MLB The Show 16 Screenshot From Target Field

[MythicalGnome]

Re: MLB The Show 16 Screenshot From Target Field

That's the "tease" I got out of it too...

Sent from my HTC One [M8] Marshmallow 6.0 | Tapatalk

Yeah that is pretty sweet. I had that up on the show forums for a long time and made a note of it here too. Was not expecting it to be in really as it looked a little iffy if they had everything down. At any rate it will be nice they did anything with this section.

I'm never a stickler for perfection on certain stadium details as ball parks are changing a lot these days.

[MythicalGnome]

Re: MLB The Show 16 Screenshot From Target Field

Is PBR always active? Or just in cut scenes, replays, and fly bys? Will we see PBR where it was implemented when the game is in action on the field? If a 1B is chasing a pop up by the dugout will the dugout have PBR on and look like that or like the screenshot of the PBR Toronto dugout that was posted a few weeks ago??

C

You should be be seeing this in game. It's a part of the lighting system.

https://www.marmoset.co/toolbag/learn/pbr-theory

I might just have to support 16 to get to 17 lmao.

16 is getting harder to resist despite no jersey template changes or confirmation YET that we can at least have a stripe on our away pants.

[Russell_SCEA]

Re: MLB The Show 16 Screenshot From Target Field

So...is this a pix about Target Field or a subliminal message that there is a time portal above their dugout?

Finger prints on the LCD

[BentleyA]

Re: MLB The Show 16 Screenshot From Target Field

You should be be seeing this in game. It's a part of the lighting system.

https://www.marmoset.co/toolbag/learn/pbr-theory

I might just have to support 16 to get to 17 lmao.

16 is getting harder to resist despite no jersey template changes or confirmation YET that we can at least have a stripe on our away pants.

This is a pretty good article for the basics and people that may have little to moderate amount of knowledge when it comes to 3D design and rendering. I recommend people taking a quick read at that article and maybe feel free to ask me questions if they don't understand that. One thing I want to point out about that article is to be careful of some of the terminology. Subsurface Scattering (sometimes referred to as SSS) is NOT the same as diffusion (hence the root "sub" before surface). I was a little thrown off by why that was stated. It is pretty similar though, so not a huge deal. It is also used instead of a diffusion layer or node (depending on the renderer you are using) for certain plastics, candle wax, and most commonly, skin. SSS is an extremely render intensive way to create those materials more realistically, and I am not even sure it is being used in Physically Based Rendering at the moment (its most popular use has been using VRay).
That moves me on to just giving a quick background to know where my knowledge and information is coming from. I am not a game designer, however I used to do 3D rendering work as well as visual effects for a living up until about a year ago (Im in finance now... quite the change haha). I specialized in photo-realistic rendering, so a majority of my work would be taking products from engineers or designs from architects/interior designers and creating photorealistic models and scenes for those. About 16-24 months ago, Physically Based Rendering started to really take off in the field I was in, and it was about 3 or 4 years ago now that it started to become more prevalent in video games.
It is really hard to throw out one exact definition of what Physically Based Rendering is (especially since it can refer to multiple things), but basically it is a new way light is treated and how it is distributed throughout a scene and the way it interacts with materials. It is a new algorithm for the light and the way it is interacting and rewriting the equations in the way the light interacts in a scene (assuming here it is still using a monte carlo simulation but with more precise results). Now, a reason i stated earlier that PBR can refer to many things is because Physical Lights are not something that are as new, however, just because one is using a "Physical" light source on a renderer or in a scene, does not mean it is Physically Based Rendering (from my understanding and experience).

Creating materials and renderings started to become extremely complicated, time consuming, and render intensive the closer things were getting to photorealism. PBR helps eliminate some of those and streamlines it more into the materials. An example, using a non physically based renderer, a lot of the time, you would have to adjust materials based on where they are in a scene or how much light they are receiving. This could result in several iterations of the same material throughout an entire scene with slight differences on the material and is insanely time consuming. PBR helps eliminate some of that headache with one material basically working in all lighting conditions. From experience, that material might be harder to hone in and get exact, but it is much less of a pain in the overall picture. Additionally less spec maps are needed, although multiple spec maps are still needed when one asset has multiple materials. Additionally, with PBR rendering, there are quite a few materials, especially metals, that can be easily made with just a gloss map and diffuse map. It also eliminates the need for a fresnel (thank god, because that can be one of the hardest things to get right throughout a scene in my opinion).
A couple of quick last things without rambling on too much. The reason the development team has only focused on certain areas of the game right now for PBR is because it requires literally scrapping every material they have already made for the entire game and trying to make the perfect PBR material again. For anyone who has done this work, it can be extremely time consuming. I have spent 10-12 hours in a day just trying to get a few materials right before. With that said, in the long run, it will be extremely beneficial since less materials need to be made in each scene.
Second, the reason I pointed out my background is because Physically Based Rendering systems are treated differently in the 3D rendering world where I come from than in video games. For instance, I don't really care if say the Beer Bottle product I am rendering takes 8 minutes to render the final image (btw, a beer bottle is another good example of a material that would use SSS instead of a diffuse layer), but in gaming, that would not work. What that means is, Physically Based Rendering didnt catch on as quickly in my field, but they are becoming prevalent. One reason for this is because Physically Based Rendering relies more on the GPU rather than the CPU to render a scene, where as before the GPU was not relied on as much. This is why some guys that render heavy 3D scenes and animations have gone out and loaded up Mac Pros with 4 Nvidia k5000 cards. In the past, that would be essentially useless. Then again, not many people want to drop $1700 on a video card, let alone 4 (plus probably a nice cooling system for that power haha). The point of saying this is that Physically Based Rendering used to benefit the gaming community more, but now is spreading across the rest of the 3D landscape. And I already know some people reading this are thinking... Dang, why cant the show be on PC too

Sorry for the long reply, I have just been wanting to comment on people asking about what PBR is but have not had the time to until I saw this post. It might be confusing, so feel free to ask questions and I can try and help answer them in a more clear and concise manner than I did here.

Cheers!