Best graphics of E3 2016

Then you lems are clearly morons, we already know that but I didn't feel the need to point out the obvious.

Now don't act like HDR for Gears 4 is something special. Pretty much all games that have HDR rendering as early as UC1 on PS3 is capable of displaying the said effect on a HDR TV. Basically those games are already rendering the effect but the data is converted to SDR (standard range) to feed our non HDR TVs. All you gotta do is disable the SDR conversion and simply send the HDR signal to the HDR TV via HDMI 2.0 (Neo or future PS4 slim would have it) and there you have your HDR game. This is nothing more than a small patch update which you will see it become common practice. Another word when all said and done games like God of War, Horizon, Detroit or Spiderman are still far better looking than Gears4.

GOW looked insane and spider man looked like a movie. Amazing E3.

GOW vs Beowulf CGI

Truly without equal.

Horizon doesn't even match the ultra versions of Witcher 3 Battlefront, or BF1 (E3). It looks great, don't get me wrong - but lets stop acting like it is some kind of benchmark. That notion is laughable.

God of War 4, yet another bullshit e3 video, we'll inevitably see downgrades - and even then what we saw doesn't match Uncharted 4, which wasn't even seen to beat PC by Digital Foundry themselves. This won't be the game to finally beat out PC, although I'm not sure why the Sony Shills are even expecting that to ever happen.

You forget Spider-Man

@gpuking:

Don't downplay HDR.

The idea behind HDR is that it can provide a higher level of contrast between light and dark images on the screen to create a much more realistic image. That may not sound like a lot on paper, but in reality, it’s a pretty significant move. In fact, many in the industry believe HDR represents a significantly bigger leap in picture quality than UHD’s higher resolution.

-Digital trends. I'm sure if it was on Playstation you would be hyping HDR as the new standard of the world.

The rest of your post is exactly why I posted that rant. Just because the brochure says an acronym for some fancy technology doesn't mean it is at all equal to other iterations or even an improvement at all. If you have actually seen "true" HDR for yourself versus that horrendous rendering in older games, you wouldn't be spouting of nonsense. The PS3's HDR (and all other HDR rendering in games since ninteen-whenever) is a complete joke, utterly insignificant glorified filter, compared to the new HDR standard. The new HDR requires rec/BT. 2020, and WCG capable of the proper color depth and spectrum for the high contrast rations, as well as HDR formats the PS3 isn't capable of on either the hardware or software side. So no, your dinky PS3 doesn't output actual HDR even on a capable display. Even if it did, that doesn't mean your cute downplay of the technology was accurate. Currently, there are not very many games that support the new HDR standard, Rise of the Tomb Raider is one of them listed by Nvidia.

Yes, on an HDR10 compliant device it would be a software update, but the PS4 (and those games displayed at E3) isn't HDR compliant so that's irrelevant.

I'll wait until the imminent downgrade and release with proper less compressed footage reviewed by third parties to make a judgement. Gear's textures, models, and lighting would have to be pretty bad for any PS4 game to surpass it in realism if Gears has both 4k and HDR under it's belt.

Edit: It's also important to note the difference in art styles between the games. Gears isn't meant to look pretty.

@gpuking said:

@MonsieurX said:

@panda30 said:

@NathanDrakeSwag said:

God of War has the best graphics to date. Looks even better than Uncharted 4.

funny I thot it look much like Ryse you know the game you people say dont look better then UC4

You what?

Oh wow, didn't realize GOW looks better than Ryse' pre rendered cutscenes. SSM is a beast.

exept its not CGI and it dont look better

Pretty much as always. God of Bore and mechanical dinosaur shooters are not that interesting tbh. Sea of thieves and BF1 stole the show with graphics/art style/fun factor.

@gpuking said:

GOW vs Beowulf CGI

Truly without equal.

Now Now no CHEATING

good try -.o

Gears was far better between smoke / particles effects and all the destruction is far impressive

God of War looked pretty incredible. Much better than Horizon, so much that it made me wonder if God of War was on a Neo and Horizon on a regular PS4. Though now it has been suggested by Sony that they are both on PS4.

I'd say God of War looked the best at E3 out of everything I saw. Whether that's what it will look like as a final product is up in the air. Plus Kratos' running is not fun to watch, it's really hard to watch him shuffling.

I'm saying he needs to play more games to form such an opinion...

Like a few people have said... big releases all look great these days it's idiotic bleating over which one looks best it's all about gameplay at this point.

Just as well for Zelda that gameplay is important it has to be said... as the graphics are f***ing awful. Nothing 'quaint' about it, it's just incredibly dated though history tells us the gameplay at least will be pretty good.

yeaaa not inpress

and this is nothing but blur effect whit drops on your screen it dont compare to the amunt of particle effects on gears and breakable environments

Most everything I saw looked pretty darn impressive. Some of you guys gett a bit fucked in the head when your online.

The irony is palpable. GoW won't be playable either... Besides walking and hitting a button to begin the kill cinematic, So a little less gameplay than 1886... Which is the point. Too much time and money has gone into the engine that made 1886... They need to make at least one more game on it, and judging from that demo I'm assuming that engine isn't capable of making actual games. I guarantee Detroit will have more gameplay by far than GoW.

I'm pretty sure most people considered 1886 to be the prettiest game at E3 when it was announced... Let's watch as history repeats itself.

Oh, best graphics would still go to GoW as long as you're not expecting a great game.

Horizon without a doubt, especially when you consider its an open world game.

Not relevant to his opinion. Maybe he watched DriveClub gameplay just like Gears 4 and formed his opinion. That makes them on equal ground.

So, unless you have PLAYED Gears, youre not any more qualified than anyone else to determine something thats already subjective.

@RemyLabue: I am expecting a great game because SSM never dissapoints. And yes GoW will be an action adventure game. It will have far more gameplay.

So 1886 wasn't a disappointment?

@RemyLabue: That was developed by Ready at Dawn. SSM just helped getting the game running on the PS4. They had nothing to do with gameplay.

ok I get GOW but Horizon dont look any Special

1) 2d hair

2) characters dont look realistic as if there clothing its realistic and head almost cartoony

3) horrible facial animation

4) world looks good but empty w/ a structure here and there

it dont even look as good as last gen outside of better textures

@panda30 said:

@gpuking said:

GOW vs Beowulf CGI

Truly without equal.

Now Now no CHEATING

good try -.o

Gears was far better between smoke / particles effects and all the destruction is far impressive

Er, yeah Kratos looks far better than Ryse. Ryse almost looks like it has no lighting. Hell it doesn't even have volumetric light , but hey it's good for a launch title I guess.

Open World vs a Linear game and you are really wondering why facial details aren't the greatest?

If Horizon was linear it'd look just as good if not better than GOW.

yeaaa

Deadrising3 side character Open World full of Npc

witcher and its not even a main NPC

ff 15 another side character

sorry kid this is not last gen open world or not it look bad /w 2D hair

For the love of god people please stop replying to panda, that guy obviously has no clue or any technical competency on how to judge a game's graphics properly. Just ignore him so that he can stop polluting my thread with his nonsense.

Same should apply to you

yea because its made by Sony so I must accept it

your the one who dont know what gfx is or the technical aspect of it I can name you shit ton of graphical aspects in gears 4 demo can you name anithing on horizon

1) why so much wind is as if shes in a vortex and he's somewhere else look at his feathers and hair don't even move

2) her flat hair flaping non stop

3) over use depth field makes her bow/ hair blury

4) plants are not moving at all texture just floping similar to Minecrat Mods trees just in faster motion look at the plants behind her

obviously horizon look way better then minecraft but the plants move the same way its just a texture flopping back and forward

Go ahead,without any grammatical errors now

Based upon technical graphics, I was really impressed by what was shown off of Horizon.

But as for artstyle, I really love where Zelda is headed. It LOOKS like a videogame, which I think will help it out more long term rather than winning graphics king for a year. Even Windwaker looks good, and it's a game that came out in the early 2000s. How many other games from that era would you say stood the test of time?

If you're more technically competent than me then by all means, I'll shut up and listen to you. But if you're not, what makes you think people should ignore me? I'd wager I know more about graphics than you do. It's easy for someone to drop a drive by post like you do without anything meaningful to back it up, nor does it add to the discussion of the topic.

You are technically competent? All you do in your threads is usually post some screenshots,call it graphics king.

You get laughed at then quote few select cows(specially am-gamer) that agree with you. Rince and repeat

1) destructive environments

2) particles / dust blowing

3) the wind pushing stuff

it dint just look good but there was lots going on all over

@RemyLabue: I suppose you've been to the future and played GOW? This was a scripted event set up for the conference, the enemies jumping out on the linear path, all the way up the ending cinematic. was designed to peak interest. Neither you or anyone else knows how exactly the full game plays.

Horizon is definitely doing an absurd amount of technical feats especially for an open world game as large as The Witcher 3. So let's see

* Fully dynamic lighting with area lights

* High res volumetric lighting and volumetric shadowing

* Volumetric cloud fully 3d modeled with complex form shifting, volumetric fog

* Dynamic weather, changing time of day

* Immense draw distance with dense foliage and mountains

* High polycount for NPCs, half million polygons for a single Thundermaw and we have many giant robots like it roaming around in one time

* High quality Bokeh DOF, motion blur, UC4 level TAA all at 1080p with no shimmering

* Fluent animations on both the main character and robot dinos, much better and complex than TW3's.

I would have missed a few others but the quality of these effects and techniques is much higher than other open world games like TW3.

No, that's what ignorant hermits do.

A quick glance at your post history shows you've been calling every major Playstation 4 (and even a few PS3 ones, for christ sake) launches Graphics Kings over PC - something that has never come to pass. Sony fanboys are the worst kind of graphics fanatics. All you care about is graphics, but oddly enough not even the best graphics (That would be PC, as you already know.) and at a terrible 20-30 fps. A living contradiction.

You have no right to post about ignorance. You are a joke and a laughing stock, and I see why your threads are always closed now. Just if your other alt was not permed for threatening someones life....you would have more allies.

So like a last gen title such as killzone 2.

@panda30 said:

@emgesp said:

@panda30 said:

@emgesp said:

Horizon without a doubt, especially when you consider its an open world game.

ok I get GOW but Horizon dont look any Special

1) 2d hair

2) characters dont look realistic as if there clothing its realistic and head almost cartoony

3) horrible facial animation

4) world looks good but empty w/ a structure here and there

it dont even look as good as last gen outside of better textures

Open World vs a Linear game and you are really wondering why facial details aren't the greatest?

If Horizon was linear it'd look just as good if not better than GOW.

yeaaa

Deadrising3 side character Open World full of Npc

witcher and its not even a main NPC

ff 15 another side character

sorry kid this is not last gen open world or not it look bad /w 2D hair

Are all three even in engine footage like Horizon is?

@gpuking said:

Horizon is definitely doing an absurd amount of technical feats especially for an open world game as large as The Witcher 3. So let's see

* Fully dynamic lighting with area lights

* High res volumetric lighting and volumetric shadowing

* Volumetric cloud fully 3d modeled with complex form shifting, volumetric fog

* Dynamic weather, changing time of day

* Immense draw distance with dense foliage and mountains

* High polycount for NPCs, half million polygons for a single Thundermaw and we have many giant robots like it roaming around in one time

* High quality Bokeh DOF, motion blur, UC4 level TAA all at 1080p with no shimmering

* Fluent animations on both the main character and robot dinos, much better and complex than TW3's.

I would have missed a few others but the quality of these effects and techniques is much higher than other open world games like TW3.

this 2 are on most next gen games

( Fully dynamic lighting with area lights)- (High res volumetric lighting and volumetric shadowing)

your kidding right "and mountains"

( Immense draw distance with dense foliage and mountains)

REALLY? really!

( High polycount) half million?

this is 80,000 polys

and this is suposto be 500,000 LOL SONY YOU MAKE THIS PEOPLE BELIVE ANITHING

(High quality Bokeh DOF)

yeah I can see that its so over use i can't even see her from behind

( Fluent animations)

Wow Another Sony Make believe trailers the in game however

@emgesp said:

@panda30 said:

@emgesp said:

@panda30 said:

@emgesp said:

Horizon without a doubt, especially when you consider its an open world game.

ok I get GOW but Horizon dont look any Special

1) 2d hair

2) characters dont look realistic as if there clothing its realistic and head almost cartoony

3) horrible facial animation

4) world looks good but empty w/ a structure here and there

it dont even look as good as last gen outside of better textures

Open World vs a Linear game and you are really wondering why facial details aren't the greatest?

If Horizon was linear it'd look just as good if not better than GOW.

yeaaa

Deadrising3 side character Open World full of Npc

witcher and its not even a main NPC

ff 15 another side character

sorry kid this is not last gen open world or not it look bad /w 2D hair

Are all three even in engine footage like Horizon is?

Can we stop with the in engine crap already?

Here's a reminder:

I swear you are either delusional or just plain dumb for accusing me of having alts. Calling other people a joke when you couldn't even build a constructive rebuttal at why pc games should look better is beyond pathetic. If you think millions of others who don't automatically take for granted that pc games always look the best is the worst fanboy then you need to seriously re evaluate life.

To be fair, multiplatform do always look better on PC but exclusive is another story especially when Neo enters the equation soon.

@gpuking said:

@panda30 said:

@MonsieurX said:

@panda30 said:

@gpuking said:

For the love of god people please stop replying to panda, that guy obviously has no clue or any technical competency on how to judge a game's graphics properly. Just ignore him so that he can stop polluting my thread with his nonsense.

yea because its made by Sony so I must accept it

your the one who dont know what gfx is or the technical aspect of it I can name you shit ton of graphical aspects in gears 4 demo can you name anithing on horizon

Go ahead,without any grammatical errors now

1) destructive environments

2) particles / dust blowing

3) the wind pushing stuff

it dint just look good but there was lots going on all over

So like a last gen title such as killzone 2.

LMAOL so did Phantom dust in the first xbox but we talking much higher level of graphics here

Hmmm, as objectively as I can I gotta give it to Horizon. The facial animations on that NPC need some work and have drawn the ire of those desperate to have things to complain about, but overall that is a ridiculously good looking game from people who are really good at making visually insane games and have been working hard for a long time, I think a little over 4 years? What's really striking is not necessarily anything technical about the game but the artistry of it and the sweet sound design (never, ever underestimate the importance of good sound) and the fact that they are making some big strides not only in action-adventure, but in open-world design as well. We have only seen the early parts of the game too, later on there are cities covered in overgrowth that are purported to be the real visual spectacle.

Only other game that struck me was maybe Zelda. Technically Nintendo is doing the best they can with that hardware, so the sheer visual density is lacking, but the game makes up for it in other areas. The character art and animations are probably the best in any Zelda game. The weather/wind/fire/snow effects have a more pronounced effect on the world both visually and mechanically. The LOD is impressively handled with silhouettes and neat cloud/fog effects that look natural, add to the world's atmosphere and cover up flaws at the same time. All of this with more clever survival and physics-puzzler inspired gameplay than just about anything on the PC and that seems like a pretty great deal.

As for the other, GOW looks great but hasn't evolved as much as it needs to. GOW at this point is a relic of a bygone era of game design that was used to prop up spectacular set-pieces, they have clearly moved forward in some ways (what, a 3d camera?!) but seem to be a little stuck in the linear rut, need to see more of it.

Overall a lot of great looking games, an embarrassment of riches for Sony and to a lesser extent MS but they both had alot of visually stunning games, but Gears still looks like they don't know what to do with the lighting system. Anyone who votes for BF1 is either in need of psychiatric care or just really needs to feel good about PC gaming right now, for which you have my sympathies and my condolences, but not my delusions...it hardly looks any better than BF4.

@howmakewood said:

@emgesp said:

@panda30 said:

@emgesp said:

@panda30 said:

ok I get GOW but Horizon dont look any Special

1) 2d hair

2) characters dont look realistic as if there clothing its realistic and head almost cartoony

3) horrible facial animation

4) world looks good but empty w/ a structure here and there

it dont even look as good as last gen outside of better textures

Open World vs a Linear game and you are really wondering why facial details aren't the greatest?

If Horizon was linear it'd look just as good if not better than GOW.

yeaaa

Deadrising3 side character Open World full of Npc

witcher and its not even a main NPC

ff 15 another side character

sorry kid this is not last gen open world or not it look bad /w 2D hair

Are all three even in engine footage like Horizon is?

Can we stop with the in engine crap already?

Here's a reminder:

all thos are real time cinematic open world game

Zelda for me, i was absolutely blown away by the Art style and graphics.

Horizon is actual in game cut scenes. The in engine footage above wasn't part of actual gameplay, it was more of a tech demo.

Post videos then. Easy to cherry pick pics and compare them to actual game footage.

Deadrising3 cant do CGI because of this

all costums cary on to the cinematicit wold be inposible to do cgi

the ff15 girl in gameplay all real time