Is Infamous: Second Son the Best Looking Game Ever?

...so your examples of people dismissing linear games with pretty graphics are two posts that state how great the graphics are in GOW3? And one of those examples is LoosingEnds who was a troll that used to claim that Witcher 2 on 360 looked better than the PC version.

And honestly, you shouldn't be calling anyone out as a worthless troll

Rofl, I have no idea why this made me laugh but it did.

Really? Come on dude

Technically Infamous is doing so much more than Ryse. Being native 1080p, 30-40fps average, tons of gpgpu particles, much grander draw distance, tons more geometry in the level and open world. Also people who prefers Ryse hasn't played it on a large tv screen back and forth with Infamous or Killzone. The difference is clear as day. Crysis 3 probably still looks better but it's not open world either.

Definitely the best looking new gen console game yet, puts titanfall, ryse, and killzone to shame when it comes to visuals

You said this exact same shit earlier only using GTA5.

Lay off the crack.

Crysis 3 and The Witcher 2 on PC are far superior to SS. SS is by far the best console game but that's as far as it goes.

I play on a 60in HDTV, and i have all 3 games. Ryse looks better.

Also, you cant say that Infamous has more going on and a greater draw distance. Im guessing you havent played Ryse?

There are tons of things going on, tons of particles, tons of enemies, etc.

Wut.

Best looking game ever? LOL no, that title belongs to Mirrors Edge.

What is it that you want me to clarify or respond to?

How you feel that Ryse has just about as much going on as infamous besides being a linear game. That would be a good start.

Ryse is not impressive at all next to Infamous or KZSF. Tiny corridors, lots of fog, low enemy numbers, 900p with framedrops all over the place. It may fool simpletons but it doesn't fool me. I've been playing PC games way too long to not notice shitty framerates and 900p blurriness.

Well, you must notice those FPS drops in Infamous SS then.

The lowest one I've seen was like 28fps or something.

Ryse was hovering around 15 in spots.

There's even a quote from DF about it.

"Originally touted as a solid 30fps experience, Ryse misses the mark more often than we'd like with frame-rates often fluctuating between 26-28fps and the most challenging situations even seeing the frame-rate drop into the teens."

Listen, im more than willing to have a discussion, but dont come at me being a smartass.

Are you familiar with how game development works? How software development works? (genuine question)

Being a linear game doesnt always mean your draw distance is shorter or have less particle effects. Its all what the dev chooses to render.

Example, i could argue that the buildings in Infamous allows the dev to render less distance since the player cant see that far.

Or i could argue that while on a building, the distance rendered in Infamous is similar to the distance rendered in Ryse from atop a mountain or hill, etc.

Second point, there is a war going on in Ryse most of the time with tons happening in the background. There is none of that in Infamous. Now im not saying that Infamous doesnt have much going on because i wasnt on the development team. But i can say first hand that i see more on screen in Ryse than i have ever seen in Infamous.

Dismissing Ryse because it isnt open world means you have an agenda to begin with. I have both and play both, and i also know a lot about software development. You cannot dismiss a game as inferior simply because it is linear or 900p.

Perfect example would be Uncharted 2. Should we dismiss its graphics or scripted sequences simply because they ARE scripted?

How about GOW3? Heavy Rain? Gears 3?

Thats a very exact value for a game that has no FPS counter.

But as has been pointed out the difference between Ryse and infamous is not anything approaching UC2,3 vs say GTA4.

Sorry but your reasoning just comes off as childish, I don't mean to be a smartass but when you make ridiculous comments like that it's hard not to be.

There hasn't been anybody on any website that has claimed Ryse looked better then Infamous SS. Fact is nobody has even compared them. I own a PS4, Xbox one and Wii U. My gamer tag is "TheSterls" on both XBL and PSN. Feel free to verify. I played the first two chapters of Ryse and to be honest it doesn't hold Infamous SS jock. If you want to compare textures , lighting and geometry then there both very similar and far above most games. But Ryse has 3 things that put it far below Infamous.

1. Its image quality is lacking compared to Infamous SS. 900p is not bad looking but there is a small difference between that and 1080p. You will also know that Ryse use of AA is less advanced then Infamous SS. They use the same technique but Infamous does a 2x SMAA while Ryse implements a 1x.

2. Performance is another problem with Ryse , sometimes even dipping into the teens, while Infamous averages 35fps and rarely ever drops below 30. You may have have times where it hits high 20s but thats usually with dozens of enemies and loads of particle effects.

3. The largest difference between them is the Scale. When first playing Ryse I thought it looked beautiful but its kind of depressing when you see this awesome looking world and you cant find a way past the small fence or any other of the vast amount of invisible walls they put in the game. In Infamous if you see it you can go there and thats a huge advantage.

I thought I'd be kind and give a middle of the road figure for the teens. Do you want to read the article?

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-ryse-son-of-rome

lol, childish? So nothing i said is relevant or matters?

Are we just to go on your guidelines or templates on what matters as far as graphics?

So my software development experience doesnt matter?

My experience with both games doesnt matter?

Should i just be like you and decide based on which console i prefer instead of facts and common sense?

I was referring to SS, I know just how bad Ryse's FPS is.

You're welcome to whatever delusions you fancy, it's your life.

Trying to insinuate that Ryse despite having a small play area with a sketchy frame rate is just as impressive as rendering an entire city which you can move freely around in despite offering a comparable visual experience is just one of the silliest things I've heard said on this board is all.

Um yea you are wrong. The difference is I had quite a big of expereince with the Witcher 2 on a GTX 680 and no it does not look as good as Infamous SS. You are just randomly babbling about a game you have never played. As good as some of these screenshots look in this thread they are still compressed. Seeing the game in person would change your mind in a second.

Ok, im done...

I prefer the VIDEO

..but it is nice to see a SW's war the excludes sales numbers.. Oh and the fact that most are comparing Ryse and SS to a PC game on high settings...

gotta love next gen.

The only point I was trying to make was that Infamous has a much more stable frame rate.

@clyde46: Yes I do. Thankfully the framerate in Infamous rarely dips below 30 and stays comfortably at 35fps most if the time. I can't say the same for Ryse and its almost slideshow framerates when I played it.

Please if your going to babble and call people peasant's at lest get your facts straight. Infamous SS does use Tessellation, actually quite a bit of it. It also has some nice effects that are not found in Crysis 3 are any other pc game for that matter. So please STFU.

lostrib, you're typically one of the more level-headed people on here, so please hear me when I say this isn't directed at you... But Sony fanboys can be just as bad as Microsoft fanboys. The one's kinectthedots is talking about. The thing about being a blind fanboy is that you argue the strengths of absolutely whatever your company gives you. Sometimes it's an open world game, sometimes it's a linear game -- which of course are going to be different graphically and everything else -- but these silly arguments aren't immune to a single console, and I think that's what kinectthedots is saying here -- and directing it at the wrong kind of poster because like I said, you're typically one of the more level-headed people here.

Xbox 360 had this kind of commanding lead last generation and was running multiplatforms better and all that jazz, and Microsoft enthusiasts were making the same arguments ps4 gamers are now, and vice versa. Really the only people who are losing in system wars are the people who are so biased they refuse to see any value in any other console besides the one they assign allegiance to. Xbox One is my least favorite console of the three on the market right now... But that doesn't mean I'm going to allow myself to dismiss everything it has to offer. That would be doing myself a disservice as a person who loves playing games.

To close off the rant, Sony fanboys have done exactly the same thing Microsoft fanboys are doing right now. And they'll do it again. Just like Microsoft fanboys will do it again. It's a never-ending cycle of stupidity, and while Microsoft fanboys aren't any better or worse than Sony fanboys, I can see exactly where their arguments are coming from, because Sony fanboys were making the same arguments about graphics with God of War III that Microsoft fanboys are making about Ryse (although Ryse is a pretty awful game, in my own -- and lots of others' -- opinions.

And for the sake of backing both of you up, kinectthedots, what you're saying is absolutely correct about people arguing the same things about God of War, but you're completely aiming it at the wrong kind of gamer with lostrib. BAM. Fairness.

Absolute truth. Playing Infamous SS "in person" (you know, actually having played the game rather than looking at random screenshots) would change your mind. I own and have played through the Witcher 2 on PC and it looked good two years ago and still does look good today. But seeing the two of them in motion, SS is a clear winner. The only edge the Witcher would have is in terms of framerate, but obviously with a good enough rig any game is going to run above 60fps. There is way more going on in Infamous at once, along with a much larger world, better lighting and particle effects, and it just looks better overall. I really don't understand this Witcher argument, I wouldn't even consider comparing the two honestly.

The only games that I feel are even worthy of a comparison are Crysis 2/3 and Battlefield 3/4. Before Infamous came out, I didn't think it looked that incredible either from just looking at screenshots. But as soon as I got my hands on it I was blown away and still am every time I play it. When consoles are still relatively new, a lot of games can actually compete with PC games I hate to say. I'm very aware that PC hardware is way ahead of the PS4 and Xbox One but every single game that has been mentioned was released on consoles too; because, like it or not, that's where the money is and developers aren't going to look past that very often. As a result, PC games are going to generally have to be developed alongside whatever console generation it is. Sports games are the worst (although I don't know many people to play sports games on PC) and a good example of this is NBA2K14 - looks stunning on PS4 and Xbox One but the PC version...Still using the technology from the 360 and PS3 versions.

So there haven't really been too many PC games that push the technology of your PC to the brink and as such, the first true next-gen game, Infamous Second Son, looks amazing and truly next gen. Why don't some of you guys hating on it so bad actually give it a try and then come talk about it because I have no clue how you could say the Witcher 2 or Mirror's Edge (really?) looks better.

oh fucking prove it will you? show me some screenshots with it? all I see is completely flat walls, flat brick walls, flat surfaces. If it uses it, its damn subtle.

and what other effects? friggin neon lights?

Still, even IF I am wrong about tesselation, fact remains, still not better looking than Crysis 3.

are peasants so far gone that any game wiht AA, 1080p 30 fps and decent textures is suddenly graphics king? NO. it is a good looking game by any platform standard, but stop kidding yourselves.

Second son better looking then Crys 3?

Some people need to lay off the crack...

Second Son does many things better than Crysis 3 such as being open world for starters, much bigger draw distance, more objects in the environment, complex gpu particles, much higher character poly count, persistent debris and much better animation. They're at least in the same ballpark.

You must not have played Crysis 3. There are areas in that game that are very wide open. And everything else you said is just a lie. When Infamous opens up, the texture quality drops which is to be expected. Look at the hardware. Console kids need to just enjoy having a great looking game. Don't make yourselves look bad with these crazy claims.

I dont see Hermits bragging about Insanely good looking graphics that outshines Infamous easily

bad pride will bite your ass easily Ps4 owners.

@MBirdy88: Do you not even know what tesselation is? Why the **** do I need to show you screenshots when you said you have the game? Look at Delsins model the armor on the DUP agents theres loads of tesselation. And the particle system in SS makes Crysis 3 look outdated. Not to mention all the real time reflections Have you even played the game?

It's awesome.

Damn witcher 2 hasn't aged well. I remember thinking it was pretty impressive when I bought it back in 2011 but looking back it was about on par with uncharted 2 and 3- maybe slightly lower to be quite frank:

@Pray_to_me said:

Damn witcher 2 hasn't aged well. I remember thinking it was pretty impressive when I bought it back in 2011 but looking back it was about on par with uncharted 2 and 3- maybe slightly lower to be quite frank:

of only the uncharted ps4 collection rumor were true, those games are gorgeous

while great AA 1080p is great with infamous but let not kid ourselves duplicate buildings, buildings have great AA on them but its texture on the buildings are so flat, no interaction with the puddles on the road or rain dropping, its like hes not really running on the ground at all floaty as hell hes really not part of the world vampire like no reflections, not enough variety of enemies open world same old same old enemies, a couple of bugs that will make you reset the game falling through the stage is unacceptable that means your game lack geometry , and fps hitting about 50 to below 30 at times when get going with the neon powers. Its a PRETTY game but again you need to be consistent and Ryse is to most consistent.

@GoldenElementXL said:

@gpuking said:

Second Son does many things better than Crysis 3 such as being open world for starters, much bigger draw distance, more objects in the environment, complex gpu particles, much higher character poly count, persistent debris and much better animation. They're at least in the same ballpark.

You must not have played Crysis 3. There are areas in that game that are very wide open. And everything else you said is just a lie. When Infamous opens up, the texture quality drops which is to be expected. Look at the hardware. Console kids need to just enjoy having a great looking game. Don't make yourselves look bad with these crazy claims.

i knew it was only a matter of time before Photoshopped bi-cubically sharpened offline crysis 3 screenshots using non in-game quality settings made an appearance.

@killatwill15 said:

@Pray_to_me said:

Damn witcher 2 hasn't aged well. I remember thinking it was pretty impressive when I bought it back in 2011 but looking back it was about on par with uncharted 2 and 3- maybe slightly lower to be quite frank:

of only the uncharted ps4 collection rumor were true, those games are gorgeous

maybe uncharted 3 could get a rewrite, jesus Christ that game had some terrible fucking writing, maybe just cut out all of uncharted 3's dialog

I thought it was good till the ending which seemed phoned in

Second Son will keep the "throne" warm up until the PC version of The Witcher 3 releases.

@Tighaman: You can see Delsins reflection in the windows. The puddles react to rain drops and he can climb in every peace of geometry in the game. Yet again another troll who hasn't played the game.

@AM-Gamer: I have played the damn game I said HE doesn't react to the puddles hes not one the ground. Theres a glitch in the game where you can go through the buildings and the streets the game is HOLLOW it lacks geometry I never said anything about climbing.