sale for less than $2.Currently on sale $2.99 on PSstore, in Moosebucks.
Looks like the Crystal Palace? I love how they squeezed in all these references to the Victorian world with a slightly alternate history.
Bump for quality.
>>657836Stunning almost autistic attention to detail, terribly designed and written game overall.
Post-processing combined with the help of low-lighting conditions. Once you step into brightly lit, glossy environments, the illusion usually drops. Fallout 4 is a terrible example for me to point to, but the worst-looking parts of that game were the Institute. The best-looking parts were going into dark, abandoned buildings. Fuck, what a disappointing game.
>>657934They forgot to make the actual game.
>>657934>He said barely anybody purchased it.
i really like their level of detail. how did they do it? photorealistic textures/UVs and PBRs with IBL lighting all over the place?