It's not games per se, it's certain effects I really don't like to see in games
- Blur: Blur can be a pleasent effect when you are driving at breackneck speeds.
When I turn my head around in TLOU just a little bit, and you just get massive amounts of blur on screen with all on screen characters blurring out... That is not realistic. The eye doesn't work like that.
- Lens flares: If you are looking through the eyes of your character... how can there be lens flares ? A camera effect... It's just meant to make games look more like movies, and I don't like it one bit.
- Bloom: can be overdone at times
- Depth of Field: this is an option I turn off by default. I don't want objects ten feet in front of me blurring out. Again, it's a clear camera effect and in no way represents how your eyes really work (sure your eyese can focus on stuff, not being able to see things in the distance is not how eyes work however)
So more than any single game I'm bothered by silly effects that add nothing... just wanting to emulate movies.
All twin console games, as far as I'm concerned. Don't get me wrong, a game can look good for console standards, but since new big console games are pretty much always hyped for their graphics, it always feel like people overrate the graphics. The Order, for example. Small (and therefor easy to make good-looking) rooms with lots of blur to hide the stuff that doesn't look good is impressive to some, and from what I understand the game is highly praised for its visuals, but it's not impressive at all to me. I'm guessing the people who are impressed by it are not used to PC gaming, or they don't know much about technology.
Another example: REmake for the GC looks absolutely stunning being on the hardware it is on. This is due to the graphics being easy to make pretty, just like with The Order. I would not rate REmake as one of the best looking GC games, since other GC games are more impressive by looking good while also being i 3D.
Star Citizen, Crysis 2&3, MGS4, MGSV and GTAV are all heavily overrated. And for the DC and The Order doubters, you guys just haven't played the games.
These are not cherry picked, there's plenty of where they come from.
The graphics of these two are too boss, nothing on PC or Xbone touches them.
Crysis 3 looks uninspired. As if it was using the default lighting in the engine with bland art direction. But it is a technical showpiece for PC guys.
The Order 1886 looks generic as ****. But again it's technically impressive.
Graphics don't mean an ounce of sh*t to me.It's nice to have a pretty game,but I want the game to be good/great.I don't know,maybe I'm alone on this topic???
Crysis - b/c it doesn't run very well and things in the distance look off and just the whole thing looks....off. Certain things look good up close, though.
Crysis 2 - it's one of those games that just doesn't look good in motion. It looks more cartoony or something that the original Crysis
GTA V - b/c it was unacceptable for it to dip to like 10fps in the 7th gen consoles. Doesn't matter if it looked decent, good, or great....if it's at 10 fucking fps....it doesn't count.
I played GTA V on 360 and had several hundred hours combined online and offline and never had major frame rate issues. It wasn't 100% steady all the time, but no where near 10fps.
Gears 1-3 looked better than Uncharted 1-3 respectively.
Gears 1-3 looked like highly detailed, quality rendered crap smeared on brown butcher paper.
Detailed high quality it may have been, but it still looked like shit. Art design is still a really important aspect of visuals. Not necessarily saying that the Uncharted games had particularly good art design, but the Gears games were really, REALLY bad in this way.
@gpuking: I've played driveclub and the order, driveclub looks nowhere near as good while playing as it does in photo mode and replay mode. Still looks good, but not impressive. The order is a blurry mess. Here is the order directly screenshotted from me. I can't believe how much this moment pissed me off. Everything outside the window is blurred completely out.
Gears 1-3 looked better than Uncharted 1-3 respectively.
Gears 1-3 looked like highly detailed, quality rendered crap smeared on brown butcher paper.
Detailed high quality it may have been, but it still looked like shit. Art design is still a really important aspect of visuals. Not necessarily saying that the Uncharted games had particularly good art design, but the Gears games were really, REALLY bad in this way.
What the heck is wrong with Gears' art?
The whole 'Destroyed Beauty'/Greek-Roman Architecture in a different planet was great.
Yep. On max settings it's doing more than the 7th gen could handle but it doesn't matter when the details are so rough. It's also very unoptimized.
It's 8 years old, ofcourse you're going to be underwhelmed if your going in expecting what people where hyping years ago. You're gonna have to mod it.
I don't think it's overrated graphically. On PC i believe modded Crysis 2 surpassed Crysis in 2011, but nothing could begin to compare on PS3/360. It released in 2007 and trashed any chance of a console video game to compete graphically for the rest of the entire 7th generation.
@Lucianu: Nah, Crysis never looked so hot to me. Like I said it's doing more than consoles could handle under the hood, i'm not disagreeing with that. It was an important game that pioneered a graphical technique or two (SSAO I know for one), but some of its details would make half life 2 blush. I played it at max in 2011 and was unimpressed, it's certainly not doing enough to justify what it took to run it, again it was unoptimized.
Not to mention that in 2007, nothing could even run it at max on a single gpu, except at 720p and sub 30fps. Plenty of console games beat it visually and i'm not talking cel shaded games either.
It's not games per se, it's certain effects I really don't like to see in games
- Blur: Blur can be a pleasent effect when you are driving at breackneck speeds.
When I turn my head around in TLOU just a little bit, and you just get massive amounts of blur on screen with all on screen characters blurring out... That is not realistic. The eye doesn't work like that.
- Lens flares: If you are looking through the eyes of your character... how can there be lens flares ? A camera effect... It's just meant to make games look more like movies, and I don't like it one bit.
- Bloom: can be overdone at times
- Depth of Field: this is an option I turn off by default. I don't want objects ten feet in front of me blurring out. Again, it's a clear camera effect and in no way represents how your eyes really work (sure your eyese can focus on stuff, not being able to see things in the distance is not how eyes work however)
So more than any single game I'm bothered by silly effects that add nothing... just wanting to emulate movies.
Camera technology itself is modelled after the human eye. Whenever you look at bright lights, your eyes would see some "lens flare" and/or "bloom" like effects. When things move too fast, your eyes would see some "motion blur", and things in the distant horizon would have some "bokeh" blur.
The problem is that games tend to heavily over-exaggerate these effects. These effects can be realistic when used with subtlety, but subtlety isn't something games are known for.
Do you mean now or when it was released? It's an 8 year old game with a now outdated engine, of course it aint gonna look great now but during its time it was one of the best , if not the best looking game on all platforms.
@gpuking: I've played driveclub and the order, driveclub looks nowhere near as good while playing as it does in photo mode and replay mode. Still looks good, but not impressive. The order is a blurry mess. Here is the order directly screenshotted from me. I can't believe how much this moment pissed me off. Everything outside the window is blurred completely out.
I've yet to see an actual gameplay screenshot of The Order look anything but a mess.
He said "These are not cherry picked" and continued to post cutscenes and photomode lol.
The Order is fantastic. I have not seen a better looking game than it at all on any platform.
That's funny. You used The Order 1886 avatar and signature for a long time, claiming that no PC game looks better than that and now you are pretending as if that never happened.
It attempt as Colbert style satire. It didn't come accross so well lol.
@darkangel115: the order was 800p because of the black bars. The image being rendered was equivalent to 1080p. I'm not sure how people don't understand that.
@gpuking: I've played driveclub and the order, driveclub looks nowhere near as good while playing as it does in photo mode and replay mode. Still looks good, but not impressive. The order is a blurry mess. Here is the order directly screenshotted from me. I can't believe how much this moment pissed me off. Everything outside the window is blurred completely out.
I've yet to see an actual gameplay screenshot of The Order look anything but a mess.
He said "These are not cherry picked" and continued to post cutscenes and photomode lol.
I really think buy-and-large every game is pretty much underrated graphically.... we have become really jaded over the last few gens.
Funnily enough, my reaction to when I first saw Star Fox back in 1993 was... Meh.
Star Fox's blocky 3D polygon graphics just didn't impress me back then. It just looked too strange and abstract to me, compared to the beautiful sprite graphics I was used to.
But later in 1993, when I saw screenshots of Virtua Fighter, I was blown away. It was mind-blowing to see, for the first time, big polygonal 3D human characters with individual limbs, fingers, ears, eyes, mouth, nose, hair, etc. Star Fox didn't leave much of an impression on me, but Virtua Fighter certainly left a huge impression on me.
Crysis - b/c it doesn't run very well and things in the distance look off and just the whole thing looks....off. Certain things look good up close, though.
Crysis 2 - it's one of those games that just doesn't look good in motion. It looks more cartoony or something that the original Crysis
GTA V - b/c it was unacceptable for it to dip to like 10fps in the 7th gen consoles. Doesn't matter if it looked decent, good, or great....if it's at 10 fucking fps....it doesn't count.
I played GTA V on 360 and had several hundred hours combined online and offline and never had major frame rate issues. It wasn't 100% steady all the time, but no where near 10fps.
I just remember playing it on the PS3 and in the city....many times the fps went to ~ 15fps or something.
@gpuking: I've played driveclub and the order, driveclub looks nowhere near as good while playing as it does in photo mode and replay mode. Still looks good, but not impressive. The order is a blurry mess. Here is the order directly screenshotted from me. I can't believe how much this moment pissed me off. Everything outside the window is blurred completely out.
I've yet to see an actual gameplay screenshot of The Order look anything but a mess.
He said "These are not cherry picked" and continued to post cutscenes and photomode lol.
On these forums....I'm not surprised at that.
Are you saying every gameplay screenshot posted by multiple users and multiple sources are all doctored to look worse?
@Halo2-Best-FPS: I'm saying most of the users on this board are anti PS4 and pick the worst shots.
I've seen shots like the one in the post...that screen looks like a transition screen...where the the character is going from running to cover or whatever. B/c I played the game....and it's not that blurry
I hope you know what I mean and don't argue the semantics.
@Halo2-Best-FPS: I'm saying most of the users on this board are anti PS4 and pick the worst shots.
I've seen shots like the one in the post...that screen looks like a transition screen...where the the character is going from running to cover or whatever. B/c I played the game....and it's not that blurry
I hope you know what I mean and don't argue the semantics.
You can take a picture of literally any moment in The Order from the gameplay and it will be blurry, no one is making it look worse than it does, it actually looks like that.
Just from playing the game I was honestly convinced that it was rendering at 480p or something and was upscaled, it's that blurry throughout the entire game...
@Halo2-Best-FPS: I'm saying most of the users on this board are anti PS4 and pick the worst shots.
I've seen shots like the one in the post...that screen looks like a transition screen...where the the character is going from running to cover or whatever. B/c I played the game....and it's not that blurry
I hope you know what I mean and don't argue the semantics.
You can take a picture of literally any moment in The Order from the gameplay and it will be blurry, no one is making it look worse than it does, it actually looks like that.
Just from playing the game I was honestly convinced that it was rendering at 480p or something and was upscaled, it's that blurry throughout the entire game...
This is exactly what I'm telling him.
I have yet to see good screenshot of The Order in real gameplay settings...on any site from any poster or article.
@Halo2-Best-FPS: I'm saying most of the users on this board are anti PS4 and pick the worst shots.
I've seen shots like the one in the post...that screen looks like a transition screen...where the the character is going from running to cover or whatever. B/c I played the game....and it's not that blurry
I hope you know what I mean and don't argue the semantics.
You can take a picture of literally any moment in The Order from the gameplay and it will be blurry, no one is making it look worse than it does, it actually looks like that.
Just from playing the game I was honestly convinced that it was rendering at 480p or something and was upscaled, it's that blurry throughout the entire game...
This is exactly what I'm telling him.
I have yet to see good screenshot of The Order in real gameplay settings...on any site from any poster or article.
Log in to comment