Support NeoGAF

[ProtoByte]

I just don't get it. 4k is a legitimate complaint and a ridiculous luxury. A decent frame rate (at the very least 40fps) is really just non-negotiable for me now in terms of delivering good visuals.

For you perhaps. For most people, no.

Ding ding ding ding. We have a winner. Another man who understands you can’t have it both ways. You can’t really have generational leaps and 60fps mode.

Buuuuut I will say the burning shores flying through clouds, the rift apart world swapping, and a good amount of demon souls arenas were VERY next gen to me. Maybe just a liiiiiittle bit higher and I’d be fully satisfied. If they can do that at 60fps then great but I have my doubts.

I think they'll continue to have performance modes, but the sacrifices are gonna become that much more harsh. Native resolutions as low as 1080p in the most extreme cases, and/or severe downgrades to particle effects and lighting. This is, to me, part of the reason why a PS5 Pro will be happening.

While I agree with you A alloush and SlimySnake that 60fps zealotry is stupid and yet another display of the gaming community's lack of perspective, I'm also not worried about the fidelity of games in the future. You might not recall, but very, very early in the PS4 gen, there was a lot of 60fps games and a lot of promises around that frame rate. Even Naughty Dog promised 60fps for Uncharted 4 when they revealed it. When people saw the actual game and motion and Naughty Dog reneged on the 60fps, there was some disappointment, but it was ultimately forgotten.

I know it's hard to watch something like Unrecord when the best we've seen from an actual game to this point is Burning Shores (and that's not shabby), but again, you guys should remember that this is something that happened consistently through last gen. Some unknown studio pops up with a seemingly unbelievable game that looks too good to be true; and then the game either never comes out, comes out severely compromised in comparison to what was first shown, or takes years going into the next gen to actually release.

We've not got long to wait before we start seeing games from the studios you expect to see graphical showpieces from, and in terms of timing, we're right on schedule. Expecting graphical showpieces from Respawn, Arkane, or anything like that was always going to be a disappointment.

 

[SlimySnake]

Would you believe me if I told you I haven't played HFW or GOW:Ragnarok yet? I just don't feel the urge to do so, I am however hella excited for Spiderman 2. I just hope that hype doesn't die down though.

Nah, I believe you. I called this two years ago that HFW and GOW and all these other cross gen games will end up feeling too samey, and you're seeing that happen with how literally no one wanted to replay GOW after the NG+ mode came out. HFW DLC is not generating any buzz. People are done with PS4 era games which themselves were an extension of PS3 era games.

Spiderman will need to do a lot more than offer Ratchet quality visuals and level switching. I remember posting some wants and expectations for Spiderman 2 in another thread. I wanted full scale destruction, better NPC AI simulations, and lightning fast traversal (not travel) and most everyone was like you're expecting too much. Wait what? What else should we expect from a next gen only game releasing THREE years after the next gen launch. More last gen trash? It's shocking that we've gone from expecting underwhelming launch games to expecting underwhelming mid gen games.

With critics handing out 95+ scores to every AAA game nowadays and fans rewarding every game with 5 million sales while also drowning out all valid criticisms as concern trolling, we've found ourselves in an era where devs are complacent and fans have zero expectations.

P.S I think Avatar is still the only game ive seen where they've talked about the wild life interacting with the forest, and your actions affecting the wildlife causing stampedes and destruction. It's the only game where they've admitted to using the ssd not just for loading times but also for faster traversal and denser levels. Sadly, its a Ubisoft game so it will get delayed and downgraded but at least they were trying. No one from Sony, Microsoft, EA and Capcom is even bothering to attempt this level of interactivity. FF16, Star Wars Survivor, Redfall all look so watered down in terms of interactivity and simulation, its embarrassing to call them next gen games.

 

[Matt_Fox]

I just started Atomic Heart last night, and I have to say the opening 30 minutes - which are kind of a sightseeing tour - are visually impressive, in particular this parade with so many npcs.

(the first 'proper' hour of gameplay that followed has been somewhat less impressive with lots of identikit office rooms but I'm hoping the game picks up again)

 

[Turk1993]

 

[GymWolf]

Console devs finally discovered the 1800p resolution uh?

Doens't horizon fw in balanced mode run at 1800p?

 

[GymWolf]

that's enough to cause an epileptic seizure to your average reeeee user.

 

[Alexios]

Finally the experts can stfu about it, from on rails to fmv to whatever made up crap, lol. Or will they find some new goal posts?

 

[Hunnybun]

Oh yeah that’s the main problem. Having so little.

But see I don’t think devs will do what you’re saying. I think we’ll continue to get 4K 60FPS targets and ours games will continue to look “alright.” I hope to god starfield or Spider-Man 2 can buck this trend.

I don't know. It seems like Spider-Man 2 will be 4k30 like R&C and will imo be quite spectacular, although logically not close to what could be done at half the resolution.

The funny thing is, I'd normally expect competition to drive down the standards resolutions as developers try to get more bang for their buck. And that is actually happening with things like Dead Space and Forspoken etc, but those devs are so crazily far behind the first parties that Insomniac etc can produce games twice as good looking at twice the resolution!

So it's a complicated picture, and all a bit puzzling so far.

My guess is that the second generation of big first party games will be more ambitious and target say 1440p30, especially with Pro consoles seemingly on the way.

 

[Represent.]

People don’t want to hear it but it’s because the whiny ass 60FPS crowd won. All those devs you named and their underwhelming next Gen games? 60FPS modes.

If the PS4 had the same 60fps or the bitch ass gaming community cried for days and declared you should be fired and they’d boycott you, we’d have never gotten the shadow fall moment. No second son. No driveclub. No order 1886. No uncharted 4. No days gone. No last guardian. No nothing. Just sharper PS3 games. And what have most games been this gen? Sharper PS4 games.

Fantastic post. The 60fps crowd is incredibly annoying and misinformed. They are also way too easily impressed and straight up I think they have lower standards for games.

They are perfectly ok with PS4 games from a graphical and design standpoint as long as the games run at 60fps.

They don’t care about things like next gen destruction, large scale battles, insane fidelity, etc.

We have gotten nothing but PS4 esque games all gen and people are so happy and satisfied about it because they run at 60fps.

People see something as amazing looking as the matrix demo and still complain because it’s not 60fps.

I cannot wait until 30fps is the norm again, performance modes cease to exist, and devs show some ambition again.

I will never get over people who claim to like graphics not wanting to move on from 30fps. Maybe they just don't see what I see, but 30fps in motion, to me, looks SHIT in basically every instance. *Especially* when you start to get much more lively worlds with destruction and good animation, lots of explosions and particles etc, all that's basically worthless at 30fps.

I just don't get it. 4k is a legitimate complaint and a ridiculous luxury. A decent frame rate (at the very least 40fps) is really just non-negotiable for me now in terms of delivering good visuals.

It’s the exact opposite….You can’t be a true graphics whore and prefer framerate over fidelity…

This crowd is ruining the industry with the 60fps nonsense. Devs have zero ambition anymore because of it. 3 years into the gen and has anything blown TLOU2 out of the water yet?

Devs are just making last gen games, they run at 60, and all these easily satisfied gamers are impressed and call it next gen.

You are playing PS4 games at 60fps. That is not next gen.

Finally the experts can stfu about it, from on rails to fmv to whatever made up crap, lol. Or will they find some new goal posts?

Holy fuck

 

[arkhamguy123]

Immortals of Aveum thoughts? Looks a little ehhhh but it’s apparently using lumen and nanite and the pc requirements are insane. Also UE5. Yet I watched the gameplay and just thought it looked alright.

SlimySnake

 

[Hunnybun]

Fantastic post. The 60fps crowd is incredibly annoying and misinformed. They are also way too easily impressed and straight up I think they have lower standards for games.

They are perfectly ok with PS4 games from a graphical and design standpoint as long as the games run at 60fps.

They don’t care about things like next gen destruction, large scale battles, insane fidelity, etc.

We have gotten nothing but PS4 esque games all gen and people are so happy and satisfied about it because they run at 60fps.

People see something as amazing looking as the matrix demo and still complain because it’s not 60fps.

I cannot wait until 30fps is the norm again, performance modes cease to exist, and devs show some ambition again.

It’s the exact opposite….You can’t be a true graphics whore and prefer framerate over fidelity…

This crowd is ruining the industry with the 60fps nonsense. Devs have zero ambition anymore because of it. 3 years into the gen and has anything blown TLOU2 out of the water yet?

Devs are just making last gen games, they run at 60, and all these easily satisfied gamers are impressed and call it next gen.

You are playing PS4 games at 60fps. That is not next gen.

Holy fuck

If you can't see the benefits a good frame rate brings to visuals, you're fucking blind. Sorry but I'm just sick of hearing this nonsense.

 

[arkhamguy123]

Fantastic post. The 60fps crowd is incredibly annoying and misinformed. They are also way too easily impressed and straight up I think they have lower standards for games.

They are perfectly ok with PS4 games from a graphical and design standpoint as long as the games run at 60fps.

They don’t care about things like next gen destruction, large scale battles, insane fidelity, etc.

We have gotten nothing but PS4 esque games all gen and people are so happy and satisfied about it because they run at 60fps.

People see something as amazing looking as the matrix demo and still complain because it’s not 60fps.

But dude I can run Ragnarok at like 80FPS!!!! Nevermind the fact that the Thor boss fight is so technically neutered it’s not even as impressive as the baulder fight from 5 years ago or that I have to traverse the entire game in the most tedious claustrophobic way possible with squeezing through tunnels and caves to get from one little combat arena to the next!! 80FPS!!!! I love my $500 badass bleeding edge hardware not being utilized in anyway shape or form as long as it runs at a high frame rate!

I love turning on 60fps in Horizon 2 as well!! Nevermind the fact the pop in is atrocious and that it looks like blurry shit and I have to check my eyes for cataracts! The frame rate is so high!!

 

[Represent.]

If you can't see the benefits a good frame rate brings to visuals, you're fucking blind. Sorry but I'm just sick of hearing this nonsense.

And if you think the peak of this medium is a fucking PS4 game running at 60fps, then you need to stop voicing your opinion. Its flatout worthless.

 

[ProtoByte]

If you can't see the benefits a good frame rate brings to visuals, you're fucking blind. Sorry but I'm just sick of hearing this nonsense.

I don't think that's what Represent's saying. He's saying that 60fps does not upgrade the texture fidelity, character models, materials, lighting, NPC counts, crowd density, or environmental interactivity. And he's not wrong.

60 frames helps the smoothness of motion, especially how it feels on the controller. That's it. That might be important to you, but to self professed graphics whores, it's not worth the sacrifice of reaching new heights in all those other areas.

 

[Represent.]

• Real, actual Destruction.
• Insane visual Fidelity. (more advanced lighting, character models, NPC counts, crowd density, environment interactivity, textures etc)
• Next Gen physics, and better hit reactions
• Truly Large scale battles. No smoke and mirrors

All would help to enhance a gaming experience more than... framerate.

All are more likely to see real improvements at 30fps than 60fps.

Its simply not worth the sacrifice.

 

[Hunnybun]

I don't think that's what Represent's saying. He's saying that 60fps does not upgrade the texture fidelity, character models, materials, lighting, NPC counts, crowd density, or environmental interactivity. And he's not wrong.

60 frames helps the smoothness of motion, especially how it feels on the controller. That's it. That might be important to you, but to self professed graphics whores, it's not worth the sacrifice of reaching new heights in all those other areas.

60fps transforms the motion clarity and hugely upgrades the visual experience. Fyi it's impossible to feel the smoothness of the motion through the controller. That makes no sense.

You can argue that other uses of the power are even more impressive - that's a debate worth having - but to say there's no improvement to the visuals, I think you'd basically have to be visually impaired.

 

[SlimySnake]

Immortals of Aveum thoughts? Looks a little ehhhh but it’s apparently using lumen and nanite and the pc requirements are insane. Also UE5. Yet I watched the gameplay and just thought it looked alright.

SlimySnake

The cutscenes look amazing but the FPS nature of the game holds back the visuals. Very stupid choice to make it first person after spending so much time on character rendering.

 

[SlimySnake]

60fps transforms the motion clarity and hugely upgrades the visual experience. Fyi it's impossible to feel the smoothness of the motion through the controller. That makes no sense.

You can argue that other uses of the power are even more impressive - that's a debate worth having - but to say there's no improvement to the visuals, I think you'd basically have to be visually impaired.

You will get 60 fps modes on mid gen consoles which should start coming out in a few months. maybe a year max. you can get them on PC. There is just no reason to hold back physics, fidelity and other simulations in favor of 60 fps modes on base consoles. No one here like the series S because we all knew 4 tflops wasnt going to be enough for next gen fidelity. Well Demon Souls is a 5 tflops game at 30 fps. Probably closer to 4 tflops since 60 fps seems to be taxing these consoles a lot more than it does PC GPUs. Every single one of us threw a bitch fit when series s was announced and yet every single PS5 game has barely been a 5 tflops game at 30 fps.

 

[Hunnybun]

You will get 60 fps modes on mid gen consoles which should start coming out in a few months. maybe a year max. you can get them on PC. There is just no reason to hold back physics, fidelity and other simulations in favor of 60 fps modes on base consoles. No one here like the series S because we all knew 4 tflops wasnt going to be enough for next gen fidelity. Well Demon Souls is a 5 tflops game at 30 fps. Probably closer to 4 tflops since 60 fps seems to be taxing these consoles a lot more than it does PC GPUs. Every single one of us threw a bitch fit when series s was announced and yet every single PS5 game has barely been a 5 tflops game at 30 fps.

As long as I get a Pro console yeah I'm happy.

PC just doesn't cut it for me yet.

 

[SlimySnake]

Finally the experts can stfu about it, from on rails to fmv to whatever made up crap, lol. Or will they find some new goal posts?

lol still not buying it. the hand animations are too good. too fluid for an indie dev.

 

[rofif]

Finally the experts can stfu about it, from on rails to fmv to whatever made up crap, lol. Or will they find some new goal posts?

I find it ironic to see everyone praising this.
-motion blur
-ca
-grain/compression shader
-distotion
-dof

Things that every pc gamer turns off the moment they launch any game.
Without these, this would look like another normal game. Except the cool camera

 

[Alexios]

I mean it's literally styled to be from a camera so those make sense. I don't hate or turn off those things if they make sense. This isn't RE9 or Swat 5 or an arena FPS but a likely short narrative FPS, not the deepest thing to keep going back to, so whatever artsy identity it has and I like I want. I liked the Alien Isolation visual effects that made it look like the movies too (and it also looked spectacular in its own right back then. especially with the TAA mod removing aliasing). This similarly styled game just put out a full trailer too, trying to capitalise on the word bodycam being super hot I guess...

 

[Grildon Tundy]

I'm guessing either:

This game never comes out, or
It finally comes out 5-7 years from now, and other games' graphics have caught up.

I'd like to think there are AAA games in development that look this good, but haven't been revealed yet because, like this one, they're so early in development.

Edit: Alexios , I hope you're laughing with me because I don't understand what's funny otherwise?

 

[SlimySnake]

I'm guessing either:

This game never comes out, or
It finally comes out 5-7 years from now, and other games' graphics have caught up.

I'd like to think there are AAA games in development that look this good, but haven't been revealed yet because, like this one, they're so early in development.

If Sony decides to hold a conference this year we might see more games like this or at least Matrix quality visuals in a couple of months.

Thats if they don’t make their games 60 fps like demon souls, ratchet and tlou.

 

[OCASM]

I'm sorry Neilg but that analogy didn't make an iota of sense. But I think I get your point.


These devs need to be shamed as you mentioned, the funny thing is, if they don't release games with high fps they will also be shamed, so damned if they did and damned if they didn't lol which makes me sometimes feel bad for them. But the majority are straight up lazy. Just today I was thinking about how we do not have proper next gen games when I fired up my ps5. I mean yeah there are some pretty good games out there right now but nothing screams next gen and I am not speaking from a graphical point of view mind you, but also in terms of animations, physics, AI, storytelling, game design etc. Devs are just phoning it in nowadays and relying on marketing to do the job of hyping up their game and getting the masses to buy them.

Would you believe me if I told you I haven't played HFW or GOW:Ragnarok yet? I just don't feel the urge to do so, I am however hella excited for Spiderman 2. I just hope that hype doesn't die down though.

Don't feel bad for them. They caused the whole situation by passing off PS4 games as PS5 games.

While I agree with you A alloush and SlimySnake that 60fps zealotry is stupid and yet another display of the gaming community's lack of perspective, I'm also not worried about the fidelity of games in the future. You might not recall, but very, very early in the PS4 gen, there was a lot of 60fps games and a lot of promises around that frame rate. Even Naughty Dog promised 60fps for Uncharted 4 when they revealed it. When people saw the actual game and motion and Naughty Dog reneged on the 60fps, there was some disappointment, but it was ultimately forgotten.

This.

 

[Hunnybun]

Edit: Alexios , I hope you're laughing with me because I don't understand what's funny otherwise?

I know it's hard not to rise to it but it's better not to respond to trolling fuckwits like him .

 

[Represent.]

I know it's hard not to rise to it but it's better not to respond to trolling fuckwits like him .

You just aren't good at arguing your point lol. Disagreement doesn't mean trolling. I made my points pretty clear. You just spam laugh emoji's and accuse people of trolling when they disagree with you.

• Real, actual Destruction.
• Insane visual Fidelity. (more advanced lighting, character models, NPC counts, crowd density, environment interactivity, textures etc)
• Next Gen physics, and better hit reactions
• Truly Large scale battles. No smoke and mirrors

All would help to enhance a gaming experience more than... framerate.

All are more likely to see real improvements at 30fps than 60fps.

Its simply not worth the sacrifice.

I told you clear as day why I prefer 30fps, somehow I am trolling.

anyways

 

[Edder1]

When path tracing makes game from 20 years ago look state of the art



RTX Remix is set to be huge!

 

[Alex11]

When path tracing makes game from 20 years ago look almost state of the art



RTX Remix is set to be huge!

It looks amazing, but sometimes in some scenes and in some parts of a scene it looks to good, for lack of a better word. In a sense that, I get that it looks accurate, the lighting, shadows, etc., but it changes the mood of some scenes, or in some interiors it looks a bit too dark in some places.

Again, it looks amazing, not trying to take anything away from it, but I think that games need to have some of the lighting hand made or hand placed, like movies, to have that dramatic feeling, coloring, which may not be entirely accurate but gives it uniqueness.

 

[kikkis]

• Real, actual Destruction.
• Insane visual Fidelity. (more advanced lighting, character models, NPC counts, crowd density, environment interactivity, textures etc)
• Next Gen physics, and better hit reactions
• Truly Large scale battles. No smoke and mirrors

All would help to enhance a gaming experience more than... framerate.

All are more likely to see real improvements at 30fps than 60fps.

Its simply not worth the sacrifice.

1. I doubt we see "real" destruction, block based like battlefield sure but thats doable 30 and 60fps
2. Textures dont have more vram in 30fps, npc counts arent really needed for most games apart from games like gta
3. hit reactions is more of animation issue, dunno what nextgen physics are but I doubt most games need it or can make it work well over network either
4. Again are these even fun to actually play, let alone needed in most games.

 

[Edder1]

It looks amazing, but sometimes in some scenes and in some parts of a scene it looks to good, for lack of a better word. In a sense that, I get that it looks accurate, the lighting, shadows, etc., but it changes the mood of some scenes, or in some interiors it looks a bit too dark in some places.

Again, it looks amazing, not trying to take anything away from it, but I think that games need to have some of the lighting hand made or hand placed, like movies, to have that dramatic feeling, coloring, which may not be entirely accurate but gives it uniqueness.

The reason path traced old games look darker and moodier is because the original games don't have sufficient light sources or light sources that take into account path tracing, so really this is not so much problem with the tech but the games and how they were designed. Nvidia will soon allow for insertion of light sources along with being able to modify graphics, something that should solve this problem to a large degree. Even if path tracing doesn't always look as good as touched up lighting, we can't deny that 90+% of the time it looks way superior and therefore is a big win in the end.

 

[Hunnybun]

You just aren't good at arguing your point lol. Disagreement doesn't mean trolling. I made my points pretty clear. You just spam laugh emoji's and accuse people of trolling when they disagree with you.



I told you clear as day why I prefer 30fps, somehow I am trolling.

anyways

I wasn't referring to you.

 

[Madserb2023]

The argument over framerate is irrelevant. At some point this generation we are going to go back to 30fps. Might have 40 unlocked with VRR as the new performance mode. If there was the ability to always have 60 without sacrifice then there would be no debate. You can always add a 30fps cap for those who really like the way it looks. However we are probably a generation or two from a situation where 4k/60 with no visual compromises is possible. Even then you can always do more at 30 it will just be less noticeable.

 

[alloush]

No he works on Unrecord (which wasn't named at the time of the last tweet - which was the first tweet about it). Paranormal Tales is a whole different studio and game to the Unrecord FPS every idiot thinks is fake. I was linking to the replies here but the embed adds what they reply to on top.

Yeah now I understand which is which, was confused at first. Unrecord looks better than Paranormal Tales though.

Ding ding ding ding. We have a winner. Another man who understands you can’t have it both ways. You can’t really have generational leaps and 60fps mode.

Buuuuut I will say the burning shores flying through clouds, the rift apart world swapping, and a good amount of demon souls arenas were VERY next gen to me. Maybe just a liiiiiittle bit higher and I’d be fully satisfied. If they can do that at 60fps then great but I have my doubts.

Oh for sure, we've always known this, you cannot have it both ways as you mentioned which is why, if it were up to me, I prefer 30fps over 60fps for single player story-driven games as it gives you a lotta head room to maximize a whole lot of other stuff.

For you perhaps. For most people, no.

I think they'll continue to have performance modes, but the sacrifices are gonna become that much more harsh. Native resolutions as low as 1080p in the most extreme cases, and/or severe downgrades to particle effects and lighting. This is, to me, part of the reason why a PS5 Pro will be happening.

While I agree with you A alloush and SlimySnake that 60fps zealotry is stupid and yet another display of the gaming community's lack of perspective, I'm also not worried about the fidelity of games in the future. You might not recall, but very, very early in the PS4 gen, there was a lot of 60fps games and a lot of promises around that frame rate. Even Naughty Dog promised 60fps for Uncharted 4 when they revealed it. When people saw the actual game and motion and Naughty Dog reneged on the 60fps, there was some disappointment, but it was ultimately forgotten.

I know it's hard to watch something like Unrecord when the best we've seen from an actual game to this point is Burning Shores (and that's not shabby), but again, you guys should remember that this is something that happened consistently through last gen. Some unknown studio pops up with a seemingly unbelievable game that looks too good to be true; and then the game either never comes out, comes out severely compromised in comparison to what was first shown, or takes years going into the next gen to actually release.

We've not got long to wait before we start seeing games from the studios you expect to see graphical showpieces from, and in terms of timing, we're right on schedule. Expecting graphical showpieces from Respawn, Arkane, or anything like that was always going to be a disappointment.

At one point, games will get much bigger much more ambitious that devs will have to go back to 30fps in order to achieve those things that made the game that much shinier and I don't just mean graphics, I also mean AI, physics, animations, game design, interactivity, NPCs etc. Subpar visuals at 60fps wont cut it anymore. It is not like we prefer 30fps for the sake of it, of course 60fps is better but the sacrifice aint worth it in my opinion. For sports games and multiplayer games and the like that's a different story.

Nah, I believe you. I called this two years ago that HFW and GOW and all these other cross gen games will end up feeling too samey, and you're seeing that happen with how literally no one wanted to replay GOW after the NG+ mode came out. HFW DLC is not generating any buzz. People are done with PS4 era games which themselves were an extension of PS3 era games.

Spiderman will need to do a lot more than offer Ratchet quality visuals and level switching. I remember posting some wants and expectations for Spiderman 2 in another thread. I wanted full scale destruction, better NPC AI simulations, and lightning fast traversal (not travel) and most everyone was like you're expecting too much. Wait what? What else should we expect from a next gen only game releasing THREE years after the next gen launch. More last gen trash? It's shocking that we've gone from expecting underwhelming launch games to expecting underwhelming mid gen games.

With critics handing out 95+ scores to every AAA game nowadays and fans rewarding every game with 5 million sales while also drowning out all valid criticisms as concern trolling, we've found ourselves in an era where devs are complacent and fans have zero expectations.

P.S I think Avatar is still the only game ive seen where they've talked about the wild life interacting with the forest, and your actions affecting the wildlife causing stampedes and destruction. It's the only game where they've admitted to using the ssd not just for loading times but also for faster traversal and denser levels. Sadly, its a Ubisoft game so it will get delayed and downgraded but at least they were trying. No one from Sony, Microsoft, EA and Capcom is even bothering to attempt this level of interactivity. FF16, Star Wars Survivor, Redfall all look so watered down in terms of interactivity and simulation, its embarrassing to call them next gen games.

Everything you mentioned in your list of things you want from Spidey 2 is doable and things we SHOULD expect from a game coming out 5 years after the original and 3 years into the new gen of consoles. I dunno why people have low standards and expectations, it's cuz of them devs have become lazy and seldom innovate, the bar has been lowered like crazy in recent years it's actually laughable. As you mentioned, Spidey 2 has to do much much more than what R&C did in terms of everything, I mean R&C shouldn't even be the benchmark as visually impressive as it was. The trailer impressed me a lot, I hope the game lives up to its hype. The fact they have been tight-lipped about it tells me they have something big for us, but them expectations though gotta keep them tempered.

Avatar is another game I am keeping a very close eye on. But then again it's Ubisoft, man. It's like this gen has been a case of So Close But Yet So Far. Very frustrating.

Don't feel bad for them. They caused the whole situation by passing off PS4 games as PS5 games.


This.

That's very true. These people have been getting away with it big time these last few years they don't deserve any sympathy honestly.

 

[ProtoByte]

I also think the importance of resolutions to people is underestimated.

When people buy these new shiny massive TVs, they buy them for increased picture quality first and foremost. Not for refresh rates.

 

[CGNoire]

lol still not buying it. the hand animations are too good. too fluid for an indie dev.

Thats my issue exactly. The visuals I can buy but its the hand animations that seem way too "Bespoke" to be realtime agency.
It just looks too choreographed.

 

[CGNoire]

Finally the experts can stfu about it, from on rails to fmv to whatever made up crap, lol. Or will they find some new goal posts?

To be clear any sus has been from the hand animations not the graphics.

 

[CGNoire]

I find it ironic to see everyone praising this.
-motion blur
-ca
-grain/compression shader
-distotion
-dof

Things that every pc gamer turns off the moment they launch any game.
Without these, this would look like another normal game. Except the cool camera

What?

 

[Hunnybun]

I also think the importance of resolutions to people is underestimated.

When people buy these new shiny massive TVs, they buy them for increased picture quality first and foremost. Not for refresh rates.

Most people who buy even quite good 4k tvs couldn't tell the difference between 4k and 1080p. They mainly buy them because that's what's available. And the most impressive thing about their picture quality is never the sheer number of pixels - that tends to be largely a luxury.

I'm well into this stuff and have a 65" OLED, and from where I currently sit about 9ft away, I actually can't tell the difference between most performance modes' clarity and 4k. If you go down to something like a 1:1 ratio of distance to screen size, then yeah there's definite degradation, but I reckon hardly anyone is in that position. In a normal living room/bedroom situation you're looking at a 75" screen minimum for that kind of demand on clarity. Even at that point, the drop off is relatively small.

 

[rofif]

What?

I am defending the widely hated effects and find it ironic that now everyone loves the look of it. I like the effects personally

 

[ChiefDada]

Most people who buy even quite good 4k tvs couldn't tell the difference between 4k and 1080p. They mainly buy them because that's what's available. And the most impressive thing about their picture quality is never the sheer number of pixels - that tends to be largely a luxury.

I'm well into this stuff and have a 65" OLED, and from where I currently sit about 9ft away, I actually can't tell the difference between most performance modes' clarity and 4k. If you go down to something like a 1:1 ratio of distance to screen size, then yeah there's definite degradation, but I reckon hardly anyone is in that position. In a normal living room/bedroom situation you're looking at a 75" screen minimum for that kind of demand on clarity. Even at that point, the drop off is relatively small.

Quite the stretch. Most people can tell the difference between 1080p and 4k even on their smartphones.

 

[Neilg]

What?

he's not wrong. tons of posts in this thread complain about those features making image quality worse, saying how they turn them off. It's a very common sentiment across the internet.
and here's a game that leans into them with everyone saying how photoreal it looks, when if it was third person with the camera FX turned off it would simply look pretty mediocre.

I've made posts about this in this thread before, but it's amazing to me that most people dont realize why they think something looks good. conversations about art direction vs technical features vs cheap tricks all get muddied up like they're equals and the contribution of each is confused. A high contrast LUT and blurry bodycam/hand held style camera animation on any modern AAA game would look outrageous.

Everyone has a different opinion on what looks good - but I do this for a living, so I try and look objectively at two things - what technical features are being done which add to the overall look - and what creative choices are being made which trick our brains and appeal our impression of what looks good. that one includes good cinematography (counterpoint lighting, hero rigs, things that are really starting to be taken seriously in games) and having the game designed entirely around a presentation style (kane & lynch, this)
I think it would make conversations in this thread smoother if people were able to define those things. You've got people into 60fps saying it objectively makes games look better and someone arguing resolution looks better but they're both technically right - it just makes different things look better (motion or IQ), and each person arguing prefers their respective different thing. complete waste of time and energy.

 

[Kataploom]

Immortals of Aveum thoughts? Looks a little ehhhh but it’s apparently using lumen and nanite and the pc requirements are insane. Also UE5. Yet I watched the gameplay and just thought it looked alright.

SlimySnake

Came to see if anyone is talking about this... The game is basically full blown UE5 featured and is asking a PC that a little MORE powerful than PS5/XSX for 1080p at 60 fps on Low-Med settings. I guess the consoles will run this thing at 1080p upscaled to dynamic 1440p using TSR on same settings (some even lower than low) at 30 fps. Literally consoles fell obsolete for 1440p to 4K gaming if that's the case and not the game being barely any optimized for PC.

I find it ironic to see everyone praising this.
-motion blur
-ca
-grain/compression shader
-distotion
-dof

Things that every pc gamer turns off the moment they launch any game.
Without these, this would look like another normal game. Except the cool camera

Not me, I'd probably remove CA and film grain but it would also depend on game art style. Cleaning the image obsessively to point it removes the game from creators vision too much and then complaining it's looking "bad" is dumb imo, sometimes the effects are essential for a game art style (like AA for Jedi Fallen Order) and the combination is what makes the game look good or how it's marketed at least.

 

[mansoor1980]

is that game using some sort of motion capture , those hand animations are the best in any game

 

[Hunnybun]

Quite the stretch. Most people can tell the difference between 1080p and 4k even on their smartphones.

Lol sure.

 

[Hunnybun]

I think it would make conversations in this thread smoother if people were able to define those things. You've got people into 60fps saying it objectively makes games look better and someone arguing resolution looks better but they're both technically right - it just makes different things look better (motion or IQ), and each person arguing prefers their respective different thing. complete waste of time and energy.

That's definitely true. My issue is that despite being all for 60fps, I recognise that it involves sacrifices to other aspects of the visual experience, whereas it's hard to get 'the other side' to even acknowledge that frame rate has a visual impact. And that's just maddening to me, cos I'm like 'do they not even see it, how's that possible', or are they just kidding themselves?

Like, I don't get how you wouldn't even see the difference.

 

[YeulEmeralda]

Photorealism in videogames? Reminds me of the hit MMO Going outside. Over 7.5 billion unique NPCs!

 

[Neilg]

That's definitely true. My issue is that despite being all for 60fps, I recognise that it involves sacrifices to other aspects of the visual experience, whereas it's hard to get 'the other side' to even acknowledge that frame rate has a visual impact. And that's just maddening to me, cos I'm like 'do they not even see it, how's that possible', or are they just kidding themselves?

Like, I don't get how you wouldn't even see the difference.

One thing i've learned in managing a team of artists is that some people really do see things totally differently - they're so wired to focus on a specific detail that other things that might be obvious to you fall away. Personal perception is so varied, and it takes a lot of conscious effort to try and be objective and see everything equally at once. I see this most of all with color - tons of very experienced artists can spend 40 hours working on something and by the end, they have a beautiful image full of detail and nice touches, but the green color in all planting is just totally wrong and fucked up. I could list countless examples but it's kind of incredible how that kind of thing manifests. it's the same for consuming media, some people are allergic to specific visual tells and get annoyed by them, or very susceptible to being 'tricked' by them. Some people have a threshold where they simply cant tell when a feature is on or off - it doesn't affect the part of the image they've trained themselves to focus on over 20+ years of watching tv/movies/games, and for others, the new feature or touch makes a significant difference.

A good example is the assets and shaders in unrecorded - they're frankly not good, many indie games have better assets and geometry detail. everyone gets distracted by the realism in the sense of motion that they cant see that unless they pause and try to ignore whats tricking their brain into going 'damn this looks real'. this isnt exclusive to this forum, a fucking shitload of people on the internet thought it was fake because of how 'real' it looks.

This is a very long way of saying, the 'other side' is universal, everything has an 'other side', fps, fidelity, color, geometry detail, lighting, and you're not going to convince them they're wrong because what they are seeing comes from their cumulative experiences up to this point, it takes a while to teach people how to see differently. And then you just end up with a fence sitter that says everything is contextual and there's no true right or wrong.

I do think this thread spends a little too much time focusing on how other people are wrong / calling devs lazy instead of discussing when things are done right and discussing why/how it works. I mean, I ain't the thread police and cant change anything, but I think that would be a much more enriching space.

Speaking of fps though, I jsut started playing horizon FW with the balanced mode - 40fps and 1800p. It's a perfect compromise, genuinely the best way to play by some distance. VRR has had a bigger impression on me than HDR, as far as new tv features go. HDR is very nice and i'm glad both exist, but as a fence sitter picking a difference option depending on the type of game, getting rid of that choice is a big upgrade.

 

[ProtoByte]

Came to see if anyone is talking about this... The game is basically full blown UE5 featured and is asking a PC that a little MORE powerful than PS5/XSX for 1080p at 60 fps on Low-Med settings. I guess the consoles will run this thing at 1080p upscaled to dynamic 1440p using TSR on same settings (some even lower than low) at 30 fps. Literally consoles fell obsolete for 1440p to 4K gaming if that's the case and not the game being barely any optimized for PC.

Well, screw UE5 until it starts running at reasonable levels. While the best UE5 demoes have looked undeniably great, the jump in visuals/geometry of the best of what we've got now is not worth that kind of hit to resolution and performance.

This Immortals game looks especially okay. Not even the particle effects look beyond what we've seen and played to this point.

 

[Hunnybun]

One thing i've learned in managing a team of artists is that some people really do see things totally differently - they're so wired to focus on a specific detail that other things that might be obvious to you fall away. Personal perception is so varied, and it takes a lot of conscious effort to try and be objective and see everything equally at once. I see this most of all with color - tons of very experienced artists can spend 40 hours working on something and by the end, they have a beautiful image full of detail and nice touches, but the green color in all planting is just totally wrong and fucked up. I could list countless examples but it's kind of incredible how that kind of thing manifests. it's the same for consuming media, some people are allergic to specific visual tells and get annoyed by them, or very susceptible to being 'tricked' by them. Some people have a threshold where they simply cant tell when a feature is on or off - it doesn't affect the part of the image they've trained themselves to focus on over 20+ years of watching tv/movies/games, and for others, the new feature or touch makes a significant difference.

A good example is the assets and shaders in unrecorded - they're frankly not good, many indie games have better assets and geometry detail. everyone gets distracted by the realism in the sense of motion that they cant see that unless they pause and try to ignore whats tricking their brain into going 'damn this looks real'. this isnt exclusive to this forum, a fucking shitload of people on the internet thought it was fake because of how 'real' it looks.

This is a very long way of saying, the 'other side' is universal, everything has an 'other side', fps, fidelity, color, geometry detail, lighting, and you're not going to convince them they're wrong because what they are seeing comes from their cumulative experiences up to this point, it takes a while to teach people how to see differently. And then you just end up with a fence sitter that says everything is contextual and there's no true right or wrong.

I do think this thread spends a little too much time focusing on how other people are wrong / calling devs lazy instead of discussing when things are done right and discussing why/how it works. I mean, I ain't the thread police and cant change anything, but I think that would be a much more enriching space.

Speaking of fps though, I jsut started playing horizon FW with the balanced mode - 40fps and 1800p. It's a perfect compromise, genuinely the best way to play by some distance. VRR has had a bigger impression on me than HDR, as far as new tv features go. HDR is very nice and i'm glad both exist, but as a fence sitter picking a difference option depending on the type of game, getting rid of that choice is a big upgrade.

Very interesting, I think I agree with most of that.

VRR is indeed the secret sauce of this generation. It's fantastic. The only downside is I think it's been exposing me to frame rates well above 60fps for some time now, and I think I might have got slightly used to it. I notice that even 40fps is starting to look jerky to me now, but I think that is more just a matter of readjustment rather than being an absolutely ugly frame rate.

Agreed about the 'lazy dev' stuff, which seems pretty unrealistic for the most part.