Is Infamous: Second Son the Best Looking Game Ever?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#851 Edited by lundy86_4 (43426 posts) -

@Pray_to_me said:

I've presented the evidence throughout the entire thread. You beat your chest like a caged animal. If you have any evidence or reasoning beyond cursing like a 5 year old to dispute my points feel free to chime in.

If you presented specific numbers, you'd have no problem replicating them. What you posted were images and videos, which require subjective reasoning. Like I said, post evidence or shut the fuck up. Images are not evidence in this instance.

You aren't talking to a two year-old.

---------

Prove the PC/console Crysis 3 polycounts are the same, and prove inFamous SS has superior environment meshes and character models... Provide a source, dip.

#852 Posted by Pray_to_me (2848 posts) -

Listen Bubbles. I know you're angry. Did they not feed you today? Don't fling poop at your computer screen ok?

A picture is worth a thousand words. The proof is in the pudding. You say clear visual evidence that the PS360 version of Crysis 3 and the PC version of Crysis 3, having the same geometry is anecdotal evidence? Like if someone robs a bank and they get caught on camera you think the jury in the courtroom just ignores it and goes: "ohhh that's anecdotal evidence". Do you not get into the club because the bouncer looks at your picture on your ID and says: "yeah it looks like you but that's 'subjective'". Or maybe you just don't get in because you're like 7 years old.

C'mon bum. You're not fooling anybody. When Crytec hyped this generic PoS they tried to pass it off as next gen talking about "toad tessellation" etc. but never once did they say there was a difference in polygon count. I'm not going to provide evidence to you that the Earth is round or water is wet. I'm just gonna ignore you like that other loser troll who tried to say that Ryse had 230k polygon character models. I don't even need to go to the gym tomorrow I've been shitting on you so hard in this thread I lost like 5 pounds.

So go sit in your corner, eat a banana or something and try and calm down.

#853 Edited by evildead6789 (7743 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:

@evildead6789: I agree that consoles are weak. But all I am saying is that Infamous is a next gen open world beat em up. Better by far, graphically than any other open world game of it's type, and I'm sure you will agree on that at least. It hasn't been stated the exact amount of polygons infamous world has, out of interest, tell me where you found this information (just curious is all). Now textures in ISS may not be as high res as Crysis 3, but Crysis 3 is a linear game and they are high compared to most open world games, and probably the highest of it's genre.

I guess a good way to put it is to list it's 'next gen feats'

1) Character models in an open world game (beats the best of last gen linear games).

2) Animations. There are much more advanced animations as there are more polygons used around the characters moth and eyes.

3) Particle effects. This you obviously know. All I know is that developers couldn't put these effects on the last gen console games.

4) Over all geometry. If you look at every object on screen, there is so much detail gone into every object mesh because they didn't have to concern them selves with the last gen consoles and whether they could comfortably display the polygons on screen at once.

5) Textures (believe it or not). While they are not as high as we have seen on some PC games, they are probably higher than any open world game without mods of course.

Where they have compromised is where shadows only cast from one light source, and the draw distance is pretty bad actually. If the PS4 had stronger hardware, the draw distance could have been seamless.

Yes 4 8800 gtx may have more horse power than PS4 gpu, but they don't have the overall grunt because there is more modern and efficient technology like DX11 class effects what, as you say, could be done with dx9, but not in hardware form or at a feasible speed. Kinda like how a 9500gs runs physx demos better than an 8800gt because it has it in hardware. DX11 made use of 'hardware' tessellation, DX9 doesn't, it has to do it in brute force. I assume this is what you mean.

I did resort to name calling and that is childish, I apologize. Just saying that there are at least some differences in next gen titles that I stated above.

Well then you're comparing apples with oranges again, there's aren't any other 'open world' games like infamous besides prototype. You have gta but gta is a lot more difficult to pull off since you have to consider car physics and graphics since you can drive one.

1) the character models maybe be better but it's not like you see that big of difference with crysis 3. Nothing groundbreaking anyway.

2) That maybe true but do realize that this is still just basic animations, there's no activity going on when you look at the cutscenes for instance. The game doesn't involve these animations while you're playing. You cannot just use cutscenes to rate the overall game. In crysis 3 for instance the cutscenes do blend in with the game world , in infamous it's always 'black screen' 'cutscene starts' 'cutsscene stops' 'black screen' game continues. The game may have the nicest cutscenes, i'll give you that (well apart from ryse then)

3) These particles effects can be done on the pc as well, but no one really bothered with it, why ? probably because they didn't see any use for it. Maybe when there's magic involved like skyrim. The neon flash magic isn't really something you can use in every game. Explosions for instance also make use of particle effects only it doesn't look like magic, because it wouldn't look real, various debree is something of a particle effect as well.

You serious think infamous use more particle effects than for instance an explosion in crysis wars.

4) There's a lot of detail in infamous, and the more I look at screens and videos the more I'm impressed by it's quality. But still , the beauty comes from the mix between artwork and tech and from a technical standpoint I wouldn't say this is the best looking game out there. Of course, when you're subjective then you could say that.

5) As for textures, If you look at the hardware of the ps4, there's only so much that you can do and when you see what you need to max out crysis 3 with only a moderate AA, you need something better than what's in the ps4. It's as simple as that. You could discuss optimization of course but crysis 3 was not made with the console in mind only. They put a lot of thought in the pc version as well. It's only obvious if you look at system requirement for a game like arma III. Which is a pc exclusive.

As for mods, I am somewhat of a modder myself, but I don't really consider it modding, I basically just increase numbers in ini files. Since dx9 was released there was so much possible that the quality of games could be increased beyond the hardware specs of that time. Games have always been developped with future systems in mind (a game does take years to make after all) but with dx9 the possibilities were pretty much endless when you had a good game engine.

And the cryengine 2 in crysis is such a good engine, even the highest detail setting (very high setting) doesn't really do the game justice but at that time the very high detail setting already smoked the 600$ 8800 gtx without any AA or AF on 1080p. So the devs didn't really bothered with higher settings. The very high setting with moderate AA already brought a 2000$ with two 8800 gtx in sli system to its knees.

However, with hardware available now, I increase hdr a little, ssao a little, view distance, lod distance, texture resulotion particle effects, dynamic shadows and so on... The very high setting was made to find the middle ground between high end systems and visual quality. The game however was capabable of a lot more.

The latest changes I made , I based myself of this video , the guy that made that mod (or the changes to the ini files) still had to sacrifice a lot in view distance, texture popin and resolution and still he only got 30 fps on average which was not enough. He deliberately avoided water and a lot of meshes in this video so you wouldn't notice the flaws. He did ran it with an oc'd hd 5870 which is about the same power as the ps4. With my changes the view distance is further, I have no texture popin, the water quality is better and the texture resolution is higher on a lot of models but I did decrease hdr. I run it at 1000 p , built in edgeAA (so zero msaa) and I still only get 40 fps average and that's on my 7870 xt which almost has double the tflops of the ps4's gpu. Optimization could do a lot of course, but the ps4 would still not be enough. With my changes the game does look realistic though , this is the video (like i said he was bit crazy on the hdr here, but i just want to show you what's possible). Watch in hd.

So I hope you can realize why I can't really say infamous is the best looking game out there or breaks new ground for a new gen. It may be a competitor when you look at pc games that come right out of the box and as an open world city superhero game it is the best looking game out there of course but there's not a lot to compare here. Even without mods I still prefer gta IV liberty cities better when I look at it from a technical standpoint. I also know the power you need to max it out , and the ps4's power is nowhere near that.

Hower, in a mix with artwork and tech, in it's genre infamous is the best looking game out there, but it's not the graphics king. Sadly for everyone, cryteks crsyis (whichever one you prefer) pretty much still is.

#854 Edited by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

lol dumb dumb i remember that prerelease crysis warhead promoshot. thats not even the same particle effect in the actual game. it was typical crytek marketing with fake assets. oh and every crysis game has HORRIBLE animation outside of the cutscenes. absolutely horrible.

#855 Posted by highking_kallor (523 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:

@evildead6789: Just stop with your shit. Your just a troll is what you are. Go and suck Gabe Newells cock or something. You don't know anything about graphics and shit so just go play with your games like a good boy and shut up about shit cos you know sparse facts at best. You're such a fucking fool. It's horrific that God would make a creature so crippled in brains.

Fucking clueless cunt!

yeah i'm clueless, you just can't handle it that I debunk all your arguments

Infamous doesn't have the most polygons in games, get over it. Even in character models crysis 3 has almost the same polygons for the character model.

You don't know what you're talking about and now you're mad because you're talking to someone that does know what he's talking about

Grow up.

You say the above yet he is clueless? Can you see a problem with what you said? Hint its in the bolded.

#856 Posted by CrownKingArthur (4794 posts) -

i'm not entirely sure what you gentlemen are discussing, but perhaps this can be of service.

http://docs.cryengine.com/display/SDKDOC3/Character+Budgets

this seems to suggest that for main/story characters only in cryengine 3, pc and console can use the same geometry.

for non-main characters they recommend dropping triangle counts from 3.5-16.5K on PC, to 1.2-8.0K for consoles. Also, on consoles LOD1 is loaded in place of LOD2, which means you get about 50% of PC's polycount.

in terms of texture for main characters PC uses 2048² whereas console uses 1024². Side characters it's 1024² and 512² for PC and consoles respectively.

however these are their recommendations, they're not set in stone.

#857 Edited by lundy86_4 (43426 posts) -

@Pray_to_me said:

Listen Bubbles. I know you're angry. Did they not feed you today? Don't fling poop at your computer screen ok?

A picture is worth a thousand words. The proof is in the pudding. You say clear visual evidence that the PS360 version of Crysis 3 and the PC version of Crysis 3, having the same geometry is anecdotal evidence? Like if someone robs a bank and they get caught on camera you think the jury in the courtroom just ignores it and goes: "ohhh that's anecdotal evidence". Do you not get into the club because the bouncer looks at your picture on your ID and says: "yeah it looks like you but that's 'subjective'". Or maybe you just don't get in because you're like 7 years old.

C'mon bum. You're not fooling anybody. When Crytec hyped this generic PoS they tried to pass it off as next gen talking about "toad tessellation" etc. but never once did they say there was a difference in polygon count. I'm not going to provide evidence to you that the Earth is round or water is wet. I'm just gonna ignore you like that other loser troll who tried to say that Ryse had 230k polygon character models. I don't even need to go to the gym tomorrow I've been shitting on you so hard in this thread I lost like 5 pounds.

So go sit in your corner, eat a banana or something and try and calm down.

You need to quote, or reply to the person to whom you are responding. It's difficult to determine to whom you are speaking.

#858 Posted by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

I dont know exactly how many polys per frame crysis 3 pushes, but crysis 2 was drastically downgraded in that regard from crysis 1. crytek stated that crysis 2 at the highest settings pushes a little over 1 million at the highest points.

#859 Posted by ferret-gamer (17312 posts) -

@CrownKingArthur said:

i'm not entirely sure what you gentlemen are discussing, but perhaps this can be of service.

http://docs.cryengine.com/display/SDKDOC3/Character+Budgets

this seems to suggest that for main/story characters only in cryengine 3, pc and console can use the same geometry.

for non-main characters they recommend dropping triangle counts from 3.5-16.5K on PC, to 1.2-8.0K for consoles. Also, on consoles LOD1 is loaded in place of LOD2, which means you get about 50% of PC's polycount.

in terms of texture for main characters PC uses 2048² whereas console uses 1024². Side characters it's 1024² and 512² for PC and consoles respectively.

however these are their recommendations, they're not set in stone.

This is exactly what i was talking about in the last page, but was conveniently ignored. Games have different LODs and it was common practice on consoles to use lower quality LODs for the same distance as the PC's higher quality LODs.

#860 Posted by Pray_to_me (2848 posts) -

@ferret-gamer said:

@CrownKingArthur said:

i'm not entirely sure what you gentlemen are discussing, but perhaps this can be of service.

http://docs.cryengine.com/display/SDKDOC3/Character+Budgets

this seems to suggest that for main/story characters only in cryengine 3, pc and console can use the same geometry.

for non-main characters they recommend dropping triangle counts from 3.5-16.5K on PC, to 1.2-8.0K for consoles. Also, on consoles LOD1 is loaded in place of LOD2, which means you get about 50% of PC's polycount.

in terms of texture for main characters PC uses 2048² whereas console uses 1024². Side characters it's 1024² and 512² for PC and consoles respectively.

however these are their recommendations, they're not set in stone.

This is exactly what i was talking about in the last page, but was conveniently ignored. Games have different LODs and it was common practice on consoles to use lower quality LODs for the same distance as the PC's higher quality LODs.

it's a non sequitur because you're talking about only character models. even if the dude from ryse has 20k more polygons than Delsin the environment infamous is rendering is like 10 times larger than those in Ryse. same goes for crysis 3.

That's the point you continue to ignore.

#861 Posted by ferret-gamer (17312 posts) -

@Pray_to_me said:

@ferret-gamer said:

@CrownKingArthur said:

i'm not entirely sure what you gentlemen are discussing, but perhaps this can be of service.

http://docs.cryengine.com/display/SDKDOC3/Character+Budgets

this seems to suggest that for main/story characters only in cryengine 3, pc and console can use the same geometry.

for non-main characters they recommend dropping triangle counts from 3.5-16.5K on PC, to 1.2-8.0K for consoles. Also, on consoles LOD1 is loaded in place of LOD2, which means you get about 50% of PC's polycount.

in terms of texture for main characters PC uses 2048² whereas console uses 1024². Side characters it's 1024² and 512² for PC and consoles respectively.

however these are their recommendations, they're not set in stone.

This is exactly what i was talking about in the last page, but was conveniently ignored. Games have different LODs and it was common practice on consoles to use lower quality LODs for the same distance as the PC's higher quality LODs.

it's a non sequitur because you're talking about only character models. even if the dude from ryse has 20k more polygons than Delsin the environment infamous is rendering is like 10 times larger than those in Ryse. same goes for crysis 3.

That's the point you continue to ignore.

Where did you get that LODs only apply to character models? They are used for practically everything in a game. I even gave an extremely specific example of consoles having a lower max LOD than PC not related to character models. You should not be debating graphics if you don't even understand one of the most fundamental processes for optimization used in games.

#862 Posted by ReadingRainbow4 (14097 posts) -
@clyde46 said:

@Pray_to_me said:

@clyde46 said:

@m3dude1 said:

i have, and im pretty sure going back and replaying it at a higher resolution isnt going to magically make it a generational improvement.

Its a previous gen game that looks better than Infamous SS.

no. no it doesn't.

Yes, yes it does. I have both and Mirrors Edge looks better. I never said Infamous looks bad, just not as good.

I played and completed mirrors edge and honestly it's not even close brah. It's got a striking visual style, but on a technical level it's not even in the same ballpark.

#863 Posted by evildead6789 (7743 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

lol dumb dumb i remember that prerelease crysis warhead promoshot. thats not even the same particle effect in the actual game. it was typical crytek marketing with fake assets. oh and every crysis game has HORRIBLE animation outside of the cutscenes. absolutely horrible.

sure thing

these are real time videos, maybe you should use the pause button and wonder what's so different

and these are wildly exagerrated crysis explosions in 2014 lol

#864 Posted by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

evil dead are you blind? plz post the freeze frame from that video where the particle effect matches up with cryteks pre-release promo shot. i own crysis warhead ive played through it too many times to count.

#865 Posted by RyviusARC (4585 posts) -

@Pray_to_me said:

@lundy86_4 said:

@Pray_to_me: can you prove the polygon counts are the same between PC and consoles? Can you prove that inFamous has superior environment meshes and character models?

What proof do you need but common sense? You realize that 3d modeling is the most expensive aspect of game development right?

You think they made environment meshes and character models for PS3 and then made a totally new set of environment meshes and character models for 360; and then made a totally new set of environment meshes and character models for low end PC's; and then made a totally new set of environment meshes and character models for mid range PC's; and then made a totally new set of environment meshes and character models for high end PC's? Is that your argument?

Maybe there's a couple of extra blades of grass and shrubs but besides that those models are exactly the same.

You do know that both versions of a game can have the same assets but one could have a higher poly count because it has a longer draw distance.

Also Tessellation will increase the detail of objects that use it.

So the PC version of Crysis 3 is rendering far more than the console versions.

Even the lowest PC settings of Crysis 3 is more detailed than either console version.

#866 Edited by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

Are you guys even aware of where tessellation is used in crysis 3? are you aware of the difference between having it on and off?

#867 Posted by I_can_haz (6551 posts) -

Man I haven't played Crysis and Crysis Warhead in over a year. That shit looks rough as hell. You guys saying it looks better than Infamous need your eyeballs examined or you've never played Infamous. It runs circles around Crysis.

#868 Posted by evildead6789 (7743 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

evil dead are you blind? plz post the freeze frame from that video where the particle effect matches up with cryteks pre-release promo shot. i own crysis warhead ive played through it too many times to count.

Sorry but you can increase the particle effects, that promo shot from crysis warhead is not over the top

And I think you're smart enough to use the pause button yourself

#869 Edited by marie4u (18 posts) -

it is just looking good but i dont think so it is as good as it looks.

#870 Posted by kalipekona (2299 posts) -

@Pray_to_me said:

@miiiiv said:

Not sure it has higher total polygon count than Crysis 3 PC. The world in Infamous SS just isn't dense and detailed enough for it to excel in total polygon count. If you stop and look closely at things in the game like debris, barrels, walls, vegetation etc, you can clearly see that they are not very detailed and that together with the low lod distance don't ad up to a very high total polygon count, it's still above average, I think.

Considering it's open world, it looks great and runs ok, +30 fps most of the time but from a pure technical standpoint it has many shortcomings.

Haha that's silly. "Not sure it has higher total polygon count than Crysis 3 PC." Why tack on "PC" at the end? Poly count is the same for PC and PS360. Check for yourself. Go boot up Crysis 3, go to the graphics settings and adjust the polygon count slider. Oh wait, that's right there isn't any.

Crysis 3 on PS3

Crysis 3 PC maxed

Does the PC version have superior textures? Yup. Superior resolution and framerate? Yup. Superior effects like tessellation etc? Yup.

Superior environment meshes and character models? Nope. They're exactly the same.

Open world. Get a grip.

This is patently false and shows how little you Sony clowns really understand. Crysis 3 on PC does in fact have greater geometry detail than the console versions.

First of all, having played Crysis 3 on both PC and console there is absolutely no doubt that the PC version has geometry that is entirely missing in the console versions. For example, there is a lot more geometry-based foliage in Crysis 3 (not just alpha textures), and there is simply more of it in the PC version. Trees, shrubs, grass and other types of foliage are denser and greater in number on PC. This is extra geometry (i.e. polygons) and alpha textures that the PC version is rendering.

Furthermore, the PC version uses tessellation along with displacement mapping to achieve even greater geometric detail. The console versions lack tessellation and displacement mapping and this is yet one more area where the PC version has demonstrably more geometry detail.

Lastly, the PC version has much less geometry pop-in than the console versions, as well as much higher quality LOD. The console versions have aggressive LOD and a significant amount of pop-in. This means that in any given scene the PC version is rendering a greater amount of objects and higher quality meshes.

This idea the two of you have that Crysis 3 on PC is just some up res'd last gen game while ISS is a "true" next gen game is baseless and absurd. It would be just as easy to make a last gen version of ISS by downgrading visual elements as it was to make last gen versions of Crysis 3. Sony is trying to sell PS4s, though, and they desperately need exclusives to help convince people to make the switch.

Crysis 3 on PC is demonstrably superior to the console versions in virtually all the key areas:

1. Geometric detail.

2. Texture resolution.

3. Normal map quality.

4. Particle effects.

5. Shadow resolution and quality.

6. Complexity and quality of the shaders.

7. Render distance and LOD.

8. Higher quality DOF and other post process effects (some of which are absent on consoles).

9. A much greater number of shadow-casting light sources.

10. Tessellation.

11. Displacement mapping.

12. Screen space reflections.

13. Single bounce global illumination.

14. Much higher quality texture filtering.

15. Much higher display resolutions. (only 1024x720 resolution on PS3)

16. Much smoother framerates. (highly fluctuating framerates well below 30fps on consoles).

If all you did was take Infamous 2 and run it at native 1920 x 1080 resolution with good anti-aliasing and a solid framerate I guarantee people would think it looked at least twice as good. So with that you would already be quite a way towards Infamous Second Son. Just add in some stuff like better lighting, more detailed character models, more geometric complexity, some better textures and particle systems, along with a few new effects like high quality DOF and screen space reflections and you would more or less have ISS.

Infamous Second Son is no more "next gen" than Crysis 3 is. To be more accurate, ISS isn't even as "next gen" as Crysis 3, since the latter game on PC has clear and objective advantages in many areas.

#871 Posted by sukraj (22800 posts) -

Ryse says hello

#872 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5280 posts) -

@lundy86_4: http://www.dsogaming.com/interstitial.php?oldurl=http://www.dsogaming.com/news/cryteks-ceo-admits-that-crysis-3-was-limited-by-current-generation-consoles/

This is pretty much what you wanted.

#873 Edited by Opus_Rea-333 (976 posts) -

LOL is Infamous SS any good? just by watching Youtube videos it acts like a sleep aid instead a game.

But i get easily bored by Sony 1st party games so that must be.

#874 Edited by kalipekona (2299 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:

@lundy86_4: http://www.dsogaming.com/interstitial.php?oldurl=http://www.dsogaming.com/news/cryteks-ceo-admits-that-crysis-3-was-limited-by-current-generation-consoles/

This is pretty much what you wanted.

Cervat Yerli says all kinds of things. He also said:

"That’s why we said [two years ago] that Crysis 3 is next-gen ready already," "We did that without knowing the specs but it’s not going to be much more than what we have done so far. And it turns out we were pretty much right."

"We used Moore's Law," he said. "If you predict how hardware evolves at the current speed of evolution, and then take consumer pricing evolution, already two years ago you could see, whatever launches in 2013 or 2014 or 2015, will never beat a PC again."

"Crytek boss Cevat Yerli, restricted by non-disclosure agreements with both Microsoft and Sony, told Eurogamer Crysis 3 running on a powerful PC looks better than next-generation games due to be announced. Indeed, he said it is "impossible" for consoles to match gaming PCs."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-02-18-crysis-3-developer-crytek-on-why-its-impossible-for-next-gen-consoles-to-match-the-power-of-gaming-pcs

Here's what Digital Foundry had to say about Crysis 3:

"And with all its graphical settings pushed to the max, Crysis 3 on PC effectively offers a "next-gen now" experience - a preview of the level of technical prowess we should expect in the years to come from the new wave of consoles, but an experience that can be appreciated now by those willing to invest in top-end PC components."

"Overall, there's no question that the PC game offers up the definitive visual experience and it clearly gives us a glimpse at the kind of rendering quality we expect to be seeing in titles running on the next generation of consoles with regards to level of detail on offer and the advanced nature of the effects work."

"Where Crysis 3 really shines is on the PC, in which we are presented with a huge leap in graphical quality that gives us a tantalising glimpse of visual accomplishment on next-gen hardware."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-crysis-3-face-off

#875 Posted by freedomfreak (40611 posts) -

jeesh

#876 Posted by BluRayHiDef (10839 posts) -

I have both inFamous and the PC version of Crysis 3, and I think that Crysis 3 is vastly superior in terms of graphics. Take a look at this gameplay footage from the PC version.

#877 Edited by scottpsfan14 (5280 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:

@evildead6789: I agree that consoles are weak. But all I am saying is that Infamous is a next gen open world beat em up. Better by far, graphically than any other open world game of it's type, and I'm sure you will agree on that at least. It hasn't been stated the exact amount of polygons infamous world has, out of interest, tell me where you found this information (just curious is all). Now textures in ISS may not be as high res as Crysis 3, but Crysis 3 is a linear game and they are high compared to most open world games, and probably the highest of it's genre.

I guess a good way to put it is to list it's 'next gen feats'

1) Character models in an open world game (beats the best of last gen linear games).

2) Animations. There are much more advanced animations as there are more polygons used around the characters moth and eyes.

3) Particle effects. This you obviously know. All I know is that developers couldn't put these effects on the last gen console games.

4) Over all geometry. If you look at every object on screen, there is so much detail gone into every object mesh because they didn't have to concern them selves with the last gen consoles and whether they could comfortably display the polygons on screen at once.

5) Textures (believe it or not). While they are not as high as we have seen on some PC games, they are probably higher than any open world game without mods of course.

Where they have compromised is where shadows only cast from one light source, and the draw distance is pretty bad actually. If the PS4 had stronger hardware, the draw distance could have been seamless.

Yes 4 8800 gtx may have more horse power than PS4 gpu, but they don't have the overall grunt because there is more modern and efficient technology like DX11 class effects what, as you say, could be done with dx9, but not in hardware form or at a feasible speed. Kinda like how a 9500gs runs physx demos better than an 8800gt because it has it in hardware. DX11 made use of 'hardware' tessellation, DX9 doesn't, it has to do it in brute force. I assume this is what you mean.

I did resort to name calling and that is childish, I apologize. Just saying that there are at least some differences in next gen titles that I stated above.

Well then you're comparing apples with oranges again, there's aren't any other 'open world' games like infamous besides prototype. You have gta but gta is a lot more difficult to pull off since you have to consider car physics and graphics since you can drive one.

1) the character models maybe be better but it's not like you see that big of difference with crysis 3. Nothing groundbreaking anyway.

2) That maybe true but do realize that this is still just basic animations, there's no activity going on when you look at the cutscenes for instance. The game doesn't involve these animations while you're playing. You cannot just use cutscenes to rate the overall game. In crysis 3 for instance the cutscenes do blend in with the game world , in infamous it's always 'black screen' 'cutscene starts' 'cutsscene stops' 'black screen' game continues. The game may have the nicest cutscenes, i'll give you that (well apart from ryse then)

3) These particles effects can be done on the pc as well, but no one really bothered with it, why ? probably because they didn't see any use for it. Maybe when there's magic involved like skyrim. The neon flash magic isn't really something you can use in every game. Explosions for instance also make use of particle effects only it doesn't look like magic, because it wouldn't look real, various debree is something of a particle effect as well.

You serious think infamous use more particle effects than for instance an explosion in crysis wars.

4) There's a lot of detail in infamous, and the more I look at screens and videos the more I'm impressed by it's quality. But still , the beauty comes from the mix between artwork and tech and from a technical standpoint I wouldn't say this is the best looking game out there. Of course, when you're subjective then you could say that.

5) As for textures, If you look at the hardware of the ps4, there's only so much that you can do and when you see what you need to max out crysis 3 with only a moderate AA, you need something better than what's in the ps4. It's as simple as that. You could discuss optimization of course but crysis 3 was not made with the console in mind only. They put a lot of thought in the pc version as well. It's only obvious if you look at system requirement for a game like arma III. Which is a pc exclusive.

As for mods, I am somewhat of a modder myself, but I don't really consider it modding, I basically just increase numbers in ini files. Since dx9 was released there was so much possible that the quality of games could be increased beyond the hardware specs of that time. Games have always been developped with future systems in mind (a game does take years to make after all) but with dx9 the possibilities were pretty much endless when you had a good game engine.

And the cryengine 2 in crysis is such a good engine, even the highest detail setting (very high setting) doesn't really do the game justice but at that time the very high detail setting already smoked the 600$ 8800 gtx without any AA or AF on 1080p. So the devs didn't really bothered with higher settings. The very high setting with moderate AA already brought a 2000$ with two 8800 gtx in sli system to its knees.

However, with hardware available now, I increase hdr a little, ssao a little, view distance, lod distance, texture resulotion particle effects, dynamic shadows and so on... The very high setting was made to find the middle ground between high end systems and visual quality. The game however was capabable of a lot more.

The latest changes I made , I based myself of this video , the guy that made that mod (or the changes to the ini files) still had to sacrifice a lot in view distance, texture popin and resolution and still he only got 30 fps on average which was not enough. He deliberately avoided water and a lot of meshes in this video so you wouldn't notice the flaws. He did ran it with an oc'd hd 5870 which is about the same power as the ps4. With my changes the view distance is further, I have no texture popin, the water quality is better and the texture resolution is higher on a lot of models but I did decrease hdr. I run it at 1000 p , built in edgeAA (so zero msaa) and I still only get 40 fps average and that's on my 7870 xt which almost has double the tflops of the ps4's gpu. Optimization could do a lot of course, but the ps4 would still not be enough. With my changes the game does look realistic though , this is the video (like i said he was bit crazy on the hdr here, but i just want to show you what's possible). Watch in hd.

So I hope you can realize why I can't really say infamous is the best looking game out there or breaks new ground for a new gen. It may be a competitor when you look at pc games that come right out of the box and as an open world city superhero game it is the best looking game out there of course but there's not a lot to compare here. Even without mods I still prefer gta IV liberty cities better when I look at it from a technical standpoint. I also know the power you need to max it out , and the ps4's power is nowhere near that.

Hower, in a mix with artwork and tech, in it's genre infamous is the best looking game out there, but it's not the graphics king. Sadly for everyone, cryteks crsyis (whichever one you prefer) pretty much still is.

If you compare Prototype PC max to Crysis 3 max, which is part of the same generation, What looks better and IS better graphically? Crysis 3. By far. Now as for the 8th generation, ISS falls into the same category as prototype, except it's in the launch time frame so there is room for improvement over the years. Prototype was never the best looking game of it's generation, neither was the spider-man games, or the Hulk sandbox games etc. Infamous SS will most likely suffer the same fate as those games in this generation. Comparing it to Crysis 3 on PC is kind of silly really, as they are totally different games. If you use prototype 2 on PC, as a guide, then compare that to the absolute best of it's generation (Crysis 3), then you have an Idea of what a next gen FPS will look like later on in the consoles life if compared to Infamous SS (which is afterall, a launch, next gen super hero sand box). My point is that it doesn't have to compete with Crysis 3 PC, Spider-Man 3 on PS3/360 never competed with Half-life, which has better character models and textures than SM3, but on a smaller scale. The same goes for Infamous SS compared to Crysis 3 PC.

The next Crysis installment is said to be created for the PS4 in mind and not last gen, so the difference between Crysis 3 PC, and Crysis 4 PC will be huge by a technical standpoint, even if the texture resolution and lighting isn't much different. I keep using this word lol. But the 'FUNDAMENTAL' assets on both the PC and PS4 will be much better than Crysis 3 PC. We will be seeing in game animations that beat out Killzone Shadowfall's character animations, every object lying around will have several times the geometry mesh as Crysis 3, and probably even newer tech from Crytek that we have yet to witness.

As for Crysis 1, It's still my favorite game on PC. I have countless nuke mods and particle mods that rival Infamous SS, but then Crysis isn't a last gen game. It, as you said, brought the SLI 8800 GTX to its knees, but for completely different reasons to Crysis 3. With C3 it's all the DX11 lighting and tessellation and next gen effects that gives the performance hits. With Crysis 1, it was the sheer amount of assets on screen, such as polygons etc that beats out even the mighty Crysis 3 in many respects. It was the sheer scale. It is by far the best Crysis game for me, I really love it. On top of that, Cryengine 2 allows so much bullshit that it's untrue. All you said is true man , I do the same shit with it. But Infamous SS doesn't compete as it's a totally different game with different focus points to Crysis games. Comparing it to GTA IV is silly because, again, it has different focus points like car physics among others. That's why it's best to compare it to other games like it such as the first 2 Infamous games, Prototype games, Spider-Man games, and Hulk games etc. Then you see the improvement over generations.

To clarify.

Spider-Man 2 PS2

Spider-Man 3 PS3

Now I know the PS2 and 3 difference seemed greater because of the law of diminishing returns as you say also. But my point is that Halo 2 PC beats Spider-Man 3 in many aspects despite being last gen, Just like Crysis 3 does to Infamous. But that doesn't mean it's even comparable at all. By the end of this gen, Infamous will be dated if anything, as will Crysis 3 etc. The next Infamous game will most likely look better than Second Son, but it will fall short when compared to linear games like the next Crysis or Uncharted, just like Infamous 2 looks nowhere near as good as The Last Of Us.

#878 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5280 posts) -
@kalipekona said:

@scottpsfan14 said:

@lundy86_4: http://www.dsogaming.com/interstitial.php?oldurl=http://www.dsogaming.com/news/cryteks-ceo-admits-that-crysis-3-was-limited-by-current-generation-consoles/

This is pretty much what you wanted.

Cervat Yerli says all kinds of things. He also said:

"That’s why we said [two years ago] that Crysis 3 is next-gen ready already," "We did that without knowing the specs but it’s not going to be much more than what we have done so far. And it turns out we were pretty much right."

"We used Moore's Law," he said. "If you predict how hardware evolves at the current speed of evolution, and then take consumer pricing evolution, already two years ago you could see, whatever launches in 2013 or 2014 or 2015, will never beat a PC again."

"Crytek boss Cevat Yerli, restricted by non-disclosure agreements with both Microsoft and Sony, told Eurogamer Crysis 3 running on a powerful PC looks better than next-generation games due to be announced. Indeed, he said it is "impossible" for consoles to match gaming PCs."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-02-18-crysis-3-developer-crytek-on-why-its-impossible-for-next-gen-consoles-to-match-the-power-of-gaming-pcs

Here's what Digital Foundry had to say about Crysis 3:

"And with all its graphical settings pushed to the max, Crysis 3 on PC effectively offers a "next-gen now" experience - a preview of the level of technical prowess we should expect in the years to come from the new wave of consoles, but an experience that can be appreciated now by those willing to invest in top-end PC components."

"Overall, there's no question that the PC game offers up the definitive visual experience and it clearly gives us a glimpse at the kind of rendering quality we expect to be seeing in titles running on the next generation of consoles with regards to level of detail on offer and the advanced nature of the effects work."

"Where Crysis 3 really shines is on the PC, in which we are presented with a huge leap in graphical quality that gives us a tantalising glimpse of visual accomplishment on next-gen hardware."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-crysis-3-face-off

What he is saying here is that the effects that are seen in Crysis 3 PC are next gen and are as good as anything seen in these so called 'true next gen' games. This is 100% true and I am not going to deny that. Crysis 3 showcases effects that just blow away most games ever and is far ahead in that respect. But as good as those effects are, they put those effects on top of the PS3/360 game.

#879 Edited by Pray_to_me (2848 posts) -

better effects and resolution etc but the geometry remains the same.

#880 Edited by displayy (30 posts) -

@BluRayHiDef said:

I have both inFamous and the PC version of Crysis 3, and I think that Crysis 3 is vastly superior in terms of graphics. Take a look at this gameplay footage from the PC version.

Look up the word "vastly" in the dictionnary. Either you don't know what it means , or you're lying. I've played both too , and i think you're exaggerating...No need to look at youtube videos because they'll never do the game any justice. (and that's true for both crysis 3 / infamous ss)

Infamous second son is the best looking open world - third person game on the market and that's that....Is it the "best looking game ever" ? No....(there's no such thing anyway since games are constantly improving)..

and the fact that people on this thread are forced to use their big guns to prove their point...(showing footage of Crysis 3 on PC / ultra)....Shows that you're all trying your best to convince yourselves that Infamous looks like crap...

#881 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5280 posts) -

@Pray_to_me: Do you think Killzone SF is more advanced than Crysis 3?

#882 Edited by PAL360 (26883 posts) -

I cant believe some people are pretending these graphics are not impressive. I'm sure that it would look even better on a high end PC, but so far, this is easily one of the best looking games on any platform!

#883 Edited by I_can_haz (6551 posts) -

@PAL360 said:

I cant believe some people are pretending these graphics are not impressive. I'm sure that it would look even better on a high end PC, but so far, this is easily one of the best looking games on any platform!

True dat. The game is truly a technical marvel and easily one of the best looking games to date. Here are some of my own PS Share screens. Despite being heavily compressed they still look awesome.....

#884 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5280 posts) -

@clyde46: Lol. Okay then tell me exactly what is better about Mirrors Edge on PC, apart from the fact it's on PC. Tell me anything that supports your claim. Anything...

#885 Posted by PAL360 (26883 posts) -

@I_can_haz said:

True dat. The game is truly a technical marvel and easily one of the best looking games to date. Here are some of my own PS Share screens. Despite being heavily compressed they still look awesome.....

Nice ones. Are the PS share screens compressed? the vids are in 720p, but i thought that the pics were in native 1080p.

#886 Edited by I_can_haz (6551 posts) -

@PAL360 said:

@I_can_haz said:

True dat. The game is truly a technical marvel and easily one of the best looking games to date. Here are some of my own PS Share screens. Despite being heavily compressed they still look awesome.....

Nice ones. Are the PS share screens compressed? the vids are in 720p, but i thought that the pics were in native 1080p.

Thanks. Yea they are still compressed when they are uploaded to FB and Twitter unfortunately. It's still better than the 540p videos at least. I wish I had a capture card to capture uncompressed screens. Some of the folks on GAF and other forums post some uncompressed screens and they completely blow my screens out of the water lol.

#887 Edited by PAL360 (26883 posts) -

Ah ok, i didnt know that! I though that the pics were in native 1080p and vids in native 720p :P

#888 Posted by BluRayHiDef (10839 posts) -

@displayy: I don't think inFamous: Second Son looks like crap; it looks amazing. However, I think the PC version of Crysis 3 looks significantly more impressive; it features more particle effects and characters on screen simultaneously, and has higher resolution textures. As for that YouTube video, I made it and can vouch for how close it is to the actual quality of the game.

#889 Edited by PAL360 (26883 posts) -

A vid i just uploaded:

I wish we could upload them in 1080p. It looks so much better when we are actualy playing!

#890 Edited by DarthRamms (534 posts) -

@Pray_to_me said:

better effects and resolution etc but the geometry remains the same.

lol a 720p compressed youtube video yet the pc version still looks better has better detail not just higher resolution

#891 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5280 posts) -

@DarthRamms: Yes. You are correct. Believe it or not the PC version of Crysis 3 looks better than the console version. Whats your point?

#892 Posted by DarthRamms (534 posts) -

@scottpsfan14:

I guess you missed the part when I said it has better details not just higher resolutions like the user who I responded to

#893 Posted by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

@Pray_to_me said:

better effects and resolution etc but the geometry remains the same.

people actually view this as some generational leap. so much delusion.

#894 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5280 posts) -

@DarthRamms: It has better resolutions, textures, effects, lighting, draw distance etc, But the same object geometry, animations, and character models as the PS3/360 version. That video was posted to prove that it is still the same game at it's core, and is not fully next gen. Do you disgree?

#895 Edited by DarthRamms (534 posts) -

@scottpsfan14:

That is false when Crytek and Digital foundry have stated it is beyond the console version in every aspect

Digital Foundry

"And with all its graphical settings pushed to the max, Crysis 3 on PC effectively offers a "next-gen now" experience - a preview of the level of technical prowess we should expect in the years to come from the new wave of consoles, but an experience that can be appreciated now by those willing to invest in top-end PC components."

"Overall, there's no question that the PC game offers up the definitive visual experience and it clearly gives us a glimpse at the kind of rendering quality we expect to be seeing in titles running on the next generation of consoles with regards to level of detail on offer and the advanced nature of the effects work."

"Where Crysis 3 really shines is on the PC, in which we are presented with a huge leap in graphical quality that gives us a tantalising glimpse of visual accomplishment on next-gen hardware."

#896 Posted by scatteh316 (4927 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:

@DarthRamms: It has better resolutions, textures, effects, lighting, draw distance etc, But the same object geometry, animations, and character models as the PS3/360 version. That video was posted to prove that it is still the same game at it's core, and is not fully next gen. Do you disgree?

360 version has no tessellation so there'a few million polygons it's missing already....

#897 Edited by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

watching the video do you view it as a generational leap? its a simple yes or no question.

#898 Edited by TheFadeForever (1770 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

watching the video do you view it as a generational leap? its a simple yes or no question.

you mean that 720p compressed youtube video better yet how about use what Digital Foundry said about Crysis 3

#899 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5280 posts) -
@scatteh316 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:

@DarthRamms: It has better resolutions, textures, effects, lighting, draw distance etc, But the same object geometry, animations, and character models as the PS3/360 version. That video was posted to prove that it is still the same game at it's core, and is not fully next gen. Do you disgree?

360 version has no tessellation so there'a few million polygons it's missing already....

What? a few million polygons? The game has less than 3 million polygons altogether. I don't think a few tessellated objects will be anywhere near that number. There is literally about 30 different objects in the whole game that are tessellated. Even then, tessellation is just an add-on anyway, it's a cheat in a way because it's not the true geometry of the object. But I guess your point is it has it anyway.

#900 Edited by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

30 is probly a generous number. these people are clueless. ive already linked twice to a comparison showing how useless the tessellation in this game actually is and they just keep chirping on and on about it.

http://www.tweakguides.com/10_c3_padm_comparison.html

thats literally like the only noticeable use of tessellation in the entire game. that 1 specific tree.