The Insane Technology Behind GTA 6 

The ass jiggle physics

Advanced Latina Technology. That's all I care about now.

Jiggle physics technology 😂

Gyaat technology

Definitely volumetric smoke/particle effects.

come the fuck on so they're both taller than i am

That and I imagine the first person mode in this game is gonna be a lot more sophisticated, so if you drift around or do a random stunt jump, you will presumably get to see the rearview mirror and a few more other decorations just move around and react to what's happening, maybe even the character being physically shoved around by the seats, it's gonna be really interesting how all of that is gonna play out and I honestly can not wait!

​@@ImAbokai Thats a good point

jason looks 6'2 and lucia looks 5'4

​@@ImAbokai if they make the car interiors intractable and customizable that would be so cool, definitely have to work really hard to get best pc and ps5 pro

You’ve never stood still in water talking to buddies??

@@KanyeWestLyricalGenius not stood solid like a plank of wood with absolutely no life in me. No, i haven’t.

@@callumturner9161do you even have friends?

@@callumturner9161 dude you’re missing out.

@@noposwowvato a couple. But i wouldn’t go to the beach in December to stand still in water to talk to them. Do you even go outside?

dead island 2 has got some really really damn good hair technlology, though this might take the cake.

Massively improved hair physics was one of my biggest predictions for GTA VI. I always thought the physics for long hair was the thing that looked the least impressive in their latest game (RDR2) and when I saw in the leaks that one of the protagonists was a woman with long hair I just knew we were in for something special.

Looked into Nvidia's Hairworks?

@@Brigand17 Nvidia Hairworks can look really good but it’s not at the level that’s shown in the GTA VI trailer.

@@simonlegosson7082 rule nr 1: never trust trailers

Cyberpunk has similar hair physics

Agreed, that's what blew me away more than anything else.

​@@prcvl 2077 also had good clothes layer physics, no crazy clipping and you can nicely layer things like jackets n stuff

the hair is volumetric particles with physics applied... the same thing as smoke particles just in the shape of hair

@@prcvl cyberjunk was a bad joke

Good comment but its probably just shape keys something we have been using in the industry since like 2005

@@tan9187 that too, I knew I was forgetting something. But yeah ultimately "vertex deformation" is not something new to the industry at all

also texture written vertex animation

the pole could also just be 2 bones, one in each end, bending the pole

Yeah, i think he is talking about physics of stress and strain, not skinned geometry, usually game physics engines don't even simulate stress/strain cause it would need some sort of FEA(Finite element analysis), so i guess rockstar is doing approx. realtime FEA.

You are absolutely correct. I should ve made the distinction between what we see on facial expressions, which is done through manipulation vs. what we see in BeamnNG which is true deformation of a 3D model. However i wanted to simplify the examples as much as i could so that people could understand the concept.

@@ObviousMalcolm Understandable. It isn't really something people think about unless they have played with it themselves.

@@shanekeenan1302 if it’s not vertex deformation than what are they using to bend limps and the jiggle physics around the body

Nah gta 6 is better

Glad to hear that. I always stress out about my pacing being good or not

Resonates with me!!!!

@Silvartop I think the pace is fine its not fast or slow it seems right

Me too!

thank you so much! I absolutely loved how GTA 4 implemented Euphoria engine vs how GTA 5 did it. So it will surely be something ill research

​@@ObviousMalcolm also would like to say, great video.. but more so, dam was GTA IV a good game! The euphoria physics are still my favourite out of any GTA game, and the NPCs react so well. Hope GTA 6 is more like GTA 4 as opposed to GTA 5.

Would also be amazing to help you out with subtitling your videos... I can't define the amount of time I spend reading videos subtitles and I enjoy them even more...

I appreciate that 💪

You sound young. Don't let hype get to you. Ignore the news and buy the game when it comes out. Play it as you would, not as what you expected.

@@TheCuriousNoob Thanks and I respect your approach to waiting on this game. I don't think it's bad to be excited and riding the hype behind this game. Rockstar has a strong track record of releasing games that are improved versions of the trailers. All the technology discussed in this video will be in the game. Imagining that in gameplay during the 2 year wait isn't bad, it's kinda fun

This comment brought a smile to my face. Specially since I stress myself about the quality of my videos ahah And thats a possibly. I love to revisit older games and do a late review/documentary kind of thing

@@ObviousMalcolm nah man this is the first time I saw your videos and after like 2 min I was like, yes this guy is funny asf while educating us at the same time, subbed!

Smart thinking

But when online comes around that would be a problem

@@LK.1207 not necessarily as it would render different for each player, and say a sniper scope would just render it back in.

@@aussieknuckles I suppose that would make sense. I don't know a lot about this kind of stuff it just seemed like a problem I thought of

@timmymcgary I guess it would still be a problem for immersion, an I really cant see Rockstar doing this method. Reason being is Fidelity. Its more likely that many interiors will be parallax interiors with actual enterable interiors being more likely rendered like that of the Original Vice city, think the first Safe house on the beach strip.

True

To your last sentence: it is true that there seems to be barely any tech that doesn't already exist in a form in a game or tech demo / rendering feature of a game engine, but obviously the impressive fact is that they have so many of them and so much of it, running simultaneously in such a presumably large and highly interactive and detailed world.

Ignoring the fact that everything you've mentioned is in an open world game as RDR2 or GTA5 is, proves that you probably never played a game from Rockstar Games. TLOU2 and Cyberpunk are the 2 games that come closest to what we saw in the trailer. Considering the fact that the game will be more beautiful upon release as usual (the first trailer of RDR2 looks so much worst than the final game with only 2 years difference). You need to play to uderstand how impressive their games are. Try it and you'll see that GTA6 gonna be craziest as you can thinking. (leaks are a good thing to show you how big the game will be).

@@matinprsd For sure I was just looking at the Tech side but stiching it all together it's a task for magicians

And what about PIP thing. Did it really that hard to make? Isn’t Split Screen every multiplayer games use since PS1 era technically PiP too?

​@@bakacdaz Well if you enable split screen, you split the amount of pixels you need to render, so both representations of the scene are rendered at half resolution, which theoretically equals rendering the scene once at full resolution. However, I am not taking into account things like culling or texture streaming, that may contribute to slightly higher rendering cost, since it could happen that your render two totally different parts of the scene at the same time (more geo & textures loaded in at the same time). But there are ways to fix this, see virtual textures, virtual geometry or super sampling like DLSS. PiP on the other hand is more like rendering the scene at full resolution once and then rendering it again, but at a resolution that fits the purpose. You can get away with smaller resolutions and slower update rates (e.g. rendering it at 256x256 pixels, at 25 fps, instead of 1080p at 60 fps). You can also decide to exclude certain things from being rendered twice. Shadows, volumetrics, reflections, complex foliage etc. are good examples, since you may not even spot the difference, if the output resolution is very small. If your scene already reached or is close to the max, you should switch to other methods instead of PiP. In the case of GTA 6, I think it is totally doable to render a few render targets on smart phone screens, but less likely in the form of video. These could be still images taken of the actual scene, at a lower resolution, when the needed resources are available. That would still be limited though, since there is only so much VRAM available to us, with all those fancy textures streamed into memory. But don't get me wrong, the video approach is not impossible. That is exactly how I do security cameras in my game. However you need to be smart about how and when to render your scene on top of what you already see on screen. A single NPC making a low resolution video in a less complicated environment would not be a problem.

I really appreciate that. Seeing comments like this make it all worth it, tbh

Great video Wonder if there gonna be an other video on gta 6 trailer analyse?​@@ObviousMalcolm

And the trigger actually moves when firing a weapon.

better hardware is the easy way out of a performance problem, but if you improve the code you could infinitely optimize a game... so raytracing is a viable option if they figured out a faster way to do raytracing

@user-tr7vo8zt5l you can not infinitely optimize a game. That is pure cope and shows you know nothing about game development. There's only so many CPU cycles and past that you are compromising what you are able to do. You can only optimize so much.

i have been developing games since 2009 actually and it shocks me that your education on this topic comes from thin air...first of all raytacing can run on a gameboy.... also. sir, this isnt just a game development topic its more about computer science in general... any programmer knows that the cpu load comes from code. better code means less cpu load. which means theres infinite possibilities. because in programming theres infinite amount of ways to do one thing@@JordanJ01 the CPU has nothing to do with raytracing however, thats the GPUs job. code that is responsible for rendering a game can be optimized infinitely as well... so both CPU & GPU can be infinitely optimized... meaning if they find a way to either optimize their rendering system or optimize somewhere else then its very possible to do what you claim is impossible.... first of all raytracing isnt a heavy process to begin with, so mirror reflections would be pretty cheap to do... but in the case that its not, you can always optimize the shit out of the game until youre happy.... the reason most games run at around 60FPS is because the developer chose to optimize it to run at that frame rate, they could have went further and attempted to get 1000FPS if they wanted to, but like i said, 60 is just fine so they stop optimizing once they can reach at least 60FPS or whatever frame rate their targeting... New optimization techniques come out every few years... research before you speak. theres always a new loop hole waiting to be discovered in the computer science world. Some examples of optimization techniques would be LODs, Imposters, OcclusionCulling, then theres Dynamic Occlusion Culling, then you have procedural Generation, then you have sectors, then you have texture atlas, virtual textures, theres gpu instancing, they even have audio optimizations, i mean these are just a few coming off the top of my head when it comes to specifically game development, in computer science you have simple optimizations like using multiple threads (its possible to do the same thing that takes multi threads on a single thread faster if you know what youre doing), my point is, theres a lot of different ways to get more frames, when developing a game you just use as many as you need to achieve the desired framerate,,,, infinite amount of ways sir... why do you think FRAPS got replaced with ShadowPlay!?!? Better fuckin code lol well honestly the diference would be they made the recording happen straight from GPU instead of trying to do all that on the CPU, btu still thats an optimization within code... Hardware is the cheap and east way out, all you have to do is beef up your CPU or GPU and thats a way to get more frames, but the hard and tedious way is sitting down looking at all your code and finding ways to take less time between frames.

@@user-tr7vo8zt5l Lol you typed out something I'm not going to read, hope that was fun.

well anyone reading the comments will see how i proved you to be completely incorrect so you dont have to read anything tbh@@JordanJ01 in the name of computer science i won this debate

it looks like same like GTA 5

@@eyeoftruth4405 if it's so then i can say it's a scam. Making a huge map or insane graphical details is not that hard like making a proper damage and ragdoll system. If we pay 80$ or more for a game we should expect a better quality and not an arcade action game. Arcades are meant to be paid 30$, not 80 or 90$. In that case they are scamming us.

@eyeoftruth4405 we literally just saw a upside down car in the trailer

@@dudemp4 And?

Well rd2 came out before the next gen consoles so rockstar does have better technology to work with.

Im glad to see so many people liking it. Thank you!

Glad to hear!

if you go inside the inferiors, I think they will swap with the real one while looking inside the inferiors will be used as parallax

Same. I kept replaying the trailer because I was upset there's not gonna be another trailer for a whole year or so

The entire trailer was rendered in-game. Rockstar just programmed the beach shot so that nothing behind where the camera was pointing, would load. No textures loaded, no NPCs loaded, no structures loaded. This gave the hardware the power to load everything and everyone on the beach in front of the camera

LOD's and Dynamic Loading

​@@asat103well simplified

@@dazzaboy04every modern game only loads whats in front of you 3:00

@@Offy That would cause some serious pop-in any time you swung around too quickly.

It wouldn't be the same sense the ogs will leave by then

Glad to know. Btw are you Brazilian or Portuguese by any chance?

​@@ObviousMalcolm brazilian but i do live in eu-suisse since younger

I appreciated the love homie

Rockstar's mission from the first GTA was to make videogames that played out like action movies - this means immersive action and cinematics. Following San Andreas, the expectations put on GTA IV to be bigger, better, and more beautiful were enormous. How do you follow up the most beloved game of all time? GTA IV did live up to the hype, it built upon the game play immersion, realism, and the quality of character interpretations in the game. Action, emotion, drama, character, realism, immersion, and the general feeling of simulation were all improved. Now some games were matching them in physics, some out doing them graphically and some outgoing them in open world interaction. However, as a combination, very few games were coming close to what Rockstar was achieving - cinematic, movie-like games that also had fun/realistic gameplay. Following GTA IV was Red Dead Redemption. By this point it was very clear the niche Rockstar, again the visuals, action and drama were all improved upon. GTAV had enormous expectations to live up to. For Rockstar to remain the premier developer in it's niche and create a product it was expected to it HAD to live up to what fans expected and they HAD to improve. Thus, Rockstar can do no less than push the limits of cinematic story-telling, realistic world building, and graphics and mechanics that push the boundaries in immersion because that's the standard they created. If they didn't do these things they'd be betraying the core concept of their company's mission. They do it because each time they get closer and closer to presenting - a game that's indescernible from and plays out just like an action movie. Peepee poopoo

Not a noob question

Also, Rockstar is one of the very few games developers in the market that can afford INSANE development times and spendings, because, considering the evolution that Androogalt mentioned, for them, spending to much is not a gamble anymore compared to other studios, so they are very confident that the game will not flop and they can go all-in with the development, I mean, which other games can afford 10 years development time? (Of course that GTA Online constant cash flow makes this long and costly development process viable)

because console/AAA gamers are always 10 to 25 years behind PC.... they do his to milk as much money as they can until everyone is bored then they add a new "technological breakthrough" thats really 25 years old its just you didnt know it existed because you play AAA games....

They define themselves as a "high-end" publishing label and development studio, which means their production values are top notch

No current gen games should not run 60 fps that should be the bare default of this generation don't gaf what game it is

It IS just weight painting. And I feel that many points that were raised in the video are lacking from a technical standpoint because we don't have proper context from the trailer alone. In my opinion the footage from the social media clips in the trailer, which are many of them actually, might as well be prerendered (in engine, but still, the cinematic team curated some good looking shots for simulating ingame social media reels), similar to any of the previous entries' tv channels, or hell, even how Cyberpunk for example did tv channels, with mocapped animations and custom environments, but it's by no means something you'd just "stumble upon" as a random event ingame. So the point about the bending pole which might as well be a simple rig, or the parallax shader in the window with the old guy, which might as well be an actual room done for a prerendered scene, don't scream "pushing the envelope technologicaly" for me. The hair physics are nice, water looks pretty sweet too, but from the trailer alone I can't say I saw anything mindbendingly new, and just because the trailer is in engine, doesn't mean that it wasn't curated to high heaven.

@@MrAisle6 I think generally Rockstar does show in-game shots in their trailers even if curated though, so at the very least, some shots are what we will see

@@MrAisle6 YEP. It's just weight painting. And the bending pole ? Could just be animated with bones. Most of the stuff that this guy talks about are either wrong, full of useless technical words or just theories. Hell, everyone forgot to not take everything on a trailer for granted, sure it's Rockstar we are talking about, but they DO lie to the customer too, and they do apply to the same rules as other publishers for their trailers aka: "Let's make it just a little bit better looking you know... for the trailer..."

The upgraded version ahah

@@ObviousMalcolmhii

booo

Thank you so much. Those words alone make it worth it