PC Gaming 2012: Top Ten Best Looking Games.

Uncharted, MGS4, God of War 3, and Halo 4 all look just as good.

At least when compared to my PC anyway

GioVela2010

that's because your 670 is broken.

And you need glasses.

SweetFX looks quite a bit better than that.

mitu123

I'm not saying it does, I'm not saying it doesn't. I haven't seen Dishonored with sweetfx, I have no interest in playing it with sweetfx as the game looks fine as it is to me.

I'm replying to the part where you said Dishonored vanilla looks like nothing special. I don't agree with that. I think it has a great looking artstyle that makes up for what it may lack in technical power.

This thread confirms that pc graphics are no where near a generation ahead. Most pc games are just console ports with high resolution and slightly better effects. Sure they look better, but a gen ahead, please. Pc hardware is way beyond a gen ahead but that's useless until developers use that power. The only pc excluseives anymore are rts and mmo and indie games. There's no longer big budget pc exclusives like the original Crysis that push pc hardware. It's sad really all that power really has been wasted for a long time. The only things that's going to push pc graphics is when ps4 and 720 come out.

angelsrul_basic

They don't look ahead...only 30-40%.

But they certainly run/play a gen ahead (performance).

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"][QUOTE="Vaasman"]I see, so this was just a troll then, since you're already attempting to say I must be butthurt. Nevermind I'll just move along then.

Vaasman

Hahaha, look at this guy. He's adamant that I'm trolling because I called him out on his idiotic red herring attempt to inject WoW into a discussion where it's not at all relevant. It's like he realized how stupid he was and then attempted to shift the blame onto me to save face.

Keep trying, kid.

This thread confirms that pc graphics are no where near a generation ahead. Most pc games are just console ports with high resolution and slightly better effects. Sure they look better, but a gen ahead, please. Pc hardware is way beyond a gen ahead but that's useless until developers use that power. The only pc excluseives anymore are rts and mmo and indie games. There's no longer big budget pc exclusives like the original Crysis that push pc hardware. It's sad really all that power really has been wasted for a long time. The only things that's going to push pc graphics is when ps4 and 720 come out.

angelsrul_basic

PCgameruk

That fish looks tasty!

Wait, it is fish... right?

Just checking...

[QUOTE="angelsrul_basic"]

This thread confirms that pc graphics are no where near a generation ahead. Most pc games are just console ports with high resolution and slightly better effects. Sure they look better, but a gen ahead, please. Pc hardware is way beyond a gen ahead but that's useless until developers use that power. The only pc excluseives anymore are rts and mmo and indie games. There's no longer big budget pc exclusives like the original Crysis that push pc hardware. It's sad really all that power really has been wasted for a long time. The only things that's going to push pc graphics is when ps4 and 720 come out.

faizan_faizan

How does modded Skyrim disprove that most developers don't bother to make games intended for top-end PC hardware?

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

SweetFX looks quite a bit better than that.

R4gn4r0k

I'm not saying it does, I'm not saying it doesn't. I haven't seen Dishonored with sweetfx, I have no interest in playing it with sweetfx as the game looks fine as it is to me.

I'm replying to the part where you said Dishonored vanilla looks like nothing special. I don't agree with that. I think it has a great looking artstyle that makes up for what it may lack in technical power.

[QUOTE="faizan_faizan"]

[QUOTE="angelsrul_basic"]

This thread confirms that pc graphics are no where near a generation ahead. Most pc games are just console ports with high resolution and slightly better effects. Sure they look better, but a gen ahead, please. Pc hardware is way beyond a gen ahead but that's useless until developers use that power. The only pc excluseives anymore are rts and mmo and indie games. There's no longer big budget pc exclusives like the original Crysis that push pc hardware. It's sad really all that power really has been wasted for a long time. The only things that's going to push pc graphics is when ps4 and 720 come out.

princeofshapeir

How does modded Skyrim disprove that most developers don't bother to make games intended for top-end PC hardware?

It just proves that PCs are capable of, and are currently, pushing those graphics. Whether professional, established developers are the ones doing it doesn't matter.

And even if console fanboys want to exclude mods (because they're jelly), there are unmodded games that absolutely crush anything available on consoles. Crysis 2 with DX11 and the official HD textures is undeniably better looking than any and all console games (except, possibly, from an artstyle standpoint. But that's subjective, and is entirely a matter of opinion). Anyone who argues that is blind.

[QUOTE="GioVela2010"]

Uncharted, MGS4, God of War 3, and Halo 4 all look just as good.

At least when compared to my PC anyway

DragonfireXZ95

[QUOTE="faizan_faizan"]

[QUOTE="angelsrul_basic"]

This thread confirms that pc graphics are no where near a generation ahead. Most pc games are just console ports with high resolution and slightly better effects. Sure they look better, but a gen ahead, please. Pc hardware is way beyond a gen ahead but that's useless until developers use that power. The only pc excluseives anymore are rts and mmo and indie games. There's no longer big budget pc exclusives like the original Crysis that push pc hardware. It's sad really all that power really has been wasted for a long time. The only things that's going to push pc graphics is when ps4 and 720 come out.

princeofshapeir

How does modded Skyrim disprove that most developers don't bother to make games intended for top-end PC hardware?

[QUOTE="GioVela2010"]

Uncharted, MGS4, God of War 3, and Halo 4 all look just as good.

At least when compared to my PC anyway

the_bi99man

that's because your 670 is broken.

And you need glasses.

[QUOTE="Vaasman"]

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"] You are butthurt, and I wasn't trolling. Why else would you bring up WoW? princeofshapeir

Hahaha, look at this guy. He's adamant that I'm trolling because I called him out on his idiotic red herring attempt to inject WoW into a discussion where it's not at all relevant. It's like he realized how stupid he was and then attempted to shift the blame onto me to save face.

Keep trying, kid.

It's just so obvious at this point. No need to keep it going. We can all tell.

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"]

[QUOTE="faizan_faizan"]







Looks nex gen nuff to me.


And what's this? LOL.

the_bi99man

How does modded Skyrim disprove that most developers don't bother to make games intended for top-end PC hardware?

It just proves that PCs are capable of, and are currently, pushing those graphics. Whether professional, established developers are the ones doing it doesn't matter.

And even if console fanboys want to exclude mods (because they're jelly), there are unmodded games that absolutely crush anything available on consoles. Crysis 2 with DX11 and the official HD textures is undeniably better looking than any and all console games (except, possibly, from an artstyle standpoint. But that's subjective, and is entirely a matter of opinion). Anyone who argues that is blind.

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"]

[QUOTE="Vaasman"]Not even I good troll, I mean geeze can't you put more entertainment into it? At least make it funny or obvious... What is this world coming to when the trolls won't put forth the effort anymore. Use to be back in the day you'd get a multi-page troll with pictures and funny memes. Then we'd all have a laugh and make a big party out of it. Not anymore. Sad day in system wars.

Vaasman

Hahaha, look at this guy. He's adamant that I'm trolling because I called him out on his idiotic red herring attempt to inject WoW into a discussion where it's not at all relevant. It's like he realized how stupid he was and then attempted to shift the blame onto me to save face.

Keep trying, kid.

It's just so obvious at this point. No need to keep it going. We can all tell.

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]

[QUOTE="GioVela2010"]

Uncharted, MGS4, God of War 3, and Halo 4 all look just as good.

At least when compared to my PC anyway

GioVela2010

that's because your 670 is broken.

And you need glasses.

Indeed mine does. I can actually say that games on my PC don't look significantly better than consoles. But that's because I'm gaming on a 4 year old laptop, and play most recent games at barely above minimum settings, and at 720p. And that looks pretty much identical to the console versions, while running at higher framerates. You saying that your alleged beast of a computer, with an i7, 670, and 24 gigs of RAM doesn't run games looking significantly better than consoles means that you're trolling and/or lying. My money is on both.

[QUOTE="Vaasman"]

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"]

Hahaha, look at this guy. He's adamant that I'm trolling because I called him out on his idiotic red herring attempt to inject WoW into a discussion where it's not at all relevant. It's like he realized how stupid he was and then attempted to shift the blame onto me to save face.

Keep trying, kid.

princeofshapeir

It's just so obvious at this point. No need to keep it going. We can all tell.

And besides, Guild Wars 2 is a good looking game, one of the best looking RPG's out I would say, especially in it's art design. Frankly I think your original statement was questionable as well. You claimed it's jaggy and has too much bloom? I mean I played for the better part of 300 hours, and there was no point when I thought the game had either of those problems. You can certainly argue against certain areas being too blocky, or some environment textures being low res, or the clipping on a lot of armor designs and animations, or the draw distance in some areas should be better. But it's not blurry, it's not jaggy, and it doesn't have too much bloom. I think that's the kind of thing someone who doesn't play would say, because they looked at a screenshot or video and came to that conclusion based on what they wanted to believe.

crysis 2 still looks better than all these games.

Where the fvck is The Witcher 2?ShadowsDemon

Not a 2012 game. The Enhanced Edition is, but I don't think anyone (in this thread) is counting special editions released after the initial games.

GioVela2010

:lol:

Yousaying that your alleged beast of a computer, with an i7, 670, and 24 gigs of RAM doesn't run games looking significantly better than consoles means that you're trolling and/or lying. My money is on both.

This. It doesn't matter what PC he has, his opinion has been disproven with direct-feeds of those games he mentioned :lol:

I'd say Sleeping Dogs at 3840x2160 with SweetFX + FXAA and Far Cry 3 at 2560x1440 w/ 2x SGSSAA and SweetFX are the best looking games of 2012.

Crysis 3 will rape both.

Riadon2

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"][QUOTE="Vaasman"]"Hey everyone, come see how good I am at trolling, I shall make a mockery of this other user to prove it!"

It's just so obvious at this point. No need to keep it going. We can all tell.

Vaasman

And besides, Guild Wars 2 is a good looking game, one of the best looking RPG's out I would say, especially in it's art design. Frankly I think your original statement was questionable as well. You claimed it's jaggy and has too much bloom? I mean I played for the better part of 300 hours, and there was no point when I thought the game had either of those problems. You can certainly argue against certain areas being too blocky, or some environment textures being low res, or the clipping on a lot of armor designs and animations, or the draw distance in some areas should be better. But it's not blurry, it's not jaggy, and it doesn't have too much bloom. I think that's the kind of thing someone who doesn't play would say, because they looked at a screenshot or video and came to that conclusion based on what they wanted to believe.

We're talking exclusively about graphics. I'm well aware WoW was released in 2004 and uses the WC3 engine. It would be idiotic to argue that it's a better-looking game than Guild Wars 2. But I'm not arguing that at all. You saying my statement that GW2 looks bad isn't valid simply because I play WoW is like me saying you have no right to talk about PC graphics because you have an Xbox Live account, and therefore play console games. I play a host of other demanding, graphically capable games; simply because I play one game that doesn't have the best graphics doesn't render my opinion worthless.

Furthermore, I do own Guild Wars 2 and have played a lot of it. If you recall, I was incredibly hyped for the game leading up to release and participated in every beta event since the very first closed beta available to the public. I'm easily able to play it on max settings (though I'm amused that the optimization still isn't where it should be and there's a fair amount of framerate issues several months after release). Let me show you a few screenshots to demonstrate why the game looks very inconsistent and plain ugly visually:

The game's only anti-aliasing option is FXAA. There are no options for SSAO and there are no DX11 features. I think I remember ANet saying in one of the betas that they'd add some DX11 features in shortly after launch, but here we are in mid-January 2013.

Also, my PC specs: GTX 670, i7 3770k, 8GB of RAM and Guild Wars 2 installed on an SSD. I enabled supersampling just to demonstrate the game at absolute max settings even though supersampling isn't really necessary.

Ugly lighting and shaders highlight the game's unnatural, oversaturated look. I can appreciate the artistic design but I'm wholly put off by the lighting and colors.

Those trees look pretty horrendous and the shadowing is very flat and boring. Light given off by certain objects isn't dynamic and appears like a blob of saturation on the ground (the lantern on the right). Notice in this screenshot and the next how the bloom is practically blinding on certain objects.

If I didn't know better, I'd honestly mistake this for a screenshot of Guild Wars 1.

Just wait consoles you might get 1080p crysis 2 in 10 years.

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/7679/crysis22013011917560608.jpg

[QUOTE="GioVela2010"][QUOTE="the_bi99man"]

that's because your 670 is broken.

And you need glasses.

the_bi99man

Indeed mine does. I can actually say that games on my PC don't look significantly better than consoles. But that's because I'm gaming on a 4 year old laptop, and play most recent games at barely above minimum settings, and at 720p. And that looks pretty much identical to the console versions, while running at higher framerates. You saying that your alleged beast of a computer, with an i7, 670, and 24 gigs of RAM doesn't run games looking significantly better than consoles means that you're trolling and/or lying. My money is on both.

crysis 2 still looks better than all these games.

cryemocry

We're talking exclusively about graphics. I'm well aware WoW was released in 2004 and uses the WC3 engine. It would be idiotic to argue that it's a better-looking game than Guild Wars 2. But I'm not arguing that at all. You saying my statement that GW2 looks bad isn't valid simply because I play WoW is like me saying you have no right to talk about PC graphics because you have an Xbox Live account, and therefore play console games. I play a host of other demanding, graphically capable games; simply because I play one game that doesn't have the best graphics doesn't render my opinion worthless.

Furthermore, I do own Guild Wars 2 and have played a lot of it. If you recall, I was incredibly hyped for the game leading up to release and participated in every beta event since the very first closed beta available to the public. I'm easily able to play it on max settings (though I'm amused that the optimization still isn't where it should be and there's a fair amount of framerate issues several months after release). Let me show you a few screenshots to demonstrate why the game looks very inconsistent and plain ugly visually:

The game's only anti-aliasing option is FXAA. There are no options for SSAO and there are no DX11 features. I think I remember ANet saying in one of the betas that they'd add some DX11 features in shortly after launch, but here we are in mid-January 2013.

Also, my PC specs: GTX 670, i7 3770k, 8GB of RAM and Guild Wars 2 installed on an SSD. I enabled supersampling just to demonstrate the game at absolute max settings even though supersampling isn't really necessary.

Ugly lighting and shaders highlight the game's unnatural, oversaturated look. I can appreciate the artistic design but I'm wholly put off by the lighting and colors.

Those trees look pretty horrendous and the shadowing is very flat and boring. Light given off by certain objects isn't dynamic and appears like a blob of saturation on the ground (the lantern on the right). Notice in this screenshot and the next how the bloom is practically blinding on certain objects.

If I didn't know better, I'd honestly mistake this for a screenshot of Guild Wars 1.

princeofshapeir

Guild Wars 2 looks like ass.

princeofshapeir 2013

You're saying that in the context of it's entire visual design.

You appear to be so gung-ho in your efforts to critique it on a technical level, just because someone brought the game up in this thread, that you've ignored the fact that that the thread topic doesn't mention what we are judging these games' visuals on at all.

This game really is beautiful.

princeofshapeir 2012 on GW2

The entire reason I brought up WoW is because that is a game that, like GW2, is praised for it's ability to carry the graphics with excellent art design. So for someone who plays that game to turn around and say GW2 looks like ass, I mean do you not see the problem here?

To answer your original non-query, yes I am asspained, you're being ridiculous.

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"]At no point was it mentioned that this thread is discussing technical graphics. Reread the OP if you want, it's not there. The thread title says top ten best LOOKING games. Not best technical graphics. You're spending a whole lot of time trying to argue it looks bad, when it doesn't. It looks good. The artistic merits of the game carry it way beyond it's technical limitations. And no one argued otherwise or mentioned pure technical design, at least not until the Skyrim mod posts came into it. So when you say:

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir 2013"]

Guild Wars 2 looks like ass.

Vaasman

You're saying that in the context of it's entire visual design.

You appear to be so gung-ho in your efforts to critique it on a technical level, just because someone brought the game up in this thread, that you've ignored the fact that that the thread topic doesn't mention what we are judging these games' visuals on at all.

This game really is beautiful.

princeofshapeir 2012 on GW2

The entire reason I brought up WoW is because that is a game that, like GW2, is praised for it's ability to carry the graphics with excellent art design. So for someone who plays that game to turn around and say GW2 looks like ass, I mean do you not see the problem here?

To answer your original non-query, yes I am asspained, you're being ridiculous.

[QUOTE="cryemocry"]

crysis 2 still looks better than all these games.

PCgameruk

[QUOTE="PCgameruk"][QUOTE="cryemocry"]

crysis 2 still looks better than all these games.

cryemocry

[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"]Where the fvck is The Witcher 2?the_bi99man

Not a 2012 game. The Enhanced Edition is, but I don't think anyone (in this thread) is counting special editions released after the initial games.