for sure! They are reaaaally getting quite close these days, arent they? There were parts of the CGI that, to me, looked perfectly realistic.. but there were enough of sprinkled oddities in there to break the illusion. Still, my gaming starting out with a commodore 64... weve gotten a looong way ;)
here is a tip look at their hair. with real hair you can see the fuzzy translucent ends and frays. where as the cgi doesn't have them. also look for the skin under Keanu Reeves's beard and other facial hair. also lighting is a hint as well as cgi is best done with only one light source and little to no light scattering on surfaces that would aluminate other surfaces.
The CGI is good visually, but the movement is what is off. Once they make things move more naturally, it will be able to trick us better. Also some of the lighting of course.
@@Alucard_Dead the skin PBR material uses sheen and subsurface scattering, which is all new stuff. The reason you get that 'smoothness' from the model is because of the old system thats still used known as smooth vertex shading, and it makes the whole face off. Humans are difficult to render, but if you look at landscapes or cars in UE5, its pretty much indistinguishable.
the character models are also a tiny bit sharp, and the faces also are a bit of a giveaway. if i had to guess id say its 95% accurate to real life, extremely simular but still there is a noticeable difference. the actual city however looks exactly like real life. cant tell the difference. truly an incredible demonstration of their capabilities
I mean, it is impressive of course, but the problem is still movement, in my point of view. Solid materials like metal or rock are already indistinguishable, but once you put movement in the equation, it tore down the things. Once the CGI walks or talks, there's no doubt it's CGI.
At this stage it's about a mass amount of objects with less computer power and quicker build rate. I'm guessing that GTA V could be made in a couple of weeks with the new software. Also the new game would have better image quality and use less people to make.
It's strange because realistic movement is almost achieved in CGI trailers since years. Take a look at AC Black Flag trailer, the movements feel way more real than this.
I think the biggest problem, besides hair rigidity being wrong, is honestly that the lighting is different between the two shots. In the real one the lighting is coming from above while in the cg one its coming more from the left. I think the two scenes would have transitioned into eachother better if they had kept it consistant They also exaggerated the intensity of his eyes and angle of his beard which throws it off too but whatever
Aside from movement, 2 things always stand out to me: 1) facial expressions - Hyper-realistic CGI always seems to be stuck on pretty stoic expressions that don’t convey the constant, natural facial emotions (vs. stylized CGI, which inherently requires exaggerated expressions). Carrie & Keanu aren’t particularly the epitome of expression, but there’s still a lot of stiffness in the CGI. 2) overall camera presentation - Cameras are always so crisp in the hyper-realistic CGI depictions, when cameras typically have a lot of natural flaws in their images. You can see the focus in the real image blurs towards the edges of the frame, while his hair and shirt are all entirely in focus in CGI.
@@LightsJusticeZ its hard to capture every little detail of the face such as little creases or cracks that make up emotion. The eyes always throw me off with CGI as well.
@@Mitch-Match True but the CGI Keanu has an almost permanent furrowed brow, which could be easily picked up with facial capture. But it also could have been a director decision to animated Keanu that way. These two pieces of media are from different things, so I wouldn't say its fair to compare these at a 1:1 ratio.
@@youngbaby464 I mean, we're now at a point where we're arguing about small details that differ between reality and real time video game graphics. Incredible how far we have come.
@@Enderplays12 This is what disgusts me about this video, calling it cgi, when its in fact real time. Cgi implies pre rendered, this is not. Ironically this gets a huge amount of fews and people dont realize how impressive that is because they compare it to pre rendered movie cgi.
@@melonytoni9016 There is only 2 instances of prerendered footage in the entire demo. When they're showing off a bunch of metahumans (would have required a loading screen but they wanted the cutscene to be seamless) and a transition in the city which also would have needed a loading screen.
It pretty much already has been achieved. Look at things like Thanos from Endgame and Infinity War-pretty much looks like real life. The main reason realistic CGI is so rare to come across is often because of deadlines and limited time. “Rango” was a movie made back in 2003 but had stunning CGI. The deadlines for this movie were very prolonged, giving the VFX artists plenty of time to work on the CGI.
@@Idk-do1ui This is from a video game test demo actually, and while movies are pre-rendered over the course of development, games are rendered in real time as it runs meaning they can’t usually achieve the same amount of quality. But here, this is all being rendered in real time and is even playable on current hardware
You also got to remember this isn't just any computer generated imagery. This is rendering real-time, meaning the computer needs to process every frame as you see it. Differently from pre-rendered which is what you see in every movie, frames that take hours to render in the most powerful computers money can buy.
@@SaturnJap Yes, I am sure. It's running real-time, the reason why interactive scenes don't look as good is quite simple. They're interactive, meaning the engine has to also deal with all the gameplay elements too, whereas with a cutscene all it has to do is process what you see. Not to mention the amount of background geometry in those scenes is very low, so they push harder on the character rendering.
@@SaturnJap you can look up Digital Foundry's review, they're professional analysts and have broken down what exactly is going on with this demo. Actually now that you mentioned there is 1 pre-rendered scene using the character model. It's the one where there are a lot of clones of Keanu and Carrie-Anne
@@ShadyPaperclips That and a certain shot of the city (don't remember which one) that's not to say the system can't handle it, it was because a loading screen would have been required and Epic/The Coalition wanted a completely seamless cutscene.
Except it's not, because this is a recording of that real-time rendering. I can watch this on a potato as much as I like and it looks just as good as if I decided to make my CPU go nuclear to run it in-engine -- bonus points, there's no reason for it to render in real-time because it's an entirely non-interactive scene. "So pre-occupied with whether we could, didn't bother to ask if we should."
The most graphically impressive games of last generation looked fuck-all like real life, i mean sure they were pretty as hell but never once was i convinced that there was a real person on screen. Meanwhile this tech demo had me questioning if i was looking at a real person or not. I may be completely wrong, but ill make a prediction: next generation we'll have games where the average person struggles to tell if what they're seeing is real footage or not until they either look close or see a small detail that's wrong, and in two generations the average person could be shown gameplay footage and be told its a scene from a movie and not be skeptical at all. I feel it will take a long time until technology has advanced far enough and consumers have hardware powerful enough that a well trained eye wont be able to tell the difference, but i really feel like we're on the path to it.
Also remember that this is showing off the detailed texture, not the animation which is what typically sells it. Imagine these realistic models being properly animated like a human
If we look at 0:18 for a direct comparison the CGI version looks off for a few reasons. The details on his tshirt and the ends of his hair are too sharp and in focus. The real version has a softness to the edges due to the camera's depth of field. Still an amazing achievement.
@@DiamondDead yes, that too. Also his movement is more jerky in real and too smooth in cgi, the camera framing and movement is off center in real but is perfectly framed and smooth in cgi. His real hair also looks longer and flatter than the cgi.
It's worth mentioning that this is Unreal Engine 5, the cutscene is not pre-rendered, it's running in Realtime instead, which is mind blowing non the less. imagine what's possible with Pre-rendered CGI now, most of it blends perfectly on modern movies.
OH, and I commented on a video about the Matrix one and I said it was something like Detroit: Become Human and everything was pre-rendered and you had to just make choices like Minecraft: Story Mode. Now I'm gonna get hated!
The more "real" things look the easier it is to spot the differences - especially in the movement of the body and face. It's hard to spot differences in the still shots but once it starts moving the imperfections start to magnify. Like video games and animation transition with a character. Amazing job though. Looks incredible.
The best way I could describe what is missing is some inertia. As soon as those people move you feel like they don't ecperiene gravity the same we do in real life. There is too little acceleration happening. It goes from still to moving way to quickly.
Movement and lighting is still quite a few years off, but it's getting there. Like at 1:00, the car chase looks highly detailed when you get a broad view. However, if you look at it closely, it just feels off because it looks too smooth. Real life is random, dirty, and unbalanced. The tiniest of details that our minds are used to seeing, but not really registering, are things that CGI creators are not yet bothering with because they are so small.
Yeah, faces should be constantly moving, but when they don’t animate that constant motion, the image ends up looking somewhat like a cartoon. Most games I’ve played have trouble capturing imperfections, whether in movement or model, which makes things feel a lot less authentic.
They've hit about 98% realism from a visual standpoint, but they're still around the 70-80% range on movement... Going to take a while to get those last percentage points.
Environment looks SO DAMN REAL but the humans are still noticeable because it's cartoon-ish, it's good so you know it's a video game rather than an actual movie.
Keep in mind this is running in unreal engine wich is a game engine that does not utilise the full capability’s of physical based lighting and rendering of materials and light rays that are used in movies.
@@thomasfenner7328 we'll he's talking about humans which are imperfect because of the amount of rigs you can put on a face can't easily match the actual facial motion.
@@thomasfenner7328 that's a movie that's not rendered in real time, do something like to an actual game and the only thing you'll do is burn off someone's computer.
The more "still" the image and movement is, the better it works. The moment you start to add any real movement and motion the entire illusion is destroyed. Still incredibly impressive though...and insert the obligatory "just imagine where this will be in 5-10 years" comment.
@@RedTyrant you make this sound like a first world problem, and yes to a certain degree it is, but that doesn't mean we have to constantly wallow in saddening thoughts. We should always try to make the world a better place, but that doesn't mean we can't enjoy ourself for a fragment of our time. Just like our blood, we can just keep donating them to help others, your intention is correct, but we are humans, we also need to recharge, like how our body need to reconstruct blood cells. Anyways, have a good day🍉
@@jakecheong664 Yes, we _should_ try to make the world a better place, unfortunately there's no bloody reason to when we're all going to be dust soon. Platitudes like yours just highlight how worthless the effort is. On an unrelated note, watermelon is just bad-tasting mush, if you want a refreshing summertime snack with no calories, chip apart an ice cube.
Was really impressed with the faces on this “game” great show of what UE5 is capable of but the bodies don’t move right hopefully it just to show faces coz they genuinely nailed that
I don't think so as the face got clear problems, especially at eyes and around them.. but it's not about the problem of the engine but the model I guess.. Faces could be better.
And yet they can't be assed to keep the original "An Unreal Tournament for every Unreal Engine" promise. At least with UE4 they _pretended_ to make one.
The reason for the movement ruining the realism of the scene is most likely because they are so unnatural. The only way we could make a good animation that can even remotely pass off as reality is by completly remaking how the muscles and bones in a real human body works, and reconstruct it in UE5. Even then it will require an expert specialized in Orthopedics to replicate it. The graphics are stunning. The animations, not so much.
The biggest tell for me has always been the stickyness of the lips. The lips closer to the corners of the mouth have very thin soft skin and, together with the saliva, tend to stick together just a little bit, causing some gentle deformation of the skin. In most cases, digital characters do not have that. The only time I've seen it was in L.A. Noire, where the characters' facial performances where fully digitally scanned. The quality was limited though, due to the technical limitations of the time, and it being real-time 3D.
impressive for real time graphics but not fooling anybody quite yet. the shot of neo in front of his PC was the most impressive, shows that you can defintely get incredibly life like when handled with a level of artistry in terms of lighting/composition. putting a cgi character on a white background just makes it very obvious
This is so interesting, shoking and scary, all at the same time. The reality we know is being re-created in game engines almost so perfect, that we won't even know what's real or not at some point. That last being the scariest of all...
In the opening you can more easily tell what's CG and what's not, but when the actual game kicks in I think the sunglasses and the deadpan delivery of dialogue where they're not moving their mouths too much really helps sell it, at times it looks real.
This is insane! I think it pushes the limits as far as realism. Assuming Unreal Engine 6 comes out in the future, I think we will have a difficult time knowing what's real or not, which for a lot of people it's scary LOL, but for those who are game devs and cinema creators, it will be scary in the BEST way
Когда же наступит момент, когда реальность будет не отличить от симуляции? Не в масштабе фильма или игры, а в реальном масштабе? Когда можно будет погрузиться в другой мир полностью? Просто мысль об этом пугает, но так завораживает. Всего несколько десятков лет прошло от простых нескольких пиксельных линий и точки, бегающей по экрану, до этого шедевра. Аж мурашки по телу пошли.
It’s important to note this is both a tech demo and running real time on a next gen console, not a PC. I’d love to see a similar demo made for the RTX 3090 and compare it. Either way it’s amazing progress!
A 3090 wouldn’t make the facial expression’s look more realistic lmao. They would need better mocap technology for the entire human body. Similar to what L.A Noire did.
@@CryptoCwis they already have mocap running on the 3090 that looks better than L.A. Noire... CGI is still not good enough to git rid of the uncanny valley in human faces.
@@CryptoCwis You’re right that the animations do need improvements but it’s also important to note that smoother animations actually do have an impact on performance. The more bones that need to be moved in the rig simultaneously, the more computational power you’ll need. So I think the animations might actually have purposely been limited for that reason, the rigs just have less bones than you would need for truly realistic expressions.
Okay... When I first saw this footage I marked young Neo as obvious CGI. That one just doesn't fully work. I never realized, though, that long-haired Neo was CGI in most of the close-ups, too. Now, that really is a surprise to me. It's probably the hair all around his head that covers up what would stick out for me.
It's kind of crazy to think about the fact that we'll probably get realistic humans long before realistic foliage. I hope they have some sort of breakthrough with leaves and grass and the way they move and interact with things. Same with water.
0:06 the cgi is pretty bad 😬 why is he so stiff and why is his neck like that both the cgi young reeves and the old one they both move their heads and neck weird
Very visually impressive, they're practically indistinguishable. It's only if you take an extremely close look at the CGI that you notice something off, such as how the skin texture seems a tad bit too smooth, clothing not having enough wrinkles when a person moves a certain way, and some minor inconsistencies with lighting and shading. But overall, CGI has reached a point where it can easily fool anyone who isn't taking a close look.
The thing is, this isn’t super pre-rendered CGI, correct me if I’m wrong but this is a graphics engine rendering or at least had rendered that stuff in real time
I think the realistic CG faces that have looked the best have been the ones that scale up detail a bit like in Yakuza or Half-Life:Alyx. They favor detail readability in the pixel density they were meant to be viewed at as opposed to exact realism with scale, while with ultra realistic faces, detail is lost as you zoom out compared to zooming out with a real camera, I think the faces end up looking smooth and have have the appearance of not having enough detail when the rendering doesn't pick up on the surface inconsistencies that are smaller than pixels.
for a game engine it looks incredible it has been able to pass the pit of the uncanny valley but it still hasn't climed up to the very top and a big part of that i believe is the physics and how the hair looks from a few meters away if the hair was fixed up it may look just like the real thing
Not feeling to well today. I suffer from bad headaches alot. So I am going to go back to bed. Hope this is a start to a beautiful long friendship. Love you Keanu. 😘
I'll say this: with these animations, they're about half-way up the uncanny valley. They aren't fully out of it, but they're worlds better than the past. These are some uncanny valley animations that won't give me nightmares. And while that sounds like a joke, it's saying a lot.
It's really terrifying how I saw the thumbnail, looked at the left side and thought "CGI looks so real nowadays" and then I saw that the left one is the real one and the right one is CGI. The gap is really closing up
When the actors were under the bright light where you can see every detail clearly, I could definitely tell it's cgi but the car chase scene confused me whether they used a filmed footage or full cgi.
When it's side-by-side, the differences seem obvious, but when we all watched that presentation for the first time, it was extremely difficult to tell when it was Real and when it was CGI
What’s amazing is that the CGI here was possible back in 2005-2007 with the absolute best commercial grade hardware that was worth millions of dollars and back then it would still take minutes to render each individual frame but now a PS5 can do that same rendering in real time at at least 60FPS when running at 1080P.
It’s true what they say eyes are the window to the soul. No matter how good the graphics are, when you look in to cgi eyes, it doesn’t feel like a person in there.
I know “CGI” is technically accurate, but it’s also not emphasizing the true achievement here. This isn’t just “CGI,” this is CGI that was rendered in real time on a $400 game console.
This should be labled as Real vs Realtime. CGI implies pre-rendered. It always has. You may be technically correct using the term CGI. But that's not always the best kind of correct if you know it's misleading.
The faces are about 80% there, haven’t yet quite passed the threshold of fully believable. The body and movements however are much further behind and have a significant way to go
i just realized what makes people beautiful and real is nature given imperfection which CGI will never be able to duplicate because they can achieve perfection but not uniqueness which we all have. Goes to show how much attention nature/creator has spent on all of us.
It would have been one thing if this was simply CGI , and we could all brag about being able to see the difference. This level of CGI would have been possible yet impressive years ago. But this isn't simply CGI , this is REAL TIME RENDERING. This is a level of fidelity , detail, scope and lighting that only 2 years ago would require hours per second for a beefy computer to "bake". Ue5 and modern GPUs do it real time. Mind blowing.
The main thing that gives it away is really the animation, but ultimately this kind of tech may be what's needed to up the animation to the next level , once animators figure out ways to exploit the realtime aspect better.
@Anders Haaland-Øverby No the first parts are pre rendered. They announced it. And you can see it in her hair. Xgen technology is not available in real time.
Amazing work, we still need to wait for the eyes and around eye muscle part in that part the luck of animation but it’s ok following progress 5-10 years and CGI will be almost ideal, it’s almost micro animation but it will give more life to this handmade
By the end of this console generation that line between reality and fiction may be unrecognizable. Technology moves quickly and this is just scratching the surface of what's possible I'm sure.
The thing people don’t understand is, this is not just CGI.. It’s Unreal Engine.. A real time renderer.. Everything that you see can be performed in real time without any need for rendering time… This is why it’s been showcased
Yes! CGI is already there when you pre-render heavy simulations. Paradox in Deadpool 3 is completely cgi in a scene I had no idea! Like a complete face swap; I thought it would be a face warping effect or something. I did notice the cgi scene with the bus of Wolverine though that was the only thing that looked off. But most of the the time it’s so good we don’t notice it’s CG.
Probably because Wolverine goes into an NPC choose your fighter idle animation. I’m not sure if it was the Cg itself though. Idk but that scene definitely stands out as not being as good as the rest of the movie
The answer of what is real or not always lies in the hair and lighting. We will never perfectly capture either of these in a digital medium. We can make something that looks incredibly convincing (and make no mistake: the matrix demo on UE5 looks INCREDIBLY convincing), but when put side by side, its easy to spot the differences.
You would think an adversarial neural network could be used to tune the CGI to be a dead match for the real life person. Basically 2 AI programs competing, one is learning how to adjust the animation to look as close as possible to real life, and the other is learning how to tell the subtlest differences between the CGI and real life. The 2 AI program fight each other to become an expert in tuning CGI, and an expert in detecting the problems with near perfect CGI. Let them fight it out, and the what you get is the closest possible CGI model that the rendering platform can create.
I like how even without the comparison I could still tell the difference, probably because I watch in lower quality most of the time. But it's still crazy how realistic it looks.
as elon said (paraphrased) if there’s any rate of improvement eventually we’ll get to a point where real life and and virtual reality is indistinguishable
Also have a look at this -
Matrix car crashes v real car crashes
th-cam.com/video/PQpMjQDZMvc/w-d-xo.html
Damn
Keep going bro you going up
What is real do you think it's air you breathe or your hair
I can see it clear to find a difference between the two close really closethe Skin's too smooth and likes texture on the CGI version
Thank for being a great fan to me Aneesh, well I’m here to let you know that the matrix 5 would be soon and I will always keep you guys updated
The CGI looks great but it’s still very noticeable compared to real life, but they’re close to finally hitting the nail
for sure! They are reaaaally getting quite close these days, arent they? There were parts of the CGI that, to me, looked perfectly realistic.. but there were enough of sprinkled oddities in there to break the illusion. Still, my gaming starting out with a commodore 64... weve gotten a looong way ;)
Body & cloth mvmnts, the issue #1 here, is already a done deal, but it still sux here
It's in the way the character moves in CGI that gives it away, just never looks natural.
@@bengonzales1182 Yeah that close-up of Keanu's face was almost flawless but when he was walking it was really obvious
Carrie Anne Moss looks just like the real one imo.
I'm not sure if I should be amazed by this or totally terrified
Leo I’ll be honest, I’m a bit of both!
For now, deep fake is the real scary shit.
here is a tip look at their hair. with real hair you can see the fuzzy translucent ends and frays. where as the cgi doesn't have them. also look for the skin under Keanu Reeves's beard and other facial hair. also lighting is a hint as well as cgi is best done with only one light source and little to no light scattering on surfaces that would aluminate other surfaces.
@@j-hp2449 Well when new horror games be using this engine it be scared
Don't be worried. It'll be too late before you realized you've been replaced and have been deactivated.
The CGI is good visually, but the movement is what is off. Once they make things move more naturally, it will be able to trick us better. Also some of the lighting of course.
The physics engine of Unreal 5 is still fucked. It's not the best part about the newest Matrix game
I don't think is just about that, there is a "smooth" texture in the 3d model that humans don't have
The most telling thing were the clothes for me, they're so stiff
@@Alucard_Dead the skin PBR material uses sheen and subsurface scattering, which is all new stuff. The reason you get that 'smoothness' from the model is because of the old system thats still used known as smooth vertex shading, and it makes the whole face off. Humans are difficult to render, but if you look at landscapes or cars in UE5, its pretty much indistinguishable.
Maybe fix facial hair aswell
CGI is getting very impressive, but body movement is still a bit rigid. You can definitely tell the difference.
And also movements are a lilbit slower than reality.
Yeah, there's something a little lifeless about the facial movements
if they used mocap it would've been perfect
the character models are also a tiny bit sharp, and the faces also are a bit of a giveaway. if i had to guess id say its 95% accurate to real life, extremely simular but still there is a noticeable difference. the actual city however looks exactly like real life. cant tell the difference. truly an incredible demonstration of their capabilities
It's the clothes for me. A dead giveaway in my opinion.
I think they've almost perfected environments and objects but living moving beings still have a ways to go
Its always been like this. Tech progressed so much but we still cant simulate real physics of objects.
Human movement is unbelievably tricky to simulate really, the way our bodies move and work is very intricate.
Uncannay Valley is almost unclimbable so it will be hard but if we get over it, it will be insane
@@superdougie4637 specially the face
@@superdougie4637 but is the expression, the muscle movement
0:38 *`CPU usage is increasing`*
I mean, it is impressive of course, but the problem is still movement, in my point of view. Solid materials like metal or rock are already indistinguishable, but once you put movement in the equation, it tore down the things. Once the CGI walks or talks, there's no doubt it's CGI.
Yeah, once he starts walking it feels way too off
At this stage it's about a mass amount of objects with less computer power and quicker build rate. I'm guessing that GTA V could be made in a couple of weeks with the new software. Also the new game would have better image quality and use less people to make.
And that's really surprising if they used mocap for this.
It's strange because realistic movement is almost achieved in CGI trailers since years. Take a look at AC Black Flag trailer, the movements feel way more real than this.
@@betafoxtrot4034 Well that's so true. I guess it all depends on where to spend all the time and resources
In few years, we won't know the differences, even if we try hard. That would be mind boggling! Get ready for the real Matrix! It's close than even!
nah....GPU's are so expensive even if we can compute the Matrix we will not be able to render it . ;-)
afterall we are in a simulation 😁
I love how I keep seeing your comments everywhere lol still subscribed
"Real Matrix" it's a contradiction but of course I know what's it about. ;)
Closer than ever*
I think the biggest problem, besides hair rigidity being wrong, is honestly that the lighting is different between the two shots. In the real one the lighting is coming from above while in the cg one its coming more from the left. I think the two scenes would have transitioned into eachother better if they had kept it consistant
They also exaggerated the intensity of his eyes and angle of his beard which throws it off too but whatever
Aside from movement, 2 things always stand out to me:
1) facial expressions - Hyper-realistic CGI always seems to be stuck on pretty stoic expressions that don’t convey the constant, natural facial emotions (vs. stylized CGI, which inherently requires exaggerated expressions). Carrie & Keanu aren’t particularly the epitome of expression, but there’s still a lot of stiffness in the CGI.
2) overall camera presentation - Cameras are always so crisp in the hyper-realistic CGI depictions, when cameras typically have a lot of natural flaws in their images. You can see the focus in the real image blurs towards the edges of the frame, while his hair and shirt are all entirely in focus in CGI.
"Wow you are very smart!" Am I doing it right?
sonic you dunno wot u talking about youth
Not at all... if you pause it You can clearly see it's CGI
@@onlinemodus Acting like a child you mean? Yeah you are spot-on.
@@ThaFuzzwood wow you destroyed me, bad boy
The biggest difference in the facial expression is that Keanu looks calm and friendly, while CGI looks overfocused/tired or maybe angry.
Which seems weird because I'm pretty sure they used facial capture of Keanu.
@@LightsJusticeZ its hard to capture every little detail of the face such as little creases or cracks that make up emotion. The eyes always throw me off with CGI as well.
@@Mitch-Match True but the CGI Keanu has an almost permanent furrowed brow, which could be easily picked up with facial capture. But it also could have been a director decision to animated Keanu that way. These two pieces of media are from different things, so I wouldn't say its fair to compare these at a 1:1 ratio.
@@youngbaby464 No way.
@@youngbaby464 I mean, we're now at a point where we're arguing about small details that differ between reality and real time video game graphics. Incredible how far we have come.
Not only that the CGIs are very detailed, they are also being rendered in real-time
That's what's the most impressive.
Yeah it's seen in older movies, but always pre rendered.
@@Enderplays12 This is what disgusts me about this video, calling it cgi, when its in fact real time. Cgi implies pre rendered, this is not.
Ironically this gets a huge amount of fews and people dont realize how impressive that is because they compare it to pre rendered movie cgi.
@@melonytoni9016 There is only 2 instances of prerendered footage in the entire demo. When they're showing off a bunch of metahumans (would have required a loading screen but they wanted the cutscene to be seamless) and a transition in the city which also would have needed a loading screen.
@@jamesalexander5559 Unless they were already loaded in, which probably was the case
How do you know it’s not offline rendering? Proof?
This is both fascinating and terrifying how close they’re getting to achieving total realism in CGI.
It pretty much already has been achieved. Look at things like Thanos from Endgame and Infinity War-pretty much looks like real life. The main reason realistic CGI is so rare to come across is often because of deadlines and limited time. “Rango” was a movie made back in 2003 but had stunning CGI. The deadlines for this movie were very prolonged, giving the VFX artists plenty of time to work on the CGI.
@@Idk-do1ui This is from a video game test demo actually, and while movies are pre-rendered over the course of development, games are rendered in real time as it runs meaning they can’t usually achieve the same amount of quality. But here, this is all being rendered in real time and is even playable on current hardware
@@emmslite6246 well that's completely different lmao
th-cam.com/video/avFP67EIYvo/w-d-xo.html.
@@emmslite6246You're really comparing an anime to reality?
You gotta remember this is in-game stuff and it's this impressive. I remember when you could only get this quality from pre-rendered cutscenes.
Man, I remember when pre rendered cutscenes looked way, way worse than this. What a time to be alive :D
Looking back it all makes sense has to.
th-cam.com/video/avFP67EIYvo/w-d-xo.html,
nfsmw intro :)
blm is anti-asian
I think the reason why their body movement is so rigid is to avoid clipping, especially the arms
The World looks perfect. The faces still need some work.
@Gee T You are probably talking about Deep fake, which isn’t the same thing.
@Gee T Deep fake uses pictures, this is 3D.
@Gee T you clearly have no idea what's the difference between frames generated by an AI and an actual 3d model.
@Gee T dumbest thing I heard lol... Deepfake is not cgi my man
@Gee T -the crazy old man
His legs around 0:10 move in a pretty convincing way. The upper body - not that good, shoulders especially. But hell it really gets better and better
You also got to remember this isn't just any computer generated imagery.
This is rendering real-time, meaning the computer needs to process every frame as you see it.
Differently from pre-rendered which is what you see in every movie, frames that take hours to render in the most powerful computers money can buy.
@@SaturnJap Yes, I am sure.
It's running real-time, the reason why interactive scenes don't look as good is quite simple.
They're interactive, meaning the engine has to also deal with all the gameplay elements too, whereas with a cutscene all it has to do is process what you see.
Not to mention the amount of background geometry in those scenes is very low, so they push harder on the character rendering.
@@SaturnJap you can look up Digital Foundry's review, they're professional analysts and have broken down what exactly is going on with this demo.
Actually now that you mentioned there is 1 pre-rendered scene using the character model. It's the one where there are a lot of clones of Keanu and Carrie-Anne
@@ShadyPaperclips That and a certain shot of the city (don't remember which one) that's not to say the system can't handle it, it was because a loading screen would have been required and Epic/The Coalition wanted a completely seamless cutscene.
Can the Matrix trump the Originator? th-cam.com/video/TguXnZGmCfU/w-d-xo.html
Except it's not, because this is a recording of that real-time rendering. I can watch this on a potato as much as I like and it looks just as good as if I decided to make my CPU go nuclear to run it in-engine -- bonus points, there's no reason for it to render in real-time because it's an entirely non-interactive scene.
"So pre-occupied with whether we could, didn't bother to ask if we should."
when I watched this for the first time with three of my friends, all of us immediately recognized the cgi
Nah, you didn't
Wow Albert Einstein!!!!
They're both cgi... thats the trick )
The chairs are cgi aswell as frozen neo etc.
Congratulations, you must be so proud of yourselves, bravo 👏🏻
Still definitely noticeable, but they are damn close to getting photo-realism rendered in real time and that’s impressive as fuck
@gab hug it's gonna be much sooner than 100 years lol
@@zorlothone exactly, once we hit the singularity the world wont be recognizable
The most graphically impressive games of last generation looked fuck-all like real life, i mean sure they were pretty as hell but never once was i convinced that there was a real person on screen. Meanwhile this tech demo had me questioning if i was looking at a real person or not. I may be completely wrong, but ill make a prediction: next generation we'll have games where the average person struggles to tell if what they're seeing is real footage or not until they either look close or see a small detail that's wrong, and in two generations the average person could be shown gameplay footage and be told its a scene from a movie and not be skeptical at all. I feel it will take a long time until technology has advanced far enough and consumers have hardware powerful enough that a well trained eye wont be able to tell the difference, but i really feel like we're on the path to it.
i think this engine will be capable of more than this, it's still early, i noticed plenty issues with the animation but those can be tweaked for sure
Thank you dear for being a great fan to me
Also remember that this is showing off the detailed texture, not the animation which is what typically sells it. Imagine these realistic models being properly animated like a human
If we look at 0:18 for a direct comparison the CGI version looks off for a few reasons. The details on his tshirt and the ends of his hair are too sharp and in focus. The real version has a softness to the edges due to the camera's depth of field.
Still an amazing achievement.
aside from that, his eyes are off. they are weirdly shaped on the cg model. the cg model looks like keanu got a botox injection
@@DiamondDead yes, that too. Also his movement is more jerky in real and too smooth in cgi, the camera framing and movement is off center in real but is perfectly framed and smooth in cgi.
His real hair also looks longer and flatter than the cgi.
I think the hair is was the main give away.
The day artists become humble and accept that their art will sometimes be blurried out in sake of the bigger picture, that day will be it
It's rendered on real time, it's not cg
It's worth mentioning that this is Unreal Engine 5, the cutscene is not pre-rendered, it's running in Realtime instead, which is mind blowing non the less.
imagine what's possible with Pre-rendered CGI now, most of it blends perfectly on modern movies.
the question is if they using just an HD or SSD/M.2 to do that.
If it is an HD is really mind blowing
OH, and I commented on a video about the Matrix one and I said it was something like Detroit: Become Human and everything was pre-rendered and you had to just make choices like Minecraft: Story Mode. Now I'm gonna get hated!
@@groundedgaming was Detroit prerendered?
@@viktorchernyk actually, idk, but most likely... :( if i wrong
@@groundedgaming it wasn't
The more "real" things look the easier it is to spot the differences - especially in the movement of the body and face. It's hard to spot differences in the still shots but once it starts moving the imperfections start to magnify. Like video games and animation transition with a character. Amazing job though. Looks incredible.
The best way I could describe what is missing is some inertia. As soon as those people move you feel like they don't ecperiene gravity the same we do in real life. There is too little acceleration happening. It goes from still to moving way to quickly.
th-cam.com/video/TguXnZGmCfU/w-d-xo.html
Good point.
I have to correct myself. Gravity is not the reason for inertia ... but my point is still that a bit of inertia is missing.
@@chrissa1896 I think the cool people figured out what you meant. I've heard the inertia/weight thing is tricky.
Yes and the eyes. They can never simulate a persons eyes as they are a window to the soul.
Movement and lighting is still quite a few years off, but it's getting there. Like at 1:00, the car chase looks highly detailed when you get a broad view. However, if you look at it closely, it just feels off because it looks too smooth. Real life is random, dirty, and unbalanced. The tiniest of details that our minds are used to seeing, but not really registering, are things that CGI creators are not yet bothering with because they are so small.
@TheFuriousHawk
The real world actually runs at 480p 12fps
@TheFuriousHawk lmao thats not how it works
@TheFuriousHawk
I thought you were being sarcastic, because the real world “running” at a framerate makes no sense whatsoever.
Yeah, faces should be constantly moving, but when they don’t animate that constant motion, the image ends up looking somewhat like a cartoon. Most games I’ve played have trouble capturing imperfections, whether in movement or model, which makes things feel a lot less authentic.
They've hit about 98% realism from a visual standpoint, but they're still around the 70-80% range on movement... Going to take a while to get those last percentage points.
millions of years knowing what humans look like is not easy to trick. this is still very impressive
i knew difference its easy
@@smithytom7405 if only your reading comprehension skills were as good...
@@BradLoyo If only you knew the difference between reading and writing.
Environment looks SO DAMN REAL but the humans are still noticeable because it's cartoon-ish, it's good so you know it's a video game rather than an actual movie.
Keep in mind this is running in unreal engine wich is a game engine that does not utilise the full capability’s of physical based lighting and rendering of materials and light rays that are used in movies.
@@thomasfenner7328 we'll he's talking about humans which are imperfect because of the amount of rigs you can put on a face can't easily match the actual facial motion.
@@amogus-bk4qn You seen the movie gemini man, the cgi blew me away.
@@thomasfenner7328 that's a movie that's not rendered in real time, do something like to an actual game and the only thing you'll do is burn off someone's computer.
@@amogus-bk4qn Your computer maybe, not mine.
The more "still" the image and movement is, the better it works. The moment you start to add any real movement and motion the entire illusion is destroyed.
Still incredibly impressive though...and insert the obligatory "just imagine where this will be in 5-10 years" comment.
50 years ago there was pong. Just a dot moving between two lines. This progression is scary.. imagine another 50 years from now.
God help us all
Yes god where u at
@@RedTyrant you make this sound like a first world problem, and yes to a certain degree it is, but that doesn't mean we have to constantly wallow in saddening thoughts. We should always try to make the world a better place, but that doesn't mean we can't enjoy ourself for a fragment of our time. Just like our blood, we can just keep donating them to help others, your intention is correct, but we are humans, we also need to recharge, like how our body need to reconstruct blood cells. Anyways, have a good day🍉
I am afraid I’ll be dead by then!
@@jakecheong664 Yes, we _should_ try to make the world a better place, unfortunately there's no bloody reason to when we're all going to be dust soon. Platitudes like yours just highlight how worthless the effort is. On an unrelated note, watermelon is just bad-tasting mush, if you want a refreshing summertime snack with no calories, chip apart an ice cube.
The CGI Keanu actually has more wrinkles than the real one. How in the (virtual) world is that even possible?!?
in vr time passes faster, therefore you get older sooner
Whut? You uh, just sculpt them in with digital sculpting software, like Zbrush for example.
Real one has make up
Because Keanu Reeves is a vampire... 😂
Nah, keanu is just part of the no aging crew
Well, technically, Carrie-Anne was in Unreal Engine before, in Mass Effect 2 and 3
Dont f with Aria
@@EdTzani Broke the only one Omega rule, in the way more than one
Yeah...choking Cerberus generals, flirting with turian flames, being a CEO, boss, queen, if you're feeling dramatic, of Omega.
Was really impressed with the faces on this “game” great show of what UE5 is capable of but the bodies don’t move right hopefully it just to show faces coz they genuinely nailed that
I don't think so as the face got clear problems, especially at eyes and around them.. but it's not about the problem of the engine but the model I guess.. Faces could be better.
keep in mind the artists do the graphics and not the engine, an engine is just a tool, nothing more
@@overdev1993 Yeah for that reason I expect more effort for those faces.
And yet they can't be assed to keep the original "An Unreal Tournament for every Unreal Engine" promise. At least with UE4 they _pretended_ to make one.
The reason for the movement ruining the realism of the scene is most likely because they are so unnatural. The only way we could make a good animation that can even remotely pass off as reality is by completly remaking how the muscles and bones in a real human body works, and reconstruct it in UE5. Even then it will require an expert specialized in Orthopedics to replicate it. The graphics are stunning. The animations, not so much.
Imagine these two arguing at each other.
That’s…..disturbing, it gets more noticeable that they’re fake towards the end but how close we’re getting is so unnerving
The biggest tell for me has always been the stickyness of the lips. The lips closer to the corners of the mouth have very thin soft skin and, together with the saliva, tend to stick together just a little bit, causing some gentle deformation of the skin. In most cases, digital characters do not have that. The only time I've seen it was in L.A. Noire, where the characters' facial performances where fully digitally scanned. The quality was limited though, due to the technical limitations of the time, and it being real-time 3D.
@Trent Mage Mocap limitations I guess
Good point
2033: "these graphics haven't aged well"
impressive for real time graphics but not fooling anybody quite yet.
the shot of neo in front of his PC was the most impressive, shows that you can defintely get incredibly life like when handled with a level of artistry in terms of lighting/composition. putting a cgi character on a white background just makes it very obvious
@@Gnaritas42 That would be the dream
It fooled me, I had to search Google to see which scenes were real.
@@dllemm that's because you're an NPC.
Fooled me.
@@Gnaritas42 suspending disbelief doesn't work in the uncanny value.
This is so interesting, shoking and scary, all at the same time. The reality we know is being re-created in game engines almost so perfect, that we won't even know what's real or not at some point. That last being the scariest of all...
You know you've witnessed a breakthrough in technology when you're both fascinated and terrified of it.
It's still a little "uncanny valley-ish" IMO, but damn are they getting close to them being indistinguishable from actual humans.
In the opening you can more easily tell what's CG and what's not, but when the actual game kicks in I think the sunglasses and the deadpan delivery of dialogue where they're not moving their mouths too much really helps sell it, at times it looks real.
Looks like they've finally fixed Cyberpunk 2077
This is insane! I think it pushes the limits as far as realism. Assuming Unreal Engine 6 comes out in the future, I think we will have a difficult time knowing what's real or not, which for a lot of people it's scary LOL, but for those who are game devs and cinema creators, it will be scary in the BEST way
@Confidential really?
@@trollege9488 he is just bluffing they didn't confirm
Holy crap the animations are getting closer to be real like our 3D reality. Technology is winning so far.
Когда же наступит момент, когда реальность будет не отличить от симуляции? Не в масштабе фильма или игры, а в реальном масштабе? Когда можно будет погрузиться в другой мир полностью? Просто мысль об этом пугает, но так завораживает. Всего несколько десятков лет прошло от простых нескольких пиксельных линий и точки, бегающей по экрану, до этого шедевра. Аж мурашки по телу пошли.
Каждый день,когда засыпаешь
You can still tell but it's impressive how close they're getting so the point where we WON'T be able to tell anymore
It’s important to note this is both a tech demo and running real time on a next gen console, not a PC. I’d love to see a similar demo made for the RTX 3090 and compare it. Either way it’s amazing progress!
A 3090 wouldn’t make the facial expression’s look more realistic lmao. They would need better mocap technology for the entire human body. Similar to what L.A Noire did.
@@CryptoCwis they already have mocap running on the 3090 that looks better than L.A. Noire... CGI is still not good enough to git rid of the uncanny valley in human faces.
@@CryptoCwis You’re right that the animations do need improvements but it’s also important to note that smoother animations actually do have an impact on performance. The more bones that need to be moved in the rig simultaneously, the more computational power you’ll need. So I think the animations might actually have purposely been limited for that reason, the rigs just have less bones than you would need for truly realistic expressions.
i was thinking that too, really wish they would release this demo for the pc so i can try it out on my 3080
this is pretty impressive when you remember its all real time 3d
Okay... When I first saw this footage I marked young Neo as obvious CGI. That one just doesn't fully work. I never realized, though, that long-haired Neo was CGI in most of the close-ups, too. Now, that really is a surprise to me. It's probably the hair all around his head that covers up what would stick out for me.
It's kind of crazy to think about the fact that we'll probably get realistic humans long before realistic foliage. I hope they have some sort of breakthrough with leaves and grass and the way they move and interact with things. Same with water.
The side-by-side gives it away plain as day but when they’re inside their own world and it’s all CGI it starts to look a lot more realistic
0:06 the cgi is pretty bad 😬 why is he so stiff and why is his neck like that both the cgi young reeves and the old one they both move their heads and neck weird
Very visually impressive, they're practically indistinguishable. It's only if you take an extremely close look at the CGI that you notice something off, such as how the skin texture seems a tad bit too smooth, clothing not having enough wrinkles when a person moves a certain way, and some minor inconsistencies with lighting and shading.
But overall, CGI has reached a point where it can easily fool anyone who isn't taking a close look.
Shii it fooled me 😂 I thought it was all real until they showed the cgi
People don't even comprehend how crazy this is... this is rendered in real time like what....
No matter how realistic graphics become, make hair looks real will always be a challenge
You can always tell which one is CGI. The essence is never there. It's like a shell.
You can always tell
I bet in 10 years you won't be able to tell though
With people it's always easy to tell. With cars, building and environments it's usually trickier.
@@Gallowglass7 They said that 10 years ago, and even before that.
At some point you will not be able to tell the difference, it's just a matter of when.
We need to capture and reproduce all the little micro-movements in the face. Especially the mouth.
The thing is, this isn’t super pre-rendered CGI, correct me if I’m wrong but this is a graphics engine rendering or at least had rendered that stuff in real time
you're correct
I think the realistic CG faces that have looked the best have been the ones that scale up detail a bit like in Yakuza or Half-Life:Alyx. They favor detail readability in the pixel density they were meant to be viewed at as opposed to exact realism with scale, while with ultra realistic faces, detail is lost as you zoom out compared to zooming out with a real camera, I think the faces end up looking smooth and have have the appearance of not having enough detail when the rendering doesn't pick up on the surface inconsistencies that are smaller than pixels.
for a game engine it looks incredible it has been able to pass the pit of the uncanny valley but it still hasn't climed up to the very top and a big part of that i believe is the physics and how the hair looks from a few meters away if the hair was fixed up it may look just like the real thing
Not feeling to well today. I suffer from bad headaches alot.
So I am going to go back to bed. Hope this is a start to a beautiful long friendship. Love you Keanu. 😘
Thanks for the love, care and support it's a pleasures taking to you over here,, where are you from? ❤
Hello dear how’re you?
I'll say this: with these animations, they're about half-way up the uncanny valley. They aren't fully out of it, but they're worlds better than the past. These are some uncanny valley animations that won't give me nightmares. And while that sounds like a joke, it's saying a lot.
This demo was pretty damn impressive. For me, it comes down mainly to the corners of the mouth when the characters are speaking.
It's really terrifying how I saw the thumbnail, looked at the left side and thought "CGI looks so real nowadays" and then I saw that the left one is the real one and the right one is CGI. The gap is really closing up
Man, we are right on the cusp of total photorealism in CGI. The only thing that holds us back is how it is animated.
When the actors were under the bright light where you can see every detail clearly, I could definitely tell it's cgi but the car chase scene confused me whether they used a filmed footage or full cgi.
That's because of the eyes.
@@AntonisDimopoulos Yep. They look as dead as my soul feels. Lol!
When it's side-by-side, the differences seem obvious, but when we all watched that presentation for the first time, it was extremely difficult to tell when it was Real and when it was CGI
this looks so close to reality its almost in that uncanny valley where you can feel that it doesnt look quite right but you dont know why
You can still clearly tell which is CGI, but man its goddamn close now!
I am embarrassed to say that I could not.
What’s amazing is that the CGI here was possible back in 2005-2007 with the absolute best commercial grade hardware that was worth millions of dollars and back then it would still take minutes to render each individual frame but now a PS5 can do that same rendering in real time at at least 60FPS when running at 1080P.
The facial expressions and skin color gives it away, the animation feels like a game
The environment feels real tho
Because it's running real time on hardware. Not pre-rendered
It’s true what they say eyes are the window to the soul. No matter how good the graphics are, when you look in to cgi eyes, it doesn’t feel like a person in there.
Thank you for being as unique as it is impressive first and foremost 💚 ✌️ 😎
Thank you for your continuous love and support towards me.
How long have you been a fan of mine?
I know “CGI” is technically accurate, but it’s also not emphasizing the true achievement here. This isn’t just “CGI,” this is CGI that was rendered in real time on a $400 game console.
Came to say the same thing and saw your comment. OP needs to replace “CGI” with “In Game”.
I think it remarks a historical achievement: Real-time footage is referred to as CGI. Achieved with Unreal engine.
This should be labled as Real vs Realtime.
CGI implies pre-rendered. It always has.
You may be technically correct using the term CGI. But that's not always the best kind of correct if you know it's misleading.
CGI makes more sense, let's use that for Realtime in the future since it is now that.
no it doesnt imply anything of the sort.
The faces are about 80% there, haven’t yet quite passed the threshold of fully believable.
The body and movements however are much further behind and have a significant way to go
Awesome. What makes real real is the lighting is never picture perfect at all times
CGI Keanu looks still puppet-like when walking around those red chairs.
i just realized what makes people beautiful and real is nature given imperfection which CGI will never be able to duplicate because they can achieve perfection but not uniqueness which we all have. Goes to show how much attention nature/creator has spent on all of us.
The CGI is actually pretty damn good at replicating humans its still noticeable if you looking for it, otherwise it is hard to notice.
It would have been one thing if this was simply CGI , and we could all brag about being able to see the difference. This level of CGI would have been possible yet impressive years ago. But this isn't simply CGI , this is REAL TIME RENDERING. This is a level of fidelity , detail, scope and lighting that only 2 years ago would require hours per second for a beefy computer to "bake". Ue5 and modern GPUs do it real time. Mind blowing.
The main thing that gives it away is really the animation, but ultimately this kind of tech may be what's needed to up the animation to the next level , once animators figure out ways to exploit the realtime aspect better.
@Anders Haaland-Øverby No the first parts are pre rendered. They announced it. And you can see it in her hair. Xgen technology is not available in real time.
Impressive. More detailed and life like the closer the character is to the camera
The hair is always a giveaway, as well as the way clothing moves with people's bodies. That's CGI's biggest weaknesses IMO and still has a ways to go
According to DF the whole sequence is calculated real time. Except of the metahuman army...
Amazing work, we still need to wait for the eyes and around eye muscle part in that part the luck of animation but it’s ok following progress 5-10 years and CGI will be almost ideal, it’s almost micro animation but it will give more life to this handmade
everything is perfectly like real life except the animation of the expressions thats the only thing still missing to make it life like
By the end of this console generation that line between reality and fiction may be unrecognizable. Technology moves quickly and this is just scratching the surface of what's possible I'm sure.
The thing people don’t understand is, this is not just CGI.. It’s Unreal Engine.. A real time renderer.. Everything that you see can be performed in real time without any need for rendering time… This is why it’s been showcased
Yes! CGI is already there when you pre-render heavy simulations. Paradox in Deadpool 3 is completely cgi in a scene I had no idea! Like a complete face swap; I thought it would be a face warping effect or something. I did notice the cgi scene with the bus of Wolverine though that was the only thing that looked off. But most of the the time it’s so good we don’t notice it’s CG.
Probably because Wolverine goes into an NPC choose your fighter idle animation. I’m not sure if it was the Cg itself though. Idk but that scene definitely stands out as not being as good as the rest of the movie
The answer of what is real or not always lies in the hair and lighting.
We will never perfectly capture either of these in a digital medium. We can make something that looks incredibly convincing (and make no mistake: the matrix demo on UE5 looks INCREDIBLY convincing), but when put side by side, its easy to spot the differences.
0:29 That was actually pretty good until she starts walking.
I finally got a microwave ad and I have the microwave
I think in five to ten years they will have perfected this kind of CGI Slightly Real Engine 5. I think the problem is lighting and definition.
Ray tracing is already being rolled out and will develop into more hyper realism
CGI is baked and pre-rendered. This is rendered real time. It's not CGI
You would think an adversarial neural network could be used to tune the CGI to be a dead match for the real life person. Basically 2 AI programs competing, one is learning how to adjust the animation to look as close as possible to real life, and the other is learning how to tell the subtlest differences between the CGI and real life. The 2 AI program fight each other to become an expert in tuning CGI, and an expert in detecting the problems with near perfect CGI. Let them fight it out, and the what you get is the closest possible CGI model that the rendering platform can create.
Wow.. I googled what adversarial neural network is. Have heard of models that do this. Fantastic. Is this what they have done with unreal engine 5
Just deep fake the cgi. I bet you could use similar programs for clothes instead of faces and then BAM! The whole scene will be photo-real.
I like how even without the comparison I could still tell the difference, probably because I watch in lower quality most of the time. But it's still crazy how realistic it looks.
Banna thank for being a great fan to me
Now games can replicate the rubber cgi people from Matrix Reloaded. Yay!
When CGI feels as real as our own world, well...it means we won't know whether we're in a CGI or a real world.
But do we?
as elon said (paraphrased) if there’s any rate of improvement eventually we’ll get to a point where real life and and virtual reality is indistinguishable