Looks pretty damn good for a 1st gen open world game.
this one in particular
The graphics will probably be downgraded from that. However, even without a downgrade, the graphics still don't look as good as Ryse. Graphics are about more than just high resolution. Much much much more.
This one is a bull actually. Either that or it's being ran on some monster resolution and then it got downscaled or something. I don't remember any single game running on a resolution higher than 1080p.
Why is this screen even up there? http://static.gamespot.com/uploads/original/1253/12539083/2373542-0021498196- It's not always about image quality, you can clearly see that no shadows are being cast, these are the kind of things that distinguish current and next gen graphics. Not only this, but I have played Sleeping Dogs and during a rainy weather, most of the reflections don't get blocked by another object, that makes no sense at all.
Crysis is 6GB and beats COD: Ghosts graphically with its 39GB.
What do game sizes mean ? Not a lot.
Even though it's the same shit every year with the EA titles, I agree. Game sizes don't indicate anything, who knows what kind of things they might have in it. CODG's huge size could be because of some poorly compressed SFX files or something.
Looks like the original Crysis with a mix of low and medium settings. I'm content, but I've seen better on PC. It doesn't look as good as the PC versions of Crysis 3 and Battlefield 3 on max settings.
Looks better than Battlefield 3 in my opinion. In scale BF3 surely has it beat, but in art direction, color pallete, and environmental detail - Killzone : SF walks all over it.
Opinions are irrelevant, you should much rather provide objective statements. The factors you included such as "art direction and colour pallete" are subjective terms.
Log in to comment