Why next gen games have last gen assets?

My friends these games have assets that are hardly better than GTA V. I think its time we look beyond just character or car models and see everything behind all the blur , pretty colors, and special effects carefully.

Well I guess they have to decide where to dedicate their resources

Been playing TW3, and it is quite jarring when you have detailed characters next to muddy textures

Whoop tee doo. Another day, another stupid graphics thread.

Most games i have been playing lately look 100% "next gen" to me (Infamous Second Son, Dragon Age Inquisition, Bloodborne, The Witcher 3, etc).

I asked for native 1080p, bigger worlds, better textures, less pop in more particles, seamless worlds with few loadings, etc, and it was exactly what i got :)

Because they just do

What the hell were people honestly expecting out of a $400 console?

Of course you're not going to get equal performance to that of a PC with an i7 CPU and SLI 980's.

The fucking console would cost $1500 at minimum.

If you want visuals and performance that blow your tits off, then splurging extra to build a quality gaming rig is the only way to go.

Consoles are always going to be lower-mid range PC's.

most games pass the eye test for me. i just need more good ones

hell the systems them selves are missing last gen assets

a lot more since by comparing GPUs we can notice that the gap is massive. The X360's GPU has 48 cores, the PS3 only like 24, while the PS4's has 1152 with improved architecture and a shit ton of memory. Yet we can hardly see a difference between most last yen and current gen games beyond some resolution increment.

DriveClub looks awesome. So does Infamous Second Son. Your shitty screens won't change that. You just sound like a desperate PC clown.

Because Xposbone is the lowest common denominator and everything is scaled down accordingly.

@bobrossperm:

sups scottsfan

Yeah you keep thinking I'm an alt. It's not hard to grasp that others out there think PC gamers are trash.

last gen stuff

@silversix_: fetches "lair" in second son was effing gorgeously crafted.

But you are lol

@silversix_:

@silversix_ said:

last gen stuff

My friend its time to look a little closer at dem texture full screen and tell me why this hardly looks better than GTA V

He just happen to use the exact same screenshot to compare Driveclub and Grid that scott did and practically said the same thing. Perhaps he's been reading SW thread for quite sometime now before he decided to start a account here.

Well maybe ask him where he got the screen from. Although I doubt he will answer.

@Gue1: If you honestly look at games like Infamous SS, Ryse, KZ :SF, The Order , BB, AC:Unity, TW3 and see little difference I don't know what else to tell you. They look significantly better then last gen consoles.

TC raises a good point the LOD must be pretty horrendous for these games

Thanks. I wondered that while playing.

Well said. I had not booted up my Xbox 360 in a while, but when my cousin had was playing some COD I was surprised how bad it looked. I did not realize how much better the PS4 looked until I went backwards and saw what it was like.

Oh, you jelly?

On topic, because the consololes have cheap ass tablet CPU and GPUs that barely match upto 570 (and below). No wonder the games on these potatoes hardly look better than PC games from 2010.

lol

Hmm....you sound like the jelly one!

It's funny how the only people disappointed with PS4 and X1 hardware and games seem to be the PC gamers.

Yup, because after hyping by consolites that the next-gen consoles will have quad SLI 680's + a beefy CPU; the most powerful consoles ended up with a cheap ass tablet CPU and a GPU that barely matches a 570 from 2010 (as per Capcom). No wonder, consololites are now using the excuse of teh optimizationzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Oh and did you miss the part that games on these crap plastic boxes hardly look better than 2010 PC games? So much so hat even Metro 2033 had to be nerfed in order to be ported to 900pStation?

LOL, DF, on record said that these consoles wouldn't even run Crysis 2 from 2011 without compromises.

^This

@PAL360: same here. Only full $60 game I played that looked last gen were

Final fantasy type 0 ( ut it's a psp remaster so expected)

And shadow of mordor (don't know how that game got praise .. it had boring repetitive gameplau, horrible small map environments with little variety, and crap story, yet GS gave it game of the year)

All other games have lived up to next gen. The people expecting everything to be cg quality don't realize the cost, time and power required to make such things. It's like the fools who call me up at work requesting a 25+ point integrated form and want it done in 30 minutes, then say "should be simple, it's just code"..lol.

@zeeshanhaider: So in other words you believed teenagers on a message board about fantasyland specs and now feel a hissy fit is justifed? That's swell.

Are you telling me gpuking, El-Tomato, Chozofication, AM-Gamer, gue and pretty much all the rest of the cows are teenagers? Or what about Bobrosperm or Scott. He knows his precious exclusives are no where near games already released on PC years ago but still he just can't bear thhe fact that their so called next-gen consoles were outdated before their release.

Oh and it's SW. I'll rub this in their faces till eternity. :D

The consoles are shit. Get used to it or buy a PC and join the master race.

@zeeshanhaider: what are these great pc exclusive graphics kings you are referring to? Besides the unreleased star citizen, what has pushed graphics on pc to the point that they get their own assets? Nothing I see. I see old school games getting a comeback from kickstarter (thank god... as that's the types of games I love pc for), but no crysis or quake 3,or nolf, or halflife 3, or hell like it used to be before xbox 360 stole pc devs and M$ closed down every pc studio ot had.

Playing on pc will only get you slightly better graphics for console multiplats. They will still be console games with better resolution (if u have the monitor and gpu for that, and for 4k it needs at least $1k+ for monitor and gpu), and maybe a tad sharper textures and aa...again it will cost more than the console for a gpu to play the Witcher 3 in max settings at max reslution.

I own a 7870 gpu, and there is no reason for me to upgrade as there is no pc exclusive that demands it. My ps4 gets the same results most of the time and it usually runs better too. Until we get publisher funded exclusive pc gfx showcase games, there is no need. Call me when half-life 3 comes out... I'm waiting. (And no I don't like mobas ewww )

People who honestly expected a console to have titan class gpu at the time of release we and are delusional. Everyone botched and made fun of ps3's $599 price. Do you honestly think console makers were going to pull that again... Hell no, no one would buy it and pc evangelists would still not saying pc is better. It's a moot point as consoles should be cheap and a set unchanging spec.

I for one have been estate with the look of games this gen.

Infamous ss

Far cry 4

Gta 5 rerelease

Bloodborne

Witcher 3

All great to me on ps4.. and I got my wasteland 2 and pillars of eternity on pc.... am set to game :)

Every game has low-resolution assets here and there that you could point out. Doesn't matter the platform. Art takes time and money. When you're rushed to get a game out the door, shit just doesn't get done properly. That's life.

All games also need to be optimized to some degree even on the almighty PC. Wasting polygons on stuff that isn't even the focus is both a waste of the artists time but also a waste of GPU time when it could be going to much more important assets. In a racing game, why would you waste polygons on some house that is 500 feet from the track when it'll be on people's screens for half a second? It's illogical to tie up a 3D artist for 2-3 weeks building the mesh for a beautiful house, texturing it, then lighting it and then when a player passes the house their framerate drops by 2-3 frames for something on screen for a split second. It's a waste throughout.

This is some dumb jab at the PS4 but never in my life have I ever seen a game that had 100% flawless assets throughout. It's impossible. Even Star Citizen will have some real duds scattered throughout and you'll be able to take some very unflattering pictures.

Drop the dumb fanboy act and use your head.

Tell me when Gear of War 4 comes out then we will have something to compare these games to.

@zeeshanhaider:

lol you do sound upset!

In fact, before people know the actual specs PS4 and X1, the majority of internet users were expecting new consoles to be 2 or 3 times better than their predecessors. On top of that, people though Move and Kinect would be their main focus.

Instead, Sony and MS gave us two core gaming consoles, and a jump similar to the ones of previous generations.

Are consoles comparable to state of the art PCs? Sure they arent, they never were, but thats the least of console gamers concerns. We compare our new platforms to the old ones...and that's what matters.

Why graphics and how this come where?...

The internet blew up when Sony released the $600 PS3 which they sold at a loss meaning it cost more to make than they sold it to you for.

Sony said f*** you and here's your cheap plastic box with laptop hardware.

Its like console gamers haven't grasped the concept of money, you pay more you get more. Every time PC gaming is on topic here you always get the same group of people posting "BUT DA PSQAUTTRO IS ONLY $350!"... And then they complain that games can't run at 1080 or at a steady framerate.

Agreed. Maybe play the game instead of zooming in to scrutinize graphics. I hear PLAYING games is fun.

@cainetao11: Playing games is too subjective. Everybody likes different things and finds different levels of quality acceptable.

Graphics are objective. You can easily compare X game with Y game and agree on a better looking game. Comparing the processing power across platforms is also objective. You can't interpret the numbers differently. That's why fanboy arguments revolve around graphics. You can "win" a graphic argument. You can't really tell somebody their opinion is wrong.

And yet so many here cant agree on better looking in games. Come on dude, what does anyone "win" in these non sense arguments? I just read last gen graphics are ugly. No. Combat on the Atari 2600 is ugly.

Yeah. If graphics were objective, there would be a lot more agreement. They're clearly not. I mean, graphics debates might include discussion on some objective things (like framerate) but when one person says another game looks "better," they're just stating their opinion.

@Grey_Eyed_Elf: the only people here complaining about framer ate are hermits who bash consoles for not having 60fps. Most console only or people like me who play both, don't stress about fps, aren't complainging. You will see the occasional lem used a 2-3 fps difference to praise xb1, but the same time ignore the resolution drop they have as it would be unplayable in 1080p (Witcher 3) on there system.

I have not once had a problem with frame rate on ps4.

You cant go by those core amounts, Going by FLOP performance you have a better base, 360 gpu is able to do 240 GFLOPS, PS3 gpu+ SPE's from Cell was around 250 GFLOPS for graphics. The PS4 gpu can do around 1800 GFLOPs. Your not looking hard enough then if your not seeing the differences. Any multiplat that is on last gen and on this gen are limited by last gen limits.

Yep and that why cows like brag about having a few better framerate than lems

I feel bad for cows. To this day they call Driveclub and Infamous gfx kings.

Yes, even after Witcher3. Go look at SonyGaf (neogaf).

do you actively try to be wrong?

hmm maybe?