• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Behold! Photorealism and Impressive Graphics Next Gen Example Thread!

geordiemp

Member
Sep 5, 2013
11,920
25,017
1,010
UK
The True King:


Not if you fly close its not. Its a flight sim, looks great at height but not for gaming.

 

Hunnybun

Member
Jun 3, 2020
1,408
1,694
360
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.

Not for Sony games, which are usually by far the best looking games anywhere, other things being equal.

Personally I think it's high time console games became 60fps as standard. 30fps just isn't an acceptable experience, it ruins the visuals completely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alabtrosMyster
Mar 28, 2021
2,293
3,973
490
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.

Not if you fly close its not. Its a flight sim, looks great at height but not for gaming.
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
 
Last edited:

geordiemp

Member
Sep 5, 2013
11,920
25,017
1,010
UK
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

Flight sim is itgs own category and not representative of next gen gaming is it which this thread is about ? Thats my point, its a bad example and there is nothing exciting ina flight sim graphically from a general gaming perspective as it only works looking at a long distance background.
 
Last edited:

VFXVeteran

Professional Victim (Vetted)
Nov 5, 2019
5,461
12,436
825
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

Member
Sep 5, 2013
11,920
25,017
1,010
UK
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.

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.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jonnyp

VFXVeteran

Professional Victim (Vetted)
Nov 5, 2019
5,461
12,436
825
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.
geordiemp 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.

The technology in FS2020 is completely relevant to any game today. Games may not need procedural placement of objects while reading a texture map but there are many other things that games need in that sim. We can take the lighting as the main example.
 

Nhranaghacon

Banned
Sep 15, 2020
626
729
495
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!
 
Last edited:

VFXVeteran

Professional Victim (Vetted)
Nov 5, 2019
5,461
12,436
825
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!
FS2020 is a genuine flight simulator. It's not a game.

I'm currently studying for my pilot's license and the value is through the roof for what it was designed to do.

As you said, it's not a game so people won't view it as one - however, it is a realtime application which graphics leap over every other game out to date. It's also very demanding by requiring GBs of data to be streamed in. UE5 demo's data streaming requirements pale in comparison for example.

I just hope developers look at how they implemented their shaders and lighting as the combination overall rendering quality has never been seen before.
 

Arachnid

Member
Jan 31, 2019
1,688
2,922
420
Yes, native 4k 60 fps during gameplay too. It's DICE's new frostbite hair tech. They showed it way back in 2019.

Finally, good looking long hair in video games. I'm tired of the shoulder length and pixie cut cop outs because devs cant animate.
 

Guilty_AI

Member
Apr 12, 2020
5,113
10,404
770
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!
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
 
Apr 11, 2016
1,423
1,654
510
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

yeah, nxgamer did something similar in his 2020 graphics top. He somehow took all the sony exclusives and put them above (i for one am shocked) it, saying it doesnt have any gameplay besides taking off and landing. We're gonna skip how gameplay was the reason for its graphical prowess ranking and just laugh at the notion that a game which simulates every detail of the act of flying an aeroplane, together with all the atmospheric conditions - aka the most sophisticated gaming genre in existence - the simulation, is being relegated to just taking off and landing or flying high to get points. What its actually happening here is you're talking on the most console vein injecting forum in existence about a PC only game. So its only natural for console folk to gather and express opinions about things they know nothing in order to prop their lord and master sony
 
Last edited:

Nhranaghacon

Banned
Sep 15, 2020
626
729
495
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

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.
 
Last edited:

NahaNago

Member
Aug 29, 2014
4,802
1,867
600
Flight simulator is fine. I'd label it more of an experience than a game I guess. Need more types of those games. I always wondered why we didn't get more experience type games simulators. A simulator to experience parts of the world. You could get educated on so many things this way.

On the photorealism next gen example I always thought it was a mistake that Sony didn't give great demo like examples of the power of the ps5 versus ps4 at the start of the gen.
 

Guilty_AI

Member
Apr 12, 2020
5,113
10,404
770
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.
 
Last edited:

Nhranaghacon

Banned
Sep 15, 2020
626
729
495
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?


Most engine instruments are barely utilized - particularly if you are flying in good weather.

After 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.

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.

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.
 

Guilty_AI

Member
Apr 12, 2020
5,113
10,404
770
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?

I'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

Most engine instruments are barely utilized - particularly if you are flying in good weather.
What, you're the type to just disable internal damage then fly with 100% throttle all the way?

After 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.
30 years of completely worthless experiences then

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.
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.

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.
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.

Troll. Ignore my threads and posts. I won't be here long.​

I'll make sure to take notes
 
Last edited:

Nhranaghacon

Banned
Sep 15, 2020
626
729
495
I'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
Take notes then, and continue inferring a score system is not important by dancing around whether it in fact has a score system or not

Continue going on about other flight sims when all I've ever made a point about was Flight Simulator and it's score system.

And continue pretending it doesn't take nearly 1,000 dollars in flight peripherals to fully utilize Flight Simulator in a meaningful way as a flight sim.

You aren't fooling anyone who has modicum of respect for gaming as a nuanced competitive and meaningful pastime. Flight Simulator once mastered boils down to nothing
more than knowing exactly when to flip the gas pump on and off mid flight even with all peripherals at your disposal.

The fact that it's depth as a simulator and in particular - a game - is insistent on you owning those peripherals - speaks volumes about the level of gameplay disposed within.

Everything else is essentially non-challenging and the game becomes worthless as a "game" once Mastered.

Had the graphics engine not gotten a serious overhaul that see's it heads and shoulders above google maps in sheer visual splendor, then no one would really care about flight simulator
outside those with a sheer curiosity that had not played flight simulator. And yes I'm sure there are thousand of adult's in charge of their fantasy aircraft, pretending that flipping most instruments
really make the game worthwhile, ignoring that outside of their own fantasy, barely bolstered by the actual gameplay - most instruments are
meaningless unless you put on your pretend hat and start fantasizing like a 10 year old.

Nothing wrong with that, but millions and millions of gamers would rather spend their time getting immersed in a game that actually has surprising non standard
gratifying outcomes and diverse gameplay mechanics.

Even the most masterful pilot who refuses to ignore the score system in Flight Simulator, will have multiple 3 minute stints during flight
where they do nothing but look out the window.

And I say that from experience. Your free time to gaze out the window and fiddle with camera angles increases the more
you ignore the score systems and perfect flight stature. 15 minutes of barely adjusting altitude/rudders so one can look out the window makes gaming a dull time.

But continue leveraging what amount's to blanket (false I might add) statements and insults and I will continue happily pointing out Flight Simulator has never been a go to
for most Hard Core PC Gamers, let alone gamers in general. Xwing on the other hand..
 
Last edited:

muteZX

Banned
Jul 11, 2019
314
411
290
flying over google maps, average sim, zero game, keep high, dont touch ground, AMEL pilot licence.
 

RJMacready73

Member
Jun 25, 2020
1,291
2,558
435
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


I dunno mate but you and I musta played 2 different games because I was consistently wow'd by TLOU2's visuals, heck each new level was a visual masterpiece superseding the one before it and the internal lighting was exemplary
 
  • Like
Reactions: Krappadizzle

nkarafo

Member
Nov 30, 2012
16,815
8,686
1,070
To me "photorealistic" means something that can fool the eye that it could be real.

So far only Flight Simulator has done that for me. And some replay shots of a few racing games. Usually in lower-res videos or gifs that can hide imperfections.

Fingers crossed so nobody starts posting TLOU2 pics.
 

Stuart360

Member
Sep 9, 2018
10,421
25,563
770
Not if you fly close its not. Its a flight sim, looks great at height but not for gaming.
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.
 

Nhranaghacon

Banned
Sep 15, 2020
626
729
495
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.
It still hasn't officially commenced when you look at what Phil Spencer and the other team have said.


If games are not exclusive or "Generation defining" on a next gen Ecosystem then this specifically means - games have not been built from the ground up
to take full advantage of the hardware - meaning those same games will look nearly exactly the same on last gen hardware as they are crossplatform games specifically tailored
to last gen standards.

Next Gen gaming will not in fact be viable on older hardware which is why Exclusives, built from the ground up to take advantage of the latest hardware - will not see the light of day on either system until 2022 and afterwards.

The games that have launched now only see modest improvements due to mainly SSD capability - but when compared to the one X for instance - Image detail remains consistent across platforms.

So continue believing Next Gen gaming is here now - while ignoring the countless threads and in fact news articles with the CEOS of both manufacturers popping up insisting that next gen does not in fact begin until 2022 as has been stated specifically by Spencer and the competition.

You can say "But exclusive software does not mean what you're saying" but it in fact does. And nearly all gamers will happily disagree with you.

In fact, any example you may give counter ignores that I have in fact already stated the SSD has amounted to the most staggering change due almost singularly to loadtimes.

RTX Implementation on these crossplatform games has been cited as not nearly impressive or even worth the performance hit in many instances - and No one is looking at first
gen Crossplatform gaming currently, and walking away saying wow that's some next gen visuals.

It's just not happening. And I'm happy, particularly as a PC gamer - to wait and see what 2022 and beyond will bring considering both manufacturers have stated "genre defining exclusive titles" or - titles
that actually utilize and are built for the hardware - exist. Right now, we have a hand full of games to choose from, all built for last gen then scaled up for new hardware.

That is not next gen gaming. That is Crossgen gaming with RTX Features tacked on and zero Load-Times. Blistering Framerates and Zero Load-Times due to an SSD have been normal to PC gamers for over 18 years now.

Name one game currently, that only exists on the latest console platform because it actually takes advantage of and is too technologically brilliant to exist on the previous platform. You can't.

And yes, that is the metric of true next gen gaming. Not some cheaply tacked on RTX feature hardly built from the ground up to utilize the hardware currently.
 
Last edited:

BusierDonkey

Gold Member
Sep 21, 2018
3,999
10,946
665
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.

Do you really think he cares? People have been digging up the absolute worst images of games since the dawn of video games in an effort to shit on "the other guys"

You can make any game look terrible if you go out of your way.
 

Elog

Member
Aug 28, 2016
776
3,125
520
I both find Flightsimulator very impressive and not impressive at the same time. In a simplistic way game environments can be broken down into three categories:

1) Static environment that you look at up-close
2) Medium distance dynamic environment such as walking in a forest filled with life
3) Long distance landscapes etc

Games have for quite some time been able to handle 1) and 3) really well. It is 2) that is the real challenge to do well due to the ability to move between 2) and 1) dynamically which pushes both the texture and geometry requirements through the roof. Add how light/shadows change dynamically and NPCs/animals with animation requirements and the complexity continues upwards.

By design, FS takes out 2) completely. FS is a close-up of a static environment (with Sun as a light source of course) and long-distance landscapes. As Geordiemp shows, if you try to fly at 2) range the game looks bad immediately.

And in that sense I can see the argument that the good looks of FS is kind of a given now that we have a few more TFLOPs and RT. It is virtual environments that do 2) well that impress me - that is where the real challenge is.
 
Oct 7, 2019
1,644
2,411
465
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.
 

Elog

Member
Aug 28, 2016
776
3,125
520
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.
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.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: existensmaximum

Ryu Kaiba

Member
Sep 12, 2018
1,402
2,229
515
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.
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.