Was the 7th gen to 8th gen the weakeast graphical leap in gaming history?

Avatar image for warmblur
warmblur

4323

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#1  Edited By warmblur
Member since 2017 • 4323 Posts

I started gaming since the Atari days I remember how big the graphical leaps have been ever since. But for me this one feels like the least impressive more like a incremental one what do you think? oh yeah and before you tell me it's all about gameplay and not the graphics no shit I still play old games for the gameplay this thread is just about graphics.

Avatar image for doomnukem3d
DoomNukem3D

445

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#2 DoomNukem3D
Member since 2019 • 445 Posts

If it's about the gameplay then why do so many popular recent games have poor gameplay? But yes graphical leaps have started to feel more minimal.

Avatar image for raining51
Raining51

1151

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By Raining51
Member since 2016 • 1151 Posts

Yes

Avatar image for goldenelementxl
GoldenElementXL

4031

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 GoldenElementXL
Member since 2016 • 4031 Posts

Just wait until next year. The most noticeable generational leap will be games loading faster. Most console gamers will need digital foundry to tell them the differences between the PS4 Pro/PS5, X and Series X.

Avatar image for r-gamer
R-Gamer

1748

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#5  Edited By R-Gamer
Member since 2019 • 1748 Posts

The last one was pretty massive honestly. Much better lighting, textures, object density, draw distance and PBR was a massive step forward. With that being said some PS3/360 games still hold up well. The fact is games are getting really good looking and that leap will keep getting smaller.

Avatar image for PAL360
PAL360

29794

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 31

User Lists: 0

#6  Edited By PAL360
Member since 2007 • 29794 Posts

We will never have something as obvious as the transition from sprites to 3d polygons again, but now we get tons of 'smaller' improvements. Current gen got rid of last gen's framerates of 20s, sub 720p, screen tearing everythere, pop up in front of our eyes, etc.

Also VR!

Avatar image for lamprey263
lamprey263

36551

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#7 lamprey263
Member since 2006 • 36551 Posts

I think it's less obvious given much of this gen was defidined by developers aiming for full resolution and steady framerates. And then the mid-gen upgrades really just chased the 4K resolution horizon. I also think the gen gap is less obvious comparing games from end of last gen to beginning of current one. Developers have evolved their techniques to improve the performance and presentation of their games over the course of the generation.

Avatar image for warmblur
warmblur

4323

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#8 warmblur
Member since 2017 • 4323 Posts

@doomnukem3d said:

If it's about the gameplay then why do so many popular recent games have poor gameplay? But yes graphical leaps have started to feel more minimal.

Good question I wish I knew my guess it's easier to have dumbed down gameplay for commercial success.

Avatar image for Telekill
Telekill

8892

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#9 Telekill
Member since 2003 • 8892 Posts

At first, that's what I thought as well but then look at the character models of the previous and current gens of the same series.

Uncharted 3 to Uncharted 4 was a pretty awesome leap.

RE6 to RE2 Remake was a pretty awesome leap.

It's all about the details. I expect similar differences going into next gen.

Avatar image for warmblur
warmblur

4323

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#10 warmblur
Member since 2017 • 4323 Posts

I just hope next gen we get rid of the plastic looking faces.

Avatar image for doomnukem3d
DoomNukem3D

445

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#11 DoomNukem3D
Member since 2019 • 445 Posts

@warmblur: Seems like that, plus gameplay doesnt sell as well as cinematics I guess.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

46017

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#12 mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 46017 Posts

What years are those gens?

You'll have to be more specific, I'm on PC where it's just one long continuous upgrade of awesome each year and month and week and so on :P

Avatar image for warmblur
warmblur

4323

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#13 warmblur
Member since 2017 • 4323 Posts

@mrbojangles25 said:

What years are those gens?

You'll have to be more specific, I'm on PC where it's just one long continuous upgrade of awesome each year and month and week and so on :P

I'm on PC too lol the gens I'm talking about is everything from 8-bit to last gen.

Avatar image for Solaryellow
Solaryellow

5419

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 Solaryellow
Member since 2013 • 5419 Posts
@warmblur said:

I started gaming since the Atari days I remember how big the graphical leaps have been ever since. But for me this one feels like the least impressive more like a incremental one what do you think? oh yeah and before you tell me it's all about gameplay and not the graphics no shit I still play old games for the gameplay this thread is just about graphics.

Of course the graphical advances would be more pronounced during the infancy days rather than now when everything looks great and has looked great for a myriad of years.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

46017

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#15  Edited By mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 46017 Posts

@Solaryellow said:
@warmblur said:

I started gaming since the Atari days I remember how big the graphical leaps have been ever since. But for me this one feels like the least impressive more like a incremental one what do you think? oh yeah and before you tell me it's all about gameplay and not the graphics no shit I still play old games for the gameplay this thread is just about graphics.

Of course the graphical advances would be more pronounced during the infancy days rather than now when everything looks great and has looked great for a myriad of years.

Yeah it's important to remember that Crysis came out 12 years ago and while things do look better than Crysis now, they don't really look that much better, and modified Skyrim and GTAV looks better than what most studios can put out.

Loading Video...

I think the point (maybe, don't want to put words in their mouth) the TC was making is that things maybe don't look as good as they should?

I would argue that the closer you are to photo-realism, the less progress you make towards photo-realism due to the demands. There is also the uncanny valley to consider, though I don't know if that's an issue with gaming (just film, perhaps?).

I'm willing to be optimistic; we have had 3D games for quite some time, but I don't think it really became common until the mid-90's, and standard until the late 90's. So 25 years of 3D games, I'd argue a lot of progress has been made; I remember playing Half-Life 1 (1998) and being blown away, and yet a mere six years later I was blown away by Half-Life 2 on the Source engine, and then Crysis two years later after that. Then we have games like ArmA 3 which look amazing but also incorporate a whole outdoor world and sky and sea, and that also blows my mind.

Modern, and even next-gen, consoles can only do so much, and even PC hardware is limiting when you get up into the insanely high visual detail; I've tried some of these mods with my modest but capable PC, they really bring down the frame rate.

*shameless VR plug below*

This is why I think VR is so important, because if we keep making slower progress on flat screens and diminishing returns are a problem, then in order to get immersion (that's what visuals are all about, after all) we need to seek alternative means.

And let me tell you; flying a plane in DCS World in VR, at lower settings, is a helluva lot more immersive than flying one on a flat-screen at 1440p with the settings maxed.

Avatar image for warmblur
warmblur

4323

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#16  Edited By warmblur
Member since 2017 • 4323 Posts

@mrbojangles25 said:
@Solaryellow said:
@warmblur said:

I started gaming since the Atari days I remember how big the graphical leaps have been ever since. But for me this one feels like the least impressive more like a incremental one what do you think? oh yeah and before you tell me it's all about gameplay and not the graphics no shit I still play old games for the gameplay this thread is just about graphics.

Of course the graphical advances would be more pronounced during the infancy days rather than now when everything looks great and has looked great for a myriad of years.

Yeah it's important to remember that Crysis came out 12 years ago and while things do look better than Crysis now, they don't really look that much better, and modified Skyrim and GTAV looks better than what most studios can put out.

Loading Video...

I think the point (maybe, don't want to put words in their mouth) the TC was making is that things maybe don't look as good as they should?

I would argue that the closer you are to photo-realism, the less progress you make towards photo-realism due to the demands. There is also the uncanny valley to consider, though I don't know if that's an issue with gaming (just film, perhaps?).

I'm willing to be optimistic; we have had 3D games for quite some time, but I don't think it really became common until the mid-90's, and standard until the late 90's. So 25 years of 3D games, I'd argue a lot of progress has been made; I remember playing Half-Life 1 (1998) and being blown away, and yet a mere six years later I was blown away by Half-Life 2 on the Source engine, and then Crysis two years later after that. Then we have games like ArmA 3 which look amazing but also incorporate a whole outdoor world and sky and sea, and that also blows my mind.

Modern, and even next-gen, consoles can only do so much, and even PC hardware is limiting when you get up into the insanely high visual detail; I've tried some of these mods with my modest but capable PC, they really bring down the frame rate.

*shameless VR plug below*

This is why I think VR is so important, because if we keep making slower progress on flat screens and diminishing returns are a problem, then in order to get immersion (that's what visuals are all about, after all) we need to seek alternative means.

And let me tell you; flying a plane in DCS World in VR, at lower settings, is a helluva lot more immersive than flying one on a flat-screen at 1440p with the settings maxed.

The problem is AAA PC exclusives don't exist anymore like you said Crysis was a big jump but right now PC gaming is restrained by AAA publishers just putting out games on consoles first and PC is mostly a after thought. We don't have AAA PC games built from the ground up pushing hardware like Half life, Crysis did ect.... the closest thing we have now to that is VR games like Lone Echo built from the ground up for PC no downgrades needed. We saw a glimpse of what a AAA PC game would like at E3 2013 if PC wasn't treated like the bastard child these days before the downgrade this is what the PC version SHOULD of looked like on release day.

Loading Video...

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

38424

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 85

User Lists: 2

#17  Edited By uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 38424 Posts

@mrbojangles25: With VR starting to be fully realized i'd argue it's possibly the greatest leap both in terms of visuals and gameplay.

The problem isn't VR as some gimmick, it just has a woeful lack of software properly utilizing it beyond 20-40 minute tech demos thanks to a tiny user-base, you mostly get glimpses than something substantial. Or assholes like Bethesda lazily converting it to justify re-selling a game than actually doing anything creative or boundary pushing.

The Lab is a good example, it's an evolution from Halflife 2's gravity gun and dog tutorial which makes the gravity gun itself feel antiquated and clunky in comparison, I think almost everyone saying Valve is stupid for going to VR either has a very short memory or hasn't used it.

Loading Video...

Avatar image for ghosts4ever
Ghosts4ever

12550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#18 Ghosts4ever
Member since 2015 • 12550 Posts

@warmblur said:
@mrbojangles25 said:
@Solaryellow said:
@warmblur said:

I started gaming since the Atari days I remember how big the graphical leaps have been ever since. But for me this one feels like the least impressive more like a incremental one what do you think? oh yeah and before you tell me it's all about gameplay and not the graphics no shit I still play old games for the gameplay this thread is just about graphics.

Of course the graphical advances would be more pronounced during the infancy days rather than now when everything looks great and has looked great for a myriad of years.

Yeah it's important to remember that Crysis came out 12 years ago and while things do look better than Crysis now, they don't really look that much better, and modified Skyrim and GTAV looks better than what most studios can put out.

Loading Video...

I think the point (maybe, don't want to put words in their mouth) the TC was making is that things maybe don't look as good as they should?

I would argue that the closer you are to photo-realism, the less progress you make towards photo-realism due to the demands. There is also the uncanny valley to consider, though I don't know if that's an issue with gaming (just film, perhaps?).

I'm willing to be optimistic; we have had 3D games for quite some time, but I don't think it really became common until the mid-90's, and standard until the late 90's. So 25 years of 3D games, I'd argue a lot of progress has been made; I remember playing Half-Life 1 (1998) and being blown away, and yet a mere six years later I was blown away by Half-Life 2 on the Source engine, and then Crysis two years later after that. Then we have games like ArmA 3 which look amazing but also incorporate a whole outdoor world and sky and sea, and that also blows my mind.

Modern, and even next-gen, consoles can only do so much, and even PC hardware is limiting when you get up into the insanely high visual detail; I've tried some of these mods with my modest but capable PC, they really bring down the frame rate.

*shameless VR plug below*

This is why I think VR is so important, because if we keep making slower progress on flat screens and diminishing returns are a problem, then in order to get immersion (that's what visuals are all about, after all) we need to seek alternative means.

And let me tell you; flying a plane in DCS World in VR, at lower settings, is a helluva lot more immersive than flying one on a flat-screen at 1440p with the settings maxed.

The problem is AAA PC exclusives don't exist anymore like you said Crysis was a big jump but right now PC gaming is restrained by AAA publishers just putting out games on consoles first and PC is mostly a after thought. We don't have AAA PC games built from the ground up pushing hardware like Half life, Crysis did ect.... the closest thing we have now to that is VR games like Lone Echo built from the ground up for PC no downgrades needed. We saw a glimpse of what a AAA PC game would like at E3 2013 if PC wasn't treated like the bastard child these days before the downgrade this is what the PC version SHOULD of looked like on release day.

Loading Video...

its because console hardware nowadays is too strong.

back in PS3/360 days. they were very weak. the difference was spot on. even gone back to PS2 and HL2 era. that was day and night difference.

in next gen, there wont be much difference because now console hardware is getting more and more stronger. less chance of games getting dumbed down compare to PS3/360 era when every game has to be dumbed down in order to work on console.

Crysis has to dumbed down for console to work and but Metro exodus is strong enough to work on consoles and PC.

Cyberpunk the game that is 10 times more ambitious working fine as multiplatform title.

AAA console exclusive donot exist at all too. except few first party games. MGS4 was last AAA third party exclusive on single console that was not JRPG. even now JRPG are now on PC.

PC may not get AAA exclusive but PC getting almost everything these days and better.

if Crysis 4 announced today. i bet it wont be dumbed down because next gen console are strong enough to run 10 Crysis games.

Avatar image for osan0
osan0

15628

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 osan0
Member since 2004 • 15628 Posts

If you were to break them down at a technical level then the leap would probably be as big if not bigger. Textures, character models, lighting, lots of little details in the environment....all of this has improved hugely. I mean look at the difference between RDR on the PS3 and RDR2 on the PS4.....that is a massive leap.

its just that we are in a time of diminishing returns for all that extra tech...it's harder to notice. the jump from a PS1 to a PS2 is much more blatant to the naked eye.

this will continue next gen too. the jump from a PS4 to an XsX (assuming its just a 5700XT with ray tracking bolted on) is very big on a technical level. just looking the the tflops figure is pointless as AMD have made loads of improvements to the efficiency to the architecture over time. I think DF roughly worked it out that 1 RDNA tflop = 1.6 PS4 tflops or something like that...but its not an exact science at all.

but it will still feel like less of a jump in the visuals department to the naked eye.

Avatar image for xantufrog
xantufrog

12372

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#20 xantufrog  Moderator
Member since 2013 • 12372 Posts

If it looked small to you, prepare to feel even more underwhelmed next year IMO. Technically the leaps are huge, but it's diminishing perceivable returns

Avatar image for TheEroica
TheEroica

18628

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#21 TheEroica  Moderator
Member since 2009 • 18628 Posts

The graphics well is thankfully almost fully dried up. We're reaching a place where only if you have a graphics fetish do you bother with upscaled hardware. Everyone else is just fine.

My next gen plan is to play next gen games on my ps4...

Avatar image for JustPlainLucas
JustPlainLucas

79941

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 226

User Lists: 0

#22 JustPlainLucas
Member since 2002 • 79941 Posts

Honestly, the only improvement I actually care about for next gen is the removal of loading times. If Sony and MS really say they can get rid of them with PS5 and XSX, then that's all I care about.

Avatar image for warmblur
warmblur

4323

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#23 warmblur
Member since 2017 • 4323 Posts

@ghosts4ever said:
@warmblur said:
@mrbojangles25 said:
@Solaryellow said:
@warmblur said:

I started gaming since the Atari days I remember how big the graphical leaps have been ever since. But for me this one feels like the least impressive more like a incremental one what do you think? oh yeah and before you tell me it's all about gameplay and not the graphics no shit I still play old games for the gameplay this thread is just about graphics.

Of course the graphical advances would be more pronounced during the infancy days rather than now when everything looks great and has looked great for a myriad of years.

Yeah it's important to remember that Crysis came out 12 years ago and while things do look better than Crysis now, they don't really look that much better, and modified Skyrim and GTAV looks better than what most studios can put out.

Loading Video...

I think the point (maybe, don't want to put words in their mouth) the TC was making is that things maybe don't look as good as they should?

I would argue that the closer you are to photo-realism, the less progress you make towards photo-realism due to the demands. There is also the uncanny valley to consider, though I don't know if that's an issue with gaming (just film, perhaps?).

I'm willing to be optimistic; we have had 3D games for quite some time, but I don't think it really became common until the mid-90's, and standard until the late 90's. So 25 years of 3D games, I'd argue a lot of progress has been made; I remember playing Half-Life 1 (1998) and being blown away, and yet a mere six years later I was blown away by Half-Life 2 on the Source engine, and then Crysis two years later after that. Then we have games like ArmA 3 which look amazing but also incorporate a whole outdoor world and sky and sea, and that also blows my mind.

Modern, and even next-gen, consoles can only do so much, and even PC hardware is limiting when you get up into the insanely high visual detail; I've tried some of these mods with my modest but capable PC, they really bring down the frame rate.

*shameless VR plug below*

This is why I think VR is so important, because if we keep making slower progress on flat screens and diminishing returns are a problem, then in order to get immersion (that's what visuals are all about, after all) we need to seek alternative means.

And let me tell you; flying a plane in DCS World in VR, at lower settings, is a helluva lot more immersive than flying one on a flat-screen at 1440p with the settings maxed.

The problem is AAA PC exclusives don't exist anymore like you said Crysis was a big jump but right now PC gaming is restrained by AAA publishers just putting out games on consoles first and PC is mostly a after thought. We don't have AAA PC games built from the ground up pushing hardware like Half life, Crysis did ect.... the closest thing we have now to that is VR games like Lone Echo built from the ground up for PC no downgrades needed. We saw a glimpse of what a AAA PC game would like at E3 2013 if PC wasn't treated like the bastard child these days before the downgrade this is what the PC version SHOULD of looked like on release day.

Loading Video...

its because console hardware nowadays is too strong.

back in PS3/360 days. they were very weak. the difference was spot on. even gone back to PS2 and HL2 era. that was day and night difference.

in next gen, there wont be much difference because now console hardware is getting more and more stronger. less chance of games getting dumbed down compare to PS3/360 era when every game has to be dumbed down in order to work on console.

Crysis has to dumbed down for console to work and but Metro exodus is strong enough to work on consoles and PC.

Cyberpunk the game that is 10 times more ambitious working fine as multiplatform title.

AAA console exclusive donot exist at all too. except few first party games. MGS4 was last AAA third party exclusive on single console that was not JRPG. even now JRPG are now on PC.

PC may not get AAA exclusive but PC getting almost everything these days and better.

if Crysis 4 announced today. i bet it wont be dumbed down because next gen console are strong enough to run 10 Crysis games.

What? lol

Avatar image for ghosts4ever
Ghosts4ever

12550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#24 Ghosts4ever
Member since 2015 • 12550 Posts

@warmblur said:

its because console hardware nowadays is too strong.

What? lol

dont know what to laugh.

console hardware this gen is powerful and next gen will be more powerful.

back in days it was very limited.

Avatar image for Jag85
Jag85

14179

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 214

User Lists: 0

#25  Edited By Jag85
Member since 2005 • 14179 Posts

Diminishing returns. Ever since the the 3D revolution of Gen 5, the graphical leaps between generations has been lessening with each passing gen. And the generational leaps will likely to continue diminishing over time.

On a transistor level, Moore's law (doubling the transistor count every 2 years) could be almost reaching its end. At nano-tech scale, quantum effects are making it difficult to scale down CMOS transistors to smaller sizes. Most semiconductor companies have given up on Moore's law, with the exception of Samsung and TSMC who are still trying to maintain Moore's law (AMD & Nvidia use transistors from TSMC & Samsung). In other words, it's likely that future generational leaps are going to diminish even further.

Avatar image for Cloud_imperium
Cloud_imperium

15142

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 102

User Lists: 8

#26 Cloud_imperium
Member since 2013 • 15142 Posts

No. It's quite big. You guys are just spoiled. Not only visuals have improved at face value but a lot of other stuff has improved behind the curtain too. Better streaming tech, stable fps, low level APIs, improved AI, weather simulation, particle systems, displacement maps, shaders and so on. This gen brought more revolutionary stuff than the last one.

Avatar image for Grey_Eyed_Elf
Grey_Eyed_Elf

6940

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 Grey_Eyed_Elf  Online
Member since 2011 • 6940 Posts

Its about to get smaller... Thanks to the mid generation console release, the Series X and PS5 are in terms of GPU power 2x or less more capable than a X1X.

That said graphics in general are less to do with hardware than you think, the technologies need to advance we have gotten to the stage where resolution is no longer a smart road to chase... More complex and accurate lighting and shadowing like we have with ray tracing will be the defining difference between the generations along with more complexity in the scene due to the stronger CPU.

Also look at the best looking PS3 game then look at the best looking PS4 game... The difference is very noticeable its just that the technologies used haven't change or advanced like the did with prior generations.

Avatar image for npiet1
npiet1

3064

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#28 npiet1  Online
Member since 2018 • 3064 Posts

@Jag85 said:

Diminishing returns. Ever since the the 3D revolution of Gen 5, the graphical leaps between generations has been lessening with each passing gen. And the generational leaps will likely to continue diminishing over time.

On a transistor level, Moore's law (doubling the transistor count every 2 years) could be almost reaching its end. At nano-tech scale, quantum effects are making it difficult to scale down CMOS transistors to smaller sizes. Most semiconductor companies have given up on Moore's law, with the exception of Samsung and TSMC who are still trying to maintain Moore's law (AMD & Nvidia use transistors from TSMC & Samsung). In other words, it's likely that future generational leaps are going to diminish even further.

For now, quantum computing is on it's way. We are pretty much at the same level we were with standard computers back in the 50's.

Avatar image for Nike_Air
Nike_Air

19470

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 Nike_Air
Member since 2006 • 19470 Posts

It might have been the smallest console leap , but it was still very noticeable , eye popping , and jaw dropping when I saw games like Killzone Shadow Fall , inFAMOUS Second Son , Uncharted 4 , etc.

I would expect Sony to bring the heat again with Horizon Zero Dawn 2 , God of War 2 , etc.

Avatar image for warmblur
warmblur

4323

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#30  Edited By warmblur
Member since 2017 • 4323 Posts

@ghosts4ever said:
@warmblur said:

its because console hardware nowadays is too strong.

What? lol

dont know what to laugh.

console hardware this gen is powerful and next gen will be more powerful.

back in days it was very limited.

Umm PS4 and Xboxone where outdated when they came out that's a fact I own a PS4 and PC so I'm no fanboy but the the truth is they are outdated. Also I don't believe this is the real Ghost4ever he would never say anything like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYG-7T2LVDc

Avatar image for ghosts4ever
Ghosts4ever

12550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#31  Edited By Ghosts4ever
Member since 2015 • 12550 Posts

@warmblur said:
@ghosts4ever said:
@warmblur said:

its because console hardware nowadays is too strong.

What? lol

dont know what to laugh.

console hardware this gen is powerful and next gen will be more powerful.

back in days it was very limited.

Umm PS4 and Xboxone where outdated when they came out that's a fact I own a PS4 and PC so I'm no fanboy but the the truth is they are outdated. Also I don't believe this is the real Ghost4ever he would never say anything like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYG-7T2LVDc

you are comparing it to PC. of course its outdated come on.

what im saying it compare to prior generation where PC and console difference were day and night. now its not that much.

I didnot own any console nor plan to own in next gen but saying their hardware not getting better is just delusion.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

37825

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 66

User Lists: 0

#32 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 37825 Posts

@mrbojangles25: PC gaming is gated by consoles so visual upgrades across the board is still dependent on consoles regardless off PC upgrade cycles.

Avatar image for warmblur
warmblur

4323

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#33 warmblur
Member since 2017 • 4323 Posts

@ghosts4ever said:
@warmblur said:
@ghosts4ever said:
@warmblur said:

its because console hardware nowadays is too strong.

What? lol

dont know what to laugh.

console hardware this gen is powerful and next gen will be more powerful.

back in days it was very limited.

Umm PS4 and Xboxone where outdated when they came out that's a fact I own a PS4 and PC so I'm no fanboy but the the truth is they are outdated. Also I don't believe this is the real Ghost4ever he would never say anything like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYG-7T2LVDc

you are comparing it to PC. of course its outdated come on.

what im saying it compare to prior generation where PC and console difference were day and night. now its not that much.

I didnot own any console nor plan to own in next gen but saying their hardware not getting better is just delusion.

I never said it wasn't all I'm saying it's not a big leap from last gen to this gen it was more of a incremental one.

Avatar image for ghosts4ever
Ghosts4ever

12550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#34 Ghosts4ever
Member since 2015 • 12550 Posts

@warmblur said:

I never said it wasn't all I'm saying it's not a big leap from last gen to this gen it was more of a incremental one.

Crysis 1 and FEAR 1 couldnot worked on 360/PS3. but more ambitious games like Metro and Cyberpunk working fine without being dumbed down.

Avatar image for warmblur
warmblur

4323

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#35  Edited By warmblur
Member since 2017 • 4323 Posts

@ghosts4ever said:
@warmblur said:

I never said it wasn't all I'm saying it's not a big leap from last gen to this gen it was more of a incremental one.

Crysis 1 and FEAR 1 couldnot worked on 360/PS3. but more ambitious games like Metro and Cyberpunk working fine without being dumbed down.

Crysis was ported to PS3/360 you know and so was F.E.A.R.

Avatar image for Jag85
Jag85

14179

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 214

User Lists: 0

#36 Jag85
Member since 2005 • 14179 Posts

@npiet1 said:
@Jag85 said:

Diminishing returns. Ever since the the 3D revolution of Gen 5, the graphical leaps between generations has been lessening with each passing gen. And the generational leaps will likely to continue diminishing over time.

On a transistor level, Moore's law (doubling the transistor count every 2 years) could be almost reaching its end. At nano-tech scale, quantum effects are making it difficult to scale down CMOS transistors to smaller sizes. Most semiconductor companies have given up on Moore's law, with the exception of Samsung and TSMC who are still trying to maintain Moore's law (AMD & Nvidia use transistors from TSMC & Samsung). In other words, it's likely that future generational leaps are going to diminish even further.

For now, quantum computing is on it's way. We are pretty much at the same level we were with standard computers back in the 50's.

That's the problem with quantum computing. It is currently decades behind standard computing, at least when it comes general-purpose tasks like graphics processing and rendering. But quantum computing is great for specific path-finding tasks, like AI and physics. Those are areas where we could see a big jump with quantum computing.

Avatar image for ghosts4ever
Ghosts4ever

12550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#37 Ghosts4ever
Member since 2015 • 12550 Posts

@warmblur said:
@ghosts4ever said:
@warmblur said:

I never said it wasn't all I'm saying it's not a big leap from last gen to this gen it was more of a incremental one.

Crysis 1 and FEAR 1 couldnot worked on 360/PS3. but more ambitious games like Metro and Cyberpunk working fine without being dumbed down.

Crysis was ported to PS3/360 you know and so was F.E.A.R.

dumbed down version.

Crysis 1 on 360/PS3 was Crysis 2 in island. with C2 gameplay.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

38424

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 85

User Lists: 2

#38 uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 38424 Posts

@ghosts4ever said:
@warmblur said:
@ghosts4ever said:
@warmblur said:

I never said it wasn't all I'm saying it's not a big leap from last gen to this gen it was more of a incremental one.

Crysis 1 and FEAR 1 couldnot worked on 360/PS3. but more ambitious games like Metro and Cyberpunk working fine without being dumbed down.

Crysis was ported to PS3/360 you know and so was F.E.A.R.

dumbed down version.

Crysis 1 on 360/PS3 was Crysis 2 in island. with C2 gameplay.

And what about Rainbow 6 and Ghost Recon?

Surely that 500X graphical power means 500X more depth, yes?

Avatar image for ghosts4ever
Ghosts4ever

12550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#39 Ghosts4ever
Member since 2015 • 12550 Posts

@uninspiredcup said:

And what about Rainbow 6 and Ghost Recon?

Surely that 500X graphical power means 500X more depth, yes?

hmm you talking about new ones?

they would suck either way.

although rainbow six siege is most beloved R6 game since originals by PC gamers. although i dont care about it as its MP only.

ghost recon? its ubisoft. it would suck anyways.

red storm are long gone.

Avatar image for sban83
SBan83

70

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#40  Edited By SBan83
Member since 2019 • 70 Posts

The improvements have been finer but no less substantial than past generations. Just compare the character/weapon/prop animations in games like God of War, Battlefield 5 and Gears of War and compare it to something from previous gen. When a game like Fallout 76 comes out now with janky animations and character detail, that's when you realise how far we've come to expect now.

Next gen will be even further about small but important subtleties, like more complex volumetric fog, ray tracing, etc.

Avatar image for KillzoneSnake
KillzoneSnake

2754

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 37

User Lists: 0

#41  Edited By KillzoneSnake
Member since 2012 • 2754 Posts

It was decent enough. I game since the 90's and it was for sure the lowest leap ever. I expect next gen to be even less. Are they really going to push for 4K+ray tracing... if so there wont be much room to improve the graphics. I just dont see next gen games blowing away current gen games... maybe Horizon 2 looks a bit better than Horizon 1... 4K ray tracing and all that. Cool and all... just not much improvement. Some might think the game is on PS4, they probably ask is it on PS4? lol Many are saying Godfall looks like a PS4 game... because it does....

Sony be like look fast loading! Cool and all, but is waiting 10 seconds that much of a big deal xD

Avatar image for ajstyles
AJStyles

1426

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#42 AJStyles
Member since 2018 • 1426 Posts

We need to convince the entire planet to go back to increasing bits.

64 bits is a joke. I don’t care how much it costs or how lazy developers are. There is no excuse as why everything stayed at 64 bits.

PS2 at 128 bits was amazing. It’s the reason why Burnout 3 could explode into a million pieces. Damn cool.

Avatar image for appariti0n
appariti0n

2851

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#43 appariti0n
Member since 2009 • 2851 Posts

@ajstyles: So you're saying you'd like more bits dangled in front of you?

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

37825

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 66

User Lists: 0

#44 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 37825 Posts

@KillzoneSnake said:

Sony be like look fast loading! Cool and all, but is waiting 10 seconds that much of a big deal xD

Yes! And depending on the game its even bigger. 10 seconds adds up.

Avatar image for dimebag667
dimebag667

1406

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#45 dimebag667
Member since 2003 • 1406 Posts

I hope graphics become photo realistic sooner rather than later. That way people will become apathetic towards it, and maybe we can go back to surrealistic graphics. I want to feel like I'm in a new world, not just more of this one... depending on the game.

Avatar image for Jag85
Jag85

14179

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 214

User Lists: 0

#46 Jag85
Member since 2005 • 14179 Posts

@ajstyles said:

We need to convince the entire planet to go back to increasing bits.

64 bits is a joke. I don’t care how much it costs or how lazy developers are. There is no excuse as why everything stayed at 64 bits.

PS2 at 128 bits was amazing. It’s the reason why Burnout 3 could explode into a million pieces. Damn cool.

"Bits" were just a meaningless marketing term that had very little to do with actual processing power.

The most meaningful measurements of processing power are the transistor count (billions of MOSFETs), bandwidth (GB/sec) and floating-point calculations (TFLOPS).

Avatar image for locopatho
locopatho

23747

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#47 locopatho
Member since 2003 • 23747 Posts

The short answer is yes.

The slightly longer answer is that it was still a massive jump, but starting from such a strong base (Crysis/Gears/etc) it's just kinda hard to notice. It's all subtle stuff now. Like, I love the soft glow of my lightsaber illuminating a cave as my cloak flaps realistically in Star Wars Fallen Jedi, it's much nicer than the less dynamically animated saber and clothing of Force Unleashed, but that's ultimately a pretty minor thing, despite how much extra effort and power was required to pull it off.

Avatar image for pyro1245
pyro1245

6000

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#48 pyro1245
Member since 2003 • 6000 Posts

But it had the highest increase in AAA sleazy industry practices.

Surely they were too busy figuring out how to optimize their monetization instead of their games.

Avatar image for miiiiv
miiiiv

929

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#49  Edited By miiiiv
Member since 2013 • 929 Posts

7th gen to 8th was easily the weakest graphical leap. Expect an even smaller leap next gen.

There are two main reasons for this, we have diminishing returns (graphics is already pretty advanced) and the leap in power decreases every gen.

I memory serves me right the leap from:

PS1 to PS2 was 70x

PS2 to PS3 was 35x

PS3 to PS4 was 8-10x

The 8th gen consoles were very weak at launch compared to hi-end PCs (not the case with previous generations)

I expect the leap to PS5 to be even smaller, the leap from XboxOne (not counting the refresh console X1X) to the new X series might be half decent because the XboxOne was extremely weak at launch.