Infamous SS is polygon count king 11 million per frame.

Avatar image for xboxdone74
#251 Edited by XboxDone74 (2116 posts) -

@walloftruth said:
@xboxdone74 said:

@lglz1337: herms have been extra salty ever since the last of us ended up winning all those Game of the Year awards. the generation 8 console kick off has really pushed them over the edge though.

Awh a peasant circle-jerk, how cute! ^_^

Aww...another beggar I have to step over.

Avatar image for Pray_to_me
#253 Posted by Pray_to_me (4041 posts) -

@xboxdone74 said:

@walloftruth said:
@xboxdone74 said:

@lglz1337: herms have been extra salty ever since the last of us ended up winning all those Game of the Year awards. the generation 8 console kick off has really pushed them over the edge though.

Awh a peasant circle-jerk, how cute! ^_^

Aww...another beggar I have to step over.

LMFAO!

Avatar image for gpuking
#254 Posted by gpuking (3914 posts) -

Man, the salty tears I've drank from the hermits lately have really unbalanced my sodium level, gotta drink more water lol.

Avatar image for deathlordcrime
#255 Edited by DeathLordCrime (893 posts) -

@gpuking said:

Man, the salty tears I've drank from the hermits lately have really unbalanced my sodium level, gotta drink more water lol.

Yet you failed to post any better screenshots than the ones posted by CroidX in the last page.

Avatar image for lostrib
#256 Posted by lostrib (49999 posts) -

@gpuking said:

Man, the salty tears I've drank from the hermits lately have really unbalanced my sodium level, gotta drink more water lol.

Make sure to take some psychotropic drugs as well since you're obviously delusional

Avatar image for gpuking
#257 Posted by gpuking (3914 posts) -

Doesn't matter what shots I post, biased hermits would never face the truth. That's ok coz what would we do without you delusional hermits?

Avatar image for Vaasman
#258 Posted by Vaasman (13198 posts) -

@gpuking said:

Doesn't matter what shots I post, biased hermits would never face the truth. That's ok coz what would we do without you delusional hermits?

From this post it seems like you've just given up :\

If you're going to troll at least try to keep it going or put some effort into it.

Avatar image for I_can_haz
#259 Edited by I_can_haz (6511 posts) -

@cimbom1993: You're trying too hard man

Dat open world graphics king

Avatar image for Guy_Brohski
#261 Posted by Guy_Brohski (1852 posts) -

@Cloud_imperium said:

@zeeshanhaider said:
@Cloud_imperium said:

@Cr
@scottpsfan14 said:

It's all well and good that there is 11 mill polys per frame, that's amazing, but the LOD distance and pop in is an eye sore because of this. I'd rather it had been less poly intensive per frame to kill the pop ins.

No , it doesn't render 11 million polygons per frame . That title is misleading , read the article . The engine draws those polygons but doesn't render until character gets closer . Which means that , those are total polygons on entire map and not all of them are there when you look at distant objects . There are only few polygons to make the geometry of distant object similar to actual one . When you get closer , more polygons are rendered and added to it and it becomes more detailed . Meanwhile , polygons in area behind you , are reduced as you move further away .

Exactly. But cows will continue having a circle jerk over just the title of the thread. I can bet none of them even read the damn article, not even the gpuking himself.

Not only that but he copy pasted comment from NeoGaf about Star Citizen Cruiser , without doing any research about the game itself . The thread was pretty weak from the start , for discussion because of that comparison . Not to mention that nowhere in the article it says that all of those polygons are rendered at the same time . Actually it clearly states that , problem do occur when player moves faster and engine fails to render extra polygons at same speed , which results in blurry textures and terrible pop ins , and someone already posted pics about that glitch in this thread .

@gpuking said:

@Cloud_imperium

The game indeed renders 11 million polys per frame if you climb on the roof and get a panorama view of the entire city, there are more than enough spots to get those shots, so there's absolutely no cheating.

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/04/14/infamous-second-sons-characters-are-120000-polygons-11-million-rendered-regularly-by-the-engine/

It says :

  • The engine streams environment blocks on a 100 meters grid. Each block loads 33 MiB (Mebibytes, basically a techie version of a megabyte) of data including everything (physics, scripts, AI and particle). Below you can see a visual representation of those blocks.
  • Only 10 blocks are displayed at any given time. An extra 7 are loaded but not rendered to help with I/O (input/output speed) from the hard disk.
  • Each object has between 1 and 3 LODs (levels of detail based on distance) for near to mid distances.
  • FAR LOD uses baked imposters.
  • In the worst case the player can move 20 meters per seconds before overtaking the speed at which the world can be rendered..

As stated in last point , doesn't look like 11 million polygons are rendered here .

Oh dear, that looks absolutely terrible. I'm sure this is the worst case scenario, but gawd.

Avatar image for m3dude1
#262 Posted by m3dude1 (2316 posts) -

its a glitch genius

Avatar image for gpuking
#263 Edited by gpuking (3914 posts) -

Hermits are such hypocrites, they would pick the worst looking Infamous shot to troll while accuse others of cherry picking Crysis 3 shots, this really disgusts me.

Nice shots I_can_haz. Anyway these Infamous shots look better than any crysis shots posted here.

Avatar image for RimacBugatti
#264 Posted by RimacBugatti (1632 posts) -

@gpuking: As far as 120k polygons for the characters I would say yes. But personally I think Watchdogs overall looks better. I'm anxious to see what Uncharted has on this game.

Avatar image for kalipekona
#265 Edited by kalipekona (2492 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

infamous is pushing an order of magnitude more polys than any currently available pc game. that part is not up for debate. will star citizen push more? who knows, altho i doubt it. the cruiser comparison is pointless, tho not for the reasons pc fanboys are bringing up. the 7 mil polys the cruiser is made up of will never all be displayed at once. in order to even see the entire carrier youd have to be far enough away and at that distance not using any lod models would just be poor optimization. thatd be like using the number of polys the entire city in infamous is made up of at lod0 and passing that off as the games poly count in any given scene.

I assume you have proof to back up that statement. How many polys per scene are Battlefield 4, Crysis 3 or AC4 pushing on PC?

Furthermore, I just have to laugh at the way you cows now act like polygon count is the most important aspect of real-time graphics when it is actually well down the list. Once you reach several million polygons per scene you start to enter a point of serious diminishing returns. It also matters a lot how the artists use those polygons. The polygon count itself doesn't tell you all that much about how good a game will look.

I mean, Infamous SS is apparently pushing upwards of 11 million polys per scene yet you still get objects that look like this:

When you consider how aggressive the LOD changes are in this game and how simplistic the models become I think that polygon count could have been used more effectively.

"This drastic case of diminishing returns is caused by numerous factors. The most simple explanation is that, visually, there is a much bigger difference when you jump from 500 to 5,000 polygons per object, rather than 5,000 to 50,000."

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/167673-ps4-and-xbox-one-the-diminishing-returns-of-next-gen-console-graphics

Avatar image for m3dude1
#266 Edited by m3dude1 (2316 posts) -

go load up a crysis 3 level in the sdk and check. bf4 is extremely low poly, much more so than bf3. its by far the worst looking "next gen" game there is. DIce should be embarrassed trying to pass off such crap as next gen. AC4 by the nature of its extreme lod is also not even going to be a contender.

Avatar image for gpuking
#267 Edited by gpuking (3914 posts) -

You can distribute that poly budget however you wanted, who says you can't have a lot of low poly geometry rather than a few of very high poly geometry? There will always be low poly objects so go ahead and nit pick some more.

Avatar image for clyde46
#268 Posted by clyde46 (49055 posts) -

@gpuking said:

Hermits are such hypocrites, they would pick the worst looking Infamous shot to troll while accuse others of cherry picking Crysis 3 shots, this really disgusts me.

Nice shots I_can_haz. Anyway these Infamous shots look better than any crysis shots posted here.

"claims hermits pick cherry picked screens."

"Points cherry picked screens."

Avatar image for m3dude1
#269 Edited by m3dude1 (2316 posts) -

lol

Avatar image for kalipekona
#270 Posted by kalipekona (2492 posts) -

@Vaasman said:

@xhawk27 said:

@TheFadeForever said:

@Pray_to_me said:

lol sure bro looks really legit

LMFAO

So did you use windows paint or something

I played Crysis 3 on a med-low PC and never did I see anything like that.

That's because it's photoshop, can people seriously not tell? It's the jungle from Goldeneye 64.

Pray_to_me is making a shitty attempt to say the Infamous screen is doctored, even though it's not, it's just an inconsistency in the LOD, likely from a bug.

I don't even think it is a glitch, it seems that is just the way the LOD looks at that distance.

Loading Video...

Avatar image for GabranthXIII
#271 Edited by GabranthXIII (996 posts) -

Do you honestly believe that PS4 with it's 1.84 tflops computing power, can even come to close a high end PC? High end PC running a sli setup can get up to 12tflops. PS4 can't even keep steady 60 frames on BF4, while a PC running sli setup up can run it 150-250 fps @ 1080p. Not to mention 4k, which looks amazing and you cant tell how huge the difference between 720p and 2160p is unless you see it in person, 2160p is THREE TIMES the resolution of a 720p (http://www.dr-lex.be/info-stuff/infoimages/res-sizes.png) Cmon, get real.

PS4 can barely keep 30 frames in this game and that is utterly disgusting. Also the graphics in that youtube look average, nice cherry picking. And even the cherry picked screens aren't that good.

Also PC can run stuff like this, http://eoinn.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/eyefinity-3.jpg

Your turn peasants.

Avatar image for kalipekona
#272 Edited by kalipekona (2492 posts) -

@topgunmv said:

@04dcarraher said:
@topgunmv said:

@Cloud_imperium said:

@topgunmv said:

@04dcarraher said:
@Cloud_imperium said:

@Pray_to_me said:

@CroidX said:

@Pray_to_me said:

Wow closer objects have more detail who cares. Still graphics king. And you can cherry pick a shitty screengrab from any game at any setting.

Crysis "very high" looking like a PS2 game

yea man the closer the more detail

lol that's cute

Mmm yeah you like that

Dude . That looks nowhere near as good as screenshots that he posted . It is a complete joke that you even tried . At least post some decent pics .

Question is how does that even look good? Rowe looks blurry and lacks detail.

Lighting probably. It's not zoomed into the character, but you can notice the improved detail on the wall with different lighting.

Still not as good as these textures shown in above pics .

Lighting is just a distraction . It doesn't make textures look better .

I never said it was, stop being so insecure.

Even with the lighting change Rowe still looks like crap

Right click open in new tab.

You can count the threads, so...unless you want to be able to zoom into the atoms I'd say that's pretty good for an open world game.

Yeah, it's decent, but it doesn't blow me away. Even Dead Space 3 had similar detail in the fabric of the character model.

Screencapture from Dead Space 3 on my PC
Screencapture from Dead Space 3 on my PC
Avatar image for cimbom1993
#273 Edited by cimbom1993 (130 posts) -

@I_can_haz: this is the reaction you guys have when you see crysis 3 on pc vs infamous :)

Avatar image for BattleSpectre
#274 Posted by BattleSpectre (7989 posts) -

Dat Polygon tho.

Avatar image for melonfarmerz
#275 Posted by melonfarmerz (1294 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

lol

Wow nice. Claims herms cherry pick screenshots. Finds the worst, ugliest possible screen on low settings. I'm assuming this is what BF4 on PS4 looks like.

Avatar image for m3dude1
#276 Edited by m3dude1 (2316 posts) -

@melonfarmerz said:

@m3dude1 said:

lol

Wow nice. Claims herms cherry pick screenshots. Finds the worst, ugliest possible screen on low settings. I'm assuming this is what BF4 on PS4 looks like.

cherry picking? you mean joining the first 63 player server i could find, and simply taking a screen on ultra settings? good to know how you really feel about a so called pc graphics king

Avatar image for lundy86_4
#277 Posted by lundy86_4 (50701 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

cherry picking? you mean joining the first 63 player server i could find, and simply taking a screen on ultra settings? good to know how you really feel about a so called pc graphics king

Is that a 4:3 ratio? Damn, get back to the 90's.

Avatar image for m3dude1
#278 Edited by m3dude1 (2316 posts) -

its 16:10 smart guy. are you not aware that you can click the picture to see full size?

Avatar image for kinectthedots
#279 Edited by kinectthedots (3383 posts) -

First Infamous SS shot's I've taken. It's truly amazing knowing this is not edited to look better as a screen shot cause this is exactly how it looks when I click to begin playing again.

Avatar image for lundy86_4
#280 Posted by lundy86_4 (50701 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

its 16:10 smart guy. are you not aware that you can click the picture to see full size?

lol. Did it, and didn't zoom. My bad.

Avatar image for bfmv2007
#281 Edited by bfmv2007 (292 posts) -

I came here to see pretty pictures of Infamous SS, and PC elitists posting pretty pictures of Crysis 3. I have not been disappointed.

Avatar image for kinectthedots
#282 Posted by kinectthedots (3383 posts) -

@I_can_haz said:

@cimbom1993: You're trying too hard man

Dat open world graphics king

somebody tell me, how do I get that jacket?

Avatar image for topgunmv
#283 Edited by topgunmv (10760 posts) -

@kalipekona said:

@topgunmv said:

@04dcarraher said:
@topgunmv said:

@Cloud_imperium said:

@topgunmv said:

@04dcarraher said:

Question is how does that even look good? Rowe looks blurry and lacks detail.

Lighting probably. It's not zoomed into the character, but you can notice the improved detail on the wall with different lighting.

Still not as good as these textures shown in above pics .

Lighting is just a distraction . It doesn't make textures look better .

I never said it was, stop being so insecure.

Even with the lighting change Rowe still looks like crap

Right click open in new tab.

You can count the threads, so...unless you want to be able to zoom into the atoms I'd say that's pretty good for an open world game.

Yeah, it's decent, but it doesn't blow me away. Even Dead Space 3 had similar detail in the fabric of the character model.

Screencapture from Dead Space 3 on my PC
Screencapture from Dead Space 3 on my PC

Bad company 2 is older and has detailed thread too

Nobody cares. Point is people too cheap to buy a console to supplement their computer are acting insecure and making asinine comments, especially now that there's threads everywhere with awesome looking photo mode screenshots.

Avatar image for m3dude1
#284 Edited by m3dude1 (2316 posts) -

more so called "cherry picked low" screenshots (actually ultra with 4x trssaa)

yeah real next gen here boys!

Avatar image for BluRayHiDef
#285 Posted by BluRayHiDef (10839 posts) -

@7mdma said:

It doesn't even look that good, tbh. Very video gamey and cartoonish albeit with some impressive anti-aliasing and particle effects. It looks tacky.

Lets be real: Crysis 3 on PC easily beats it and Watchdogs on PC is about to shit on it. I wont even mention Star Citizen out of pity for the peasants...

Enjoy it, chums. The plastic, tablet CPU POS has peaked and it only gets worse from here against the PC.

You hit the nail right on the head. You are such a hammer!

Avatar image for I_can_haz
#286 Edited by I_can_haz (6511 posts) -

@kinectthedots said:

@I_can_haz said:

@cimbom1993: You're trying too hard man

Dat open world graphics king

somebody tell me, how do I get that jacket?

I got mine with the limited edition. It comes with a DLC code. Once you type in the code on your PS4 it opens extra missions. Complete all the extra missions and the jacket is yours :D

Avatar image for Vaasman
#287 Edited by Vaasman (13198 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

more so called "cherry picked low" screenshots (actually ultra with 4x trssaa)

yeah real next gen here boys!

A. This is multiplayer, it's pretty well known the multiplayer for BF3 and 4 doesn't look close to as good as singleplayer.

B. No one really brought up BF4 anyway.

C. You're definitely still picking bad screens intentionally and it's pretty obvious.

Avatar image for m3dude1
#288 Posted by m3dude1 (2316 posts) -

picking bad screens? the 2 you quoted are spawn points...LOL...blame dice not me. sp and mp are the same graphically.

Avatar image for Vaasman
#289 Edited by Vaasman (13198 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

picking bad screens? the 2 you quoted are spawn points...LOL...blame dice not me. sp and mp are the same graphically.

They absolutely are not the same graphically. Lighting, environment clutter, character models, and animations are all much better in single player, same as it was with BF3.

And yes, you're picking bad screens, or you've lowered your settings, it's hard to tell. Even the console versions typically look better than the shit you're posting.

Avatar image for m3dude1
#290 Posted by m3dude1 (2316 posts) -

post a screen from the same spot on the map if you think im fudging the settings. took some sp screens just to shut down ur other argument

Gallery image 1Gallery image 2Gallery image 3

Avatar image for Vaasman
#291 Edited by Vaasman (13198 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

post a screen from the same spot on the map if you think im fudging the settings. took some sp screens just to shut down ur other argument

Gallery image 1Gallery image 2Gallery image 3

Thanks for proving the point? Those are all far more detailed than your other screenshots from multiplayer. Also here's some better multiplayer screens that better represent what the game looks like. I'm not bothering to reinstall the game, but these prove the point, and most of them are from the PS4 version except the last one. They look better than what you posted in every area but the crappy resolution. I don't know how you even got your water to look that bad if it really is ultra, which I doubt honestly. Even gamespot's beta screenshots look better than yours.

Not that it makes a difference anyway, no one was talking about BF4. Making this point is a wasted effort.

Avatar image for m3dude1
#292 Posted by m3dude1 (2316 posts) -

first of all bf4 is always mentioned as a graphics king if its running on pc. secondly your shots dont look better than mine..its the same shit.

Avatar image for Vaasman
#293 Edited by Vaasman (13198 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

first of all bf4 is always mentioned as a graphics king if its running on pc. secondly your shots dont look better than mine..its the same shit.

Wrong on both counts. Arma 3 and Crysis 3 and Metro 2 are mentioned far more often as graphics king contenders, and everything is better in my screens save the resolution. Just look at the damn palm trees in my last shot compared to your first shot. But even if they were "the same shit," mine are from the PS4 version and yours are supposedly from ultra. Clearly you've done something horribly wrong.

Avatar image for m3dude1
#294 Edited by m3dude1 (2316 posts) -

your last shot is with the resolution slider cranked waaaaaay up. im not going to post unplayable screens. my screens are native 1920x1200 ultra settings w/ nvidias trssaa at 4x. as for the ps4 comments, the biggest difference is AA, which you can clearly notice between our shots.

Avatar image for Vaasman
#295 Edited by Vaasman (13198 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

your last shot is with the resolution slider cranked waaaaaay up. im not going to post unplayable screens. my screens are native 1920x1200 ultra settings w/ nvidias trssaa at 4x

lol if you say so, but I think the images speak for themselves, and the last image is 1080p from the PC version, hardly cranked way up. Your shit just smells, there isn't much getting around it at this point. Here are the specs this shot was played at.

Avatar image for m3dude1
#296 Edited by m3dude1 (2316 posts) -

nah that screen is 100% taken with the resolution slider at 200. i just went and checked that exact area.

1080p ultra

200 resolution scale

easy to see which one matches up exactly with your pic

Avatar image for tonitorsi
#297 Posted by tonitorsi (8685 posts) -

@displayy said:

Amazing graphics for an open world game...

All these screencaps , were taken using this technic...

This is In-game !

This game looks nuts.

Just so crazy that this amount of detail and fidelity its already being rendered and current gen began not even 5 months ago.

Avatar image for wis3boi
#298 Edited by wis3boi (32507 posts) -

@lostrib said:

4 blocks are rendered with 48 MiB high resolution texture packs that are streamed separately.

FAR LOD uses baked imposters.

I guess that's why everything seems to blur or disappear in the background

Dat next gen pop-in

Avatar image for Opus_Rea-333
#299 Edited by Opus_Rea-333 (1238 posts) -

Lol Infamous SS happens to be the first next-gen looking game thats all, it is just a welcome to next-gen game.

Be sure to be ready to shit your pants When PC games coded to the metal

screenshots start releasing soon if Infamous SS "impresses you"

Avatar image for edgeofreality45
#300 Posted by edgeofreality45 (25 posts) -

@CrownKingArthur: I dont get it. You guys make big deala about how good the game looks but is it out yet? Have you played it? No. Dark Souls II looked insane too until they released it. It looks 20 times worse. Not to mention the framerate. Graohics like that come at a price. Its not just going to magically happen. Go buy yourself a 3000 dollar pc to play one game and have to update it in a year because you cant play battlefield 5 while the consoles still run it at 60 fps 1080p. Your arguementa are invalid when your shits fried in a year buddy