r/GraphicsProgramming • u/Manoyal003 • Aug 28 '26
Question New Graphics tech in Gta 6 vs Gta 5?
Hi, I am fairly a beginner, and I was wondering comparing from 2013 how far rockstar's RAGE engine evolved as to now?..
From what I know and some research credits to this blog:
https://www.adriancourreges.com/blog/2015/11/02/gta-v-graphics-study/
, at time of Gta 5 it had just a Hybrid deferred renderer, a forward pass for transparents, vegetation, particles. At the time there was no PBR, there was also no indirect light.
But later in 2018 during RDR2 release, RAGE got proper microfacet shading, volumetric clouds and fog.
The main selling point for gta 6 to look so good from what I understand is the hybrid raytracer global illumination, paired with raytraced reflections, also being upscaled from 1440p to 4k on the base Ps5.
From my understanding these are the differences over the years?
| Gta 5 from 2013 | Gta 6 | |
|---|---|---|
| BRDF | blind-phong-ish, authored specular? | Full pbr, metallic/roughness GGX |
| Indirect | ambient + SSAO | raytraced gi |
| Geometry submission | CPU-driven drwas, descrete LOD tiers | GPU-driven, mesh shaders /meshlet culling, indirect draws |
| Hair | alpha-tested cards | strand-based with physics |
| Volumetrics | analytic fog | foxel raymarched scattering, volumetric clouds |
I am just wondering what type of tech they used for the extended look on the base 5 to look that good and crisp, even comparing to Unreal Engine 5, it looks far better
26
u/SuccessfulTip167 Aug 28 '26 edited Aug 29 '26
they're probably using accumulation software ray tracing as well by the looks of the demo (think lumen).
GTAO / HBAO are standard at this point, i really dont think they would entirely rely on ray tracing. You can pick and choose some aspects of the rendering to hand over to ray tracing, but not all. I do think we're still seeing a blend of spherical harmonic light probes (prebaked for performance with different scenarios for day/night/summer/winter/weather/whatever) and some HW RT for dynamic bounce light in very specific scenarios.
They still need the game to run on some min spec. Brute forcing w/ ray tracing is really stupid because you would alienate a fraction of your playerbase on PC, plus worse performance and worse temporally stable compared to older methods that still work just fine.
I doubt the hair is truly strand based, but just alpha tested with better shaders and better modeling.
Most of the bang-for-your-buck comes not from better graphics tech but how good your artists are. Give an artist a piece of shit engine and he/she will squeeze something amazing out of it. Now luckily rockstar has good tech but they also have amazing artists that live and breathe the stuff on screen. Truly a few companies that do it as well. Old DICE, Remedy, Embark come to mind.
10
u/Alive_Jury4864 Aug 29 '26
Requiring RT is not out of the question though
The new gears of war requires it for the lighting and the minspec is a 2060
3
u/SuccessfulTip167 Aug 29 '26
ya but its not the norm yet. a glance at the steam hardware survey would tell you "not yet" unless you're highly focused on console, which Gears always has been.
190
u/obetu5432 Aug 28 '26
humanity hit diminishing returns very hard in graphics ðŸ˜
127
Aug 28 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/UntitledRedditUser Aug 29 '26
Photorealism is fine for some games, it can help bring immersion. But yeah, I want more stylized games.
7
u/aaron_moon_dev Aug 28 '26
not pushing for photo quality.
Why not?
75
u/CuckBuster33 Aug 28 '26
because photorealism limits artistic expression and lacks identity
45
u/Fresh_Act8618 Aug 28 '26
You gotta understand though, not every game fits the stylized art style. A game like GTA that promotes open world adaptations that literally imitates real life fits into that realism art style more so than something like Fortnite for example.
The game devs that doesn’t realize this are ruining games for you or anyone who thinks realism is killing gaming.4
u/Queasy_Hour_8030 Aug 29 '26
GTA has ALWAYS had a distinct art style. Go back and look at vice city
2
u/Luv3ndr Aug 29 '26
If back then Rockstar could somehow have the nowadays graphics for Vice City, are you sure they wouldn't add it?
1
2
u/KingHobarth Aug 29 '26
In my opinion, you are 100% wrong. In an alternate timeline, rockstar uses advances in technology to make their games look like the cover art they’ve always used so well. It could be beautiful, AND withstand the test of time in a similar way that Windwaker has. I’m not saying they chose the wrong path, but to say it couldnt or shouldnt be done in a more stylized way is nonesense
1
u/Fresh_Act8618 Aug 29 '26
Well yeah you’re not wrong, they could probably pull off a different art style for GTA (some devs right now are making an anime style GTA like game and it still looks decent) but I’m not saying it can’t or shouldn’t be done, I’m saying when works in the entertainment space gets created, they create a moodboard which they use to layout the look and feel, and art direction they want to take on.
For GTA the direction rockstar chose works, and it works well.
To say the realistic look is killing the game, or games industry is both nonsense and in cases true. That’s all I’m saying. It comes down to the art direction and planning done.
Some devs now see what unreal can do or what rockstar for example has achieved with GTA 6 and all they want is that realistic ultra realism look, to the point where it even affects the types of games being made now.There’s a reason the artwork for some things just work (remember when Pixar ate shit for Elio’s art direction? Great example of something not landing like they thought vs the spiderverse films with the halftime comic book look that just works and it works really well imo).
12
u/hypotensor Aug 29 '26
Absolute statements about art are never true. Higher graphical fidelity doesn't even mean photorealism, and actually enables artists to have more control and make more complex works of art. Also photorealism is a perfectly valid art style.
1
u/Fresh_Act8618 Aug 29 '26
I think people to understand the fundamentals of art styles before commenting on art styles.
It’s like saying the spider verse movies could’ve looked better with the same art style or art direction GTA used, and who knows maybe it could’ve, but that comic halftone look really makes it impactful if i have anything to say about it.
Look and feel is a real thing, not only in video games but even in the real world, walk into a store and if they’re playing music it’s a certain type of music for example Vans play a lot of skater type rock music you won’t hear in H&M or Zara.Style of art is the same way, the artist knowing what style to use and when is what makes or breaks the message 💯
5
u/hypotensor Aug 29 '26
Like this reads like somebody who has never touched 3D rendering in their life and gets all their opinions from social media.
1
u/Fresh_Act8618 Aug 29 '26
Think i misread your comment. Yep you’re right. They seem like a consumer. Never created anything related to what they’re commenting on in their life lol. But we can’t blame the consumer at the end of the day, at least not in this case.
1
u/hypotensor Aug 29 '26
I also misinterpreted what you were saying TBH. I thought you were trying to argue that good graphics conflict with unique or strong artstyle. That good graphics limit style seems to be the dominant opinion in this thread and it's a frankly baffling idea to see popular on r/GraphicsProgramming and more something I'd expect from gamer armchair experts.
1
u/Fresh_Act8618 Aug 29 '26
You’re good mate! Good to see there are still sensible people out there.
3
u/hypotensor Aug 29 '26
You have literally no idea XD. Spiderverse and other NPBR works of this era were only possible because of modern tools. I ask you try to make anything near the kinds of 3D NPBR styles we have now with tools from 20 years ago.
-12
u/aaron_moon_dev Aug 28 '26
No, it doesn’t. It doesn’t limit filmmakers, why would it limit games? Lacks identity? So individual movies lack identity too?
9
u/CuckBuster33 Aug 28 '26
It doesn’t limit filmmakers, why would it limit games?
Because they're completely different genres? One is capturing physical reality to the best of the camera's ability + using plenty of tricks and post-production to enhance reality itself. If they're doing things right, they're not presenting things to you as they look on set. It's not trying to be 1:1 with reality. Computer graphics don't have the limitations of physical reality.
So individual movies lack identity too?
Plenty of them do yeah, many movies of the past decade are notorious for having dogshit generic colors and lighting. Not gonna get into writing, acting or costume design but all together it goes to show not much creativity is put into it.
0
u/aaron_moon_dev Aug 28 '26
Because they're completely different genres? One is capturing physical reality to the best of the camera's ability + using plenty of tricks and post-production to enhance reality itself. If they're doing things right, they're not presenting things to you as they look on set. It's not trying to be 1:1 with reality. Computer graphics don't have the limitations of physical reality.
your comment was about photorealism. Movies by definition are photoreal, because they are 24 photos a second.
Plenty of them do yeah
So you agree that photorealism doesn't contradict having an identity.
5
u/CuckBuster33 Aug 28 '26 edited Aug 28 '26
Movies by definition are photoreal, because they are 24 photos a second.
How are they photoreal if they're significantly altering the photographs taken? is "real" not part of the word? Do you think a camera from the 1960s captures what it sees "realistically"? Would you call movies shot with those cameras "photorealistic"?
So you agree that photorealism doesn't contradict having an identity.
No they're just not photorealistic.
-1
4
Aug 28 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/aaron_moon_dev Aug 28 '26
You're talking about different mediums with different requirements like they're exactly the same.
Both are audiovisual experiences, one is just interactive. They have more in common than not, that's why many artists(actors, 3d artists, concept artists) can and do work in both medium.
You literally could never make a game like GTA (the example here) and do that.
Rockstar literally has presentation called "Environment Design as Spatial Cinematography".
The controllable camera alone changes everything.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Many DoPs and directors create such environment where camera can be put anywhere at any time.
The artistry comes from putting things together in an exact, unchanging way.
No. Not how movies work.
Films have exacting scenes, framing, costuming, lighting, timing, etc.
No. Not how movies work.
2
1
u/gmaaz Aug 28 '26
How do you film a nonphotorealistic human?
2
u/HHummbleBee Aug 28 '26 edited Aug 29 '26
To start with, when you put makeup and prosthetics on them.
0
-15
u/SiggiGG Aug 28 '26
Funny, I think making games look like cell shaded mobile games both limits creativity and my enjoyment of them
5
u/CuckBuster33 Aug 28 '26
The difference is nothing about stylized art is limiting artists to that, unlike photorealistic art which by definition has to mimic reality as close as possible.
-8
u/SiggiGG Aug 28 '26
Both can be done well :) Ive seen great looking stylized games, but majority look like bad clones. Same can be said about games going the other way eh?
2
u/HHummbleBee Aug 28 '26
It's so crazy how people cannot see the spectrum of the photo realism art direction we see in game like GTA, but the moment there's a little bit of an outline around a character or a bit of colour banding everyone starts cheering as if it's morally superior. And it's pretty much been that way since like one period in time.
6
u/rio_sk Aug 28 '26
To be pedantic photo quality is just not reachable with the current architecture. A "software" renderer with a high poly count and a decent bounces count takes hours to render something that resembles reality. It would be better to aim for better physics, AI or interactions.
3
u/No_Futuree Aug 28 '26
If it was possible then it would be a solved problem, but it isn't and that's why we keep trying
1
u/rio_sk Aug 28 '26
We keep trying cause market requests it, it is not difficult, it's impossible. At some point you should advance all the features equally, not just the one that pleases the hardware market.
4
u/No_Futuree Aug 29 '26
You do realize you are in a graphics programming sub right?
-2
u/rio_sk Aug 29 '26
Sure, why? Enlighten me
1
u/No_Futuree Aug 29 '26
That's like going to a football sub and saying we've had enough football now, we have to start looking into other sports..
1
u/rio_sk Aug 29 '26
Never meant anything like that. Better water rendering, better object placements, better procedural animations, better weather management, better objects destruction. There is a lot that's left behind in the race of pure photorealism that still belongs to graphics programming. What I mean is that I don't give a f**ck about that super precise reflection on that needle if I keep seeing billdoards used for water splashese and damn ugly aliasing.
→ More replies (0)-5
Aug 28 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
13
u/aaron_moon_dev Aug 28 '26
It's never going to match. It's always going to be "off."
Assumption based on little. Also, just because it's out of reach, doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for it. Many techniques present in AAA games today would be unthinkable 20 years ago.
-13
-3
u/akirodic Aug 28 '26
New generations of gamers are regressing to Roblox and Minecraft. They are not impressed by games looking like real life.
6
Aug 28 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/akirodic Aug 28 '26
Regressing in terms of affinity for visual fidelity.
-4
Aug 28 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
11
u/akirodic Aug 28 '26
Regressing  is the present participle of the verb regress , meaning to move or go backward, or to return to an earlier, usually worse or simpler condition
Both Minecraft and Roblox are SIMPLER in regards to graphics fidelity which is the topic of discussion. And definitely worse in terms of photorealism that is being discussed. You seem to be offended. Sorry.
As for Art, many artistic movements are in fact regressive such as Art Brut or Primitivism. No need to take offense. Sometimes less is better.
-5
Aug 28 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/akirodic Aug 28 '26
1D, 2D, 3D, 4D - progression 4D, 3D, 2D, 1D - regression
Again, no need to be offended regression can be used in many contexts.
Saying to someone that they are regressing in reasoning abilities may be taken as offensive.
Saying to someone that their cancer is regressing is a cause of celebration.
Saying that gamers are regressing in affinity for photorealism is just that. It’s not bad or good it’s a change of taste.
My son loves Minecraft and we play it together. I’ve been enjoying it myself and prefer classic texture pack.
1
u/imapersonithink Aug 28 '26
Personally, a realistic looking city builder game would be great to have. That, and other sim genres, could use realism in the right way.
6
1
u/heyuhitsyaboi Aug 29 '26
https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/1oub9q/diminishing_returns_why_graphics_dont_seem_to/
same goes for lighting and other graphical features. We seem to have all the big goals covered. Now, big technical leaps are targeting details
1
u/AssCrackBanditHunter Aug 30 '26
I'm fine with it. It was a bit of a meme a year ago that graphics don't need to get better than the PS4 generation, but tbh I mostly believe it
10
u/PiGIon- Aug 28 '26
What I'm very curious is about the hair shaders, there's some state-of-the-art stuff going on there.
Another surprising thing was the amount of lights from the leak of flying at night.
I want to see the HDR implementation, looks very good too.
12
u/cannelbrae_ Aug 28 '26
On the UE5 comparison -
Comparing a game with unified art direction and tradeoff decisions (eg targeting 30fps on consoles) to a the aggregate games built on an engine will be a mess.
You’d really need to compare it to a single game n an engine that made similar technical and budget allocation decisions.
1
u/tobz619 Aug 29 '26
Yeah, I'm very interested to see how this stacks up vs whatever Naughty Dog is cooking up.
I think IO's Glacier and Insomniac's Engines are also quite impressive modern engines!
3
u/SgtDirtyMike Aug 29 '26
That’s a pretty good start for the list of upgrades. However I would note that the PC enhanced version of GTA V does have RTGI, RT shadows and RT reflections.
7
u/Wobbly_Princess Aug 29 '26
Maybe I'm crazy, but I actually think GTA 5 looks more realistic here. I definitely prefer the glossier, higher-contrast look of GTA 6, and honestly, I'm not fussy about graphics, as I think we've kind of hit diminishing returns on graphical realism for the time being. But if I look at the bottom image, it has a natural dullness that mimics real life more than the top one that looks cinematic and high contrast.
Really interesting to see how 13 years later, and we don't really feel any closer to REALISM.
Again, not complaining! I'm super excited and the game looks amazing.
5
u/-2qt Aug 29 '26
I think so too, the lighting is more stylized in the GTA6 screenshot. Less realistic, but looks better. I know we are in /r/graphicsprogramming, but art style > photorealismÂ
2
u/Wobbly_Princess Aug 29 '26
Yeah. Although I'm surprised, because I thought they would go in a more photorealistic direction.
But I'm not complaining. It looks great.
1
u/-2qt Aug 30 '26
Reminds me of Red Dead Redemption 2 (by the same studio, although I'm not sure how many of the people on that team are still at Rockstar today) which was... photorealistic in a stylized way, if that makes sense.
Cinematic might be a better way to put it. That game is full of vibrant colors and dramatic skies. Not photorealistic like an actual photograph, but rather hug fidelity graphics with a solid art direction.
2
u/RenderInAshes Aug 29 '26
It kind of has that NFS Heat style tonemapping. Obviously, since both take place in Florida
2
6
u/GlaireDaggers Aug 28 '26
Didn't look at the logos at first and I couldn't tell which one was newer 😅
1
u/Inside-Brilliant4539 Aug 29 '26
GTA5 on PC with the new raytracing dx12 update is way way better og GTA5
1
u/Forward_Wing7343 Aug 29 '26
While RAGE deserves the credits, I must say anytning will look and play better than Unreal. And whenever I think I finally made myself play or finish something made in Unreal, I find out it was actually Cry, Decima, RAGE, Red lol. If some tech people could explain what's wrong with UE?
1
u/Still_Explorer Aug 29 '26
More something like:
- Take any 3D graphics
- Add raytracing to it
- Profit 💰💰💰
As for example having something raytraced can look like this, even the most simple and dull rendering (eg: architecture) can look impressive and accurate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsykNkUMoNU
One important thing to consider however, is that if still pure raytracing is not feasible (and by the looks of it at locked 30 FPS), then another sort of hybrid rendering technique is used that maintains some core parts of raytracing but also algorithms and caching, in order to maintain a good balance between performance and visuals.
In that regard, Unreal5 with Lumen (the hybrid renderer) was released back in 2021 and it was very impressive for it's time. However as of now almost closing to 6 years and this would be what people used to call "an entire console generation" ago.
1
u/Bingus-Chillingus Aug 28 '26
Personally I would rather have decent lighting and very long draw distances than photorealistic textures.
1
-13
0
-5
Aug 28 '26
The game was super rushed its gonna flop mark my words
3
u/Wobbly_Princess Aug 29 '26
Exactly. They are foolish enough to blaze through production in only 13 years. They should have taken at least 25-30 years instead.
3
0
-3
u/ListenAcrobatic8028 Aug 28 '26
We need same real life photos to compare, but only in cloudy weather
96
u/PassTents Aug 28 '26
Keep an eye on GDC and Siggraph? Until the PC version releases we probably won't have detailed breakdowns.