scott you realize youre arguing with someone who doesnt even understand what anti-aliasing is. based on his lack of knowledge when it comes to, well anything, im pretty sure hes like 12
when you report to "show me a roadside texture as good as this", youre owned. pcars overall looks like shit.
So you can't do it then? Better luck next time... So that's you owned then.... You may now proceed to come up with some bullshit logic about how it's me that's owned and not you.
Have a nice day.
PCars = traditional texture maps. DriveClub = physically based material pipeline. Not even a close call.
I'm sick of noobs touting PBR like it's the next coming of god, yes it's nice but it doesn't automatically make games that use it better looking then games that don't.
That grass, wall and tree textures look like shit. Typical problem with Drive Club, the assets are low quality.
PBR will become the standard. It is in fact the future of real time graphics. Pretty much every game that hasn't got ties to last gen consoles utilizes it.
You seem stuck in 2004 with you thinking that flat textures>materials. We have to move on at some point, and taking photos of grass with sticks just doesn't cut it.
Grass is shit you say? In context of Pcars it's pretty sensational.
DriveClub is simply a more graphically advanced game on every single level. Pcars is pre baked in comparsion to DriveClub. You love to call people noobs but never actually prove anything for yourself. Just lots of Doffed images of close up cars and flat textures. That just doesn't cut it, times have changed.
5ive Club is a game with old generation assets coupled with a next gen lighting engine.
scott you realize youre arguing with someone who doesnt even understand what anti-aliasing is. based on his lack of knowledge when it comes to, well anything, im pretty sure hes like 12
Hahaha... you can be quiet.. owned you more then enough times..... I have more then enough power to run all the AA I need at my resolution.
when you report to "show me a roadside texture as good as this", youre owned. pcars overall looks like shit.
So you can't do it then? Better luck next time... So that's you owned then.... You may now proceed to come up with some bullshit logic about how it's me that's owned and not you.
Have a nice day.
PCars = traditional texture maps. DriveClub = physically based material pipeline. Not even a close call.
I'm sick of noobs touting PBR like it's the next coming of god, yes it's nice but it doesn't automatically make games that use it better looking then games that don't.
That grass, wall and tree textures look like shit. Typical problem with Drive Club, the assets are low quality.
PBR will become the standard. It is in fact the future of real time graphics. Pretty much every game that hasn't got ties to last gen consoles utilizes it.
You seem stuck in 2004 with you thinking that flat textures>materials. We have to move on at some point, and taking photos of grass with sticks just doesn't cut it.
Grass is shit you say? In context of Pcars it's pretty sensational.
DriveClub is simply a more graphically advanced game on every single level. Pcars is pre baked in comparsion to DriveClub. You love to call people noobs but never actually prove anything for yourself. Just lots of Doffed images of close up cars and flat textures. That just doesn't cut it, times have changed.
5ive Club is a game with old generation assets coupled with a next gen lighting engine.
Please stop scaring me with your stupid shit. DriveClub has higher quality assets than any other racer in existance. That includes car models, track detail, texture mapping, lighting, object detail, foliage, reflections, refractions, particles, rain physics, etc. And then the things that PCars completely lacks such as volumetric cloud formations, light deffusion, real time global illumination, all on a deffered renderer. All light sources cast shadows and tunnels etc are composed of accurate bounce light. I really don't know what to say.
I could literally show you an image or a gif proving everything I listed the game has.
when you report to "show me a roadside texture as good as this", youre owned. pcars overall looks like shit.
So you can't do it then? Better luck next time... So that's you owned then.... You may now proceed to come up with some bullshit logic about how it's me that's owned and not you.
Have a nice day.
PCars = traditional texture maps. DriveClub = physically based material pipeline. Not even a close call.
I'm sick of noobs touting PBR like it's the next coming of god, yes it's nice but it doesn't automatically make games that use it better looking then games that don't.
That grass, wall and tree textures look like shit. Typical problem with Drive Club, the assets are low quality.
PBR will become the standard. It is in fact the future of real time graphics. Pretty much every game that hasn't got ties to last gen consoles utilizes it.
You seem stuck in 2004 with you thinking that flat textures>materials. We have to move on at some point, and taking photos of grass with sticks just doesn't cut it.
Grass is shit you say? In context of Pcars it's pretty sensational.
DriveClub is simply a more graphically advanced game on every single level. Pcars is pre baked in comparsion to DriveClub. You love to call people noobs but never actually prove anything for yourself. Just lots of Doffed images of close up cars and flat textures. That just doesn't cut it, times have changed.
5ive Club is a game with old generation assets coupled with a next gen lighting engine.
Please stop scaring me with your stupid shit. DriveClub has higher quality assets than any other racer in existance. That includes car models, track detail, texture mapping, lighting, object detail, foliage, reflections, refractions, particles, rain physics, etc. And then the things that PCars completely lacks such as volumetric cloud formations, light deffusion, real time global illumination, all on a deffered renderer. All light sources cast shadows and tunnels etc are composed of accurate bounce light. I really don't know what to say.
I could literally show you an image or a gif proving everything I listed the game has.
Just no....
I see you're in denail. The sad part is, if this was on PC, you would straight up agree. Okay then, name 2 racers apart from Project Cars (since you have already established that you think that is king) with higher quality assets than DriveClub.
I don't have to name more then 1... you stated 'then any other racer' PCars deffo smacks it all the place when it comes to textures, some shaders, shadow resolution, reflection resolution...... Bit of a stupid comment you made there.
Problem with Drive Club is that the second you stop racing and the motion blur is no longer there to blur everything you start to see just how bad some parts of it really are.
You and I are seeing a very different game by the looks of it, it has a very nice lighting engine and I'll never deny that but the best lighting engine in the world won't make your shit looking assets look amazing.
Is project cars perfect? No it isn't but as complete package it's far superior to Drive Club.
You could argue that I've posted the worst Drive Club shots I could find if you want but it doesn't change the fact that the game can and does look that bad while there's no motion blur.
I don't have to name more then 1... you stated 'then any other racer' PCars deffo smacks it all the place when it comes to textures, some shaders, shadow resolution, reflection resolution...... Bit of a stupid comment you made there.
Problem with Drive Club is that the second you stop racing and the motion blur is no longer there to blur everything you start to see just how bad some parts of it really are.
You and I are seeing a very different game by the looks of it, it has a very nice lighting engine and I'll never deny that but the best lighting engine in the world won't make your shit looking assets look amazing.
Is project cars perfect? No it isn't but as complete package it's far superior to Drive Club.
You could argue that I've posted the worst Drive Club shots I could find if you want but it doesn't change the fact that the game can and does look that bad while there's no motion blur.
You can't find one so you resort to posting the worst shots possible of DriveClub. You do realize that some of those are when the track details are still loading before the race and aren't fully loaded? I could take the best looking games on PC and find shit shots of it.
There's one of Crysis 3 showing less than stellar visuals. But so what, that doesn't change the fact that the game can look like this..
The fact of the matter is that DriveClub beats Project Cars visually and technically in most cases. If you want to argue that some road side texture looks better in your opinion, then so be it. That is really subjective. But out of interest, what shaders does Pcars beat DriveClub in?
I can't even find gameplay of PCars still shots because all of them are close up car shots. You somehow suggest that PCars has next gen assets for a racer and DriveClub has last gen. Bull shit. But hey, whatever, if that's what you think, then okay.
Those shots of Drive Club are easy to replicate in pretty much any part of the game.
No the fact of the matter is you said Drive Club has higher quality then 'any other racer in existence' and now you say 'in most cases' Back peddling much.
Shader wise? Reflections, rain looks better in Project Cars, sun shafts, paint work... blah...blah...
Problem with Project Cars is that there's so many builds of the game you don't know if what you're looking it is the latest build or an old one but I'll help you out.
Couple of small video from a more recent build ( Although not the latest )
http://a.pomf.se/jfnbmo.webm
http://a.pomf.se/rpdpae.webm
http://a.pomf.se/ytljok.webm
http://a.pomf.se/bnitmu.webm
http://a.pomf.se/valsrb.webm
How about some .Gifs from the latest build?
And please remember that Project Cars IS NOT EVEN FINISHED YET.... They add higher quality assets, cars, effects and assets to it almost weekly now ready for its March release.
no reason to even exclude pcars, the assets in that game are absymal
Post a pic of them.
Gallery
lol
Somehow these are last gen assets in racers. But PCars is the next generation?? It shouldn't even be debatable. I think scatteh needs to remind himself what racing games last gen looked like this close up to the environment. Also note that the lighting and shading of the leaves are in real time too. It changes depending on the lighting condition.
Why does everything look like it's covered in Vaseline? And 2D copy and pasted foliage...LOL... Picture 7 and 9 show that really bad! Where's the AF? And if you look at the distance in most of the shots it looks god awful.
And the last picture, bottom left.. that grass texture and blurry ass road texture is next gen to you? lol
Shot number 3 also shows how basic the games AO can be... the white barricade especially looks disjointed from the environment.
PC Herms always talking about how Consoles are "holding back the PC" ..and then show countless screens of graphically superior games. Isn't that oxymoron? The first image you posted (while fan boyish) shows that the PS4 is BETTER than the PS3 in terms of visuals. That is the point of these consoles.. to surpass their predecessors, not compete with an ever changing PC platform. dumb dumbs..
no reason to even exclude pcars, the assets in that game are absymal
Post a pic of them.
Gallery
lol
Somehow these are last gen assets in racers. But PCars is the next generation?? It shouldn't even be debatable. I think scatteh needs to remind himself what racing games last gen looked like this close up to the environment. Also note that the lighting and shading of the leaves are in real time too. It changes depending on the lighting condition.
Why does everything look like it's covered in Vaseline? And 2D copy and pasted foliage...LOL... Picture 7 and 9 show that really bad! Where's the AF? And if you look at the distance in most of the shots it looks god awful.
And the last picture, bottom left.. that grass texture and blurry ass road texture is next gen to you? lol
Shot number 3 also shows how basic the games AO can be... the white barricade especially looks disjointed from the environment.
The game itself does indeed have lackluster AA and AF. But what you seem to forget is that racers have different rendering focus points to that of a FPS or TPF for example. Environments are normally scaled back compared to other genres to focus on the cars and the track ahead. You will find that every racer has 2D foliage, but that detailed that reacts differently to different lighting situations? In order to have a solid argument, you have to compare similar conditions in other games of the same genre. A close up to a tree detail in PCars would do it. In racing games, the whole image makes up what you see and you drive past it fast. So devs tend to leave out small track details. In DriveClub, they have went to a lot of detail in rendering the environment more so than any other racer. There is always going to be nitpicking, but you are saying it's bad when all you have shown of PCars is the cars and gifs.
DriveClub is starting off with a more advanced baseline with a deffered render, real time GI and physically based shading. This in itself is a GPU hungry task and when you factor in that every raindrop, spark, piece of kicked up dirt is a real time particle, all reflections are real time screen space, dynamic cloud system and rendering that much detail in environments, It becomes very impressive. You clearly haven't played the game. When you play it and see everything in action in real time, it impresses to say the least. When the volumetric light shines through the 3D clouds (thatform dynamically btw). It's a game that has really truly impressed me. Find all the worst pics in the world, but two can play that game with any game in existance. Youy have every right to say PCars looks better, but it isn't a patch in terms of technical graphical fidelity.
Oh the world of the uneducated
I have played Drive Club, just as I have most of PS4's block busters... but that's the first time I've touched it for over a month...... It'll be in the second hand shop soon.
It still looks like ass and not a patch like the trailers portrayed it to look with perfect AA and AF.
The game won't run on other 4 consoles, and 3rd party devs want to make the game as much profitable as possible. However, every gen there are always games released exclusively on PC that look better than anything out there in their own respective genre or in some cases overall.
Meaning to say, PC exclusive = less profit, Multiplats = more profit.
Sounds like profit holding back graphical leap, not consoles.
After Ryse's debacle, Crytek is in financial stress. http://venturebeat.com/2014/07/25/crytek-secures-capital-as-it-finally-comes-clean-about-its-financial-issues/
With the PC's Crysis 1/Warhead, Crytek was expanding.
Are volumetric clouds that big a deal still? Even FSX from 2006 has had dynamic volumetric clouds which was important in every flight sim. You'd thing every game engine should have them by now.
Damn those DC pics just totally annihilated anything PC has to offer at this stage, its so technically advanced Pcars looks almost a gen worse. Also it would be more accurate to say dirty PC pirates scumbags are holding back the graphics, otherwise you would see more devs investing on AAA budget PC exclusives than just Star Citizen Alone as of now.
Damn those DC pics just totally annihilated anything PC has to offer at this stage, its so technically advanced Pcars looks almost a gen worse. Also it would be more accurate to say dirty PC pirates scumbags are holding back the graphics, otherwise you would see more devs investing on AAA budget PC exclusives than just Star Citizen Alone as of now.
Indeed. PS4 is current gen 8 console graphics king and now this!!! :o
I personally don't think that these consoles are holding back pc games right now, the most cpu intensive games tend to be pc exclusives anyway. Almost all console games run at somewhat stable 30 fps at 1080p or lower res. When the devs target those resolutions and frame rates, the core assets of the games are usually pretty good. PC gamers should almost be thankful that console gamers don't demand 1080p at 60 fps from all games, which would really mean less detailed core assets and probably worse AI as well for most multiplats.
Fanboy hyperbole aside..... Both DC and PC look great to me. It's just that the weather effects of DC puts it over the edge. Obviously, I have a bias because I'm a sucker for weather effects.
That's a given, consoles are indeed doing so by definition. A console is a computer, one that cannot be upgraded(hardware-wise), and one that is "trapped" in time. The PC platform advances every day. Each has their pros and cons.
You now the beahvior the fanboys like gpuking and m3dude are displaying would have put a ban a few years ago but it seems insulting people is ok now.
So let me make it simple dear m3dude, you are either a troll that tries to get a reaction or extremely BUTTHURT at pc's superiorIty and immature.
Gpuking? You are an idiotic fanboy that needs to get a life you cant study computer science or whatever else you pretend you study and actually defend a japanesse console made by westerners like amd which makes pc hardware and think that the said console which is made by budget parts as you can see from the plastic alone, is better and more powerfull than pcs.
Even amd has stated that the hardware they got for pc are far superior than anything on the next gen consoles. Even sony has admited that the hardware in ps4 is outdated.
You keep posting the same pictures for shadowfall, when other interior pictures that make the game ugly can easilly be found.
SONY screwed up with ps3, HORRIBLE achircture, this time both consoles use x86 architecture and cheap pc hardware, everyone keeps bashing ms because xbone is weak. So you think sony didnt screw up and their hardware is not weak because they do a better job than xbone? How so? ms is a huge corperation with the best engineers they screwed up, infact sony did so last year.
Ps4 might be something big for you and the other sony damage control drone force but in reallity its just a decent console and both consoles are vastly inferior than pc.
It is quite sad when a the 120$ right now 750 ti can run games just as well as ps4 and both consoles have weak tablet cpus.
The tc makes a fine point, nothing on ps3/x360 reached crysis from 2007 and most games were held back, for example ps3s low ram is the reason why most games had doors closing behind you to load the next area into the available resources.
Now we finally got new hardware and the games you are seeing like the order and uncharted would have been possible YEARS ago in older pc hardware.
This new generation isnt a big jump. I played infamous and it doesnt look anywhere near as good as you make it to be.
Uncharted 4 didnt look as good as the trailer and it wont in the final game juding by naughty dogs history. The game is aimed at 60 fps so it cant be the best looking game ever on the hardware it runs on. Then again back in 2009 you fanboys tried to argue uncharted 2 beats crysis, so screw logic.
The order has shown very little gameplay to maintain the lie of "HUR DUR CGI VISUALS" and i am sure when its out you will see alot of blurry textures in the backgrouns and perfomance will go under 30 fps, they use screen effects and antialising with a "cinematic" resolution because the game couldnt maintain a good framerate at 1080p apparently (you can damage control that one but look at digital foundry and evil within, obviously the game doesnt render in 1080p as sony tells you)
Its not like the order is a big open world game or 60 fps game its corridor after corridor with doors closing behind you, no physics not much interactivity and utterly scripted.
Obviously crysis isnt on par with next gen games, its a 7 soon to be 8 year old game but the fact it still has so many things that look good and how advanced the physics and the foliage/water are, kinda proves how limited hardware limits what you can put in the game.
There is no point in even making an argument, the consoles have weak hardware and a cheap pc can easilly outperfom them, any multipaltform game has better graphics on pc. So what you even arguing? Consoles hold graphics back, but i am more cocerned about limited ai, physics and simplistic level design that was hold back by old consoles rather graphics. I could go on but you see the point.
Does your butt hurt so much it wakes you up in the middle of the night lol?
I never said PS4 is stronger than all the PCs out there, I'm just saying the games coming out or out on PS4 are better looking. I'm sure at some point down the line there will be a new "Crysis 4" type of game hermits would celebrate over, but till then The Order and DriveClub are the Kings.
@aroxx_ab: Nope it looks average, i am actually dissapointed from the visuals as i am with the game, its not like its hard to make a racing game look reallistic.
:@gpuking:Funny because you are infamous for having nothing other to do with your life than coming here and damage controling for sony, then you act as if i am the one who is "butthurt"
"but till then The Order and DriveClub are the Kings."
I find it sad you think driveclub is a graphics king game, if anything it is dissapoint in every way possible and the order hasnt come out yet.
@scottpsfan14: First of all you "skimmed past" my post without reading it but you quote the whole thing and wasted space in the forum
Thats hypocritical thing number one
Then you say that shader and GI is of the charts in those games when infact the exact opposite is true, you say that they make the game photoreallistic which is insanelly faceapalm worthy since its the exact opposite.
Thtas hypocritical thing number two.
Then you talk about excess blood and other effects, which DUH its what CONSOLES GAMES LIKE THE ORDER DO TO LOOK "PHOTOREALLISTIC" as for godrays? Something tells me you are mad because you cant have em, just like far cry 4 on ps4 lost its godrays.
By your logic arma 3 that doesnt have all those effects but tries to look reallistic is the best looking game ever.
".It's all the subtleties that count."
Thats like saying that cod is the best looking game ever since it has the most subtle little details in the enviroment and art direction. Such as how detailed the weapons are, the gear on the characters, the objects in the room the "cineamtic" shadows.
You call me a hermit and talk about "shinny" when we were the ones who said that blur, lens flare and bloom effects are stupid yet you console morons thought that those things were making a game impressive.
Thats hyporcitical thing number three
All the posts i see from you is NONSENSE damage controling sony.
"Graphics mods and shit are artificial embelishments and nothing more. The core lighting engines and how finely tuned they are is what counts."
So you are saying that enb mods and that stuff are not making the game look better?
"You act like people on PC have had visuals like DriveClub or Infamous for years when in fact, they have only had 360 ports."
Blurry visuals with bloom and tricks that make the game look better than it is, you know like driveclub does. But ofcoruse you dont remember how you fanboys picked games that use tricks like killzone 2 and claimed they were the best looking thing ever.
Also yes we did have things like driveclub and infamous for years, maybe not alot of years, but we still did. You say the games we had were x360 ports which is wrong becuase bf3 on consoles run on low settings and crysis 3 even on the lowest settings does look better than the console versions.
So essentially we did have 1080p, far superior textures, more detail on enviroments, better lighting, more shadows etc etc. The effects that games use now like FXAA MSAA, HBAO and advanced physics pc had them for years.
So thats hypocritical thing number four
I dont think driveclub or infamous are true next gen games, they are made too fast and obviously dont blow away what we had on pc the last 2 years. Maybe the order is a next gen game, maybe more next gen games come in 2016, but so far this "next gen" is highly unimpressive.
It might look like a big step to you, but if you were playing the same games we played on pc, you would see that they look far better than the console versions and the diffirence between the so called "next gen" only games isnt that big. But i find it funny that all the comparisons are made on ps4 and not on xbone, which proves that you are a fanboy or that you think that games on xbone do not look impressive enough, but hey your ps4's games do apparently, thats where you draw the line...well we draw the line further they have to look better than that and they can on pc.
@aroxx_ab: Nope it looks average, i am actually dissapointed from the visuals as i am with the game, its not like its hard to make a racing game look reallistic.
:@gpuking:Funny because you are infamous for having nothing other to do with your life than coming here and damage controling for sony, then you act as if i am the one who is "butthurt"
"but till then The Order and DriveClub are the Kings."
I find it sad you think driveclub is a graphics king game, if anything it is dissapoint in every way possible and the order hasnt come out yet.
why would he need to damage control the fastest selling console of all time? the sales of its hardware and software wipe the floor with anything on pc. it holds the graphics crown, and will do so well into the future.
Log in to comment