Fallout 4 looks horrible.

Character models very low poly count and horrible detail and textures, animation still really bad almost as bad as fallout 3 and skyrim. Textures and shading pretty horrible. Why can't Bethesda make a game with graphics and animation comparable to other recent games?

I'm gonna wait for this until it's a GWG game. :P

It's a shame graphics and animation are the complete and utter focus of vast open world rpgs - oh wait!

Do RPG's need spectacular graphics ?

-_- Where did you come from ?

There is just this massive difference between non-gameplay shots and gameplay shots.

I think they are still using their old engine... I never thought Skyrim or Fallout 3 looked that great either.

Having said all of that: I don't care that much xD

Game isn't even out yet and you're complaining already.

Just don't buy it then.

The graphics are the least of this game's worries. Instead, let's focus on how awful the writing and RPG elements will likely be, yes?

Who gives a flying **** about graphics? If the game is fun and engaging, it's a good game no matter the textures, character models and other crap that doesn't matter.

I played RBI Baseball on NES yesterday and had fun. Did it matter that the characters were 8-bit, blocky sprites?

My spidey sense are tingling and they say this thread isn't trying. Moderator shut this no trying thread down.

I think it looks great.

It's last gen all over again, when some fanboys used to think that Uncharted, Gears and GoW3 were more demanding and advanced than games like Skyrim and RDR!

Bethesda RPGs can't, for obvious reasons, compete visualy to linear games. They are simply too complex, with thousands of pickable objects with their own physics, no invisible walls, hundreds of NPCs to interact with, dozens of main and secundary missions, etc. Fallout 4 will also feature seamless transitions between in and outdoors and customizable world.

Fallout 4 are The Witcher 3 are easily the most demanding games on current gen consoles so far.

Graphics are important in games and everyone expects advancement but Fallout has never been or made claim to graphics king. Compare Fallout 4 to New Vegas or even Fallout 3, there is a massive improvement and at the end of the day the graphics are acceptable, it's the game I'm far more concerned about being good (btw I think it will be, so not really concerned at all)

I will be busy blowing up Raiders not giving a ****.

Thousands of pickable objects? what a cop out. Witcher 3 is a huge game, huge world, looks 10x better than Fallout. And there is no excuse for the stiff animation but lazy programmers.

Go play broforce and shut the **** up.

I do have to admit though, Bethesda really needs to sort their engine out.

I think it will be just fine for an open world RPG.

It's mod time.

"it's GO TIME!"

*Gameplay will win over graphics every single time.

Just played Minecraft Story Mode. So good you don't think about the blocks.

*unless you own a PS4 and play games like The Oder and DriveClub. Then graphics over gameplay is what you seek.

Yep

We have mods.

Word.

This.

Also, it does look good. Stop being a graphics whore.

it looks fine for what it is

besides they are still using the same old engine

Don't buy it. Nobody's forcing you.

Graphics aren't horrible. They are fine. The game looks good. It just doesn't push the boundaries, which is fine. Not every game needs to do that.

Looks good to me.

Day one PS4, $35.75 "Thanks BB" between this Bloodborne dlc, and MgsV, I'll be very busy...

Word to your mother.

It's only 22GB from what I heard, meaning the game probably doesn't have a whole lot of content, which leaves me to suspect the game abandoned traditional RPG quest writing and variable task solution for auto-generated content (e.g. "the Jarl wants you to go kill a dragon/troll, please go do so and return here for your reward when you are finish"). The trading outpost feature I think is even more indicative of auto-generated filler in this game. Plus I Tweeted them asking whether the game will have traditional written quests or rely on auto-generated features, they didn't respond, so I take their silence as an affirmation of my suspicion.

I care more that it plays well. Auto-generated content won't be bad if they can actually make it work this time. However, did they get it right with Skyrim? Oh hellz no!! And that wouldn't worry me so much by itself but nobody called them out on it, everybody gave them a free pass, and that worries me they think that its perfectly acceptable to do it again, and in my opinion it is not.

The game really does look like ass crack and those who are defending it just because graphics is not their priority are just dumb as ****. I understand you care about gameplay, open world and etc, but what if you have all those but also top notch graphics too? Current gen consoles can handle something like that for sure, check The Witcher 3, Batman AK, Horizon Zero Dawn, Far Cry4, Far Cry Primal and I'm sure I missed a few. FO's graphics look like a joke next to them, hell even GTAV remaster looks better at times. Having breathtaking graphics is also a major part of the experience, it makes you feel more involved, immersed and a sense of tangibility to the game world. I don't get why people would oppose such a standard.

Why would you even include such a game

Bah the graphics aren't important and just aren't that bad. You could have picked; the loss of any meaningful choice that affects the story, invincible characters that laugh in the face of nukes, generic storyline that hasn't improved on the original 2 games, FPS combat with RNG & turn based pausing that satisfies neither option well and to top it all off a terrible ending (if the previous incarnations by the same people are anything to go by).

Whatever though, you only made the thread to troll so *shrug*.

Well, given your use of language and petty insults the following doesn't surprise me:

With a good sense of imagination and a level of creativity graphics are irrelevant, gameplay is the only thing that matters. Your lack of ability to see and understand this fundamental point (or more succinctly, your dearth of creativity and imagination showing you up) is holding you back in your enjoyment of some amazing games. Still, not to worry as long as da game be prettah right?

The only time I would agree with you is if we were talking about a game called - Graphically close to life: Better than your eyes edition.

don't worry, everyone on SW seems pretty sure gpuking doesn't actually play games, he just looks at screenshots

After it's released and mods have a chance to play around, this place will be flooded with gorgeous pics.

And this is exactly the problem.

My use of profanity has nothing to do with the point I'm making here lol. You know just because some gameplay gimmicks work for you doesn't mean the game should gimp on its graphics anyway. You are just very backwards thinking, feeling content about something yet overlooking another. How do you know advanced graphics wont change its core gameplay? Speaking of imagination, now imaging fluid dynamic physics so advanced it would create flood, changing the whole level underwater in an instant thus creating new gameplay possibility, fire so intense you could melt anything on a wall, complex destruction, ice that could freeze the entire level and then melt it away using your blow torch etc..Graphics and gameplay are one, they only complement each other. You are a fool to think graphics don't matter.

Yup, uncanny valley springs to mind - the closer you get to realistic graphics or models, without actually reaching full realism, the stranger it appears to people. The human brain seems to handle the abstract better than something masquerading as reality but falling short.

Crysis annoyed me because it was so beautiful and realistic in parts that the glaringly bad textures and lack of detail in other areas was immersion breaking.

T U N N E L S N A K E S

@gpuking: It's pointless arguing with you as you don't understand the core issue. The very fact that you talk about graphics and then use an element of a physics engine (fluid dynamics) to make your point shows this to be true.

Let me clarify - you can have a fully realised world, with a complete physics model that is true to real life all drawn in basic 3 colour art. To you it would look hideous and we'd all be 'fools' for playing it, to me that could be a game of amazing beauty which enables my mind to create the world within the framework provided. There is a massive difference between being technologically advanced and 'looking good'.

I never said that graphics 'don't matter', I said they were irrelevant if the gameplay is good. One of the greatest games I've ever played featured nothing more than black and white lines and dots, that game was Elite and it's still creating spin offs today....all of which look graphically impressive but fail to capture something the original had. The graphics are there to facilitate the gameplay. As long as graphics are present in some form and don't negatively impact the gameplay then how 'good' or 'close to real life' they are IS irrelevant.

Looks pretty fucking amazing to me

I agree. I know others love Bethseda games, but they are all crap to me. Crap combat, crap graphics, just crap everywhere.

I'd argue that we've gotten to a point where they do, yes.

I'd argue that's completely wrong. Tales of Maj'Eyal has been one of my favourite RPG's for a long time and Ultima VII is still lauded as one of, if not the, best RPG of all time (it's 22mb in size yet contains more story, dialogue, items, explorable areas and memorable scenes than anything recent).

'Spectacular' graphics are not needed for anything. If they were they the indie revolution started by Steam wouldn't have any traction....yet it's booming.

Not horrible. But on par with what Skyrim was at the time. skyrim was slightly below the standards of that time, Fallout 4 is also sub par for today's standards. but still quite pretty.

In this case it may negatively impact the game ....we should postpone the discussion after the release of the game.

You've played that game like decades ago so you inherently didn't expect a better graphics.

Agree with the highlighted part, don't worry mods will make it gorgeous.(If you're on PC tho)

By some screenshots and trailers you can't make the final conclusion about the graphics of a game and whether it negatively impacts the immersion ...

Horrible threads with only opinions in OP. The animations are not the same... the physics animations are 10 fold of what fallout 3 was. People react to gunshots, melee hits push enemies in the direction they are hit, enemies crawl over and around objects, pushing things out of the way.... Graphics and animations are really not why you play the game, but it is night and day from FO3 and NV. TC seriously just forgot what those games looked liked.

This thread should be locked on the basis of a terrible OP.

Graphics are gimmicks. Give me gameplay, or give me death.

Were any of them made by a big-ass studio in 2015?

Just asking.

Too bad the game in question isn't indie and can't get away with looking like it's 1997.