and then i look towards the "graphical fidelity i expect this gen" thread, and all i see are replies like this
You're posting a screenshot when in reality that CGI is a generation ahead of TLOU P1 when actually viewing it in motion.
We all want games to be able to do photorealism. Let's not start lying to ourself and pretending they already do when we are still a decade away.
When we reach photorealism you will know.
We have a ways to go
No, console are not near cg quality.
Am i out of the loop here? what's the issue? how does Horizon not literally look like CG?
Can anyone point out to me how visuals like Sony's first party doesn't literally look like CG made by gigantic renderbeasts in pixar's office?
At this point, i'm getting a bit tired of this constant chase for photorealism... These are some of the most realistic video game images you guys could ever ask for. Visuals that look better than the stuff you see looking out your window.
People keep wanting more, though, stuff like Raytracing which still is being assisted by AI tools to make something as ancient as portal run at a decent framerate, which has a setting in many AAA games but feels less like an actual lighting effect and more like placebo.
What is the endgame for you guys? How is this not satisfying to you already?
I'm typing this because i feel that it's a bit silly that something as beautiful as Horizon Forbidden West is somehow "not close to CGI" and that "we're not there yet" even though the images on my screen clearly suggest that we are. You're gonna be seeing more of this stuff in the future too so why do we need all of these new graphical features? Everything looks great today. Why can't we invest all of that budget and time into developing something like VR or game physics, which would have more of an effect on our games than something silly like Raytracing?