Image not available

557x645

1673704528547.png

🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 950789

I hate PBR and how it makes everything look plastic and shit. I miss when most/all of the details were in the texture itself.

Anonymous No. 950810

you have no idea what PBR is

Anonymous No. 950822

Same here OP. I've been playing the original Silent Hill games and can't help but to wonder what a modern day game like that with 4k photo based textures would look like.

Anonymous No. 950826

>>950789
If your PBR shader makes everything look plastic you have a bad PBR shader or bad assets.
PBR is objectively superior as it allows you to approach photo-realism, problem is if your assets are too naive
they'll look like scale-model toys or warhammer models.

The artist need to understand the shading model and what values goes into each channel to get the effect going.
It can be conceptually difficult to attribute the look of a surface to the correct spectral return without understanding the shading model inside out.
PBR raises the roof of what is possible but also asks more of artists both in technical skill and technical understanding.

It's not the PBR that makes 2023 tank look like plastic, it looks like plastic because it's wrapped in ambient light but lacks the fine detail geometry and
specular gloss texture detail (which in common PBR terms would correspond to normal, roughness and metalness) to split up the spectral return so it looks
like a metal surface covered in rust and dust instead of a handpainted scale model that fakes all detail in diffuse color return (what unfortunately was named albedo).

So you're right a lot of PBR looks like shit, but you're wrong in it being because PBR is shit.
It's because most artists and developers are mediocre and can't utilize the capacity because it asks too much of them.
What is true is that many artists could make more appealing results with more ease using render legacy tech.

Anonymous No. 951052

The problem with pbr is that it uses a reflection cubemap, which in many cases highlights areas that should be darkened.

Anonymous No. 951056

>>951052
you dont know what pbr is

Anonymous No. 951061

>>951056
Where am I wrong?

Anonymous No. 951067

>>950826
>PBR is objectively superior as it allows you to approach photo-realism
The purpose of PBR isn't to make everything look realistic, it's to make objects look "acceptable" under different lighting conditions.

Image not available

1024x768

final.jpg

Anonymous No. 951238

On an unrelated note, do you recommend any good tutorials for flat hand painted textures where the detail is in the texture like this?
https://www.moddb.com/tutorials/all-texturing-tutorial

Anonymous No. 951314

>>950789
>>950810
>PBR
>Physically """Based""
>its actually cringe and not based at all

Image not available

2422x1508

testbullet.jpg

Anonymous No. 951427

There isn't anything inherently wrong with PBR. Even low res, low poly PBR can be made to look pretty decent if you put the work in. Stylized as they may be, Doom 3 and Quake 4 are perfect examples of this.
I suspect a lot of modern games just do nearly omnidirectional lighting in a lazy attempt to emulate real life light bouncing. I've also noticed it's become common to have extremely little contrast in diffuse textures, which is perfectly fine in a pre-rendered or maybe even raytraced context, but I suspect that leads to things looking awful in traditional realtime lighting.

Anonymous No. 951522

>>951052
>uses a reflection cube map

Dude what

>>950826
I use renderman which doesn’t really work too well with PBR (for obvious reasons I hope) and whenever I tried to jam PBR in a PxrTexture it always came out looking like shit, why are PBR workflows so wonky? Maybe I don’t really understand how to correctly use them in an offline render engine but it seems the way PBR work is a bit hamfisted

Anonymous No. 951524

>>951052
>The problem with pbr is that it uses a reflection cubemap
some game engines might do that, it's not intrinsic to the pbr workflow, for sure.
I would have thought nowadays games would use screen-space reflections or true cone-traced reflections, not just simple cubemaps

Anonymous No. 951693

>>950789
did you actually play the games?

some explanation for clueless anons: the game suffered heavy counter-shilling(men of war also did but much smaller) during beta testing
and the game is supposed to be more colorful because RTS with washed out colors like CoH2 really hurts your eyes. in this situation its a good change

Anonymous No. 951789

so much misinformation in this thread, jesust.

Anonymous No. 951790

>>950789
Have u tried not using Unreal Engine?

Anonymous No. 951797

>>951789
Elaborate then?? Lmao

Anonymous No. 951799

>>951797
why would I? Half of you wont even make it in the industry so less fuck heads.

Anonymous No. 951812

>>951799
>so less fuck heads

…what??

Image not available

800x450

1658854665665510.jpg

Anonymous No. 951815

>>951812
would I really want to work with someone like OP? who complains about PBR? for whatever sperg reason.

Anonymous No. 951981

>>950789
The asset in the upper image has shit textures. Has nothing to do with PBR. It's not that it's wrong to make a clean, freshly painted tank, but it will look like shit in an engine with limited capabilities, so you need to exaggerate the textures and add some fake details into the base color and probably use a specular map as well.

Anonymous No. 951992

>>950789
this isnt the fault of pbr its the fault of lighting

Anonymous No. 951993

>>951992
not even that its the camera angle, viewing the 2009 tank from the other side would make it literally look the same in terms of texture quality as the top pic

Anonymous No. 952014

>>951815
I mean there are very valid reasons to critique PBR workflows lol, they can’t work in Rman for instance