@nl_skipper - Yeah, it's not just you. There's no rhyme or reason to how the comparisons proceed. Although the side by side comparisons are nice when there's a huge difference in quality (ps3 to ps4), I'd prefer to just have more of the still shot comparisons, and it would be nice if they'd just stick to changing between them in order from least powerful to most powerful hardware.
@natanmir - The footage in these clips is always subjective, but the game looks amazing when you're actually playing it, and there are graphical benefits in the PC version that aren't as obvious in a quick video comparison.
@Gamer_4_Fun I did mention that it would be fine for a 4GB card according to ram loads that others have posted. I guess we'll see what happens on my 280x 3GB.... I will be playing at 1080p though, so hopefully thing will be fine.
Either somebody mistakenly set the PC settings to Low, or PC gamers really got screwed with this game. The graphics problems for the PC version comparison shots go far beyond texture detail. It's missing shading and atmospheric effects as well.
@Lord_Sesshy @Poison-tooth It's not adding anything. The textures were already a part of the game, but it's up to people to decide whether their computers are capable enough to make the extra install size worthwhile. It'll suck up 3.5gb of VRAM at 1440p, so only the current highest end cards will be able to run it at those settings. This is probably an area where consoles will actually have a single advantage over PC's for the next year or so due to their unified memory architecture, at least until 6-8gb graphics cards work their way into the mainstream. Luckily it probably won't be much of an issue, as most XONE and PS4 games won't be making use of anywhere near that much memory due to processing limitations.
Dizoja86's comments