lukeskymac
Member
Nxgamer is a Sony fan first and foremost. It's plausible that affects his choices.
Eeeh, if that is the case, why is RotR so high? It's a very inconsistent looking game.
Nxgamer is a Sony fan first and foremost. It's plausible that affects his choices.
Nxgamer is a Sony fan first and foremost. It's plausible that affects his choices.
Anyone else really love the point in rendering we've hit this gen? Both Battlefront and The Order are benchmark games, gorgeous and hold their performance targets quite well. I adore the look of both games.
Lol, 2016 just started few days ago.
But nice try.
I still remember his first uncharted 4 demo analysis. He saw tessellation and other effects everyware.
at first I was thinking why ryse wasn't on the list, then I realized it was silly coz it was a launch title or somethingAnyone else really love the point in rendering we've hit this gen? Both Battlefront and The Order are benchmark games, gorgeous and hold their performance targets quite well. I adore the look of both games.
This is a graphics thread and besides I love Battlefront and The Order has better controller response than most 30fps games. It isn't the same people that handle content and gameplay as visuals in any case.I do, but you said it nice, many ppl agree that they are just that benchmarks.
While i want my games to look nice, i also want to play them and enjoy while doing that.
I am not saying these two games don't have fans, they for sure have them but i wish developers of both games focused more on the content and gameplay side of these games.
Anyone else really love the point in rendering we've hit this gen? Both Battlefront and The Order are benchmark games, gorgeous and hold their performance targets quite well. I adore the look of both games.
This is a graphics thread
The thing is because of the game it is and the setting and the pace I never ever ran into any issue playing it at all infact I didn't even notice these abysmal frame rates and I'm pretty picky with that stuff.Until Dawn is very nice looking but the performance just isn't good enough. The frame-rate is abysmal. Would keep it from my list for sure.
The rest all look great.
The thing is because of the game it is and the setting and the pace I never ever ran into any issue playing it at all infact I didn't even notice these abysmal frame rates and I'm pretty picky with that stuff.
damn, I just realized nintendo was not on the list at all.
It was cleaned up a bit with patches but not a major change. Alpha effect drops are the main thing that got addressed.I would have to agree as well. With my time with it, I did notice some dips, but nothing that had any effect on gameplay, or the enjoyment of the game compared to some other games that suffer from lower frames in instances.
Wonder if a lot was cleaned up in the patches, since I am LTTP with this one.
It was cleaned up a bit with patches but bot a major change. Alpha effect drops are the main thing that got addressed.
last gen I do remember there were times when Wii games won "best visuals" or whatever by IGN. I think one year it was a Kirby game or maybe it was one of the Mario Galaxies.Kinda hard when the console is significantly weaker then the other 2
I think it's the other way around.
Firstly, motion blur can be turned off on pc. Games with forced motion blur lose a lot of points visually for me.
The thing is I know it to be true as I've tested it countless times.
Playing Borderlands 2, for example, at 60fps with physics set to high, when I explode a barrel that sends shrapnel bouncing across the environment, as I run and gun I can clearly make out each piece of shrapnel as it moves. This also helps to give a great sense of the virtual 3d space as I can clearly make out the distance between each partial due to the high level of clarity, and as I move around the particles I can see how they interlink with each other extremely clearly.
At 30fps, I simply cannot see the detail. With half the frames I don't get to see as precise a travel time for each particle, I don't get to see the clarity of their movement or get the same sense of 3d space. It's a definite lose to the detail I can perceive on screen, therefore a loss to the overall quality of the visuals.
If I run past a set of textures at 60fps, say bricks on the wall, I can make out each individual brick. At 3o I cannot as they blur a little as you've lost half the frames.
All of these things add to the overall visual quality of the game.
Again, I may be explaining this poorly and maybe someone in the thread I linked explained it better.
Apologies for that, then. I must have misinterpreted your own tone as I felt as though I was responding in kind. My bad as that's a thoughtless thing to do on my part regardless
Half of 60, as these are the two examples I'm using.
I'm not suggesting aside from the idea that FPS and resolution should be considered eye candy generating effects as much as any other visual effect. Every game has a different set of options, and there's trade-off involved in all of them. I'm not suggesting anything about a 60fps standard, nor am I saying fps is the most important factor.
last gen I do remember there were times when Wii games won "best visuals" or whatever by IGN. I think one year it was a Kirby game or maybe it was one of the Mario Galaxies.
I agree, I'm just saying what I remembered and when it happened back then I was just like, wtf? How did that game get it over a 360/Ps3 game?That just seems weird to me although Super Mario Galaxy looked great. Either way I don't think there was anything too visually impressive this year from Nintendo to knock any of these games off the list.
I agree, I'm just saying what I remembered and when it happened back then I was just like, wtf? How did that game get it over a 360/Ps3 game?
uhh.. Bloodborne should be number 1, no?
I think that was a trolly tongue-in-cheek joke about GOTY threads.Nah. Poor aliasing and occasional judder.
it wasn't goty, it was best visuals/best graphics, iirc.It might've been the only game that year that featured color. Also the metrics for the award had more to do with the overall package than just technical prowess.
uhh.. Bloodborne should be number 1, no? i guess it's too niche and underground for some. but anyone who has actually played it and is a true Souls fan is blown away by Yharnam, i challenge anyone to find better graphic in open world games:
-incredible geometry, dem polygons <3
-great lighting
-perfect animations
-superb smooth gameplay
-best ever character designs and monsters
-true 1080 full hd
-realistic blood effects only possible on ps4 (it even splatters on your clothes and STAYS there)
so all in all no contest IMO. From shows Crytek how its done. edit: well also Sony's own legendary coding ninja team ICE, who know the ps4 inside out..
it wasn't goty, it was best visuals/best graphics, iirc.
uhh.. Bloodborne should be number 1, no? i guess it's too niche and underground for some. but anyone who has actually played it and is a true Souls fan is blown away by Yharnam, i challenge anyone to find better graphic in open world games:
-incredible geometry, dem polygons <3
-great lighting
-perfect animations
-superb smooth gameplay
-best ever character designs and monsters
-true 1080 full hd
-realistic blood effects only possible on ps4 (it even splatters on your clothes and STAYS there)
so all in all no contest IMO. From shows Crytek how its done. edit: well also Sony's own legendary coding ninja team ICE, who know the ps4 inside out..
Uh yeah I thought that's what we were discussing. Epic yarn winning best visuals took into account it's unique visual approach over what was considered the norm in the 3D space at the time. Anyway not to further derail this thread, it just goes to show that different metrics can be taken into account for what is considered "best" with regards to graphics. Hell, this thread is proof of that.
So much salt in this thread.
Totally agree with the list.
Anyone want to take an educated guess who'll win 2016' Best grapics award? And why is it Uncharted 4?
epic yarn, that's the one. according to wikipedia, it was gametrailers, and epic yarn got it over Kz3, GoW3, and Crysis 2.Uh yeah I thought that's what we were discussing. Epic yarn winning best visuals took into account it's unique visual approach over what was considered the norm in the 3D space at the time. Anyway not to further derail this thread, it just goes to show that different metrics can be taken into account for what is considered "best" with regards to graphics. Hell, this thread is proof of that.
Yes. The award wasn't for the punchiest graphics, it was looking good and being visually interesting. You certainly could argue for other games that year as well, but Yarn isn't really that weird of a choice.it wasn't goty, it was best visuals/best graphics, iirc.
I'm still confused when people use the "but resolution?" argument against The Order.
Am I incorrect in stating that while rendered at 1920x800 it is still being done within a 1920x1080 framebuffer thus unscaled and with the same pixel density and detail as a native 1080p game? If so what is there to complain about, as there really is no other way to obtain a higher aspect ratio than 16x9 other than doing it this way.
You're correct but there's two genuine complaints that can be made, but rarely are.I'm still confused when people use the "but resolution?" argument against The Order.
Am I incorrect in stating that while rendered at 1920x800 it is still being done within a 1920x1080 framebuffer thus unscaled and with the same pixel density and detail as a native 1080p game? If so what is there to complain about, as there really is no other way to obtain a higher aspect ratio than 16x9 other than doing it this way.
You are incorrect. There is a reason some games on ps3 were using adaptive resolutions to keep framerates stable.
Pixel density has nothing to do with rendering complexity.
this conversation started when I said I noticed there was no nintendo games on the list. "best graphics" is subjective, and I think I would award to to the game with the punchiest graphics, if I'm interpreting that correctly.Yes. The award wasn't for the punchiest graphics, it was looking good and being visually interesting. You certainly could argue for other games that year as well, but Yarn isn't really that weird of a choice.
Yes, a great deal better....Until Dawn looks better than The Witcher 3?
Agreed, people always come into tech threads talking about laptop cpu's and such, but look at what devs are accomplishing when they've not even began to put GPU COMPUTE into full use.It always amuses me when people say that this gen is only marginally better than last gen, visually. These games along with stuff like Witcher, Infamous and Driveclub represent a substantial generational leap imo.
If AK looked rough in spots on the PS4, with it's high quality assets and dense detail and had much better rain effects and such even over the PC version (for the longest while), I don't know what to say to you, Witcher 3 is an inconsistent mess on consoles on quality of presets alone, notwithstanding it's questionable framerate even after the latest patch (far less before). Witcher 3 just does not belong on that list, even the PC version at max. Texturework is not impresseive, animations leave a lot to be desired and it's lighting is a far cry from MGSV, if an open world deserves to be on that list it's the phantom pain.My early contender for 2016 is Horizon: Zero Dawn. But am ready to be wowed by Uncharted 4.
Great list, Arkham Knight on the PS4 looked rough in some spots. Would have chosen The Witcher like others here, but it was still a very good looking game.
Driveclub did not halve it's framerate as opposed to every other arcade racer in the last ten years on consoles. In any case we're talking about visual detail and fidelity as opposed to the fraps OSD indicating that we are running at locked 60. 1886 and DC are two of the best looking games at 30fps which also control fluidly. One has the best sense of speed in an arcade racer and (the order)...is one of the most responsive TPS I've ever played irrespective of they not being 60fps......Driveclub halves the framerate to get better graphics for the genre, not worth the praise in my opinion, but I definitely never thought I'd see an open-world game looking like The Witcher 3 on consoles this generation, comparing it too any other open-world game from last gen will make you say wow for sure.
Thank you.....Because they probably aren't. Agreed with resolution, although The Order has a really good AA implementation and doesn't look jaggied or blurry.
Now, to say that we are able to see more effects and better graphics at a higher framerate? Not so sure about that. I haven't seem a single person that told me that The Hobbit looked better, SFX-wise, at 48 FPS than the standard 24 FPS. Sorry, but I'm definitely sure you're the minority here concerning that, although as you've said, this is really subjective.
But for me, I'm damn sure that 60 FPS provides a better gameplay experience, not better graphics.
Is this some type of condescending remark aimed at discrediting a well renowned tech guy who works in the industry? So if I make up some two-bit website in a couple of minutes in webstudio, pay the cheap fee to get a domain and host it, then I'd be more credible? Such remarks are always very strange to read.Opinion from a random website, It is not even a website, just a youtuber.
Some would argue that since there are fewer pixels being rendered, the results aren't as impressive as if a 1920x1080 backbuffer were used.I'm still confused when people use the "but resolution?" argument against The Order.
Am I incorrect in stating that while rendered at 1920x800 it is still being done within a 1920x1080 framebuffer thus unscaled and with the same pixel density and detail as a native 1080p game? If so what is there to complain about, as there really is no other way to obtain a higher aspect ratio than 16x9 other than doing it this way.
even though the framerate was halved the graphics came out amazing. amazing. why is it not worth the praise? Uc4 halved its framerate too but its getting nothing but praise alreadyDriveclub halves the framerate to get better graphics for the genre, not worth the praise in my opinion, but I definitely never thought I'd see an open-world game looking like The Witcher 3 on consoles this generation, comparing it too any other open-world game from last gen will make you say wow for sure.
IGN's award was "best visuals," which is a fairly open topic. NX gamer is more explicitly awarding cutting-edge tech, and sure enough, didn't feature any Nintendo games.this conversation started when I said I noticed there was no nintendo games on the list. "best graphics" is subjective, and I think I would award to to the game with the punchiest graphics, if I'm interpreting that correctly.