That's the price you have to pay when there is a thing like the Series S.
From this
To this
Even Fable looks better.
Metro 2039 looks from another dimension compared to this.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Graphical Fidelity I Expect This Gen
- Thread starter ResetEraVetVIP
- Start date
- NSFW
Even Fable looks better.
Metro 2039 looks from another dimension compared to this.
Represent.
Represent(ative) of bad opinions
ILL remains the best looking game after all showcases
analog_future
Resident Crybaby
Here direct feed feed press pics still reveal cgi looks miles aheads
It pretty much nails it. I didn't even know it was CGI to be honest in the reveal trailer
More here direct feed pics for press
this looks awesome.
WOW okay. Incredible. This may be a very significant case of YouTube compressions really letting a geme's visuals down. This one might just set a new bar when it comes out this Fall.
BlownUpRich
Member
Wolverine looks so underwhelming.
Bitstream
Member
Gears presented poorly in the trailer, but the direct feed shots show it was shitty youtube compression ruining the fidelity. Same likely applies for the rest of the games we've been seeing over the past week. Lots of impressive stuff coming up!
Now I just need to keep the cope train going and convince myself the RE:V trailer was in game.
Now I just need to keep the cope train going and convince myself the RE:V trailer was in game.
Msamy
Member
On consoles I am with you on pc stellar blade 2 is the best thing showed hopefully more of it at unreal fest
Killer8
Member
More here direct feed pics for press
Hard to tell where the line between bullshottery and Youtube compression ends.
For some reason the showcase footage even gave Marcus' boots some lifts.
Negotiator101
Member
Don't be silly when we all know how good Gears 5 looks, the Coalition are near the very top as far as graphics are concerned.
Bojji
Member
Those Wolverine pics as well (DOF etc.). Classic bullshots.
Shadow of the Tomb Raider (RT shadows, DLSS 4.5):
Last edited:
All of these "direct feed" pics are balant fake from gears to senua, etc. they are all fake.
It's sad this thread no longer sees obvious fakery as basic as this.
Bojji
Member
100% this.
H . R . 2
Member
explains alot
they should have pushed harder
I wish devs had the balls to go with 45fps/30fps and/or 1440p but give us something truly next-gen that would blow everyone away
Gears of War: E-Day Supports 60 FPS With Hardware Ray Tracing in Campaign, 120 FPS in Multiplayer
they should have pushed harder
I wish devs had the balls to go with 45fps/30fps and/or 1440p but give us something truly next-gen that would blow everyone away
Last edited:
Killer8
Member
Some direct feed pictures for Blood Message too. Others are on their website if you scroll down the page. These are better looking ones.
Easily doable real-time, reminds me of a next-gen Assassins Creed: Origins.
ResetEraVetVIP
Member
Halo look almost CGI in some screens.
Last edited:
rsouzadk
Member
It looks marvelous!More here direct feed pics for press
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
This gen graphics sacrificed at the alter of 60 fps
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Just finished watching the 30 minute Gears dev diary, im not exaggerating when i say it looks next gen only 5% of the time. i giffed the only two impressive scenes in this 30 minute video. see below.
- Poor usage of nanite. there is so much debris and rubble on the ground, and it simply doesnt look detailed.
- building details are equally mid. there are two shots in the 30 minute footage that look like nanite level of detail. 2.
- lumen is very weak here. so many different lighting conditions in this footage look absolutely bland.
- lumen reflections are not used well here. especially at night. cars should be far more reflective. ground too.
- fog is trash. very low quality volumetrics that make several levels look last gen. it doesnt have that cg look of other ue5 games.
- they said they rebuilt everything from scratch. well, good job, you made it look identical to previous games.
- shouldve started from gears 5 and upgraded from there. just a gigantic waste of time and resources.
this bullshot screenshot here shows what ue5 games look like. the gameplay doesnt even come close to this. notice the lack of volumetrics that are present here around light sources giving the image a cg look missing from gameplay.
- Poor usage of nanite. there is so much debris and rubble on the ground, and it simply doesnt look detailed.
- building details are equally mid. there are two shots in the 30 minute footage that look like nanite level of detail. 2.
- lumen is very weak here. so many different lighting conditions in this footage look absolutely bland.
- lumen reflections are not used well here. especially at night. cars should be far more reflective. ground too.
- fog is trash. very low quality volumetrics that make several levels look last gen. it doesnt have that cg look of other ue5 games.
- they said they rebuilt everything from scratch. well, good job, you made it look identical to previous games.
- shouldve started from gears 5 and upgraded from there. just a gigantic waste of time and resources.
this bullshot screenshot here shows what ue5 games look like. the gameplay doesnt even come close to this. notice the lack of volumetrics that are present here around light sources giving the image a cg look missing from gameplay.
BlownUpRich
Member
Absolutely! If Gears E-DAY had to run only at 30fps with a resolution of 1440p or even lower on Series X, we'd get double the visual throughput with vastly more destructibles & animations, the simulation fidelity would be of much higher quality & volume.
Not saying that what we have now isn't good, it's impressive actually (maybe I'm too generous here) but yeahhhh...
Balducci30
Member
Here's the thing with gears after watching the long video. It looks good yes, but at first glance does not look like a crazy leap from what it was before. Part of this is due to:
A. the fact that when it first came out the characters looked appropriate to the game at that level of graphics - now they are too absurd looking to fit into a super realistic looking game.
B. They chose to target 60 FPS (is that for series s too?)
C. I guess the environment is way more open?
The lighting looks great tho, that I will give.
A. the fact that when it first came out the characters looked appropriate to the game at that level of graphics - now they are too absurd looking to fit into a super realistic looking game.
B. They chose to target 60 FPS (is that for series s too?)
C. I guess the environment is way more open?
The lighting looks great tho, that I will give.
coachmcguirk91
Member
How does Fable look better than Forza with the same engine? Some of those gameplay shots were CGI level quality
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Asha's balls in my throat?
More here direct feed pics for press
Aside from Dom's sausage fingers, looks fuckin' awesome.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
this shot reminds me of the raid in Sicario.
Msamy
Member
I tell you the truth i didn't so for a second that Faye would look better than this but here we are, also this one take more time to make and build using UE5 advanced tech since the beginning, on other hand allamah pearce confirmed that when he joined Faye game 5 years ago game was steel on very early pre production with 6 people's working on it which mean SMS only truly start working on Faye after finishing ragnarok, unlike what we thought that Cory have full team working on it since 2018 beside other projects,,so less time than the coalition on gears, back to it it's also true dissapointed that smaller newly formed team like that's no moon studio make crossfire which is on close genre and same engine looks truly generation ahead than gears, ILL, stellar blade 2, crossfire, senua, exadus and star trek all use UE5 and looks better than gearsJust finished watching the 30 minute Gears dev diary, im not exaggerating when i say it looks next gen only 5% of the time. i giffed the only two impressive scenes in this 30 minute video. see below.
- Poor usage of nanite. there is so much debris and rubble on the ground, and it simply doesnt look detailed.
- building details are equally mid. there are two shots in the 30 minute footage that look like nanite level of detail. 2.
- lumen is very weak here. so many different lighting conditions in this footage look absolutely bland.
- lumen reflections are not used well here. especially at night. cars should be far more reflective. ground too.
- fog is trash. very low quality volumetrics that make several levels look last gen. it doesnt have that cg look of other ue5 games.
- they said they rebuilt everything from scratch. well, good job, you made it look identical to previous games.
- shouldve started from gears 5 and upgraded from there. just a gigantic waste of time and resources.
this bullshot screenshot here shows what ue5 games look like. the gameplay doesnt even come close to this. notice the lack of volumetrics that are present here around light sources giving the image a cg look missing from gameplay.
Last edited:
Msamy
Member
They heavily modefied and upgrade forza engine to run fable with whole different genre and better graphics , truly impressive work, that what I prefer developer to do instead of taking easy path
coachmcguirk91
Member
Yeah, there was a rumor that Playground was considering switching to UE5 a few years ago. Cool that they doubled down on their proprietary engine. Pure wizardry if their open world looks that good consistently
ResetEraVetVIP
Member
Where's the nanite in Gears? The dynamic lighting?
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
wow i thought this was ai at first.
viveks86
Member
So… I finally watched the Gears videos.
The fuck was that all about?
They got megalights in (you can see with the gun having multiple shadows in the very first shot and then later everywhere in the store (televisions, tubes etc) but they disabled everything else? No lumen or nanite, going by the videos.
The asset quality is absolutely atrocious and they have given up on GI for infinite direct lighting instead. Who thought that was a good idea?
Where are the textures on anything in the shot above? And what is going on with those bulbs?
Look at the shadow map resolution on the structure?
Am I I nitpicking a sniper scope shot? Well, perhaps. So let's zoom out a second later and it looks just as bad. There's a lot of geometry in the distance but without GI, there's just no sense of depth. Looks like a collage of 2D objects layered on top of each other:
And with such bright lighting outside, I'm not seeing any secondary bounce indoors at all. It's just a baked direct lightmap. Not even baked GI. Seems like the Sun itself is not a mega light, then.
Why are the press screenshots looking so different? Can't just be YouTube. Been a while since I'd seen this big a discrepancy. And the framerate seemed quite rough at times too. Isn't this just 4 months away?
The amount of destruction and interactivity seems really good and quite happy to see that. But that's the only nice thing I noticed apart from megalights. All the footage looks like the they are extremely low res and then upscaled all the way up (unlike the press screens)
Unless they showed the console version and the press shots are from a high end PC? If so that could explain the wide gap, especially if megalights is too heavy. But I don't think that was worth such a large compromise for this game. It's not cyberpunk
Or are they seriously going back to completely fabricated bullshots? I don't even…
Totally agree. Either we are seeing console footage versus high end PC screenshots or we are being completely taken for a ride with those press shots. The game looked nothing like most of that
The fuck was that all about?
They got megalights in (you can see with the gun having multiple shadows in the very first shot and then later everywhere in the store (televisions, tubes etc) but they disabled everything else? No lumen or nanite, going by the videos.
The asset quality is absolutely atrocious and they have given up on GI for infinite direct lighting instead. Who thought that was a good idea?
Where are the textures on anything in the shot above? And what is going on with those bulbs?
Look at the shadow map resolution on the structure?
Am I I nitpicking a sniper scope shot? Well, perhaps. So let's zoom out a second later and it looks just as bad. There's a lot of geometry in the distance but without GI, there's just no sense of depth. Looks like a collage of 2D objects layered on top of each other:
And with such bright lighting outside, I'm not seeing any secondary bounce indoors at all. It's just a baked direct lightmap. Not even baked GI. Seems like the Sun itself is not a mega light, then.
Why are the press screenshots looking so different? Can't just be YouTube. Been a while since I'd seen this big a discrepancy. And the framerate seemed quite rough at times too. Isn't this just 4 months away?
The amount of destruction and interactivity seems really good and quite happy to see that. But that's the only nice thing I noticed apart from megalights. All the footage looks like the they are extremely low res and then upscaled all the way up (unlike the press screens)
Unless they showed the console version and the press shots are from a high end PC? If so that could explain the wide gap, especially if megalights is too heavy. But I don't think that was worth such a large compromise for this game. It's not cyberpunk
Or are they seriously going back to completely fabricated bullshots? I don't even…
Just finished watching the 30 minute Gears dev diary, im not exaggerating when i say it looks next gen only 5% of the time. i giffed the only two impressive scenes in this 30 minute video. see below.
- Poor usage of nanite. there is so much debris and rubble on the ground, and it simply doesnt look detailed.
- building details are equally mid. there are two shots in the 30 minute footage that look like nanite level of detail. 2.
- lumen is very weak here. so many different lighting conditions in this footage look absolutely bland.
- lumen reflections are not used well here. especially at night. cars should be far more reflective. ground too.
- fog is trash. very low quality volumetrics that make several levels look last gen. it doesnt have that cg look of other ue5 games.
- they said they rebuilt everything from scratch. well, good job, you made it look identical to previous games.
- shouldve started from gears 5 and upgraded from there. just a gigantic waste of time and resources.
this bullshot screenshot here shows what ue5 games look like. the gameplay doesnt even come close to this. notice the lack of volumetrics that are present here around light sources giving the image a cg look missing from gameplay.
Totally agree. Either we are seeing console footage versus high end PC screenshots or we are being completely taken for a ride with those press shots. The game looked nothing like most of that
Last edited:
Bojji
Member
So… I finally watched the Gears videos.
The fuck was that all about?
They got megalights in (you can see with the gun having multiple shadows in the very first shot and then later everywhere in the store (televisions, tubes etc) but they disabled everything else? No lumen or nanite, going by the videos.
The asset quality is absolutely atrocious and they have given up on GI for infinite direct lighting instead. Who thought that was a good idea?
Where are the textures on anything in the shot above? And what is going on with those bulbs?
Look at the shadow map resolution on the structure?
Am I I nitpicking a sniper scope shot? Well, perhaps. So let's zoom out a second later and it looks just as bad. There's a lot of geometry in the distance but without GI, there's just no sense of depth. Looks like a collage of 2D objects layered on top of each other:
And with such bright lighting outside, I'm not seeing any secondary bounce indoors at all. It's just a baked direct lightmap. Not even baked GI. Seems like the Sun itself is not a mega light, then.
Why are the press screenshots looking so different? Can't just be YouTube. Been a while since I'd seen this big a discrepancy. And the framerate seemed quite rough at times too. Isn't this just 4 months away?
The amount of destruction and interactivity seems really good and quite happy to see that. But that's the only nice thing I noticed apart from megalights. All the footage looks like the they are extremely low res and then upscaled all the way up (unlike the press screens)
Unless they showed the console version and the press shots are from a high end PC? If so that could explain the wide gap, especially if megalights is too heavy. But I don't think that was worth such a large compromise for this game. It's not cyberpunk
Or are they seriously going back to completely fabricated bullshots? I don't even…
Totally agree. Either we are seeing console footage versus high end PC screenshots or we are being completely taken for a ride with those press shots. The game looked nothing like most of that
"Direct feed" screenshots are just classic bullshots we always got in the past, with perfect IQ and photoshop all over the place (now - AI filters), it's weird that people forgot about them and belived that these shots will represent in game graphics. Wolverine shots from Sony are the same.
That's why screengrabs from 4k YT videos are more accurate than press shots (the best things are screengrabs from HQ non YT videos).
Xtib81
Member
Pretty much yeah. Next gen should be a relief for everyone. We'll have visuals AND performance.
Negotiator101
Member
YT videos are not representative of playing the game on your preferred system, come on man let's not do this. As has been mentioned game is still in development and we're comparing console version to best PC version with everything turned on most likely.
Bojji
Member
But press bullshots don't represent the game even more...
At least gameplay video is from actual game.
Negotiator101
Member
We've always had that though but I can guarantee that when this arrives on October 6th it will look amazing and the PC version will look very close to those shots.
H . R . 2
Member
that's exactly what it was designed around. MW2019 did something similar with a scene that never made it into the final gamethis shot reminds me of the raid in Sicario.
but there's a big difference here , in the Sicario scene, the soldiers are mere silhouettes descending into the shadows and the darkness, signaling a major story development
this one, although impeccable, is only heavy on the visuals. I hope the director is brave enough to use symbolism and visual storytelling.
CrossFire is a dream come true though, we never had a combination of COD, GHOST RECON, SOCOM before.
and the fact that they focused on the characters instead of the militaristic aspects of the game gives me hope
P.S. remember the time when Sledgehammer said they wanted to create a 3rd person COD with a Vietnam setting. this might be the next best thing
Last edited:
H . R . 2
Member
am I the only one who thought that the guns [design, recoil, muzzle flash, etc] and the gunplay in GEARS were all absolutely pathetic
the cool one and the odd one out was the shotgun, but the rest were just horrible. when you focus on the character while shooting the gun, you'll notice an odd absence of impact that makes the whole scene immersion-breaking
I hate it when the guns are weak and the gunplay feels too light or unimpactful [Hitman Trilogy [the main pistols], Uncharted 4, even TLOU1]
the cool one and the odd one out was the shotgun, but the rest were just horrible. when you focus on the character while shooting the gun, you'll notice an odd absence of impact that makes the whole scene immersion-breaking
I hate it when the guns are weak and the gunplay feels too light or unimpactful [Hitman Trilogy [the main pistols], Uncharted 4, even TLOU1]
Last edited:
GymWolf
Member
Lol even fucking fortnite has better ripples than black flag...
Last edited:
H . R . 2
Member
the reason we are seeing a spike in visual fidelity of games, besides the impact of UE5, is the fact that the industry has now settled on its numbers.
4K, 60fps [anything beyond these 2 is negligable if not imperceptible, as per science]
by the end of this gen, they will have got their 60fps bullsh%t out of their bloody systems, so they wil , as they should, focus on visuals and graphics again otherwise SONY and MS and major studios shouldn't even bother with the next gen consoles
people were already disgruntled about the state of the current gen, lack of exclusives, broken promises and failed projects, the GaaS focus and the lack of next-gen innovations. and after GTAVI releases, people will learn to expect more from these companies
so it's in their interest to deliver on the next-gen promise this time around. even Hulst knows it, after many an abortive f#ckup he and Ryan had this gen. and with MS's new CEO refocusing on exclusives, we can hopefully expect healthy competition and more innovative games
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll