You can pretty up a game all you want but it still needs good gameplay to be considered a good game, DriveClub and The Order are focusing waaaay too much on graphics I fear.
Yep. I'm not really into most of these early titles, but their visual fidelity has me excited for things to come. We're already off to an impressive start and in a few years we're going to see some real lookers.
And I don't know why some hermits have to be so uptight about this. This only boils over into better looking PC games in the long run as well. The better visual output we get from consoles, the less held back the games will be on PC.
As for the pretty graphics, shallow game remarks. Yes that does suck, but this has been a thing for a looooong time now. And out of all these nice looking games with crap gameplay there is always going to be the games that do justice to both. It's always been this way.
Exactly. Some hermits seem to forget that, less than one year ago, all their multiplats were ports from consoles with 512mb ram. They dont understand that, despite not being as powerful as some PCs, PS4 and X1 will mean a graphical boost on most of their games!
Glad PS4 and Xbox One have 'upped' their graphics. And its early days also which means, its only going to get better ;) That in effect will also produce more better PC games visually. Am sure the new next gen engines will do wonders. Expecting big things from Unreal 4.
I'm extremely excited for what this gen potentially bears aesthetics-wise no doubt, especially from developers such as Rocksteady, Naughty Dog, and CD Projekt. Star Citizen also looks like it's going to be a real eye-opener (for those who can afford capable rigs to run it on ultra).
I'll always argue that graphics are an often vitally important overlooked element of any game's enjoyment and I think we're going to see some prime examples this gen as to why, even more so with VR coming into play.
It's a great time to be a gamer. I can't wait for E3.
PC graphics are already leagues ahead of PS4 and Xbox One , as some of my fellow gamers have already proved by posting stunning screenshots .
PC graphics will always be much better, but I think games for the consoles will improve a lot in the future. They will of course never be able to match a powerful gaming PC.
Considering the people from CD Projekt said they feel like they are very close to maxing the PS4's power I'm not impressed. Especially when rumors are that it will be sub 1080p.
Considering the people from CD Projekt said they feel like they are very close to maxing the PS4's power I'm not impressed. Especially when rumors are that it will be sub 1080p.
Yeah I always thought the hardware should have been more powerful. I'm sure Naughty Dog may impress, but generally the technical side of things could have been better. However, perhaps research was done in just exactly how much better could have things been on current display technology vs the price/risk of manufacturing increase. We are on 1080p screens. At that resolution it only makes so much sense to display X amount of detail as far as textures and the like. And yes the fact that many games may not display native 1080p, more than half of bluray films dont either, and the general public still thinks they look just fine.
Considering the people from CD Projekt said they feel like they are very close to maxing the PS4's power I'm not impressed. Especially when rumors are that it will be sub 1080p.
Yeah I always thought the hardware should have been more powerful. I'm sure Naughty Dog may impress, but generally the technical side of things could have been better. However, perhaps research was done in just exactly how much better could have things been on current display technology vs the price/risk of manufacturing increase. We are on 1080p screens. At that resolution it only makes so much sense to display X amount of detail as far as textures and the like. And yes the fact that many games may not display native 1080p, more than half of bluray films dont either, and the general public still thinks they look just fine.
Not much to disagree with there, but I do feel like the hardware could of been slightly improved. If rumors are true and The Witcher 3 looks similar to The Witcher 2 on consoles then that is disappointing. It's just a rumor so take it with a grain of salt. http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/the_witcher_3_gtx_780ti_could_push_35_45_fps_at_max.html
Considering the people from CD Projekt said they feel like they are very close to maxing the PS4's power I'm not impressed. Especially when rumors are that it will be sub 1080p.
even a pi-calculator can fully utilize PS4. it all boils down to the game engine's efficiency.
Considering the people from CD Projekt said they feel like they are very close to maxing the PS4's power I'm not impressed. Especially when rumors are that it will be sub 1080p.
Yeah I always thought the hardware should have been more powerful. I'm sure Naughty Dog may impress, but generally the technical side of things could have been better. However, perhaps research was done in just exactly how much better could have things been on current display technology vs the price/risk of manufacturing increase. We are on 1080p screens. At that resolution it only makes so much sense to display X amount of detail as far as textures and the like. And yes the fact that many games may not display native 1080p, more than half of bluray films dont either, and the general public still thinks they look just fine.
Not much to disagree with there, but I do feel like the hardware could of been slightly improved. If rumors are true and The Witcher 3 looks similar to The Witcher 2 on consoles then that is disappointing. It's just a rumor so take it with a grain of salt. http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/the_witcher_3_gtx_780ti_could_push_35_45_fps_at_max.html
To my understanding the initial crop of games were built up in mind with less RAM available. Now, I do remember reading that the ps4 uses damn near half the ram for OS? Well, i'd assume that Sony, over time, would be smart enough to adjust to the market that is supporting the console. Meaning, if there isn't much use of features outside of Netflix and games, they could streamline the overblown OS and dedicate more to just games. People complain and complain about this sort of thing, but never really look at it from Sonys perspective. What does sony see? Sony sees people/communities on youtube, the LARGEST on the site, making a living(of sorts) through simply streaming videogames/etc. Now, this is concrete proof that a large amount of gamers do this, and it only makes sense to think, "well, if people that know tech do this, would people that don't know tech do this if they had a device that streamlined the process of content creation?"
The sad part about the power/price is that considering how long last gen was, and people willing to pay more for technology in generall, a higher price was actually expected--and would have even seemed reasonable.
Stroll for like 5 minutes in this thread. If you've got the dosh you can get the graphics now. Some examples...
jesus....is that thread real life? I'm rarely impressed by graphics, but that thread is absolutely stunning. Even Borderlands blew my mind. The 4k hype must be real.
Considering the people from CD Projekt said they feel like they are very close to maxing the PS4's power I'm not impressed. Especially when rumors are that it will be sub 1080p.
Yeah I always thought the hardware should have been more powerful. I'm sure Naughty Dog may impress, but generally the technical side of things could have been better. However, perhaps research was done in just exactly how much better could have things been on current display technology vs the price/risk of manufacturing increase. We are on 1080p screens. At that resolution it only makes so much sense to display X amount of detail as far as textures and the like. And yes the fact that many games may not display native 1080p, more than half of bluray films dont either, and the general public still thinks they look just fine.
Not much to disagree with there, but I do feel like the hardware could of been slightly improved. If rumors are true and The Witcher 3 looks similar to The Witcher 2 on consoles then that is disappointing. It's just a rumor so take it with a grain of salt. http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/the_witcher_3_gtx_780ti_could_push_35_45_fps_at_max.html
To my understanding the initial crop of games were built up in mind with less RAM available. Now, I do remember reading that the ps4 uses damn near half the ram for OS? Well, i'd assume that Sony, over time, would be smart enough to adjust to the market that is supporting the console. Meaning, if there isn't much use of features outside of Netflix and games, they could streamline the overblown OS and dedicate more to just games. People complain and complain about this sort of thing, but never really look at it from Sonys perspective. What does sony see? Sony sees people/communities on youtube, the LARGEST on the site, making a living(of sorts) through simply streaming videogames/etc. Now, this is concrete proof that a large amount of gamers do this, and it only makes sense to think, "well, if people that know tech do this, would people that don't know tech do this if they had a device that streamlined the process of content creation?"
The sad part about the power/price is that considering how long last gen was, and people willing to pay more for technology in generall, a higher price was actually expected--and would have even seemed reasonable.
Right. A lot of people, including myself were expecting a $500-$600 system from Sony and were willing to pay for it if it brought staggering quality, but that wasn't the case. I feel this generation will be a shorter compared to last. It wouldn't surprise me if a company revealed a new console in 4-5 years.
Considering the people from CD Projekt said they feel like they are very close to maxing the PS4's power I'm not impressed. Especially when rumors are that it will be sub 1080p.
Well, Epic said they were pretty close to maxing 360's power with Gears 1, then Gears 2 came out and looked alot better, then Gears 3 came out and made Gears 1 look one gen older... That have been happening with almost every series in every past gen.
Every game uses most, if not all, power of a console, but only late gen ones uses it right.
Considering the people from CD Projekt said they feel like they are very close to maxing the PS4's power I'm not impressed. Especially when rumors are that it will be sub 1080p.
Well, Epic said they were pretty close to maxing 360's power with Gears 1, then Gears 2 came out and looked alot better, then Gears 3 came out and made Gears 1 look one gen older...
Every game uses most, if not all, power of a console, but only late gen ones uses it right.
Yeah, looking at Uncharted and then Uncharted 3 is the perfect example of that. Except Wave Race 64--that was a launch game and remained one of the best looking titles on the console.
Considering the people from CD Projekt said they feel like they are very close to maxing the PS4's power I'm not impressed. Especially when rumors are that it will be sub 1080p.
Well, Epic said they were pretty close to maxing 360's power with Gears 1, then Gears 2 came out and looked alot better, then Gears 3 came out and made Gears 1 look one gen older...
Every game uses most, if not all, power of a console, but only late gen ones uses it right.
Yeah, looking at Uncharted and then Uncharted 3 is the perfect example of that. Except Wave Race 64--that was a launch game and remained one of the best looking titles on the console.
N64 had a very short lifetime. Devs never got the oportunity to take the best out of it.
i do like me some good graphics but more often i like artistic graphics much much more than technical graphics.. infamous has the imo the best of both worlds, but take the case of child of light.. a good art direction can work wonders without being too demanding.
The issue I take is that so much emphasis is being put on graphics but a lot of the time the gameplay isn't anything we haven't seen before. Not saying that's a bad thing, but it seems to me that this place is fulled with graphics whores.
exactly the reason why i haven't brought any of the next gen consoles yet. im still waiting for something to impress me in terms of gameplay
I'm trying to work out tho, what else can they do to the gameplay, I mean honestly I think last gen nailed gameplay and the only things i can think of which are going to get better is probably the AI, graphics really are the main focus because that's what really can be pushed further, gameplay wise i think we had it to good last gen.
Yeah I just hope Microsoft's parity clause doesn't hold console graphics back this gen
The difference between both console's hardware is there, but not big enough for us to expect different design concepts in games. The fact most games will multiplatform this gen will help PS4 versions to maintain good performance, probably 1080p30/60 for the entire gen. Unless devs start making sub720p30/60 games for X1, but i dont believe that would ever happen.
@lglz1337: I'm not even saying "next gen" gameplay. But so far most of what I personally have seen doesn't look like anything to write home about. I'm not saying something like Infamous is bad (never played it) but think about it... How much hype is built around how a game looks? It's not reassuring.
The issue I take is that so much emphasis is being put on graphics but a lot of the time the gameplay isn't anything we haven't seen before. Not saying that's a bad thing, but it seems to me that this place is fulled with graphics whores.
exactly the reason why i haven't brought any of the next gen consoles yet. im still waiting for something to impress me in terms of gameplay
I'm trying to work out tho, what else can they do to the gameplay, I mean honestly I think last gen nailed gameplay and the only things i can think of which are going to get better is probably the AI, graphics really are the main focus because that's what really can be pushed further, gameplay wise i think we had it to good last gen.
But don't you think something like The Order, which has a neat setting, should be more than another cinematic action game?? I mean I can enjoy those kinds of games (Dead Space 2 was one of my fav games last gen) but there is definitely an over saturation of these types of games. I'd just like to see something that is more involved.
I'm not looking for something hugely different, but so far it doesn't seem they're really trying too hard.
Unlike last gen, I hope the gameplay innovations keep up with the graphics. Soon, we're just going to be watching pretty CGI movies that prompt us to move to the next scene.
jesus....is that thread real life? I'm rarely impressed by graphics, but that thread is absolutely stunning. Even Borderlands blew my mind. The 4k hype must be real.
Downsampling 4k makes tons of sense. Things like AA are just masks to help improve image quality but nothing beats just rendering the pixels at a high level and down sampling. You get far better image quality.
At 4k all of the graphical effects basically have more pixels that they are displayed over. This greatly increases their effects. Things like textures and geometries also have more pixels to cram details on. More pixels = more detail. When the final image is rendered and then shrunk, all of that detail is condensed and you're given an absolutely astounding picture. It's not easy to do rendering wise, and you'll need a very powerful PC to have playable framerates at 4k or 8k, but that's the direction we are going. A lot of post processing effects will be null and void when they don't need to make up for a lack of pixels. AA will be a thing of the past.
I for one am looking forward to the day our GPUs are powerful enough for 4k to be the standard. Even if you have a 1080p monitor, 4k rendering will drastically improve your picture quality. It's quite awesome.
@R4gn4r0k: Nope. Those BF4 screens are probably just super sampled for more detail per pixel. Colors come out better, details come out better. Everything is better. BF4 has a really powerful renderer that is highly optimized. Most high end GPUs can supersample without much problem and get playable framerates. You only need 60fps, so if you're running at 90 fps constantly you can up the render until you're at 60fps.
@R4gn4r0k: Nope. Those BF4 screens are probably just super sampled for more detail per pixel. Colors come out better, details come out better. Everything is better. BF4 has a really powerful renderer that is highly optimized. Most high end GPUs can supersample without much problem and get playable framerates. You only need 60fps, so if you're running at 90 fps constantly you can up the render until you're at 60fps.
Than Battlefield 4s colors look a lot better than BF3s. BF3s just looked bland without using SweetFX.
I really should try supersampling, I have never done it. It could be great for older games where you get a lot of FPS anyway.
Supersampling can be done on both AMD and Nvidia cards, right ?
@R4gn4r0k: Nope. Those BF4 screens are probably just super sampled for more detail per pixel. Colors come out better, details come out better. Everything is better. BF4 has a really powerful renderer that is highly optimized. Most high end GPUs can supersample without much problem and get playable framerates. You only need 60fps, so if you're running at 90 fps constantly you can up the render until you're at 60fps.
Than Battlefield 4s colors look a lot better than BF3s. BF3s just looked bland without using SweetFX.
I really should try supersampling, I have never done it. It could be great for older games where you get a lot of FPS anyway.
Supersampling can be done on both AMD and Nvidia cards, right ?
Supersampling can be done right in BF4 on the PC. There is a slider to push it up to 200% so you don't need to fiddle with AMD/Nvidia control consoles to force custom resolutions. It can be done though.
BF4 also doesn't have that blue filter that BF3 did. It still has filters, but they are a lot more subtle and unique to each map to give each just a slightly different tone. Those screens clearly have a slight brown/orange tint to them to bring the autumn colors out.
jesus....is that thread real life? I'm rarely impressed by graphics, but that thread is absolutely stunning. Even Borderlands blew my mind. The 4k hype must be real.
Downsampling 4k makes tons of sense. Things like AA are just masks to help improve image quality but nothing beats just rendering the pixels at a high level and down sampling. You get far better image quality.
At 4k all of the graphical effects basically have more pixels that they are displayed over. This greatly increases their effects. Things like textures and geometries also have more pixels to cram details on. More pixels = more detail. When the final image is rendered and then shrunk, all of that detail is condensed and you're given an absolutely astounding picture. It's not easy to do rendering wise, and you'll need a very powerful PC to have playable framerates at 4k or 8k, but that's the direction we are going. A lot of post processing effects will be null and void when they don't need to make up for a lack of pixels. AA will be a thing of the past.
I for one am looking forward to the day our GPUs are powerful enough for 4k to be the standard. Even if you have a 1080p monitor, 4k rendering will drastically improve your picture quality. It's quite awesome.
To add to the downsampling conversation, I own a Nokia Lumia 1020, which has a 41MP camera, that takes a 34MP and 5MP image concurrently, and the 5MP image is created from a downsampled version of the 34MP image... and they are some of the best phone camera pictures I've ever seen. I would fully support downsampled rendering in gaming.
Log in to comment