When did you stop being impressed by graphics, /v/? Crysis for me.
I remember when I was younger I was blown away by graphical improvements. Like the FFVIII fmv, soul reaver then moving on to defiance.
Is it because improvements are such a comparatively small gap these days?
I havent stopped being blown away by good graphics, it's just that games arent pushing hardware to its limits anymore because of consolization.
Even when witcher 3 came out, I thought "Damn this is a really good looking game", downgrades and all
When I realized aesthetics > technical
Somewhere after Crysis and Arma 2
Gameplay > Everything
Aestheticsfag has a good point too, there are many PS2 and older games that look better than games today simply because they have an actual visual design by competent artists (pic related) as opposed to blind photorealism and
>OMG LOOK HOW MANY PIMPLES HE HAS
stupid shit
>>333240592
>>333240807
>>333241260
>>333241569
I still care and so should you.
Many devs are too lazy to even optimize their games, let alone let them look good.
Attitudes like this are cancer for videogames. We are way too easy on devs. We accept all kinds of shit big companies and even small indie developers put down your throat.
Back in the day devs actually had to deliver.
>>333241891
Stop making assumptions. All the posts you've quoted only indicate a shifting the focus away from graphics instead of worshipping the golden calf as has been done for the past decade or two.
Graphics really never needed to go past Crysis tier, whats needed now is actual innovation in gameplay. You do notice how gameplay across AAA games have become more and more homogenized even though graphics have improved? Its ridiculous shit.
I appreciate them but I don't get the same kind of "WOW" these days. Last time graphics really impressed me was with TW2. That was such a such a massive leap for RPG games, it was ridiculous.
>>333242185
>notice how gameplay across AAA games have become more and more homogenized even though graphics have improved
That's because console players don't care about gameplay, they care about the cinematic experience. They don't want deeper gameplay mechanics, they want a game about a father and an adopted child out in the post apocalyptic wasteland.
>>333242428
>Remembering RPG's prior to TW2
>Every characters face looked like a mong
>Animations were PS1 tier
>So little environment detail
>Copy pasted environments everywhere
>2 Whole generations of Shader tech behind current games
Jesus christ they've come a long way. Even though DA:I looks like ass it's still amazing Bioware managed to make something that looked like ass.
>>333242778
The topic as about graphics, not consoles.
And it is a simple fact that the push for graphics has dumbed down games considerable, it dosent matter the platform.
>>333242998
It wasn't the push for graphics at all. The best looking games have always been the least complex system/mechanics wise.
It's simply because back in the early 90s fucking anyone and their dog were making games. Startups were everywhere the industry was young and people were fucking around with whatever they thought might be cool. They'd develop something and put it in the game without thought, no consideration to design, balance or how it would control they just did it.
Gameplay was not dumbed down because of graphics focus. Gameplay has been dumbed down by focus testing and game design mimicry.
>>333242998
AAA games are centered around consoles. AAA games sell well because of the console userbase. You're wondering why AAA games are stale when it comes to gameplay, it's because they're pandering to the lowest common denominator aka people who don't spend most of their days indoors to play video games aka normies aka the mass majority of console players.
>>333240592
When the games stopped being good. I realized it doesn't matter if they can't compete with games decades ago in fun factor.
When I opened my eyes.
When I realized I was cucking myself by playing games that look pretty but at the base are mediocre
That's when I stopped caring. I still don't care. I don't follow the advances anymore, I don't follow news I don't examine new games like I used to. Rather, I appreciate really shitty looking games because I can quickly see what the game is about instead of going through Godrays and destructive environments and etc.
Yeah, I really do value straightforward visual design these days.
>>333242185
crysis hasn't been surpassed in raw graphics and the gameplay for an fps is still superior to any other fps
>>333243781
>crysis hasn't been surpassed in raw graphics
Stop this. There are far better shaders now. Not to mention some of the textures look like ass. Sure it looked fantastic when it came out, but these things age.
diminishing returns have severely impacted how much I give a shit, when I have to look at textures and jam my camera up against a wall to notice if something's better, it's not worth caring about, full stop.
Crysis didn't even look that good. It was 90% mods. Lighting was ass, the game is set in the night for such a huge portion, and the admittedly nice greenery is almost immediately thrown away after the like first 2 missions, when you start having to deal with fucking aliens and shit.
>>333240592
Never did actually.
But remarkable "wows" were Morrowind, Max Payne, Crysis and probably remastered Last of Us on ps4.
Around the start of the PS3. There was nothing specific but i realized that graphical fidelity doesn't matter as much as the style. Now i see shit like Watch Dogs and the Assassins Creed games and these games are beyond what i thought was possible as a kid, but at the end of the day it doesn't really matter to my enjoyment of the actual game. Back in the day no matter what a game would probably be good enough, and graphics was a nice cherry on top. Now, every game has good graphics, but none of the other stuff that makes a game good.
I also find the debate around FPS about the same. The more people bitch about Graphics and muh 120 FPS, the more Devs are going to think that's what people want and the more they're going to focus on that and solely that.
Now, all this having been said, if a game goes for good graphics and fails, or does not have a stable, respectable FPS (30 imo) it's a mark against the game, but when all your critiques and criticisms of the game revolve around those two aspects, Devs get the wrong idea and focus on them.
>>333243910
textures aren't graphics you retard. raw graphics in crysis shit on everything, especially EA games you're probably thinking of.
>>333240592
I was blown away the first time I booted up FFVIII.
I think I'm still impressed by graphics, but more so because I focus in on facial animations and other movements that make a character seem more real instead of just a meat puppet.
>>333244106
How are you determining 'graphics' because processing textures is most certainly a part of 'graphics.
>>333244169
textures have been high resolution for over a decade. it's subjective art comparing some 2k textures to other 2k textures let alone the shitty lower resolution textures that ALL games use, modern or not.
>>333244106
>diffuse maps, normal maps, specular maps aren't graphics
Nigger are you high? Go play Crysis again and keep telling yourself it hasn't aged.
As a PCcuck pirate who's [spoilers]torrented[/spoilers] every AAA title released in the past three years:
the last time I said "WOW" unironically at a game's graphics was when I watched a friend play Star Wars Battlefront.
The environmental textures looked phenomenal, and so did the blasters/explosions.
Only really watched it for like 20 minutes, though. Any glaring issues with it that take it out of the running?
>>333244221
.....
You do realize textures vary drastically on a case by case basis. Games don't work soley on 2k locked res for each texture.
>>333244314
>he posts witcher 3 which had many effects that were inferior to the witcher 2
>and was downgraded to last-gen levels
you must be incredibly ignorant.
>>333244365
are you going to keep deflecting by saying you don't like x textures so therefore an entire games graphics are somehow nulled?
>ctrl-F: "bastion"
>zero results
My little sister's taste can't be this bad~!
>>333244458
Now you just aren't even making fucking sense.
>Textures aren't graphics
>All textures in a game are 2k res, devs don't scale textures based on visual priority at all
>you don't like x textures so therefore an entire games graphics are somehow nulled?
>Prompty goes on to call TW3 last gen despite the very screenshot posted being some of the best looking character models and lighting in games
![ir8501_The-Witcher-2-Screenshot-42[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/q0Q91ls.jpg "ir8501_The-Witcher-2-Screenshot-42[1].jpg")
>>333244458
>which had many effects that were inferior to the witcher 2
And this is where you made yourself look like an idiot. Sharpening + bloom =/= better graphics.
![GGXrdR-Demo4[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/OvdS6JN.jpg "GGXrdR-Demo4[1].png")
>>333244349
>lighting
lol. The character face models are the single saving grace of the game, everything else is last-gen.
TW3 only has decent lighting during cutscenes and even then it was unimpressive.
And again, that's simply subjective art. There's no objective advancement in graphics tech in those character faces.
>>333244723
And apparently you haven't even played the game, that's not even a final screenshot of it.
>>333244723
I love how people forget TW2's visual issues
>Worse skin shaders everyone looks metallic
>Horrendous pop-in 15m form Geralt
>Heavily dithered low res dynamic shadows
>Very short range distance fog
>Environments 100x smaller than TW3
>Engine didn't support alternate AA methods from FXAA
>Engine didn't natively support AF
>>333244945
>Cutscene models and lighting vs In-game lighting and models
Shh anon, I've used Redkit I know what you're doing. Stop being a dumbass.
>>333245051
Witcher 2 doesn't use either of those things you retarded shitposter.
>>333244945
I have actually. Here's a screenshot of Crysis that I literally took a minute ago, maximum settings. Compare this to fucking Far Cry 3, a screenshot that I will post in a bit.
>>333244475
>2d game
>graphics
>>333244945
>There's no objective advancement in graphics tech in those character faces.
>What are improved skin shaders
>What are reflective shaders for eyeballs
>What is higher poly count
>What is higher bone and muscle count for animation
>What is Improved attached physics components
>What is improved all variations of texture maps
I'm done here, I've been arguing with an idiot.
>>333240592
That's because nothing has tried to surpass Crysis at max settings yet.
>>333245160
Far Cry 3. Let me see if I can fetch an old Witcher 2 screenshot.
>>333245142
Yes, yes it does. It uses specific ENV lighting methods that the engine changes to when it transitions to cutscenes.
Graphics still impress me. But it has to be inline with a game I'm enjoying. When I'm having fun, the graphics are like the icing. But if it's boring or unfun, it does nothing for me.
>>333245160
That isn't remotely maxed out and Far Cry 3 doesn't have volumetric barely anything or the capability to render millions of physics based particles.
>>333245221
>What are improved skin shaders
Something TW3 doesn't have.
>What are reflective shaders for eyeballs
Something Oblivion and older games had.
>What is higher poly count
Something TW3 barely has, it's barely above last-gen standards.
>What is higher bone and muscle count for animation
Something TW3 barely has, it's barely above last-gen standards.
>What is Improved attached physics components
Something TW3 actually doesn't have.
>What is improved all variations of texture maps
Again, average from last-gen.
>>333245319
TW3 does, 2 does not.
>play F.E.A.R.
>60 FPS
>looking great
>some of the best goddamn lightning out there
>run with basically no resources
>play XCOM2
>barely crack 30fps
>All RAM used up, GPU and CPU at the point of meltdown
>game looks like absolute shit
I think we're taking more and more steps back in development.
>>333245160
>Crysis fags
Dude let it go, the game looked beyond amazing for its time, but now it looks like what it is, a previous gen game, even Crysis 2 looks better.
>>333245419
>Talking out my ass the post
>>333240592
BF3, I remember being really impressed by all of the trailers and demos, and then when I finally played it maxed out on my then top-end PC, all I noticed were the flaws.
I'm still impressed by games. Ori was beautiful and I love the look of water in that game. But the pursuit of photorealism got hit hard by diminishing returns.
When I stopped liking good graphics.
There's too much detail, I can't focus on any one element, all the textures and poly's blend into one indistinguishable gelatinous mass. Every game looks like another, I don't see much difference between Witcher 3 and Skyrim.
When I realized I care more about gameplay than realistic graphics. There's no point to those graphics of the gameplay is ass and butter.
Also my favorite genre is JRPG, why the fuck would I care about nice graphics when most of the games have an anime art style?
>>333240592
dont know how pathetic this sounds but the animation in GTA V impressed the shit out of me. stuff like running, jumping over small fences, and how they transition between them, was so utterly smooth, there seems to be no choppiness in the animation, it impressed me hard.
then again I'm always like two gaming generations behind.
>>333245703
>cop out because he has no argument: the post
You can't prove me wrong in any way because I'm completely correct.
>>333245742
>But the pursuit of photorealism got hit hard by diminishing returns.
full retard. take a look at ue3/4 demos, pt, and similar titles that are plenty photorealistic even in motion.
>>333245809
You might need to get your eyes checked anon. Could need glasses or some shit.
>>333245841
Nice rock textures brah, nice grass without AO, nice low LOD cliffs, nice short range distance fog and nice obvious low lod trees/shrubs only 30m away.
>>333245839
Animation is objectively more important than texture res and lighting.
>>333245841
It just doesn't look that good when I play the game. P.T. was a great example of something that looked realistic through screenshots and video compression, but the "game" itself was full of blurry textures and other imperfections.
i was highly impressed by PT and the new star wars, but i feel like a cohesive and nice looking art direction does a lot more than packing as much detail as possible. games like paper mario and silent hill 2 still look good to this day
>>333245963
>muh textures
Not graphics. AO on grass is retarded too, that's completely unrealistic.
Now post an open world game with volumetric clouds, lighting, particles, and physics based trees. And destruction.
I'll wait.
>>333245249
>That isn't remotely maxed out
I made this webm just to prove you wrong. Crysis is dated.
>>333245562
Learn to read.
>>333246389
Shit I meant to reply to >>333245419
>he still thinks Witcher 2 has better shaders
>>333245841
>saving someone's color corrected screenshot to try to prove your point
>>333246167
You realize that shaders are dependent on textures to make the objects look good, right? Textures are graphics.
>>333246389
Now open the .cfg files. The in-game options don't let you do fucking anything, even the textures aren't maxed out using them.
In before your cop out.
>>333246495
Nice low res textures dude.
>>333246696
>textures don't matter
>except in this game I like
>>333244349
You havemt torrented Bloodborne
>>333246615
>he doesn't know that's completely vanilla and that Crysis itself supports amazing color grading
Proving my point.
>>333246691
>>333246774
Amazing arguments.
I don't care about graphics because I don't play AAA trash not that this means I play pixelshit either
Good graphics nowadays just kinda make me stop every now and then and go "hey this looks nice" and then move on with my bizz, I aint gonna be in awe of the high definition bullets and guns that are currently being fired at me, Nor and i going to pause and pay good attention to the level of detail they went into making a demons entrails.
Environmental graphics is neat, Anything else not so much.
>>333246997
Thanks. We can all rest easy now that we know that. Clearly this thread was for you.
Fucking weebs. They're the muslims of imageboards. No one asked you to come here.
>>333246696
Difference is Witcher 3 is open world, meaning some textures had to be low resolution to speed up loading times and reduce stutter. It makes up for it with large populated cities and enterable buildings that don't need loading screens. Witcher 2 on the other hand is linear, has towns separated by instances, and arguably dated shaders. You're stuck in the past, let it go.
Was recently surprised by how good Far Cry Primal looked. Meh gameplay but beautiful world.
>>333247253
Yes we fucking know. Graphics aren't the end-all-be-all for video games. Every moron including your mother knows this. You aren't Ghandi or enlightened for pointing it out. This thread IS, however, about graphics, though.
You literally cannot mention graphics without people enforcing some negative stigma on it.
>>333247675
damn that game does look good. worth a play?
>>333247675
it's because of all these fedora tipping sperglords who are like "i play games as an intellectual! i want to be told a story by tortured geniuses! graphics dont matter" that you get attacked for saying something as innocuous as "wow, look at those graphics"
absolutely ridiculous.
>>333246696
TW3 can also be maxed beyond what's in the menu.
>>333247684
>>333247781
>>333247854
>1020x574
could you please...
>>333248047
Sorry man couldn't find anything higher res and decent, am well aware.
>>333247793
Overall absolutely.
The game has you pulling levers and pressing buttons for 20 hours but it's an incredibly atmospheric 20 hours.
It's better than every alien movie after Aliens. Optimized beautifully as well.
>>333247675
Drop the fucking venom bro, I was just saying that graphics nowadays dont make me go all "WOW" like they used to.
>"You literally cannot mention graphics without people enforcing some negative stigma on it."
Honestly i think its usually because people dont have good enough shit to run better stuff, So they have to sperg and shout at clouds and say that "I DONT NEED GREATER GRAPHICS, THIS WORKS JUST FINE FOR ME", It's like fucking vegans, Constantly shouting their opinion at people expecting them to care.
>>333240592
Battlefront amazes me every time
>>333248047
Just 4 u m8
Never really card about graphics desu. Give me good art direction and stable 60fps and I'm happy.
I'll never not be impressed by good lighting though
>>333240592
Because shit is stagnated to hell, photorealism is boring and overused and basically I'd rather have games with a good and creative art design.
Maybe when consumer hardware gets good enough for real time raytracing I might get impressed by graphics.
>>333247675
>>333247793
>>333248221
what game is it
>>333248685
>good lighting
Can we get some METRO up in here?
>>333240592
I don't think there was a specific game that made me think that but I believe it was in 2010ish.
I was really getting saturated with games that looked good but were just absolute shit. The thing I value visually is art style/design and stability.
>>333249405
sometimes i play it just to walk around.
I don't know how they did this.
Slavs are literally saving the world right now. In more than just video games too.
