Name a PC a game that looks better than God of War (PS4)

Avatar image for Pedro
#451 Posted by Pedro (34958 posts) -

@brah4ever said:

When was the last time a PC game even won GOTY?

I believe it was in 2004 with World of Warcraft.

Have fun with your mobas and indies!

So when you lose the argument you move goalpost? Nice.

Avatar image for drlostrib
#452 Posted by DrLostRib (5004 posts) -

kind of surprised this is left up and running, but I guess there's not much to do these days

who was that user that would always make the graphics threads about some PS4 exclusive being the next graphics king?

Avatar image for Juub1990
#453 Posted by Juub1990 (8639 posts) -

@drlostrib: gpuking. He’s still around under a different alt.

Avatar image for drlostrib
#454 Edited by DrLostRib (5004 posts) -

@Juub1990 said:

@drlostrib: gpuking. He’s still around under a different alt.

oh yeah that's right

And there was always pretty strong suspicion/evidence that he was already an alt anyways :P

Avatar image for BassMan
#455 Edited by BassMan (10393 posts) -

@brah4ever said:
@BassMan said:

I think some people need to get their eyes checked and maybe get some new glasses. I will give you a pair so that you can enjoy the high resolution graphics...

Oh, but apparently resolution doesn't affect graphics though. My bad.

I was trying to avoid roasting Bassman, but he's gonna get it now.

Texture resolution is more important than screen resolution, with your logic. Quake II running at 4K resolution should look better than Star Citizen or Cyber Punk running at 1080p.

Bro, I know it takes you awhile to "get" things but I"ll help you out. The graphical quality as in assets of AAA console games blows away your PC games that run at 4K resolution.

Put those same AAA console games at 4K and now you have a massacre. Also, of course PC is capable of higher resolutions, first of all they are upgradeable and second of all the resolution can be adjusted.

Doesn't change the fact that consoles dictate progress and push graphics which is why you guys have to resort to comparing blades of grass to spot a difference.

We spend $400 tops for our consoles, you guys spend $2500 - $3000 to play console games ported to PC.

You sure roasted me.

LOL

Anyway... let me go back to playing my non-exclusive game. The graphics are so terrible...

Playing at 3440x1440 max settings and high frame rates sure does suck. I wish I had consoles so I could play those exclusives. Oh wait... I do own the consoles. But why do I rarely play games on them? hmmm.....

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
#457 Posted by DragonfireXZ95 (25386 posts) -
@BassMan said:
@brah4ever said:
@BassMan said:

I think some people need to get their eyes checked and maybe get some new glasses. I will give you a pair so that you can enjoy the high resolution graphics...

Oh, but apparently resolution doesn't affect graphics though. My bad.

I was trying to avoid roasting Bassman, but he's gonna get it now.

Texture resolution is more important than screen resolution, with your logic. Quake II running at 4K resolution should look better than Star Citizen or Cyber Punk running at 1080p.

Bro, I know it takes you awhile to "get" things but I"ll help you out. The graphical quality as in assets of AAA console games blows away your PC games that run at 4K resolution.

Put those same AAA console games at 4K and now you have a massacre. Also, of course PC is capable of higher resolutions, first of all they are upgradeable and second of all the resolution can be adjusted.

Doesn't change the fact that consoles dictate progress and push graphics which is why you guys have to resort to comparing blades of grass to spot a difference.

We spend $400 tops for our consoles, you guys spend $2500 - $3000 to play console games ported to PC.

You sure roasted me.

LOL

Anyway... let me go back to playing my non-exclusive game. The graphics are so terrible...

Playing at 3440x1440 max settings and high frame rates sure does suck. I wish I had consoles so I could play those exclusives. Oh wait... I do own the consoles. But why do I rarely play games on them? hmmm.....

I can't believe he said what he said. He's trying to argue texture resolution when high res texture packs are commonplace on the PC, and the consoles are stuck with the base medium to maybe high(not ultra, but high) res textures?

This isn't even including mods. Many games have official high res texture packs released for PC.

Also, LOL @ high res textures on consoles in general.

Are these the high res textures you're talking about, @brah4ever?

Avatar image for fantasygamer
#458 Edited by FantasyGamer (437 posts) -

@boxrekt said:
@DragonfireXZ95 said:

I can't believe we're seeing doctored pre-release Killzone 2 screenshots in 2019. Wow.

And now (just for you) , in motion....

lol and just like that, all hands on deck to DAMAGE CONTROL! LOL

We'll need to move to the next goal post.

Yeah yeah I know, Killzone 2 still looks freaking incredible. Console exclusives are amazing aren't they Dragon?

And just to save you the effort of another regurgitated reply, I've got you:

"It's all scripted, it's running on high end PC, it's all pre-rendered cut scenes, faked bullets, phony gameplay, fake graphics, fake news!"

Hope I covered it all for ya.

No need to thank me ;) Always gotcha back

Btw the Crysis games last gen destroyed killzone 2 / 3 and uncharted 3 / last of us in graphics / tech which all of them use pre rendered cutscenes unlike crysis real time in game scenes

(Digitalfoundry)

"For the most part Crytek has weaved its technical wizardry exceptionally well across all three platforms" - ps3 - Xbox 360 - PC

"Crytek's Crysis 3 is one of the most technically accomplished games of this generation, a visually spectacular piece of software that pushes graphical boundaries on all platforms. 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." - PS4 - Xbox one.

@brah4ever

Avatar image for Macutchi
#460 Posted by Macutchi (6798 posts) -
@boxrekt said:
@Macutchi said:
@boxrekt said:
@Macutchi said:

i'm sure i remember reading that avatar often took several hours to process one single frame. not sure that's an acceptable framerate to play at. even console only gamers wouldn't put up with that

Why would it matter if it takes a second or 10 years to render? What we are talking about is the result of "graphical" quality.

ok cool i think i get you, you're saying there's no correlation between "graphical" quality and the length of time it takes to render the graphics

I'll break it down for ya bud.

I was saying there is no correlation between graphics and resolution. Resolution is an application ON graphics, it doesn't make the actual graphics.

It's not that difficult to grasp, but if I have to break it down for people who have difficulty with coming to grips with this I'll dumb it down best I can.

thanks pal. i think the sea of thieves avatar comparison was dumb enough, no need to go any further down

Avatar image for NoodleFighter
#461 Edited by NoodleFighter (10347 posts) -

@DragonfireXZ95: No wonder cows use the argument "Our games look good in motion while yours only in still shots!" and use small gifs to increase the pixel density and hide lack of detail along with it being in motion with motion blur to cover things up. They know if you see a full screen shot or video their argument of having superior graphics immediately goes out the window because the differences can be much more easily spotted.

Avatar image for ghosts4ever
#462 Posted by Ghosts4ever (10016 posts) -

@brah4ever said:
@ghosts4ever said:
@xantufrog said:

@ghosts4ever: he has no idea, he's judging PC from the eyes of someone who doesn't want to see any good in it. I'd point him back to Total War Warhammer 2 which can eat CPU threads and GPU bandwidth like candy - clearly able to utilize PC hardware to high levels - but then he'll just change gears and complain that one of the 1000 independently animated CPU combatants doesn't look as good at 60 FPS as one Kratos does at 30. There's no winning a battle where characters like cloud just make and change rules as needed.

Take the L, PC :-p

theres another AAA PC exclusive coming by billionaire company. that is age of empire 4 funded by microsoft.

but i guess it doesnot count because its strategy game.

Consoles gamers will be playing games that look like this...

Guess who wins?
Guess who wins?

lol cinematic movie game.

Age of empire 4 take brain unlike this QTE fest. but its RTS so its now count.

Avatar image for cyberpunk_2077
#463 Posted by cyberpunk_2077 (601 posts) -

Minesweeper!

Avatar image for sirk1264
#464 Posted by sirk1264 (5997 posts) -

Are cows really this insecure that they have to make these graphics threads? I mean seriously, it’s pretty sad.

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
#465 Edited by DragonfireXZ95 (25386 posts) -

@NoodleFighter: Yep, I have posted those before and they tend to ignore them and/or deflect onto other arguments whenever I do. Lol

Avatar image for brah4ever
#466 Edited by Brah4ever (1679 posts) -
@fantasygamer said:
@boxrekt said:
@DragonfireXZ95 said:

I can't believe we're seeing doctored pre-release Killzone 2 screenshots in 2019. Wow.

And now (just for you) , in motion....

lol and just like that, all hands on deck to DAMAGE CONTROL! LOL

We'll need to move to the next goal post.

Yeah yeah I know, Killzone 2 still looks freaking incredible. Console exclusives are amazing aren't they Dragon?

And just to save you the effort of another regurgitated reply, I've got you:

"It's all scripted, it's running on high end PC, it's all pre-rendered cut scenes, faked bullets, phony gameplay, fake graphics, fake news!"

Hope I covered it all for ya.

No need to thank me ;) Always gotcha back

Btw the Crysis games last gen destroyed killzone 2 / 3 and uncharted 3 / last of us in graphics / tech which all of them use pre rendered cutscenes unlike crysis real time in game scenes

(Digitalfoundry)

"For the most part Crytek has weaved its technical wizardry exceptionally well across all three platforms" - ps3 - Xbox 360 - PC

"Crytek's Crysis 3 is one of the most technically accomplished games of this generation, a visually spectacular piece of software that pushes graphical boundaries on all platforms. 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." - PS4 - Xbox one.

@brah4ever

Ok and what does the equivalent this gen?

Avatar image for lundy86_4
#467 Posted by lundy86_4 (53382 posts) -

@brah4ever said:

Ok and what does the equivalent this gen?

People have responded to your request throughout this thread. You playing dumb doesn't negate that fact.

Avatar image for heirren
#468 Posted by Heirren (1597 posts) -

@brah4ever:

Ha ha ha. Pc offers next gen, now. Thats funny.

Avatar image for brah4ever
#469 Posted by Brah4ever (1679 posts) -
@heirren said:

@brah4ever:

Ha ha ha. Pc offers next gen, now. Thats funny.

Really?

Is that why only a handful of games support RTX?

Is that why the graphic kings are console games?

PC offers next gen features, consoles offer next games.

Remember this.

Avatar image for xantufrog
#470 Posted by xantufrog (11521 posts) -

@brah4ever: i don't onow how to break it to you but 1) PC doesn't have "gens" and 2) that PC game from prior console gens looks better than GoW. That's... not a good look for this conversation

Avatar image for fedor
#471 Posted by Fedor (5159 posts) -

@brah4ever: He's actually on your side. He just sucks at punctuation. Similar to how you suck at reading comprehension.

Avatar image for calvincfb
#472 Posted by Calvincfb (0 posts) -

@ghosts4ever: you play doom, a brainless shooter.

Avatar image for heirren
#473 Posted by Heirren (1597 posts) -

@brah4ever:

What is it that you are trying to say?

Game engines dictate next gen.

I believe Nintendo Gamecube had some graphical features which xbox and ps2 did not have(something dealing with reflections if i remember correctly). So because gamecube had a feature which would be prominent in the next gen, does that mean it was outputting next gen games, at that point in time?

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
#474 Posted by DragonfireXZ95 (25386 posts) -
@fedor said:

@brah4ever: He's actually on your side. He just sucks at punctuation. Similar to how you suck at reading comprehension.

LOL. This comment tickled my funny bone.

Avatar image for zaryia
#475 Posted by Zaryia (9056 posts) -
@brah4ever said:

PC offers next gen features, consoles offer next games.

Remember this.

Then why is PC currently gfx king with several better looking games than anything on consoles?

Hmm...

Hey Giovela, still live in that tiny house btw?

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#476 Edited by ronvalencia (28082 posts) -

@boxrekt:

@boxrekt said:

And now (just for you) , in motion....

lol and just like that, all hands on deck to DAMAGE CONTROL! LOL

We'll need to move to the next goal post.

Yeah yeah I know, Killzone 2 still looks freaking incredible. Console exclusives are amazing aren't they Dragon?

And just to save you the effort of another regurgitated reply, I've got you:

"It's all scripted, it's running on high end PC, it's all pre-rendered cut scenes, faked bullets, phony gameplay, fake graphics, fake news!"

Hope I covered it all for ya.

No need to thank me ;) Always gotcha back

1. Your animated GIF are pixelated on my 4K display.

2. I specifically selected 8 cores PC CPUs that comfortably run PS3 emulator which incidentally exceeds PS5's lower clocked 8 core Zen v2 CPUs.

Avatar image for ghosts4ever
#477 Edited by Ghosts4ever (10016 posts) -

@calvincfb said:

@ghosts4ever: you play doom, a brainless shooter.

Its more challenging than cinematic movie games you play. with no handholding. but you never played it. so yeah games you play are far more braindead than Doom as Doom is one of the most gamey game this gen.

most of old PC FPS took brain like System shock and Stalker.

here we are talking about age of empire. a game that is RTS, AAA PC exclusive but its not count.

Avatar image for calvincfb
#478 Edited by Calvincfb (0 posts) -

@ghosts4ever: you're not even able to finish a mega Man or a soulsborne game, uninspiredcup alt, who are you to talk about hard games? Comeback when you finish a Mega Man or a Soulsborne game, you're unable to do it.

Avatar image for boxrekt
#479 Edited by BoxRekt (1812 posts) -
@fantasygamer said:
@boxrekt said:
@DragonfireXZ95 said:

I can't believe we're seeing doctored pre-release Killzone 2 screenshots in 2019. Wow.

And now (just for you) , in motion....

@Pedro said:
@DragonfireXZ95 said:

I can't believe we're seeing doctored pre-release Killzone 2 screenshots in 2019. Wow.

The poor folk is in denial and believes that resolution has NO effect on the graphics.

lol and just like that, all hands on deck to DAMAGE CONTROL! LOL

We'll need to move to the next goal post.

Yeah yeah I know, Killzone 2 still looks freaking incredible. Console exclusives are amazing aren't they Dragon?

And just to save you the effort of another regurgitated reply, I've got you:

"It's all scripted, it's running on high end PC, it's all pre-rendered cut scenes, faked bullets, phony gameplay, fake graphics, fake news!"

Hope I covered it all for ya.

No need to thank me ;) Always gotcha back

Btw the Crysis games last gen destroyed killzone 2 / 3 and uncharted 3 / last of us in graphics / tech which all of them use pre rendered cutscenes unlike crysis real time in game scenes

(Digitalfoundry)

"For the most part Crytek has weaved its technical wizardry exceptionally well across all three platforms" - ps3 - Xbox 360 - PC

"Crytek's Crysis 3 is one of the most technically accomplished games of this generation, a visually spectacular piece of software that pushes graphical boundaries on all platforms. 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." - PS4 - Xbox one.

@brah4ever

@lundy86_4 said:

Low-quality GIFs don't much help the argument...

@DragonfireXZ95 said:

@boxrekt: That game looked like shit on release, and it looks even worse now. I don't know what you're trying to prove.

@kali-b1rd said:
@boxrekt said:
@DragonfireXZ95 said:

I can't believe we're seeing doctored pre-release Killzone 2 screenshots in 2019. Wow.

And now (just for you) , in motion....

lol and just like that, all hands on deck to DAMAGE CONTROL! LOL

We'll need to move to the next goal post.

Yeah yeah I know, Killzone 2 still looks freaking incredible. Console exclusives are amazing aren't they Dragon?

And just to save you the effort of another regurgitated reply, I've got you:

"It's all scripted, it's running on high end PC, it's all pre-rendered cut scenes, faked bullets, phony gameplay, fake graphics, fake news!"

Hope I covered it all for ya.

No need to thank me ;) Always gotcha back

Using Killzone 2 as an example is pretty entertaining. Yea it looked good.

The entire game was godamn grey, and very repetitive.

The bullet sponge gameplay was some of the worst in the genre.

The MP while the closest thing to traditional PC MP available on peasant machines.... HAD INPUT AND HIT DETECTION DELAY. My god, embrassing by anyones standards.

That game, if any of that generation was a false-AAA .... another example of media hyping up graphics above anything else. And a good reason why most people don't rely on critics anymore...

Majority of gameplay elements were stale and broken. Any of its positives (MP modes, and "Weighty feeling") were drowned out by the sheer mediocrity of every other element.

WOW 🤣

I didn't realize posting this simple killzone 2 example would cause all this fall out from PC and xbox fans.

The amount of damage control, essays, teary eyed excuses and mental gymnastics I got over this single Killzone 2 example looks is glorious.

And after all that damage control...

Not one of you guys answered the question if those 5k Halo CE PC shots had better "graphics" than the 720p shots of Killzone 2 from PS3! Ya know, what the actual purpose of why I brought up KZ2 to begin with was? lol.

😏 Yea, I didn't miss that!

Deflections is one way of showing that someone realizes answering a question directly will destroy their argument.

"it's blury , it looks like shit anyway, teh gameplay is bad....wh...what about Crysis?"

lol, damn so the goal post moved from simply "resolution" and a comparison between Halo CE at 5k resolution to the crown gwel of PC graphics Crysis to combat an "ugly, low quality, 720p console game that looks like shit with apparent bad gameplay."?

Damn the damage control really went from A to Z on this one, but why did no one answer the question?

@boxrekt said:

Halo Combat Evolved on PC 5120 × 2880 or *5k*

Again 5k on PC

PC

vs

Killzone 2 on PS3 1280 x 720 or 720p

Which one has better "graphics"?

Kek

Sony causing devastation on all fronts.

Not just Naughty Gods, we've also now got Guerrilla Gods causing butthurt 10 years later with last gen Killzone 2.

Avatar image for clone01
#480 Posted by clone01 (27489 posts) -

wow, this stupid shit thread is still going on?

Avatar image for R10nu
#481 Posted by R10nu (1519 posts) -
@brah4ever said:

Consoles gamers will be playing games that look like this...

Guess who wins?
Guess who wins?

You mean games rendered in 280p? Poor sods.

Avatar image for Pedro
#482 Posted by Pedro (34958 posts) -

This thread is a perfect example how much a select group of Sony fannies hate when gamers who enjoy other platforms.

When it was the PS4 vs Xbox, graphics mattered.

When it was the PS4/Pro vs Xbox One X, graphics doesn't matter.

When Xbox lost ALL its exclusives, exclusives matters.

When PC gamers point out that they have more exclusives, metacritic matters.

When Nintendo gamers point out that they have the highest scoring exclusives on metacritic, metacritic doesn't matter but sales.

When they can't game on PS4 with high framerates and high resolution, they try to redefine the meaning of graphics.

Their console is struggling to maintain solid framerate at high resolutions but PC high end video cards which run the same game without problem is not be fully utilized.

They are the most butt-hurt faction on the net. LOL.

Avatar image for baelnergal
#483 Posted by BaelNergal (280 posts) -

@clone01 said:

wow, this stupid shit thread is still going on?

Because an entertaining train wreck will draw lasting viewership.

Avatar image for Livecommander
#484 Posted by Livecommander (1062 posts) -

@Pedro: no way you where here last gen.

Cows never stopped prasing exclusives

They always had pride in graphics but it never over shadowed their pride is 1st/2nd party games

The ps4 was lower in price and both gens were ina game droughtso that was the only reason why it seems cows cared much about resolution

Since the ps3 tho our exclusives have been more visually impressive than pc or xbox tho

Technical herms are never gonna admit it tho.

The fact that the resolution will always be higher etc on pc will always be there single arguement

As if base level character models dont exist and textures cant be compared at the same resolution for true bragging rights.

Consoles developers almost always go the hardest and you herms never wanna give us ( well mainly sony ) their credit.

That's what this post shows.

Avatar image for BassMan
#485 Edited by BassMan (10393 posts) -

@boxrekt: The argument was whether resolution affects graphics and it was proven many times that it does. You are the one with the deflections trying to compare a less graphically advanced game to a more modern one. It is ridiculous.

Resolution affects graphics just like the quality of the assets, lighting, shadows, shaders, etc.. Take Killzone 2 and run it at a higher resolution and you will see the graphics get better. There will be less aliasing and more clarity so that you can see more details. This will also highlight the importance of the various resolutions of assets/rendering techniques like textures, normal maps, shadow maps, lightmaps, reflections, post processing, etc.. So, overall image resolution along with the resolutions of the internal workings of the engine all affect graphics.

Avatar image for boxrekt
#487 Edited by BoxRekt (1812 posts) -
@BassMan said:

@boxrekt: The argument was whether resolution affects graphics and it was proven many times that it does. You are the one with the deflections trying to compare a less graphically advanced game to a more modern one. It is ridiculous.

Resolution affects graphics just like the quality of the assets, lighting, shadows, shaders, etc.. Take Killzone 2 and run it at a higher resolution and you will see the graphics get better.....

LMAO no they don't!

Your own example proves that better than any other example here.

Think fast...Did the higher resolution seen through the glasses improve the "visuals" (aka graphics) of the scene in the background?

Avatar image for zaryia
#488 Edited by Zaryia (9056 posts) -
@Livecommander said:

@Pedro: no way you where here last gen.

Since the ps3 tho our exclusives have been more visually impressive than pc or xbox tho

This never happened. PC was graphics king last gen via Crysis 1,2,3 among other titles. Those 3 alone obliterated anything PS3 had to offer - that was the consensus here and at DF. It's also graphics king this gen via Metro and BF among other titles, which again is the consensus here and at DF.

Lying doesn't actually make you win a debate.

Avatar image for zaryia
#489 Edited by Zaryia (9056 posts) -
@boxrekt said:
@fantasygamer said:
@boxrekt said:
@DragonfireXZ95 said:
@lundy86_4 said:

Low-quality GIFs don't much help the argument...

@kali-b1rd said:
@boxrekt said:
@DragonfireXZ95 said:

Kek

1. Why are you using a PC gamer meme/phrase?

2. Do you acknowledge the fact that PC is currently the gfx king via multiple games that look better than anything on PS4? Do you admit the TC was wrong?

Avatar image for BassMan
#490 Edited by BassMan (10393 posts) -

@boxrekt said:
@BassMan said:

@boxrekt: The argument was whether resolution affects graphics and it was proven many times that it does. You are the one with the deflections trying to compare a less graphically advanced game to a more modern one. It is ridiculous.

Resolution affects graphics just like the quality of the assets, lighting, shadows, shaders, etc.. Take Killzone 2 and run it at a higher resolution and you will see the graphics get better.....

LMAO no they don't!

Your own example proves that better than any other example here.

Think fast...Did the higher resolution seen through the glasses improve the "visuals" (aka graphics) of the scene in the background?

Yes, because I can now see clearer. Blur is reduced and I can see details. Are you recommending people not use glasses or get vision correction if they have trouble seeing? Are they already seeing the world the best way possible? The glasses and corrective surgery will have no effect on their vision and how they see the world?

Avatar image for brah4ever
#491 Posted by Brah4ever (1679 posts) -
@boxrekt said:

Halo Combat Evolved on PC 5120 × 2880 or *5k*

Again 5k on PC

PC

vs

Killzone 2 on PS3 1280 x 720 or 720p

Which one has better "graphics"?

Hermits are going to say Halo, because resolution.

My response to them is...

Boys, we won this war
Boys, we won this war

Avatar image for brah4ever
#492 Posted by Brah4ever (1679 posts) -
@zaryia said:
@boxrekt said:
@fantasygamer said:
@boxrekt said:
@DragonfireXZ95 said:
@lundy86_4 said:

Low-quality GIFs don't much help the argument...

@kali-b1rd said:
@boxrekt said:
@DragonfireXZ95 said:

Kek

1. Why are you using a PC gamer meme/phrase?

2. Do you acknowledge the fact that PC is currently the gfx king via multiple games that look better than anything on PS4? Do you admit the TC was wrong?

Suuuuuuuure
Suuuuuuuure

Avatar image for dxmcat
#493 Edited by dxmcat (2684 posts) -
@brah4ever said:
@boxrekt said:

Halo Combat Evolved on PC 5120 × 2880 or *5k*

Again 5k on PC

PC

vs

Killzone 2 on PS3 1280 x 720 or 720p

Which one has better "graphics"?

Hermits are going to say Halo, because resolution.

My response to them is...

Boys, we won this war
Boys, we won this war

How about 2 different resolutions of the same game? LOL.

A+ on shit tier comparisons

Avatar image for BassMan
#494 Posted by BassMan (10393 posts) -

@dxmcat said:
@brah4ever said:
@boxrekt said:

Halo Combat Evolved on PC 5120 × 2880 or *5k*

Again 5k on PC

PC

vs

Killzone 2 on PS3 1280 x 720 or 720p

Which one has better "graphics"?

Hermits are going to say Halo, because resolution.

My response to them is...

Boys, we won this war
Boys, we won this war

How about 2 different resolutions of the same game? LOL.

A+ on shit tier comparisons

Xantu's TW3 comparison shots owned him nicely.

Avatar image for boxrekt
#495 Edited by BoxRekt (1812 posts) -
@BassMan said:
@dxmcat said:
@brah4ever said:

Hermits are going to say Halo, because resolution.

My response to them is...

Boys, we won this war
Boys, we won this war

How about 2 different resolutions of the same game? LOL.

A+ on shit tier comparisons

Xantu's TW3 comparison shots owned him nicely.

No they didn't

I've given you an example using the very same picture you posted and you choose to ignore it. No big deal.

Believe what you want but it's pretty clear that resolution doesn't make graphics better. If that was true any game at higher res would look better than any game at low res but we all know that isn't true.

Using your image of an actual scene we know that NOTHING is changing, but the higher res allows you to see the details you couldn't make out in lower resolution.

No leaves were added, no extra bars were given to the rails, the bridge didn't get any extra rocks or dirt that wasn't already there. This is common sense really but I digress.

I'll agree to disagree and be done with it.

KZ2 on PS3 at 720p has better gfx than Halo CE on PC at 5k! The base graphics determined that fact regardless of what resolution was applied.

KZ2 may "look" 10x better at 4k, but it's only because you're able to see base graphics that are already there a lot better than at 720p. The resolution wouldn't be "making" KZ2's graphics better no different than those glasses did for that background scene.

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
#496 Posted by DragonfireXZ95 (25386 posts) -
@BassMan said:
@dxmcat said:
@brah4ever said:
@boxrekt said:

Halo Combat Evolved on PC 5120 × 2880 or *5k*

Again 5k on PC

PC

vs

Killzone 2 on PS3 1280 x 720 or 720p

Which one has better "graphics"?

Hermits are going to say Halo, because resolution.

My response to them is...

Boys, we won this war
Boys, we won this war

How about 2 different resolutions of the same game? LOL.

A+ on shit tier comparisons

Xantu's TW3 comparison shots owned him nicely.

Yep, he completely ignored Xantu's post, which is typical of Box once he has no counter-argument.

Avatar image for boxrekt
#497 Edited by BoxRekt (1812 posts) -
@DragonfireXZ95 said:

Yep, he completely ignored Xantu's post, which is typical of Box once he has no counter-argument.

I didn't, @xantufrog made a great post.

It made a lot of sense and he supported his opinion with his own evidence. It was a great job.

In the end I didn't agree with is conclusion but I respect his contribution to the discussion.

I was going to use the same argument I stated here to Bassman to counter that post. I ended up getting caught up responding to Bassman and used it with him instead.

If you'd like just apply that same argument, the one with the glasses, to Xantufrog's post as a direct replay.

If you'd like I can copy and paste but it will literally be the same thing.

Avatar image for boxrekt
#498 Edited by BoxRekt (1812 posts) -
@xantufrog said:

In my opinion, the only way to settle this is to use carefully controlled, apples-to-apples comparisons. None of this random stuff comparing different artists, game types, etc across platforms or even GAMES vs MOVIES.

Let's break it down into the simplest parts.

PC and console versions of TW3 differ in many ways. Let's focus on just TWO, independently - leaving all else constant.

I've generated a factorial comparison - TW3 captured at 4K Ultra, unmodded, on PC. All I have changed is resolution, and texture quality, to contrast 4K with 900p rendering (X1). All else is kept constant.

Zoomed to 75% of the image. Click to compare properly, since GS images often display blurry in-line

4K Ultra with Ultra textures VVVV

4K Ultra with Medium textures VVVV

900p Ultra with Ultra textures VVVV

900p Ultra with Medium textures VVVV

A few observations (again, you can't see this on PSP sized thumbnails, you have to view them fullscreen):

1) both rendering resolution and texture quality (resolution, cough) clearly impact "graphics". The image simply looks worse when you turn either one down.

2) neither is game breaking. Let's be honest. The real issue comparing PC to console with TW3 is that a LOT more than JUST texture quality and rendering is reduced. I can snap a screen based on the DF analysis of that for posterity, but that's not the point of this particular post and muddies the issue (although, yeah - it does address the OP to a certain degree)

3) just to say it again - yes, resolution matters. It's not just the jaggies on Geralt and the rocks. Look at the pine branches in the foreground. The exact same texture quality (I repeat, the exact same), and yet they LOOK like clearly higher quality foliage at 4K than 900p. Why? Because lower rendering resolution introduces aliasing which harms the sharpness

So, there's that. You can return to your regularly scheduled programming :-P

Point #3"yet they LOOK like clearly higher quality foliage at 4k than 900p..."

Yes, they "look" like that...

Is there anything in this physical scene that is added in the high resolution area that's not actually there in the blurry portion?

I'm not talking about what you can "see" or how it "looks", I'm asking if anything is actually THERE in the high res area that's not there in the blurry part?

If this was a video game scene then you'd probably rationalize that something was added ect. but it's not and therefore you have to take what you're given at face value.

Knowing we're looking at a physical scene allows us to rule out the possibility magical upgrades in things that we couldn't "SEE" in the low res area.

Using a physical scene we know that NOTHING is changing, but the higher res allows you to see the details you couldn't make out in lower resolution.

No leaves were added, no extra bars were given to the rails, the bridge didn't get any extra rocks or dirt that wasn't already there.

If the what's there is a beautiful scene, higher resolution will be able to show that more clearly.

If what's there is derpy and ugly we'll be able to see that more clearly as well.

That's all there is to resolution without actually changing the properties of the base graphics I.E Low, med, high settings for example or adding and removing effects.

Avatar image for zaryia
#499 Edited by Zaryia (9056 posts) -
@brah4ever said:
Suuuuuuuure
Suuuuuuuure

I mean you played the substantially inferior looking and running version of nearly all titles this gen but suddenly care about how games look.

Your opinion on tech and gfx isn't really relevant after pulling something like that.

Current GFX King is on PC. Several games on PC look better than anything on PS4. This has been answered multiple times, and apart from 3 2018-2109 alts backing you up everyone disagrees with you. Even Digital Foundry.

Avatar image for Pedro
#500 Posted by Pedro (34958 posts) -

@Livecommander: You validated my response without even realizing it.