Is Final Fantasy XV going to be consoles graphics king ?

IMAGE 1

IMAGE 2

IMAGE 3

Personally i'm finding FF XV tho in beta looking graphically stunning for a FF game from the new gameplay vids.Is FF XV looking most graphically stunning game amongst new gen consoles or other console games as Killzone Shadow Fall looks 10 X superior ?

Well ? :)

haha those screenshots meant to be impressive? look 720p, maybe its xbone verison. at least show ps4 version

Looks like Final Fantasy goes GTA ^^

Simply put, no game on console will ever compare to Crysis 3 on PC. Enthusiast hardware from 2013 will always crush mid-range hardware from 2012(console's hardware).

I don't understand why console gamers have such a fascination at beating PC graphics, that's not what consoles are here for. They're here for convenience, price and exclusive franchises. People should simply stop comparing console graphics to PC graphics. It's tiring and frankly pointless.

For example, the original Crysis released in 2007 looks better than anything released on PS3/360. Only games that could be debatable are TLOU and Uncharted 3 and it's mostly due to arguably superior animation but aside from that, they get crapped on by Crysis. What makes you think a game made to take advantage of 2013 top of the line hardware will be beaten by game limited to mid-range 2012 hardware?

there's a 99% that the game will come to PC a year later than the console version soooo........

4k@60fps,sorry consolites

Wut?

Did i even mention comparing it to PC graphics or being better than PC? Please read what i posted, i'm comparing amongst next gen console games only :)

Hoping so. I wouldn't need to buy a PS 4 just for this game :)

- EIGHT years in development.

- Two directors since development started

- Two engines since development started

- Crew of 300 going in and out of production

This game is gonna fucking blow

@indzman: Well you said graphics king so I assumed it included everything. The answer is still no. Second Son still looks better.

np :)

True and stylish from the new beta vids :)

No. Great art style tho.

Does it really matter if it is or isn't ?

I think so. It looks absolutely stunning. I'm not sure about whether it's going to be a great game, but it's certainly a looker.

Oh we're back on the "Console Graphics King" nonsense again?

Next you're going to be telling us THIS TREE from Uncharted 4 is the best thing on Systems.

yes because this is system wars you idiot.

Maybe. If there isn't any downgrade then maybe....maybe...

EDIT: MAYBE!

That third image reminds me a lot of Shadow of the Colossus... in the sense that you can distinctly see the different grades of rendering as it goes off into the distance to help save on resources.

Possibly.

@Gue1:

Whats with the insults ? :(

This or The Witcher 3. Assuming TW3 hasn't been downgraded has some pics indicated. But i trust CDPR.

Both games on consoles would pack alot of detail considering they're open world games.

Still, i'm starting to wonder how Project Horizone will look considering Shadow Fail's graphics

lmao "console graphics king" is funny stuff. Do they give awards for being the tallest midget these days too?

No, but it appears to be a good looking game.

It still looks amazing regardless. Bunch of morons on this forum. Does it have to be THE VERY best(obvious high end PC's will always be the best)

Cars in Final Fantasty are going to feel so weird man.

The Order 1886 will be the best looking game of all time when it's released!

funny, since xbox versions of games have way better lighting and look more realistic. PS4 games look pale.

Probably not since I assume any screenshot given to us by devs is not representative of the final game.

@m3dude1 pretty much just got murdered.

that's wise

anything that takes this long to make tends to be a massive disappointment given that people have way to much time to expect more than it can deliver, the FFXIII games looked great but that didn't stop people from hating on them, probably much of it attributed to the long development delay and probably equally relevant was it going multiplatform

FFVIII had cars which you drive through roads on the world map. And FFVII had the buggy.

This is different, they need to take physics into account as well. it's going to be a massive fail if it's as boring to drive as past FF vehicles, times have changed. Especially if you're stuck with that same car throughout most of the game.

Time, money, and a talented art team.

Nah, just a better realized version of the kind of world FFVIII had.

Probably not

Also lol console graphics king

It's pretty obvious that they will upgrade from the car to an airship at some point in the game. We've already seen them in the trailers and it was hinted at just after the name change. Prob going to save it for E3 reveal or something.

No.

I think it will look amazing on all platforms (except Wii U, nobody wants to see teh pixellated FF dudes) but I'm worried it's all dudebro crap with Final Fantasy Zero combat basically I'm seeing the game looks great but will very possibly play like shoite.

Crysis 3 most definitely wasn't built around the 360 as the console experience was compromised in favor of the visual. Even DigitalFoundry called the console performance absolutely terrible. as said here. It was a multiplatform release and absolutely not a ''port''. Ryse is a port. Watch Dogs on Wii U is a port.

Crysis 3 was extremely well-optimized as it ran decently on old hardware and still looked pretty damn amazing as shown here. It was also one of the few game that took full advantage of 4-cores and i7 hyperthreading. It used a wide array of features exclusive to PC and DX11. You're wrong on two accounts of Crysis being a port and being poorly optimized.

Even Crytek stated repeatedly that no game would beat Crysis 3 for at least 2 years graphically knowing full well Ryse was on development for the Xbox One.

Yerli said Crytek made a concerted effort with Crysis 3 to push graphics as far as they could possibly go to keep its PC gaming fans happy.

Not only that but the CEO even said they pushed Crysis 3 to the max to please PC gamers. Right here

The fact that it(Ryse) uses more RAM is simply due to the fact that the Xbox One has 8GB of DDR3 available and at the time of Crysis 3 release most consumer-grade GPU's had around 2GB VRAM. Even the GTX 690(really two 680) only had 2GB and the 7970 had 3GB. Crytek simply didn't have the luxury of 4GB mainstream GPU's so they had to be much more efficient in the utilization. VRAM is also a tiny part of the whole process anyway.

They basically did whatever they could to make Crysis 3 look amazing on PC and crammed as much as they could on console to make it look as good as possible without having a slideshow for a frame rate and even then, they more or less succeeded.

So yes, the PC version of Crysis 3 was definitely built around the most powerful hardware available. It wasn't limited by the 360. Don't know where you got that from.

I just beat Ryse a month ago and it looks very good but still doesn't beat Crysis 3. The textures even at very high don't look as good as Crysis 3 textures at very high. The foliage in Crysis 3 absolutely craps on the static grass featured in Ryse. No enthusiast will tell you Ryse looks better than Crysis 3.

@Juub1990:

I don't know--all the polygon models are the same on pc, 360, etc. If you claim nothing on PS4 bests Crysis, how is that possible when many art assets on ps4 put last gen 360/ps3 games to shame? That doesn't add up.

Because polygon models are everything? Even Crytek decreased the number of polygons in Ryse because it wasn't worth the performance hit. Crysis 3 on PC looks miles better than on consoles and has tons of options not available on console. You may as well compare Shadow of Mordor on PS3 to Shadow of Mordor on PS4(and the difference between Crysis 3 on PC vs 360/PS3 is sill probably bigger). We've also reached the point of diminishing returns when it comes down to polygon counts. Increasing the amount doesn't produce the amazing results it used to.

No, they aren't everything, just like resolution isn't everything. You are coming across as making this all inclusive claim regarding Crysis 3 demolishing any console graphics. That is just silly.

Number of polygons per character doesn't always mean better. Better comes down to the artist designing the model, not the machine rendering it. This is why many console games hold up over time--talented people understanding the medium from an artists perspective, not an engine builder perspective. One of my favorite PC games was Rainbow Six Raven Shield. Go back and look at these graphics. They were stellar at the time, or so people thought. Truth is they are dogshit for the most part--it is an awkward looking game. Then go back and look at Mario 64--it is a fully realized world with a consistent look.

@Heirren: I separate artwork from graphics. Okami looks gorgeous to me and still better than most games today. I wouldn't make the silly claim it is more visually impressive than Infamous Second Son or Ryse though. Graphics are highly quantifiable whereas artwork absolutely isn't.

Crysis 3 from a graphical standpoint does demolish pretty much any console titles. Artwork is a whole different story.

@Juub1990:

Okami looks like horse shit. Throwing a photoshop filter over an image does not make something "arty".

And I disagree about distinguishing art design from "graphics" as the former makes the latter. Creative use of less tools at hand can certainly produce a better end product than an amateur with endless tools. The end product of their work is a "graphic", if we are to use that word.

That pretty much should put the debate of graphics vs art style to rest. I think Okami looks amazing. You think it looks like crap. From a technical standpoint it's outdated and eventually, every game will be outdated. Hell, realistic games suffer the most from that as the more games become visually realistic, the less impressive the older games will look whereas cartoony games graphics don't get old(Wind Waker). Tesselation, resolution, polygon counts, aliasing, texture mapping, SSS, AF etc. These should absolutely be distinguished from artwork which is purely opinion-based. That might be just me though.

Personally, I see better graphics on consoles that what I see in this game.

I know it's not an open world game but for the sheer graphical prowess displayed on screen this is unmatched, by far. It actually looks like the CGI of other games.