geordiemp
Member
The True King:
Not if you fly close its not. Its a flight sim, looks great at height but not for gaming.
The True King:
I think 1440p 60 or 4kcb 60 is a waste of resources. The consoles are the lowest common denominator holding back an entire gen. If i want to play games at 60 fps, i can buy a pc or even a mid gen console upgrade in a couple of years.
What i don't want is devs utilizing only 5 tflops to do 1440p 30 fps And use the rest on either pushing pixels or framerate. Id rather it go towards more physics, more npcs, more effects and a more photorealistic presentation. There is always pc for those who want 60 fps.
hahaha are you being serious?Not if you fly close its not. Its a flight sim, looks great at height but not for gaming.
i love how most posts in here are from teasers, demos, alphas, etc and not actual gameplay. the only posts worth looking at are the Cyberpunk, Flight Sim, and maybe FIFA. the rest are NOT representative of what you'll actually play.
hahaha are you being serious?
you're right. it's a "flight sim" which means you will be flying thousands of feet above the surface of earth. you're only gonna be flying close to the ground for take off/landing lmao which is like 1% of the time you'll spend playing the game.
i really can't believe you're critising a FLIGHT SIM for having low quality graphics near the ground when all textures/models are designed to be viewed for afar. hahahahaha
Not if you fly close its not. Its a flight sim, looks great at height but not for gaming.
A flight simulator doesn't focus on 10ft flying. You are taking a realtime application that simulates the entire physical world with enormous visual range and trying to judge it based on a camera's view in a FPS. Completely unfair. Just because the textures become too low res compared to a FPS up close doesn't mean everything else the sim does better than any other graphics engine is rendered meaningless. The sim has the absolute best lighting of any videogame to date. And it's texture sizes are upwards of 8k for every few meters. Along with true 3D volume textures with accurate light propagation not seen in most games today. I swear I'll do a graphics analysis on this simulator at some point as there are several technical achievements in the sim.Not if you fly close its not. Its a flight sim, looks great at height but not for gaming.
A flight simulator doesn't focus on 10ft flying. You are taking a realtime application that simulates the entire physical world with enormous visual range and trying to judge it based on a camera's view in a FPS. Completely unfair. Just because the textures become too low res compared to a FPS up close doesn't mean everything else the sim does better than any other graphics engine is rendered meaningless. The sim has the absolute best lighting of any videogame to date. And it's texture sizes are upwards of 8k for every few meters. Along with true 3D volume textures with accurate light propagation not seen in most games today. I swear I'll do a graphics analysis on this simulator at some point as there are several technical achievements in the sim.
geordiemp - not trying to argue dude, but I'm not the only one that's responding to your statements as they seem to try avoiding comparisons to other games simply because it's a flight sim thereby dismissing the graphics tech in it.Stop with the analysis against things nobody said. Your smart enough to know what that is and what its called. Strawman.
My photo example was not 10 ft. Facts.
I also did not say it was meaningless graphics , I said it was great for a flight sim at distance but a technique no use for most gaming.
Try dscussing what I said instead of noises in your head.
does it really matter if you will be flying at those heights 99% of the times.Not if you fly close its not. Its a flight sim, looks great at height but not for gaming.
FS2020 is a genuine flight simulator. It's not a game.Flight Sim is an amazing looking game.
And it still fails to get gamers excited (myself included) because if you've played flight sim you know it's lacking in nuanced meaningful action oriented gameplay.
Any game that commands you to keep your altitude for a perfect score, the only caveat being you wont get a perfect score and will instead be able to look out the window for upwards of 15 minutes
without having to worry about "losing"
lacks meaningful nuanced gameplay.
But it is amazing looking. Which is strange considering it has for decades looked underwhelming.
I expect Microsoft will fully utilize this engine for the vast sprawling vista, graphics and gameplay environments gamers really desire... one day.
Until then, Flight Sim is a fairly meaningless game up to and even particularly once you've landed with a perfect score at all destinations.
Even when mustering the wherewithall to sit there and land a perfect score - the game feels overly characteristic of a interactive screensaver.
Afterwards it then becomes a game about switching camera angles and looking out the window. It severely lacks the nuanced meaningful gameplay
gamers crave.
BF6 with it's jet aircraft thankfully should fill the void for those wanting a more fulfilling flight experience. And will hopefully lend a good a example to this
thread once it unveils!
Yes, native 4k 60 fps during gameplay too. It's DICE's new frostbite hair tech. They showed it way back in 2019.
I love seeing someone who has no idea what flight sims are about trying to argue how flight sims aren't "nuanced" and that they're just about flying around while looking out the windowFlight Sim is an amazing looking game.
And it still fails to get gamers excited (myself included) because if you've played flight sim you know it's lacking in nuanced meaningful action oriented gameplay.
Any game that commands you to keep your altitude for a perfect score, the only caveat being you wont get a perfect score and will instead be able to look out the window for upwards of 15 minutes
without having to worry about "losing"
lacks meaningful nuanced gameplay.
But it is amazing looking. Which is strange considering it has for decades looked underwhelming.
I expect Microsoft will fully utilize this engine for the vast sprawling vista, graphics and gameplay environments gamers really desire... one day.
Until then, Flight Sim is a fairly meaningless game up to and even particularly once you've landed with a perfect score at all destinations.
Even when mustering the wherewithall to sit there and land a perfect score - the game feels overly characteristic of a interactive screensaver.
Afterwards it then becomes a game about switching camera angles and looking out the window. It severely lacks the nuanced meaningful gameplay
gamers crave.
BF6 with it's jet aircraft thankfully should fill the void for those wanting a more fulfilling flight experience. And will hopefully lend a good a example to this
thread once it unveils!
I love seeing someone who has no idea what flight sims are about trying to argue how flight sims aren't "nuanced" and that they're just about flying around while looking out the window
I love seeing someone who has no idea what flight sims are about trying to argue how flight sims aren't "nuanced" and that they're just about flying around while looking out the window
I seen livestreams when i'm scrolling on reddit and I always think its a real video of someone pointing a camera out the window. It's the only game thats ever tricked me.The True King:
Played flight sims since i was a kid, so not 30 but about 20? And from the way you're talking i have some doubts if you actually have as much experience with them as you're claiming. Like, scores? Normally flight sims don't even have any scoring system, its probably something that might be included for the more casual public, but you'd hardly need to care aboutit besides as a form of quick distraction. AKA couldn't care less how the scoring system works in whatever flight sim.Also, Im again for the MILLIONTH TIME a MICROSOFT FAN and PC GAMER.
Specifically, I never said "flight sims" I said - MS Flight Sim. As in MS Flight Simulator.
I find this laughable considering my over under on MS flight sim, has come from over 30 years of playing flight sim.
Are you even old enough to infer you have 30 years of MS flight sim experience? Doubtful.
But please, continue insisting flight simulator really has competent training value. Perhaps, just this latest iteration does.
But previous iteration's have all had bare minimum cockpit simulation metrics with fairly little emphasis on utilizing all those buttons and switches.
Tell me, in order to get a perfect score in flight sim - is it still mandatory that you keep your planes nose seated firmly towards the clouds and stars?
Does it still require little more than minor tweaks to the flight stick?
Sure you can get the Modded variant and build a flight cockpit, but who does that for such a boring game unless your a fanatic who can't afford actual flight school.
As a gamer - and since MS categorizes Flight Sim as a Game far more than a Flight Sim - Makes more sense to splurge on something like a cockpit for Star Citizen.
Played flight sims since i was a kid, so not 30 but about 20? And from the way you're talking i have some doubts if you actually have as much experience with them as you're claiming. Like, scores? Normally flight sims don't even have any scoring system, its probably something that might be included for the more casual public, but you'd hardly need to care aboutit besides as a form of quick distraction. AKA couldn't care less how the scoring system works in whatever flight sim.
Maybe you just spent the last 30 years flying around in them without exploring deeper systems? Have you tried messing with radio, taxi procedures, flight plans, instrumental flight w/ navigation equipments? Because i'll tell you those are far more important to experiencing what flying a plane is about than how well you can handle the stick. Yeah, theres no proper carrot&stick system like "normal" games, but thats not really a problem if you're just after the experience.
And i never said it could be used as training, but its close enough to be a interesting experience.
Again, I'm only talking about MS Flight Simulator - "Normally Flight Sims" is a broad category and completely undermines and diminishes this fact.
So more specifically you are inferring Flight Simulator has no score system?
Wat?
What, you're the type to just disable internal damage then fly with 100% throttle all the way?Most engine instruments are barely utilized - particularly if you are flying in good weather.
30 years of completely worthless experiences thenAfter 30 years of experience, Flight Simulator has no meaningful gameplay metric outside of looking out the window, flipping a couple of buttons per flight - and adjusting to ground and keeping altitude.
You're supposed to use those in ALL standard flights, you'd normally use rudders to align the plane in the correct direction for example.I mean sure, if you want to go through and flip all the rudders switches brakes engines ect, go ahead but most of that is fairly hands off during standard flight.
Dude, this just further confirms your "experience" with flight sims is dubious.If your just after the "experience" then your not going to be playing a game like flight sim past completion for very long. If you want something you can literally go "Hands off" with and sit around and enjoy the view - I guess you might be of the small majority who rigorously play a game like Flight Simulator after completion.
I'll make sure to take notesTroll. Ignore my threads and posts. I won't be here long.
Take notes then, and continue inferring a score system is not important by dancing around whether it in fact has a score system or notI'm inferring FS's score system is not important. I said clearly that even if score system were included they're nothing more than a distraction so stop being disingenuous
What, you're the type to just disable internal damage then fly with 100% throttle all the way?
30 years of completely worthless experiences then
You're supposed to use those in ALL standard flights, you'd normally use rudders to align the plane in the correct direction for example.
Dude, this just further confirms your "experience" with flight sims is dubious.
Flight Sims have always been mostly hands off, where you are in charge of the experience.
I'll make sure to take notes
I dont really get the sony worship for technical stuff when just this last year you had Cyberpunk, Half Life Alyx and Flight Simulator far above anything sony has ever done, including tlou2, which was really jarring personally with how flat and wrong the lightning looks in interiors especially. Once you train your eye with proper ray traced illumation, contact shadows and ambient occlusion every mistep in baked lightning which tlou2 uses just punches you in the eye. Coupled that with the extremely tight and narrow locals of the game, tlou2 ends up being a pretty middle of the road as visual prowess goes.
Plus a lot of the visual impact comes from the artwork. Cold, wet colours, being 3rd person you see everything from a distance so they can get away with much more than a first person game can. In Cyberpunk, you need visual fidelity that holds up at 2 cm distance if the player so chooses to look at it
Just look at this
Just a heads up, if you download the area data beforehand, the graphics dont break up like that.Not if you fly close its not. Its a flight sim, looks great at height but not for gaming.
Next gen started in consoles last year. If you mean top notch AAA with top level visuals taking advantage of the next gen hardware like any other game did before in PC or console, this year we're upposed to get Horizon 2 and GoW Ragnarok.Particularly because "Next Gen" is not scheduled to officially begin on Console Hardware until 2022.
It still hasn't officially commenced when you look at what Phil Spencer and the other team have said.Next gen started in consoles last year. If you mean top notch AAA with top level visuals taking advantage of the next gen hardware like any other game did before in PC or console, this year we're upposed to get Horizon 2 and GoW Ragnarok.
Where does this fiction spring from?Not for Sony games, which are usually by far the best looking games anywhere...
Just a heads up, if you download the area data beforehand, the graphics dont break up like that.
The reason why stuff like that happens is because all the data is being streamed, but if download the data before you fly, the grphics are much more solid with little break up.
I 100% agree but I would also add controls - how precise and responsive they are and feel (which is also linked to animation since that is part of the control feed-back loop together with sound). If those things are not nailed the graphics do not really matter.Am I the only one who thinks that the overall impression of the graphics are ruined if character models and animation (especially facial animations/motion capture) aren't top notch? Even if everything else (environments, lighting etc) looks extremely impressive and gorgeous. I can hardly appreciate the graphics then .. It just "feels" cheap.
Graphical technology is always evolving, and we've got 5 recent impressive examples of video games looking cooler than ever.
Not even kidding. Fifa 21 is the most impressive next gen game out so far.
I feel that way in Cyberpunk precisely. The surrounding environment and lighting look excellent but then an NPC crosses my path and it drags things down.Am I the only one who thinks that the overall impression of the graphics are ruined if character models and animation (especially facial animations/motion capture) aren't top notch? Even if everything else (environments, lighting etc) looks extremely impressive and gorgeous. I can hardly appreciate the graphics then .. It just "feels" cheap.