Is Infamous: Second Son the Best Looking Game Ever?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#751 Posted by T-razor1 (1067 posts) -

Can someone post some full day time shots of ISS or does everything take place at night? Just curious to see what it looks like in the day. I think I saw maybe one shot during the day. Yes from what I've seen in this thread the game looks great. Best looking game ever? Quite the bold statement there. Never was interested in any Infamous game but I'm tempted to rent this and see for myself what all the fuss is about.

#752 Posted by Nonstop-Madness (9477 posts) -

Best looking game ever? Nah but it's pretty good looking, even if you've been gaming on PC.

#753 Posted by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

@T-razor1 said:

Can someone post some full day time shots of ISS or does everything take place at night? Just curious to see what it looks like in the day. I think I saw maybe one shot during the day. Yes from what I've seen in this thread the game looks great. Best looking game ever? Quite the bold statement there. Never was interested in any Infamous game but I'm tempted to rent this and see for myself what all the fuss is about.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=716795&page=178

that page and the previous 5 or so have tons of high quality screens of infamous both day and night.

#754 Edited by Pray_to_me (2849 posts) -

@T-razor1 said:

Can someone post some full day time shots of ISS or does everything take place at night? Just curious to see what it looks like in the day. I think I saw maybe one shot during the day. Yes from what I've seen in this thread the game looks great. Best looking game ever? Quite the bold statement there. Never was interested in any Infamous game but I'm tempted to rent this and see for myself what all the fuss is about.

Shit is just ridiculous

#755 Edited by evildead6789 (7743 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

@T-razor1 said:

Can someone post some full day time shots of ISS or does everything take place at night? Just curious to see what it looks like in the day. I think I saw maybe one shot during the day. Yes from what I've seen in this thread the game looks great. Best looking game ever? Quite the bold statement there. Never was interested in any Infamous game but I'm tempted to rent this and see for myself what all the fuss is about.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=716795&page=178

that page and the previous 5 or so have tons of high quality screens of infamous both day and night.

These are bullshots, gameplay videos look like shit

nice particles, nice character models

the rest is previous gen consoles.

#756 Edited by ReadingRainbow4 (14111 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@m3dude1 said:

@T-razor1 said:

Can someone post some full day time shots of ISS or does everything take place at night? Just curious to see what it looks like in the day. I think I saw maybe one shot during the day. Yes from what I've seen in this thread the game looks great. Best looking game ever? Quite the bold statement there. Never was interested in any Infamous game but I'm tempted to rent this and see for myself what all the fuss is about.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=716795&page=178

that page and the previous 5 or so have tons of high quality screens of infamous both day and night.

These are bullshots, gameplay videos look like shit

nice particles, nice character models

the rest is previous gen consoles.

Do you try hard to act this dumb, or is it just a natural thing for you?

#757 Posted by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

bullshots??? LOL. no id have to link you to the pc screenshot thread to see those.

#758 Posted by MonsieurX (30281 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

bullshots??? LOL. no id have to link you to the pc screenshot thread to see those.

extra lolz

#759 Posted by Heil68 (44658 posts) -

IT's not really fair since the PS4 is the worlds most powerful video game console.

#760 Posted by Chutebox (37233 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@m3dude1 said:

@T-razor1 said:

Can someone post some full day time shots of ISS or does everything take place at night? Just curious to see what it looks like in the day. I think I saw maybe one shot during the day. Yes from what I've seen in this thread the game looks great. Best looking game ever? Quite the bold statement there. Never was interested in any Infamous game but I'm tempted to rent this and see for myself what all the fuss is about.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=716795&page=178

that page and the previous 5 or so have tons of high quality screens of infamous both day and night.

These are bullshots, gameplay videos look like shit

nice particles, nice character models

the rest is previous gen consoles.

Ya, those aren't bullshots bud. The game actually does look like that.

#761 Edited by tonitorsi (8397 posts) -

The thread that keeps on giving.

Awesome awkward e-hugs for ye based Tc.

#762 Edited by scottpsfan14 (5299 posts) -

@kalipekona: How is it absurd to say that the particles in Infamous SS are more prominent in the game than most other games? I know particles are scalable with scripts on PC but no game has took particle effects as far as ISS. Show me a PC game with more advanced or better looking particle effects please. And don't try to tell me that those particle effects in the game are as easy replaceable as textures and shadow detail. The devs even said that these effects were only possible because the PS4 allowed them to run wild with no compromises from last gen consoles. All I've been trying to say is that Infamous Second Son is a true next gen game, as is Ryse and Killzone SF. Crysis 3 is a last gen game. Put it this way, if Crysis 3 was written for next gen consoles, and not PS3/360, there would be some big differences in animations and overall polygon count which are the fundamental graphics assets.

Of course PC Crysis 3 looks a million times better on PC than consoles, and there are some graphical techniques used in the game that are better than in Infamous like water, foliage, tessellation and dynamic lighting, and I know that ISS cut some crucial corners with things like draw distance and time cycles, but it is an open world game with unprecedented detail.

You say that nothing fundamental would have to be changed about Infamous to go on PS3, well for a start, every object on screen has several times the geometry than any open world game object on PS3, so in a sense of having to rebuild every object with less polygons to suit last gen consoles, I'd say that's pretty fundamental. The main character in the game has over 60,000 polys, find another open world game that comes close to that. You probably haven't played Infamous SS, I have played both and I can tell you now that I think Crysis 3 looks better to me, but I also know that ISS is more advanced at it's core because it's next gen. The bells and whistles effects on top my be better on crysis 3, but they are still on top of a last gen game that has the same character models, animations and code as the PS3/360 versions.

I'M STATING FACTS HERE FOR FUCK SAKE!!!

#763 Posted by PinkiePirate (2086 posts) -

I'd say InFamous: SS looks mighty impressive. And this is coming from someone who owns a GTX 680.

#764 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5299 posts) -

@Pray_to_me said:

I don't know why Hermits are in here posting graphs n shit. The point is not that PS4 is more powerful than PC, (even though according to Steam Stats it is more powerful than 90% of the PCs out there). PC can be infinitely powerful. It can be as powerful as however much money you want to throw at it.

The point is that Infamous: Second Son is graphically more advanced than PS360 ports like Skyrim and Crysis 3 for one reason: polygon count. Yes anti-aliasing, tessellation, lighting effects, etc is important and can profoundly improve how a game looks.

Here is Final Fantasy 12 on PS2

And here it is on on PC

Clearly, obviously, the superior resolution and aliasing have drastically improved the look of the game. And yet it still falls short when compared to FF13:

Because Final Fantasy 12 is a PS2 game and you could bump the resolution to 4k, apply 16X anti aliasing, whatever it would still look like a blocky PS2 game. To compete with FF13 graphically, the environments, characters, the entire game essentially would need to be remade.

The same is true for those Crysis and Skyrim Mods. You're basically just slapping new textures over PS360 titles. Second Son is an actual next gen game doing what Crysis 3 does and an infinitely greater scale.

You PC might be "2 billion times more powerful than a PS4 and takes a super ultra dump all over it times infinity" or whatever hyperbolic rhetoric you want to use but you're still playing last gen ports. Titles designed first and foremost to run on Xbox 360 and PS3.

Trying to explain these things to sheep is useless. Justice is blind here, It's like that movie 'Idiocracy'. You have had to explain in layman's terms to reach these clowns yet the first reply to this post was ferret-gamer totally ignoring your point by saying modded HL2 is better graphics than games like Uncharted. What they don't realize is that you can mod the original quake to have better textures and lighting than uncharted 3 if you wanted, but that doesn't make the game more graphically advanced.

I suppose some people know the score. But they will always call you out on something to try to disprove our point so it's a loosing battle. Remember, it's programmed into their heads that if its on PC, it's better (regardless of release) and nobody will swing their opinion because they are 'PC Master Race'. They are as bad as 12 year old cod bots in a different way.

#765 Edited by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

http://laughingsquid.com/the-expert-a-hilarious-sketch-about-the-pain-of-being-the-only-engineer-in-a-business-meeting/

Great representation of what its like trying to discuss shit with these pc die hards. "but but but high resolution yo!!!" it rly is amazing how the most complicated platform attracts the dumbest individuals. Just play an hour of any pc shooter online and you see how ridiculously clueless the pc community is.

#766 Posted by zeeshanhaider (2555 posts) -

@MikeMoose said:

@zeeshanhaider:

@zeeshanhaider said:

@Master_ShakeXXX said:

Lems and herms are in a state of total disarray and befuddlement. Sony has struck a killing blow with ISS, the best looking game of all time ever.

Yup, killing blow with a game that has no shadows, sub 30 fps, crappy draw distance, no SSAO/SSDO, low resolution textures.Looks like 900pStation is living up to its name to me.

Everything you just stated is false

My fellow hermit already posted a proof of that. How convenient for you cows to ignore evry post that debunks your pathetic claims.

#767 Edited by evildead6789 (7743 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:

@Pray_to_me said:

I don't know why Hermits are in here posting graphs n shit. The point is not that PS4 is more powerful than PC, (even though according to Steam Stats it is more powerful than 90% of the PCs out there). PC can be infinitely powerful. It can be as powerful as however much money you want to throw at it.

The point is that Infamous: Second Son is graphically more advanced than PS360 ports like Skyrim and Crysis 3 for one reason: polygon count. Yes anti-aliasing, tessellation, lighting effects, etc is important and can profoundly improve how a game looks.

Here is Final Fantasy 12 on PS2

And here it is on on PC

Clearly, obviously, the superior resolution and aliasing have drastically improved the look of the game. And yet it still falls short when compared to FF13:

Because Final Fantasy 12 is a PS2 game and you could bump the resolution to 4k, apply 16X anti aliasing, whatever it would still look like a blocky PS2 game. To compete with FF13 graphically, the environments, characters, the entire game essentially would need to be remade.

The same is true for those Crysis and Skyrim Mods. You're basically just slapping new textures over PS360 titles. Second Son is an actual next gen game doing what Crysis 3 does and an infinitely greater scale.

You PC might be "2 billion times more powerful than a PS4 and takes a super ultra dump all over it times infinity" or whatever hyperbolic rhetoric you want to use but you're still playing last gen ports. Titles designed first and foremost to run on Xbox 360 and PS3.

Trying to explain these things to sheep is useless. Justice is blind here, It's like that movie 'Idiocracy'. You have had to explain in layman's terms to reach these clowns yet the first reply to this post was ferret-gamer totally ignoring your point by saying modded HL2 is better graphics than games like Uncharted. What they don't realize is that you can mod the original quake to have better textures and lighting than uncharted 3 if you wanted, but that doesn't make the game more graphically advanced.

I suppose some people know the score. But they will always call you out on something to try to disprove our point so it's a loosing battle. Remember, it's programmed into their heads that if its on PC, it's better (regardless of release) and nobody will swing their opinion because they are 'PC Master Race'. They are as bad as 12 year old cod bots in a different way.

You're both morons,

not only was the difference between the ps3 & ps2 like twenty times bigger than the difference between the ps3 & ps4, there's also the law of diminishing returns

And saying modded halflife 2 looks better than uncharted or doom 3 better than infamous is just irony. Something you idiots clearly can't grasp.

The last time a console game outclassed a pc was in the time of the neo geo. Which was basically unpayable for john doe, it was also used in the arcades. Maybe in the beginning of the ps1 era some ps1 games were better than the pc as well.

But the moment x86 pc's & 3d accelerated graphics card were released, consoles have never been able to catch up, not with super beefed consoles like the ps3 & x360 and certainly not with a weak ass console like the ps4.

#768 Posted by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

nah it was said 100% seriously. pc die hards are quite amazing. i love when they try and claim they know more about coding than the developers of the actual game.

#769 Edited by clyde46 (46304 posts) -

Well, it looks good but its not the best. The same NPC's repeated over and over, the lack of shadows, the piss poor framerate clash horrible with the lighting and particle effects, the nice draw distance and the detail of the main character.

That said, its still just more Infamous, forgettable story and piss poor controls.

#770 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5299 posts) -

@evildead6789: You just wont ever get it. Argue black is white for the rest of your life, but lets just admit that uncharted 1 is better graphics than half life 2. It is true that ever since the first Voodoo card in 1996, the PC was king in graphics power, but look at what the less powerful N64 was capable of the same year. Mario 64 was unprecedented at the time and while it was rendered in 320x240 (Voodoo 1 was max 640x480), It still was a more impressive feat than anything anyone had seen before, the Voodoo card may have been able to do that, but because the game was designed entirely for the N64, developers were able to define the generation of gaming to come. Kind of like what Uncharted did for the 7th gen, and kind of what Infamous SS is doing this gen. Sure the laws of diminishing returns are kicking in now because realism at a far away point was achieved throughout the current gen games and now they are making things more detailed and that shows with Infamous SS poly count etc.

Mario 64 was much more advanced than Quake 1 from a technical standpoint (you will disagree because Quake is a PC centric game of course). It is, however, interesting to note that Quake on the N64 is noticeably inferior to Quake PC running on Glide (Voodoo API) which makes use of higher res textures with linear filtering, and of course ran at 640x480. What is interesting about this is how Battlefield 4 also shares the same fate on the PS4 compared to the PC version which can be ran in 4K with the big rigs. Exclusive games always make better use of the hardware than multiplats.

My point is that Voodoo Quake had better textures and resolution than Mario 64, but that didn't change the fact that Mario 64 was a game changer (in this case, in both gameplay and graphics). Assets like textures or anything modders can add are not generation defining, or fundamental to the game. The same goes with HL2 compared to Uncharted, and Crysis 3 compared to Infamous SS. They might do things better, (like Quake PC does textures better than Mario 64) but Crysis 3 is not an 8th Gen game at it's core.

HL2 is slightly different in the sense that it was a PC exclusive at release so it really couldn't be put on the PS2 without major modifications to the core code (Just like how the Crysis 1 port to PS3/360 was a hack job pretty much). It's kind of like a generation 6.5 game in that sense. But it is stupid to say that HL2 is more advanced than Uncharted just on the basis of it being on PC. It may have higher textures etc, but there is so much more on screen in Uncharted because it was designed for 'Next Gen' of it's time. Same goes for any 7th gen exclusive game or multiplat.

And Irony only happens when it's factual, Doom 3 is not better graphics than Infamous 1,2, or SS you fucking idiot.

#771 Edited by evildead6789 (7743 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:

@evildead6789: You just wont ever get it. Argue black is white for the rest of your life, but lets just admit that uncharted 1 is better graphics than half life 2. It is true that ever since the first Voodoo card in 1996, the PC was king in graphics power, but look at what the less powerful N64 was capable of the same year. Mario 64 was unprecedented at the time and while it was rendered in 320x240 (Voodoo 1 was max 640x480), It still was a more impressive feat than anything anyone had seen before, the Voodoo card may have been able to do that, but because the game was designed entirely for the N64, developers were able to define the generation of gaming to come. Kind of like what Uncharted did for the 7th gen, and kind of what Infamous SS is doing this gen. Sure the laws of diminishing returns are kicking in now because realism at a far away point was achieved throughout the current gen games and now they are making things more detailed and that shows with Infamous SS poly count etc.

Mario 64 was much more advanced than Quake 1 from a technical standpoint (you will disagree because Quake is a PC centric game of course). It is, however, interesting to note that Quake on the N64 is noticeably inferior to Quake PC running on Glide (Voodoo API) which makes use of higher res textures with linear filtering, and of course ran at 640x480. What is interesting about this is how Battlefield 4 also shares the same fate on the PS4 compared to the PC version which can be ran in 4K with the big rigs. Exclusive games always make better use of the hardware than multiplats.

My point is that Voodoo Quake had better textures and resolution than Mario 64, but that didn't change the fact that Mario 64 was a game changer (in this case, in both gameplay and graphics). Assets like textures or anything modders can add are not generation defining, or fundamental to the game. The same goes with HL2 compared to Uncharted, and Crysis 3 compared to Infamous SS. They might do things better, (like Quake PC does textures better than Mario 64) but Crysis 3 is not an 8th Gen game at it's core.

HL2 is slightly different in the sense that it was a PC exclusive at release so it really couldn't be put on the PS2 without major modifications to the core code (Just like how the Crysis 1 port to PS3/360 was a hack job pretty much). It's kind of like a generation 6.5 game in that sense. But it is stupid to say that HL2 is more advanced than Uncharted just on the basis of it being on PC. It may have higher textures etc, but there is so much more on screen in Uncharted because it was designed for 'Next Gen' of it's time. Same goes for any 7th gen exclusive game or multiplat.

And Irony only happens when it's factual, Doom 3 is not better graphics than Infamous 1,2, or SS you fucking idiot.

your first sentence already shows that you still don't get the irony

Halflife2 doesn't have better graphics than any uncharted, why would anyone say that in a serious manner. It was designed to run on a single core system and was already maxed out with a geforce 4. The xbox original came very close to the maxed out version of the pc and the xbox original was basically a pc, a p III 700 mhz with a geforce 3. Uncharted was made for the ps3 and actually made use of the ps3 extra power that it had over the x360. The ps3 was so strong at release that some entrepeneurs bought it to build supercomputers. It's 8-core 3ghz vs 1-core 2 ghz and a geforce 4 vs a geforce 7...

The same with doom 3, somebody says that doom 3 looks better than infamous and you take that seriously?, yet you call me an idiot.

Like I said the step the ps3 & xbox360 took was not a step but a giant leap when you compare them with the ps2 & xbox original. The difference between the ps3 & ps4 is like 1/20 of the difference between the ps4 & the ps3. You already need the power of a ps4 to run previous gen games normally released the last three years. In some case you actually need more. Crysis 3 needs at least a hd 7870 for full detail on 1080p with a small amount of AA. Same with the metro series, dead space 3, battlefield 3 & 4 , bioshock infinite etc..

And we're not talking about insane levels of aa or insane resolutions here, this is just 1080p and basic fxaa or even 2 x msaa to remove the worst jaggies. I already said that devs tried to find a middle ground between consoles and pc's before the ps4 & xboxone got released. But there was hardly any ground left for the x360 & ps3, when you look at the latest games you see they made enormous sacrificies to still make the game playable on the x360 & ps3. Yet you're saying on the pc they're just addons, while the pc version is the game without all the handicaps.

The fact that you can increase the resolution above 1080p and increase AA above low to moderate levels is because of the law of diminishing returns. If you would run a game from 2000 like hitman on hd resolutions the game wouldn't look prettier because the 3d models don't have enough polygons to be sustainable at these resolutions. A lot of models would simply look uglier because the higher resolutions would make the flaws in the 3d models more noticable. The low res was actually a good thing for these games, because they hid a lot of the flaws, or at least make em less obvious

This is an example with hitman

This is a pic of hitman codename 47 in 1280 x 1024

As you can see the models look all pointy and blocked

this is hitman code 47 in 1024 x 768

As you can see the models look actually better in a lower resolution, off course decrease the resolution even more and you would start noticing pixels. These games weren't made to play on big screens too.

This is actually the point i mean with diminishing returns, you can increase resolutions with games for x360 and ps3 as high as you want, with the right amount of AA, the game will simply look sharper and sharper and the 3d models will still have their natural look, they won't start to look blocky and pointy.

Of course this doesn't take anything away from the nice character detailed modelling in infamous, but infamous made sacrifies on all sorts of levels just because the ps4 can't do it all, they increased the polygons on character models but made all sorts of sacrifies when it comes to texture resolution, shadowing lighting and aa. Things we got used to already ages agon on the pc and even on the x360 & ps3. In infamous they got creative with the power available and when it comes to character models and particles it may be one of the best looking game ever, it's still only a small step when you look at models of crysis 3 for instance and all the rest is lower quality that we were used too.

That's something you would never have seen on a x360/ps3 game when you compared them with a ps2/xboxoriginal game.

And comparing super mario n64 with quake is comparing apples and oranges. They're two different games that made good use of 3d but Quake laid the foundation for games like unreal and halflife which were the real game changers. They showed what fps games could do and fps games pretty much dominated the game market the last 15 years. I haven't seen many 3d platform games as super mario n64 after that allthough it was a very original game.

Infamous isn't even that original, calling it a game changer or 8th gen is ridiculous. You could call it cross gen at best and ryse is even way better than infamous when it comes to character modelling.

#772 Edited by handssss (1836 posts) -

@clyde46 said:

Well, it looks good but its not the best. The same NPC's repeated over and over, the lack of shadows, the piss poor framerate clash horrible with the lighting and particle effects, the nice draw distance and the detail of the main character.

That said, its still just more Infamous, forgettable story and piss poor controls.

well at least some of what you posted isn't factually incorrect.

#773 Edited by SummerParadise (160 posts) -

#774 Edited by Pray_to_me (2849 posts) -

Crysis 3 is linear, Ryse is even more so.

You're just being funneled from one non-interconnected parking lot sized area to the next. Is it pretty? Sure. But so is Infamous.

Difference being that Second Son is Open World, doing all this on a scale that's larger than all 3 Crysis games combined.

As mentioned earlier in this thread even Crytec has admitted that Crysis 3 was held back by PS3 and 360.

Infamous is now the current graphics king even if its time on the throne will be brief until a true next gen multiplat makes its way to PC. It doesn't really matter whether Hermits are ready to admit it or not. There was a time when people thought the world was flat and it was considered heresy to think otherwise.

For PS4 next gen is already here. For PC.... you'll have to... just wait ;)

#775 Edited by SummerParadise (160 posts) -

@Pray_to_me said:

Crysis 3 is linear, Ryse is even more so.

You're just being funneled from one non-interconnected parking lot sized area to the next. Is it pretty? Sure. But so is Infamous.

ifference being that Second Son is Open World, doing all this on a scale that's larger than all 3 Crysis games combined.

As mentioned earlier in this thread even Crytec has admitted that Crysis 3 was held back by PS3 and 360.

Infamous is now the current graphics king even if its time on the throne will be brief until a true next gen multiplat makes its way to PC. It doesn't really matter whether Hermits are ready to admit it or not. There was a time when people thought the world was flat and it was considered heresy to think otherwise.

For PS4 next gen is already here. For PC.... you'll have to... just wait ;)

#776 Edited by Pray_to_me (2849 posts) -

is that supposed to impress?

#777 Edited by SummerParadise (160 posts) -

@Pray_to_me said:

is that supposed to impress?

Your InFamous is not even top 30 grahpics. Looks cartoony and bad.. Low textures, linear game. I played, not even impressive.

#778 Edited by Pray_to_me (2849 posts) -

no you didn't "played".

consoles aren't even legal in your country.

Come back with some in game screens noob.

#779 Posted by ReadingRainbow4 (14111 posts) -

@Pray_to_me said:

no you didn't "played".

consoles aren't even legal in your country.

Come back with some in game screens noob.

lul.

#780 Edited by displayy (30 posts) -

#781 Edited by evildead6789 (7743 posts) -

@summerparadise:

lol if you would run arma III on the ps4, it would simply go up in flames

#782 Posted by Cyberdot (3537 posts) -

If you include the rest of PC titles in your comment, then I might have to break some of my ribs by hard laughing.

#783 Posted by evildead6789 (7743 posts) -

@Pray_to_me: Lol @ the particle effects, it has been done before

next gen... lmao

Watch in hd

#784 Edited by Pray_to_me (2849 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@Pray_to_me: Lol @ the particle effects, it has been done before

next gen... lmao

Watch in hd

Haha you think you're slick eh? That's cute. That vid is a repost from like 6 years ago. With custom maps and the AI turned off (here's a hint troll the enemies are standing still and not moving). And it still looks blocky, still looks last gen and still looks like shit compared to second son. Stop embarrassing yourself and PC gamers in general.

btw I said Second son was superior because of poly count not particle effects derp

#785 Edited by evildead6789 (7743 posts) -

@Pray_to_me said:

@evildead6789 said:

@Pray_to_me: Lol @ the particle effects, it has been done before

next gen... lmao

Watch in hd

Haha you think you're slick eh? That's cute. That vid is a repost from like 6 years ago. With custom maps and the AI turned off (here's a hint troll the enemies are standing still and not moving). And it still looks blocky, still looks last gen and still looks like shit compared to second son. Stop embarrassing yourself and PC gamers in general.

btw I said Second son was superior because of poly count not particle effects derp

poly count on character model you mean

The overall poly count in crysis is much higher and poly count doesn't carry the weight like in the past because of the law of diminishing returns. You think ai has something to do with performance lol, that's cpu workload and crysis only uses two cores, you can put the ai on a third core if you wanted.

Besides i'm not comparing crysis here with infamous second son as a whole game, I just wanted to show that particle effects were possible a long time ago. No one ever used it much because it doesn't look realistic or there wasn't much use for it. It's basically like fireworks on the 4th of july. Second son implements it nicely but It's not groundbreaking lol.

Second son looks nice but graphics king?

#786 Edited by Pray_to_me (2849 posts) -

Poly count is higher in Crysis over second son? LMFAO you are a clown and a troll confirmed.

You just got caught trying to post a vid with dead AI and pass it off as ownage. I won't be responding to you further you've been getting pounded out this whole thread maybe you're a masochist or something but I'm over you now like an old toy I don't even wanna hit that anymore.

#787 Posted by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

At least some of the pc screens on this page are actual raw in-game native res shots. some of them are photoshops tho.

#788 Edited by evildead6789 (7743 posts) -

@Pray_to_me said:

Poly count is higher in Crysis over second son? LMFAO you are a clown and a troll confirmed.

You just got caught trying to post a vid with dead AI and pass it off as ownage. I won't be responding to you further you've been getting pounded out this whole thread maybe you're a masochist or something but I'm over you now like an old toy I don't even wanna hit that anymore.

crysis contains over 3 million polygons

It's not because second son has put 60000 polygons in a character that it all of a sudden has the most polygons in the entire game lol

And Ai is cpu workload lol, they just made those characters standing still because they could show of the explosion, crysis only uses 2 cores, you can easily offload it to another core in the ini files but that's not even needed, crysis wasn't really cpu heavy but whatever..

You dumb?

#789 Edited by MiiiiV (481 posts) -

Infamous SS looks really good, but it's lacking in several aspects. Poor lod distance, mediocre textures, seems to lack tessellation (the asphalt and walls seem so unnaturally polished close up and not coarse at all), the water on the ground doesn't react when Delsin walks over it, no dynamic lights (except for a certain few lights in the game), rudimentary foliage on trees and bushes. The only thing that's really great is main character poly count, it's around 60 000 I believe, more than most games. I hope it doesn't sound like I bash Infamous ss now, because as I said I think it looks really good. But from a technical standpoint it has a long way to go before it can truthfully be called "the best loking game ever"

#790 Edited by Pray_to_me (2849 posts) -

#791 Posted by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

what are you trying to show with those unimpressive screens pray?

#792 Posted by gpuking (2873 posts) -

Crysis 1 looks kinda dated in comparison to Second Son, the lighting, shading and effects are simply sub par. SS is definitely the best looking console game right now and hangs comfortably with the best of PC games out right now.

The real shocker would be The Order, UC4, GOW4, Quantic Dream's new game and GT7, these games would easily take a grand dump on Crysis 3 or Metro.

#793 Posted by evildead6789 (7743 posts) -

@Pray_to_me said:

Anti aliasing doesn't show in screenshots, you moron lol

Still didn't answer me about the 3 million polygons?

desperate fanboy lol

#794 Posted by Pray_to_me (2849 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

what are you trying to show with those unimpressive screens pray?

last gen games

#795 Edited by displayy (30 posts) -

In game screencap of Delsin.

#796 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5299 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:

@evildead6789: You just wont ever get it. Argue black is white for the rest of your life, but lets just admit that uncharted 1 is better graphics than half life 2. It is true that ever since the first Voodoo card in 1996, the PC was king in graphics power, but look at what the less powerful N64 was capable of the same year. Mario 64 was unprecedented at the time and while it was rendered in 320x240 (Voodoo 1 was max 640x480), It still was a more impressive feat than anything anyone had seen before, the Voodoo card may have been able to do that, but because the game was designed entirely for the N64, developers were able to define the generation of gaming to come. Kind of like what Uncharted did for the 7th gen, and kind of what Infamous SS is doing this gen. Sure the laws of diminishing returns are kicking in now because realism at a far away point was achieved throughout the current gen games and now they are making things more detailed and that shows with Infamous SS poly count etc.

Mario 64 was much more advanced than Quake 1 from a technical standpoint (you will disagree because Quake is a PC centric game of course). It is, however, interesting to note that Quake on the N64 is noticeably inferior to Quake PC running on Glide (Voodoo API) which makes use of higher res textures with linear filtering, and of course ran at 640x480. What is interesting about this is how Battlefield 4 also shares the same fate on the PS4 compared to the PC version which can be ran in 4K with the big rigs. Exclusive games always make better use of the hardware than multiplats.

My point is that Voodoo Quake had better textures and resolution than Mario 64, but that didn't change the fact that Mario 64 was a game changer (in this case, in both gameplay and graphics). Assets like textures or anything modders can add are not generation defining, or fundamental to the game. The same goes with HL2 compared to Uncharted, and Crysis 3 compared to Infamous SS. They might do things better, (like Quake PC does textures better than Mario 64) but Crysis 3 is not an 8th Gen game at it's core.

HL2 is slightly different in the sense that it was a PC exclusive at release so it really couldn't be put on the PS2 without major modifications to the core code (Just like how the Crysis 1 port to PS3/360 was a hack job pretty much). It's kind of like a generation 6.5 game in that sense. But it is stupid to say that HL2 is more advanced than Uncharted just on the basis of it being on PC. It may have higher textures etc, but there is so much more on screen in Uncharted because it was designed for 'Next Gen' of it's time. Same goes for any 7th gen exclusive game or multiplat.

And Irony only happens when it's factual, Doom 3 is not better graphics than Infamous 1,2, or SS you fucking idiot.

your first sentence already shows that you still don't get the irony

Halflife2 doesn't have better graphics than any uncharted, why would anyone say that in a serious manner. It was designed to run on a single core system and was already maxed out with a geforce 4. The xbox original came very close to the maxed out version of the pc and the xbox original was basically a pc, a p III 700 mhz with a geforce 3. Uncharted was made for the ps3 and actually made use of the ps3 extra power that it had over the x360. The ps3 was so strong at release that some entrepeneurs bought it to build supercomputers. It's 8-core 3ghz vs 1-core 2 ghz and a geforce 4 vs a geforce 7...

The same with doom 3, somebody says that doom 3 looks better than infamous and you take that seriously?, yet you call me an idiot.

Like I said the step the ps3 & xbox360 took was not a step but a giant leap when you compare them with the ps2 & xbox original. The difference between the ps3 & ps4 is like 1/20 of the difference between the ps4 & the ps3. You already need the power of a ps4 to run previous gen games normally released the last three years. In some case you actually need more. Crysis 3 needs at least a hd 7870 for full detail on 1080p with a small amount of AA. Same with the metro series, dead space 3, battlefield 3 & 4 , bioshock infinite etc..

And we're not talking about insane levels of aa or insane resolutions here, this is just 1080p and basic fxaa or even 2 x msaa to remove the worst jaggies. I already said that devs tried to find a middle ground between consoles and pc's before the ps4 & xboxone got released. But there was hardly any ground left for the x360 & ps3, when you look at the latest games you see they made enormous sacrifices to still make the game playable on the x360 & ps3. Yet you're saying on the pc they're just addons, while the pc version is the game without all the handicaps.

The fact that you can increase the resolution above 1080p and increase AA above low to moderate levels is because of the law of diminishing returns. If you would run a game from 2000 like hitman on hd resolutions the game wouldn't look prettier because the 3d models don't have enough polygons to be sustainable at these resolutions. A lot of models would simply look uglier because the higher resolutions would make the flaws in the 3d models more noticable. The low res was actually a good thing for these games, because they hid a lot of the flaws, or at least make em less obvious

This is an example with hitman

This is a pic of hitman codename 47 in 1280 x 1024

As you can see the models look all pointy and blocked

this is hitman code 47 in 1024 x 768

As you can see the models look actually better in a lower resolution, off course decrease the resolution even more and you would start noticing pixels. These games weren't made to play on big screens too.

This is actually the point i mean with diminishing returns, you can increase resolutions with games for x360 and ps3 as high as you want, with the right amount of AA, the game will simply look sharper and sharper and the 3d models will still have their natural look, they won't start to look blocky and pointy.

Of course this doesn't take anything away from the nice character detailed modelling in infamous, but infamous made sacrifies on all sorts of levels just because the ps4 can't do it all, they increased the polygons on character models but made all sorts of sacrifies when it comes to texture resolution, shadowing lighting and aa. Things we got used to already ages agon on the pc and even on the x360 & ps3. In infamous they got creative with the power available and when it comes to character models and particles it may be one of the best looking game ever, it's still only a small step when you look at models of crysis 3 for instance and all the rest is lower quality that we were used too.

That's something you would never have seen on a x360/ps3 game when you compared them with a ps2/xboxoriginal game.

And comparing super mario n64 with quake is comparing apples and oranges. They're two different games that made good use of 3d but Quake laid the foundation for games like unreal and halflife which were the real game changers. They showed what fps games could do and fps games pretty much dominated the game market the last 15 years. I haven't seen many 3d platform games as super mario n64 after that allthough it was a very original game.

Infamous isn't even that original, calling it a game changer or 8th gen is ridiculous. You could call it cross gen at best and ryse is even way better than infamous when it comes to character modelling.

Saying that Half Life 2 was better graphics than Uncharted is sarcasm not irony. It would be irony if it actually was better graphics. And based on the stupidity of some PC fanatics, yes I wouldn't be surprised if one of them said Doom 3 was better graphics than infamous in some way. It is true that the PS2 - PS3 difference is by far bigger because they introduced real time shadows and lighting that was used very sparsely in the 6th gen, and of course from SD to HD (even though a good number of games on PS3 were sub HD). It is also true that PC gaming has lightened the blow of next gen consoles because it closed the gap in graphics massively.

You keep saying that Infamous SS only does character models and particle effects better than any other game of it's type, but it actually has more polygons on screen than pretty much any open world game of it's type. Every object has a better mesh than previous gen games from small objects to main characters. Textures are no where near as bad as what you say they are, in fact I'd be hard pressed to find a PC open world game with better textures without mods. Play the game and I can tell you, the only upper limit I find with ISS is the draw distance and the shitty sea. Everything else looks fantastic and keep in mind that the map size is significant. You say there is sacrifices on all parts with this game, and maybe compared to a linear last gen game on PC, there will be some, but compared to any open world game of it's style, it blows everything away including prototype on PC.

Sure Crysis 3 might have the edge on certain things like some textures, lighting, tessellation, water, and foliage, but linear games generally do. No open world game has ever had the sheer amount of geometry this game has and the textures are still better than any game of it's kind btw. By all means post a picture of some blurry texture in an ally way or something, but for the most part, it blows the competition out of the water. Character models may not be a massive jump when compared to Crysis 3, but compared to other open world games, it's pretty significant. I also forgot to mention that the 60,000 polygons were in the main characters head alone, with an extra 7,500 polygons for his beanie (note that Gordon in Halflife 2 is made up of 8,000 polys altogether).

http://www.videogamer.com/ps4/infamous_second_son/news/delsin_rowes_beanie_hat_is_made_up_of_7_500_polygons.html

You also say that there is nothing on the PS2 that beats the launch PS3 games, that's true. But if you look at Halo PC on max settings (a 6th gen game at it's core), it has better textures than say Resistance Fall of Man at PS3 launch, even though that is probably the only thing it excels at in comparison.

Mario 64 pretty much invented the 3D platform genre regardless of how the genre is overlooked in today's world. No game compared to it at the time in both gameplay and graphics. Now while Infamous is nothing new in gameplay (what is?), it has made leaps in graphics in it's genre of open world beat em ups or what ever you call it. These genres never excelled at dynamic lighting and shit anyway because they typically never had day and night cycles. It's good. Best graphics in open world games while still beating the linear PC Crysis 3 at some pretty fundamental things like character models, AI, animations, and over all geometry. In contrast, no open world game came close to Crysis 3 at any level before hand. Play it and open your mind. You will be impressed even after seeing the super PC games maxed out. I was, and I still love my PC far more than my PS4.

I know that games are just gonna keep improving on PC anyway so why be so defensive over this one game?

#797 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5299 posts) -

@evildead6789: Just to clarify, HL2 on the first Xbox is no where near the PC version in texture res and geometry. The 360 version is identical to the PC version but it's only 720p.

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2007/10/10/generation-gap-half-life-2-and-the-orange-box

HL2 on Xbox original was an example of a game that was cut down drastically in both textures and geometry. Similar to what Crytek did to Crysis 1 on Xbox 360 and PS3.

But then that was not my original argument.

#798 Posted by evildead6789 (7743 posts) -

@scottpsfan14:

Crisys has over three million polys and infamous is nowhere near that.

It's not because they did more polys on the main character model that the overall game is suddenly the king of polygons

#800 Posted by speedfog (3201 posts) -

The only things that makes Infamous SS look good is the reflection and the neon lights. Not that it's bad, but it just makes people say wow wwhen a neon light pops up on screen.