@Navardo95 @vault-boy @The-Neon-Seal Thats crazy talk! Now, I don't think its a gamechanging experience but when your in that glider flying around the island at 400 feet in the air... that is a view to behold, there is no doubt and on the PC it is all the better. Not to mention I think it might be getting Oculus Rift support. At that point the PC gaming master race is hands down superior :P
@caucel_cr Well, while making photorealism is going to increase budget costs, I'm hoping the industry won't be fucking idiots about it. Its not even that hard of a problem to tackle, either. If your budget has to go up that means that you have to start getting more people to buy your game or profits will decrease. As of now, the dumbshit industry leaders think that means making games more widespread by watering them down. Good for them in the short term, but look at EA's profits these last few quarters.
Instead, if they really want to make up for their bigger graphics budgets they need to tap untapped demographics. Women and possibly even the older generation might be the key to maximizing sales, therefore allowing for bigger budgets.
@Navardo95 @vault-boy @The-Neon-Seal Ya, it looks nice on all platforms but that is also due to its aesthetic being REALLY nice, but if you want the full experience you gotta play it on PC, the better textures and draw distances make it look absolutely stunning. Watching videos makes it look good, but until you actually play it... its just to much to describe, and I'm only on a $130 graphics card.
@The-Neon-Seal @vault-boy @GSGuy321 True, at the current rate it is estimated at doubling every 18 months, which will make high end graphics cards about 50 times stronger in 10 years than the Nvidia Titan, therefore it would be able to render 100 photorealistic faces. So in a big game (like, lets say an imaginary Planetside 3), there is no way in hell it will be completely photorealistic, but maybe in something smaller.
@The-Neon-Seal @vault-boy TBH, I know I'm in the minority but I prefer Crysis 2 to the first one. I really thought the open world in Crysis 1 was built pretty poorly and while the second was more linear it felt like it wasn't just randomly thrown together. But to each his own, I will definitely agree that it was scaled down in scope for the sequel.
@The-Neon-Seal @GSGuy321 PC looks fucking nice on a $1500 rig, their is no doubt in anyones mind (just google Crysis 3 max settings) but there is still some work to be done. Even on the Nvidia Titan AKA the best consumer graphics card to date uses half of its power just to generate 1 photo-realistic face.
A game with nice graphics is no doubt very cool to look at. However, that doesn't mean that it should come at the cost of gameplay and story. A perfect example of getting good graphics right would be Far Cry 3, that game has some of the best graphics to date, but even if you took that away the gameplay, exploration, and even story would keep the game good, the graphics are just icing on the cake.
Then we have Rage, a game that isn't really bad, but would have been much better if more money was put into the actual game and not the visuals.
I read the review and all I can say is YES! I cannot WAIT to get my hands on this expansion. I loved Gods and Kings (but I don't think its worth $30, but I got mine on sale for like 7.50 or something) and this sounds like it is gonna be even better! I hope its as good as it sounds, Civ 5 is easily one of my favorite games I own and to improve even more on its already phenomenal gameplay sounds like it is going to be mindblowing.
Not to mention I love that they are making improvements to cultural victories, I always wanted to play culturally but never was able to get into it that much.
vault-boy's comments