Sosokrates
Report me if I continue to console war
Lighting,textures and geometry
Maybe, but you said that lights can transform even something like minecraft and the question the op is asking is what is more important between textures and other factors like lights etc.Getting the feeling you're not understanding me at all.
There's more to lighting than ray tracing btw.
Maybe, but you said that lights can transform even something like minecraft and the question the op is asking is what is more important between textures and other factors like lights etc.
And if that is not a proof that only good lights achieve jack shit without detailed textures, i don't know what other proof people need.
Again, you are not gonna convince me that the minecraft demo looks impressive in any shape or form unless you like the vomit inducing minecraft artstyle to begin with, but that's more of a personal thing than a real argument.
There have been minecraft resource packs that replace the games textures with realistic versions and it all tends to look off. Minecraft is a giant voxel, it would never look good with realistic textures because the juxtaposition between the lifelike textures and the blocky design actually kills my immersion more than anything. Minecraft is intentionally meant to look pixellated and when you remove that, the game looks uncanny. Better textures isn't worth completely fucking up the artstyle that made the game what it is.Again, you are not gonna convince me that the minecraft demo looks impressive in any shape or form unless you like the vomit inducing minecraft artstyle to begin with, but that's more of a personal thing than a real argument.
Ok i get that (although they don't look any more real to me, just different shade of low details stuff).My point is that the right light can take the ugly minecraft brick and make it look like a real (ugly) brick. It can look like I made a box and painted it.
No textures can do that. With poor light, all textures fall apart.
All of them.
I saw the trailer with realistic looking minecraft and yeah it still look like shit because i hate the art design, but to me it looks vastly better than the trailer with only rtx lights without texture rework.There have been minecraft resource packs that replace the games textures with realistic versions and it all tends to look off. Minecraft is a giant voxel, it would never look good with realistic textures because the juxtaposition between the lifelike textures and the blocky design actually kills my immersion more than anything. Minecraft is intentionally meant to look pixellated and when you remove that, the game looks uncanny. Better textures isn't worth completely fucking up the artstyle that made the game what it is.
Cool, but when I play final fantasy 7 remake I'm playing a game that ISNT painted, neither is it a voxel game. It's a realistic, cinematic reinterpretation of the original back in 1997. I expect everything to look good, and mediocre lighting wouldn't affect me that much since I can still feel immersed into the world and characters. That never happens when a pixellated, blurry texture completely fucks up the illusion and you see the curtains behind the beautiful environments. It's the reverse situation of minecraft, blocky textures with beautiful, immersive designMy point is that the right light can take the ugly minecraft brick and make it look like a real (ugly) brick. It can look like I made a box and painted it.
No textures can do that. With poor light, all textures fall apart.
All of them.
Scud Race looks better than both of em.flat-shaded Virtua Fighter 1 & Virtua Racing would like you to know textures are overrated
I think RTX is overrated honestly. It does it's thing, but there are other ways of doing things. An old game like Blue Dragon for example at times it still looks like it's just built out of playdough or something. It's obviously far more complex than just one thing, and the overall art direction is hugely imoportant, but just slapping on som ray tracing and calling it a day isn't gonna make anything look life like.Ok i get that (although they don't look any more real to me, just different shade of low details stuff).
My problem is that i think at rtx like something that aim to improve realism, and my brain can't see any realism on games like minecraft or quake 2 so rtx on these games is absolutely pointless to me because even with realistic lights, those shitty textures remain shitty and not realistic at all.
I see the point of rtx on good\realistic looking games, but not on stuff with old ass graphic unoless you also work on the textures (like another famous rtx minecraft demo that looks much better than the one i posted)
I think RTX is overrated honestly. It does it's thing, but there are other ways of doing things. An old game like Blue Dragon for example at times it still looks like it's just built out of playdough or something. It's obviously far more complex than just one thing, and the overall art direction is hugely imoportant, but just slapping on som ray tracing and calling it a day isn't gonna make anything look life like.
but stray and demon souls look good though, they dont have rtx.In terms of looking real Lighting is absolutely the most important thing by far. If it looks like playdough fine, it will look like Playdough.
If you raytrace legos you get real looking legos, Accurate lighting makes everything look like a real something.
Minecraft still looks absolute shit if you don't mod the textures tho
You are not gonna convince me of the opposite.
> Photorealism in games
Order 1886 vibes?I don’t care how sharp your textures are if your game is boring and lifeless.
I think the poster means art direction...and they are correct. If a game has shitty art direction, all the bells and whistles of 4k textures and ray traced lighting are not going to save it.Art Style IS a part of textures...
Best Texture not means "All in 8K ultra HI-RES lol"
I agree, there's certainly a less taxing way to have accurate light than RTX and it's goofy performanceI think RTX is overrated honestly.
but stray and demon souls look good though, they dont have rtx.
Mario 64 and FF9 are vastly different games from stray and demons souls, the former look far less realistic than the latter (though i think FF9 is one of the best looking games ever made)And I love the look of Mario64 and Final Fantasy 9 but we re talking about looking realistic aren't we? And yes Demon's Souls and Stray would look far more realistic with raytracing.
I agree, there's certainly a less taxing way to have accurate light than RTX and it's goofy performance
Mario 64 and FF9 are vastly different games from stray and demons souls, the former look far more realistic than the latter (though i think FF9 is one of the best looking games ever made)