When the fuck will games look like CGI?
never
unless you want to play it at that renderingspeed
which is like a frame a day
>>340728830
In a hundred years, and they'll look like 2010 CG, not 2160 CG.
Uncharted 4 for the Sony playstation 4 says hi....
>>340728830
but anon, aren't vidya game graphics already generated by computers?
>>340728907
This demo runs at 30 fps on a PS4 tho
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sYX9I3ONHc4
>>340728830
CGI =/= Games
Just because they can both be animated doesn't mean they are the same
>>340729007
now play that while spinning and jumping like an idiot and having a dynamic firefight or something
>rendering static shit
>>340728973
He said games that look like CGI, not games that look like kindergarten drawings by 5 year olds.
I'd say we're getting there, honestly.
People will shitpost this game to death, but these characters are infinitely more life like and detailed the the average CGI character in film.
>>340729070
It's a fully dynamic global illumination solution. Obviously no game will look like that on PS4 but on the scorpio/neo, absolutely
>>340729157
>It's a fully dynamic global illumination solution.
Do you have a single fact to back that up?
>>340729070
meh even that's possible with extreme optimization work and top talent, but you'd either have an extremely short vertical slice or you'd never manage to break even
I guess I'm trying to make the point that a lot of our efforts are still largely limited by stuff like organization and logistics than actual hard physical limits
>>340729157
and who will make it?
even if thats true it would take highlevel first party money and take like 5 years
>>340729116
we've reached 2001-levels of CGI
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jYejzdBwvY4
>>340729116
That scene SHOULD look like a prerendered seen because there's no point in it not being prerendered
ie there's no gameplay
ie I can "play" through that 1000 times and it will be literally identical each time
>>340729116
>posts a cutscene
>>340729116
>M-Muh Uncharted...
If you sincerely think Uncharted 4 looks soooooo much better than any other video game, then you clearly haven't seen a cutting edge PC game.
>>340729252
>Full control of the character.
>Have an attack and defense options.
>Not gameplay.
Guess Mario is just a cutscene, since all that faggot does is run and jump.
>>340729216
I remember reading about the engine a few months ago
>>340729236
Games are actually getting easier to develop because of PBR workflows though, so probably not. UC4 and Order 1886 aren't even that far off visually
>>340729357
yeah and UC4 and the order took highlevel first party money and over 3 years to make
>>340729346
>lying
Who do you think you're going to trick?
>>340729457
Are you retarded?
>>340729453
Assassin's Creed Unity is close too
>>340729007
>slow movement
>no physics
>no dynamic breaking of anything
>>340729116
I'd say we are well past that point. This was mo-capped in real-time on stage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ymDg2NI584
>>340729540
unity have like three areas that even comes close
and its not really that close
and its not even 1080p
>>340729095
>>340729550
>Just like movies, except ours run in real time.
>>340729286
It'd a good looking game on a $300 console that's replicating high settings on PC
sure you could show pics of a game running on a decked out PC but its not impressive at all
>>340729721
>trying this hard
>>340728830
The Witcher 3 looks perfect on 4k all details maxed
>>340729637
So you think graphics will just stagnate forever, then? Most AAA games releasing in the next few years will be on-par with UC4 visually. Look at Battlefield 1, Horizon Zero Dawn, even Mirror's Edge looks fantastic
Photorealism is near
Soon...
>>340729286
What's a cutting edge PC game that actually looks cutting edge?
>>340729779
The thing is, the game itself isn't all that impressive considering you could run Crysis 3 at 1080p30 on a $300-$350 PC, and it looks better.
Now what's really impressive is Crysis 3 running on PS3/360.
That's some fucking black magic shit.
>>340728830
When we can readily afford computers able to render that level of quality in real time.
>>340729803
I think The Witcher 3 looks kinda plastic-y, the water especially
GTA V looks much better
>>340728830
Real-time video games will never have animation and lighting quality like this.
>>340729779
It would look good on a PC, but just knowing that it's running on a Playstation is enough to make it look like shit. Sony branding just sours everything it touches. I won't allow their products in my home until they abandon the console market and let their hostage games go. Then they can run free, to PC, where games belong.
>>340729874
I dont think so, it looks better than crysis thats just my opinion though
>>340729923
What makes the animation so much smoother looking? Pure talent or are there actual tech limitations?
>>340729246
not in the lighting department.
>>340728973
>>340729116
>>340729216
>>340729606
>>340729803
Every fucking time this thread pops up i have to come and post this picture. aside from the lighting and model resolution. every single hair on that bear is individually rendered, lit, has applied physics and mass.
Game's are a long long way off even pixar level detail, Don't even talk about ILM or Weta cgi.
Don't be fucking idiots, we aren't anywhere near it and wont be for a long time.
>>340730151
Yes we have, UC4 looks just as good
>>340730197
see
>>340729007
From a lighting perspective we aren't that far off. Sheer detail isn't as important
>>340730197
>Every fucking time this thread pops up i have to come and post this picture. aside from the lighting and model resolution. every single hair on that bear is individually rendered, lit, has applied physics and mass.
source
>>340730073
Better model rigging, no limit on bones (or not as much real time rendering), maybe, I don't know
>>340729990
Your opinion is brain damage, then.
>>340729990
Ehh, you're entitled to your opinion, regardless of what other anons say.
>>340730343
Pixar doesn't use bone rigging on faces, they use deforms all the way. Go look at their behind the scenes shit.
>>340729874
texture resolution isn't everything. geometry complexity and shaders and whatnot advance considerably every year and vary in the computational power they require
>>340730197
That guy with the top hat in the back left is creeping me out.
>>340729116
hello sony friend
>>340730431
>advance considerably every year
No, not really.
In fact, in some cases they actually get worse.
Crysis 3 has comparable geometry to the vast majority of modern games, and pic related isn't even at its best considering when I took the screenshot I was running an HD 7870, a C2Q Q8200, and 6 GB of DDR2 RAM.
The only part I'd agree looks somewhat dated are the character models.
>>340730073
Both. Without time or hardware constraints, they're free to make the art they want. Think of it as the difference between building an action figure and filimg stop motion.
>>340729816
lol no
>>340730336
I'm not a source, but Disney did the same shit in Frozen, and pretty much all big-game CGI movies nowadays are using this kind of tech. Hair physics has come a long way. What you can do in games, being rendered in real time by console hardware, has absolutely nothing to do with what you can do with "render farms", as they call them.
None of what they apply can be pulled of in real time, especially not with player input. You can "spoof" some of the same visuals and come up with something that looks almost as good at a glance, but it will never be like individually rendered strands of hair. Anna's hair in Frozen looks almost too realistic in one scene where it's all frizzed up in bedhead.
>>340730430
I don't know anything about 3d modeling/animation. I'm just taking shots in the dark. How does deforming work?
Also, Zootopia isn't Pixar
>>340730197
I'd say Uncharted 4 still looks better. Art direction > technical capabilities.
>>340730284
There isnt anything happening in that scene though. Everything is static. It looks nice but you wouldn't be able to play that and smash everything, apply gun fights. Anything. We are getting there but we are still a long way off.
>>340730336
Source on what? That the bear is that way? Go watch the dvd extras of the film and also look at the previous work of pixar. Tangled is another prime example of the lengths they go to when it comes to hair rendering detail. You're delusional if you think we are even 1/10th of what pixar can do.
Another case is pic related. this is entirely cgi. even the eyes. we are not near this kind of quality and its already 10 years old.
>>340730640
Uncharted 4 looks better than Toy Story 3? Lmao nigga baka......
>>340729116
>grabs a sword which the enemy doesn't notice
>enemy takes a giant swing at you, could easily dodge and stab him
>hit his sword instead
???
>>340730604
>but Disney did the same shit in Frozen
Yea, Frozen isn't exactly the best example for high-detail CGI.
>>340730674
>Lmao
>nigga
>baka
>......
>>>/b/
>>340730520
vegetation looks bad and lighting is inferior to the kind of shit we're starting to see in games like ff15 and uncharted 4.
>>340730209
it *can* look good but it never does this gen with all games being downgraded console ports
>>340730520
They have Crysis 3 on sale for like £2, is it worth checking out?
Is this a CGI thread?
>>340730714
I was talking specifically about Anna's hair, if you'll bother to read instead of skimming for something to greentext.
It doesn't surprise me at all that Disney cheaped out on things nobody was going to pay attention to. Even their classic animated films utilized major corner-cutting. Pixar is a lot more detail-oriented.
>>340730806
get Crysis 1 instead
>>340728830
X years ago on PC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSXyztq_0uM
Though in all honesty, CGI is made in renderfarms, not on your consumer-grade PC
>>340730651
Like I said earlier, it's a GI solution. Scorpio/Neo games will be able to handle those visuals alongside physics-heavy interactions
Obviously Pixar levels of detail are a long way off though
>>340730790
The vegetation is actually much better than what's employed in either of those games and the lighting is just as good, complete with proper refraction shadows which neither FF15 nor UC4 have.
>>340730824
already got it with the expansion senpai
>>340728830
>When will everyone in the world have a $1k graphics card so devs can waste lots of time and money focusing on high end graphics?
>>340730640
This isn't about art direction though. OP was talking about reaching CGI levels of detail. and as much as i like U4 and think it looks sensational, it's sadly nothing compared to the cgi in use today.
But okay lets look at your uncharted art style. And look at modern cgi and compare. It can't even hold a candle to SE cgi. and they are NOTHING against Pixar, ILM and Weta.
>>340730812
>>340728830
games already look better than toy story
>>340730878
Uncharted surpassed crysis, just give it a rest gramps
>>340730930
>>340730957
Toy Story 1 sure, but that looks terrible now. I'm referring more to mid-late 2000s era CGI, hence the wall-e screen
>>340728830
When technology reaches a point where said CGI can be rendered in real time and in an interactive environment.
Today's video games look about the same as CGI looked around 10-15 years ago.
So in about 10-15 years games will look like today's CGI. That lag will always exist due to the difference in power required to render in real time versus rendering one frame at a time over many, many hours to create a pre-rendered movie.
>>340730714
wow that is some low quality washed out shit. honestly blood and wine occasionally looks better than this
>>340730991
Crysis 1 unmodded?
Sure.
Crysis 3?
No, not even close.
>>340730991
well, UC4 runs at 30 fps in singleplayer, where the graphics are
and crysis is 10 years old
>>340730991
>game released 9 years later looks better
>in SOME aspects
Does Uncharted have a "photo mode"?
>>340730991
it's impressive what talented devs can do. it probably forces them to think creatively to work within the limitations of console hardware
>>340731082
>No, not even close.
Feel free to prove it then, Uncharted has done vegetation the best there is no contest
Does anyone have that cool video on the tech behind The Good Dinosaur and how they rendered the entire "map" that they used and the volumetric weather and the things like that? I can't find it.
>>340728830
You want games to look like pic related?
>>340731178
>Uncharted has done vegetation the best
Yea no, see >>340729874 and >>340729990
>>340731134
*all aspects
>>340730916
>Weta
District 9's CGI just looks like black magic to me. Normally I find CGI jarring and distracting in movies, but D9 was the big exception for me.
>>340730991
This looks ridiculous man, we really aren't far at all from photorealism
>>340730991
>photo mode
>>340729457
He's right actually. You have full movement and can choose when to attack/block in that segment. The only QTE style 'scripted' parts only pop up during transitions to the next phase of the boss fight.
>>340728830
>It's another muh graphics thread
>>340731239
This post >>340729990 is Uncharted 4 if you didn't realize
>>340731134
that's pretty much the only argument that's been made. for example console limitations in the texture department haven't been worked around nearly as effectively as lighting
>>340731005
What is this from?
>>340730991
Is this a cutscene...??
>>340731317
No shit, I linked to it.
The foliage there looks like crap.
>>340731254
Looks like Witcher 3
Remember when games weren't loaded with screen-space effects and relied on actual graphics like lighting, model and texture quality to look impressive?
I miss those days.
>>340731369
>The foliage there looks like crap.
I'm still waiting to see the best foliage from crysis 3
>>340730853
I'd love to agree with you but we are still yet to see anything groundbreaking come from the current generation of consoles. and i doubt the ScorpNeo will be any different. We'll have higher resolution rendering sure but once you start chucking in the million other processes it's going to fall short. But i am hoping im pleasantly surprised. Just don't be fooled by tech demos and benchmarks. these are not indicative of a real game.
Uncharted and by extension ND are wizards and create really cool ways to bake lighting, hide the smoke and mirror effect to give a better visual fidelity. I just hope in 5 years we don't need to tricks and we get there on the merits of the hardware. Maybe 10.
Uncharted 4 IS the best looking game on the market right now, hands down. SW:B looks phenomenal too but it falls a little short of that way U4 "hides" the game-y parts. Crysis had the crown for a long time, modded Crysis 3 can also look really damn good. But ND and U4 are just above the rest. I would give my left nut to see what they could do with a PC exclusive targeted at high end gpu users.
Have another screenshot of an average cgi company that looks jaw droppingly real
>>340731352
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo-gfy49svk
>>340731363
no its the dolled up photomode that adds extra graphics
>>340731397
What's a screen-space effect?
I never understood how filters make The Order look better than its actual graphics
>>340731017
well we're currently approaching 2001 cgi so give it 5 or 6 more
>>340731417
>>340731378
Still salty huh? Don't worry, you might be able to afford a 970 once the 10XX series gets its legs.
>>340731254
I watched a friend play most of U4 and the whole goddamned game looked absurdly nice, much better than this pic. I had actually started to believe the shitposting memes but the game didn't disappoint in the visual department at all.
It's like when they post the really shitty looking Bloodborne screens and .webms, and they look absolutely nothing like the game I play almost daily. I'm not saying the games are flawless by any means, but every screen of a Sony game on /v/ has an agenda behind it, be it for or against the game.
It was mostly the bodies and faces that got me.
>>340731504
>>340731429
You haven't explained why the Mizuchi demo is infeasible. It's a real-time global illumination engine running at 30fps on a PS4
It doesn't even look much better than UC4
QUANTUM
COMPUTERS
>>340731480
>What's a screen-space effect?
An effect applied in the screen space (i.e. the viewport) and not in the actual game world.
e.g. anti-aliasing, fake HDR, ambient occlusion, etc.
>>340731504
Uncharted did foliage better
>>340731246
Yeah anon, weta are super hit and miss. the LotR cgi looks pretty dated, Hobbits cgi was always shitty but something happened with D9. It's insane how good that film looks.
>>340729246
No, not even close, the watch Sherk in Blu-Ray recently, puts any game to fucking shame
Especially the hair
>>340731290
it's still context sensitive which is 99% of what makes a qte a qte. just because it's happening during gameplay instead of a cutscene doesn't mean anything. it's just a shitty middle ground that's been seen before but never defended as not a qte until uncharted fanboys started defending this shit boss fight
>>340730913
more like
>when will developers focus more on game engine to make it easier to work with and optimize well, than shilling their game " cuz we got fishz that swim away when you go near"
>>340731640
>>340731579
>>340731504
Both look good to me.
What's the problem here?
>>340731645
King Kong was embarassingly bad as well.
>125 posts
>38 posters
Oy vey
>>340730916
Weta are trash
>>340731640
Try again without using photo mode.
Here, I'll help.
>>340731504
this is a tightly controlled bullshot. in game but using shit like dof and probably a texture mod to enhance how "realistic" it looks
>>340731579
The geometry in that pic is too obvious. The game looks dated. Uncharted has done foliage better still imo
>>340731669
>it's still context sensitive
What do you mean? You can press a button to attack, move around, or block whenever you want. It's like a shitty fighting game.
When I think QTE, I think RE4 where an FMV or cutscene plays and you press button prompts not to die.
>>340731553
Those mushrooms don't look all that great
>>340731741
Wow that's 3 whole posts per person, almost as if there is some kind of discussion happening in this thread or something.
>>340731553
great art design is hiding low res textures limited geometry and sparse grass textures.
also 3d dynamic vegetation when?
>>340731762
wow that looks like fucking garbage
>>340731781
>Doesn't have a single "screenshot" of his own
Try harder, maybe you'll get paid more
>>340731797
Yes, a very stimulating
>DUDE UNCHARTED LMAO
discussion
>>340731254
has this got a filter or something over it because it looks like complete ass
seriously the water quality is fucking terrible, and the shadows are straight outta 2005, everything looks so flat are ugly
>>340731781
>The geometry in that pic is too obvious.
What does that even mean?
>>340731579
is this crisis 3? that games like 4 or 5 years old. makes sense for consoles to be lagging a few years behind
>>340731767
>this is a tightly controlled bullshot.
Yea no, get your head out of your ass anon.
>>340731863
Crysis 3 is only 3 years old actually.
>>340731668
why is vegetation so graphically intensive? sparse 2d patches of grass in games is the worst shit
>>340731902
Render a metric fuckton of 2D patches, apply physics, apply shadows
Character models are fine
What pisses me off to no end is that every single game has terrible ground textures
>>340731894
3 years? Wow, it feels like forever ago
>>340731781
>The geometry in that pic is too obvious. The game looks dated.
>>340731762
I just did here >>340731781 and here, pic related. Stop using compressed images and pretending like you have a point, whats in discussion here in not graphical fidelity but technical detail. The foliage in Uncharted 4 is complex and impressive knowing the game is running on a laptop cpu
>>340731832
You're free to fuck off if you don't like what you see.
>>340732009
>The foliage in Uncharted 4 is complex and impressive
No, not really, even the interactivity and physics was done better in Crysis 3 3 years prior, and Crysis 3 ran on PS3/360, so the weak nature of the PS4 isn't an excuse.
>>340732038
You first, nigglet
>>340731861
games can only process so many triangles. the more triangles the more realistic until you cap on diminishing returns which hasn't happened yet.
look at a objects in newer games compared to older and you'll see more and more edges to thing to the point where current games can achieve a naturalistic appearances
>>340732009
Why don't PC devs put this much effort into the much more powerful hardware at their disposal?
If Uncharted looks like this on PS4 hardware, PC games should make my dick explode.
>>340732110
Photo mode
>>340732072
i'm not the one having a cry about it.
>>340732092
>where current games can achieve a naturalistic appearances
No, not at all.
In fact, a lot of current games have the same low-quality geometry we've been seeing in games for years.
>>340731762
were finally starting to see tesselation in games. fromsoft does it better. took fucking forever.
>>340732110
>PC devs
No such thing, no one owns PC to spend billions on developing exclusives
>>340732170
Don't have an Uncharted thread to attend? This started as a CGI one
>>340732197
>were finally starting to see tesselation in games.
Uwotm8?
Tessellation has been a thing for fucking years now, and it's been common as fuck since like 2011.
>>340732061
>No, not really
Yeah it looks better than crysis, it's time to move on.
>even the interactivity and physics
I know this is reaching but the physics in Uncharted are fine, foliage reacts intuitively when it is stepped on or brushed against the player
Crysis 3 looks excellent, but it is dated and Uncharted 4 has surpassed it requiring a fraction f the hardware to run at max settings and it is impressive.
Singing out
-bulldog
>>340731669
I did this shit all through Resident Evil 5 and I don' see any threads shiposting about it. But I guess it's okay when Japan does it.
I've literally never had an issue with QTE heavy games. If I did, I just wouldn't play them. Nobody else has an issue, either. Until it's a western game, PS4 exclusive, and Sony owned stuido. Then it's just shit.
>>340731861
Polygons.
Crysis 1 looks good overall, but the textures and polygon count are very glaring. People who defend it as looking better than top current gen games tend to ignore that fact.
What happens far in the future when they reach the fps cap? Will they increase real life's fps cap?
>>340731645
>>340731645
LOTR cgi is dated, those movies came out a long time ago as far as CGI goes. For its age, and for just how much CGI it had in it, along with Jacksons absolute newbishness at using it, I'd say LOTR looks remarkably good for when it came out and how it was made. It's also complimented by the massive fucking amount of practical, detailed props, costumes, and makeup went into that trilogy.
With D9, Weta also made a lot of real shit, like the Prawn weapons, that look so fucking cool and "blend" with the CGI and just bring it all together.
I don't know what's wrong with the goddamned hobbit, but it looks like shit. I know they didn't put half the effort into it physically, so it's just plastered in CGI. It's sad that Fellowship of the Ring looks better than the entire Hobbit trilogy.
>>340731702
King Kong looked like shit until the bug pit. That bug pit is still fucking spooky.
>>340731586
Real time GI is hard but it's not the hardest things games have to face if they want to be cgi levels. Take any modern film with exceptional cgi. They apply translucency to EVERYTHING. Because, funnily enough, Pixar found out when creating the work for A Bugs Life. Literally everything in life is translucent on some level. That is fucking insane. But that's off topic.
The reason i don't see that tech demo being feasible in a game setting is because there is next to nothing happening in that scene. There is no applied physics, no individual particle effects. Nothing that a normal game would have. if you run that tech demo on a neo, sure it's do exactly that. But literally the only things the console wold need to care about is to run the predetermined animations of the robot, render the models, textures and so for and apply the GI.
Not think of doing those things and adding a player in, with other robots. all having to dynamically move in response to the player, the AI processes having to need to power, the animations needed power. now add the ability to destroy these robots and the displays around you, then you have the applied physics of each individually rendered component moving interdependently to each other. needed more power. now add particle effects from the destruction like smoke and sparks which also effect the GI, now add physics to the projectiles needed to effect these robots and the destruction of them. Everything im listing is taking the processing power devoted to the GI, the textures and the pre determined robot and using it elsewhere, thus slowing down the process of those things in that tech demo suddenly you 30fps is now 10.
>>340732246
>Yeah it looks better than crysis
No, it doesn't.
>and Uncharted 4 has surpassed it requiring a fraction f the hardware to run at max settings and it is impressive.
You're delusional anon.
The foliage in Uncharted 4 is generally blurry and low-quality, especially when it comes to texture detail.
Unfortunately, Naughty Dog is no longer the master of console graphics.
>>340732174
but this just isn't true. games even 5 years ago couldn't create realistic looking mountainsides because of the amount of curves and edges. now they can. get your head out of your ass.
>>340732110
Because they try to develop for lower end PCs too and as a result limit how good the highest settings can get
Whatever happened to VXGI? Just another nvidia meme that never went anywhere?
>>340732313
We augment our eyes.
You shitpost, but 300fps around is where the human eye stops noticing a difference. Fighter pilots can only recognise flashes of light at intervals as low as 1/300 of a second
>>340732313
By that time you'll be strapped permanently in to a VR world anyway.
>>340732210
But /v/ told me that consoles dying and exclusives disappearing would only increase competition and raise the production quality of games.
Who cares about grafix? I want hand-drawn isometrics back
>>340732319
Oh don't get me wrong, i think LotR looks phenomenal, but if you compare to some of the cgi out there today it looks average but its not a fair comparison i know. LotR is a masterpiece in film making and it'll always be that way for me.
>>340732369
>especially when it comes to texture detail.
nup. texture detail looks great, almost photo realistic
>>340732432
The average bloke is not a fighter pilot, anon
>>340732457
There's like loads of them dude.
>>340732372
>now they can.
Which games?
Please, tell me, I'm still waiting for a game that has mountains that don't look like shit.
>>340731762
>game has a feature that lets players experience increased visual fidelity
>d-do not use that feature
pcucks everybody
did people forget photo mode upscales the game a ton?
UC4 looks like shit in action.
>>340732498
https://boards.fireden.net/v/search/image/gKxzBFEAPt99AMgMl8m0Eg/
Piss off
>>340732498
>texture detail looks great, almost photo realistic
Alright, I'm convinced that this is falseflagging used to make Sony fans look bad.
>>340732514
I can't think of any, they all just use 3D objects seen from an isometric view
>>340732457
90% of that is made up of 3d models though brobeans. Then either flattened or applied movement limitations to the player and camera. Resident Evil would have been a better example. But i hear you iso games are great for art.
>>340731005
>girl grabs her huge fucking minigun
>nerd summons his staff
>chef just grabs his frying pan
Hue
Nice CG though.
>>340730692
There were about two dozen different instances where one or both of them left themselves completely unguarded and the other could have stabbed them but went for a swing at their sword instead.
Right near the end you see the guy the player's fighting against actually use his sword hand to PUNCH instead of stab, which would've taken a 100ms flick of the wrist to accomplish.
It's hollywood swordfighting. I fucking hate it and how fake it is.
>>340732617
Pillars of Eternity
Shadowrun Returns
UnderRail
Torment Tides of Numenera soon too
>>340732574
Perhaps you should tell your friends to first? >>340730512? Or do you turn a blind eye to when they do it?
>>340732329
Reading this back makes sense to me because i typed it but fuck i need to go to bed because i make some mad typos. Sorry anons.
>>340732620
wtf is a brobeans?
>>340732795
>Bloobloo they make fun my repeated shilling
>>340732765
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFBK-eVl76M
>>340729116
The reason people shitpost this game to death is due to the fact that graphics stagnated 9 years ago. PCucks have seen photo-realistic visuals numerous times in the past 9 years. PC hardware advances so fast that photo-realistic visuals have already happened to that audience, so to Consolefags, this a wonder of graphical fidelity that nobody has ever seen before.
Personally, I think the most important thing to making a game look good, isn't the geometry or the amount of polgyons. Not even the textures.
It's the lighting. Just the lighting turns shit around massively and makes anything look good.
>>340732765
>It's hollywood swordfighting. I fucking hate it and how fake it is.
Well to be fair, Drake isn't really fighting to kill and Rafe is a bit of a prick show off.
>>340732865
Thad Castle.
>>340732554
they just hope no one notices
Are we at least Toy Story levels of real-time rendering yet?
>>340732952
>PCucks have seen photo-realistic visuals numerous times in the past 9 years.
The best photo realistic looking game on PC now looks dated and worse than Uncharted 4 though, they might gotten them earlier but they are now the last despite the glaring hardware advantage. Witcher 3 is the only modern PC game that really takes advantage of the hardware now and it doesn't look like PC is getting many more in the immediate furture besides possibly watchdogs 2 which will be borowing tech from Uncharted 4.
>>340732554
This is from standing still and pressing the share > screenshot button.
I still haven't even been able to figure out how to turn on photo mode. it's not in any menu for me. So, you're an idiot. And im also an idiot but you're a bigger one for thinking this game doesn't look good out of photo mode.
>>340732265
Anon, they're talking about Crysis 3.
#nextgen
CGI quality visuals.
>>340733196
Toy Story 1? Yeah. But not 2 or 3. Pixar kicked shit into overdrive when they realized how much money was in a cgi cartoon film.
>>340733254
I know. I'm just making note of fags who like to post Crysis 1 and ignore its terrible textures.
>>340732901
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5w2Mh6CyXo
>>340733230
>This is from standing still and pressing the share > screenshot button.
Nice google results, faggot
>>340733327
>implying cgi doesnt glitch out
Which even proves my point in this thread that games can't compare. It's like comparing stage to screen. one has to do it "real time" and the other gets to do it over and over until it's perfect.
So look at your biggest budget stage play to your biggest budget non cgi heavy film. which one has more detail/locations/sets/costume details. Movies.
>>340733460
They're not even trying to hit each other, I don't get it
>>340731005
Based chef
>>340733482
>>340733482
You reversed it and found my uploaded folder on imgur? Congrats. Here have the whole folder wiseass /a/5jthK
>>340733230
>>340733230
yeah that does look pretty bad
I want sonyponies to go
>>340730651
Also Monsters Inc.
The DVD in that has info about how they created Sully.
>>340730197
And none of that is real time. It was rendered in a fucking FARM of computers for years, frame by frame.
>>340733723
Nice damage control, anonymous faggot
>>340733568
They absolutely are, you're just blind or retarded.
>>340733568
Because if they were trying to hit each other the fight would be over in seconds?
Even nowadays when CQC is much more advanced and rigorous than it was in the iron ages, real fights would barely last more than a minute before ending up on the ground.
>>340733878
>You'll never krav maga in vidya
>>340732952
Why is it always "we have games that look that good" and never "look at this example game that looks that good"?
Is it because you're lying?
>>340733807
>>340733810
Exactly. We are so far off modern cgi for real time games it's stupid to even talk about it. but these threads come up all the damn time and i always make the exact same posts. modern CGI tech is insane. it makes game engines look like a joke visually.
pls
>>340734096
>Posting the multiplayer
>>340734120
pls
>>340734197
Also multiplayer.
It runs in 900p with reduced graphics to achieve 60fps
>>340734197
Looks so much better in bullshot mode
>>340734197
>multiplayer beta 900p upscaled.
PC cucks on permanent ass hurt mode
>>340734197
is this a ps3 game?
Pls every game on this shitbox looks the same
you are not fooling anyone
>>340728830
Never, because CGI of <current year> will always look better than real-time graphics of <current year> due to having infinitely more rendering power.
If you want to talk about 2016 real-time graphics, they've already surpassed CGI from the 90's.
>>340730991
It's sad because it hasn't in any way.
Physics? No. Lighting? No, it's all baked shit. Geometry? No. Particles? No.
Crysis is still literally more graphically impressive than any other game, if only for the fact it has volumetric lighting/particles and soft shadows in a physics based environment. Forget the other cool stuff, that alone makes it better than Battlefront or Assassin's Creed games(which both look better than Uncharted 4).
>>340731363
No
>>340728830
>see amazing CGI
>move on to play with PS 2 tier graphics
all you´re doing by adding cinematics is making me want to watch movies coz they dont look like shitty source engine titles and dont force you to restart a scene if the hero didnt jump far enough
>>340735998
You're still here?
>>340736217
Not op
>>340735859
That looks like shit though and requires a $5000 PC to get it running on that level. You go so far only to get clowned by a console and start spouting things about physics without any proof that Uncharted 4 already dose it better
>>340736493
>That looks like shit though and requires a $5000 PC to get it running on that level.
That image is like 9 years old and the game isn't even maxed out or modded much.
I'm sorry you haven't played the game though, maybe one day you'll have a job so you can buy yourself a toaster from 2009 to play Crysis with.
>>340736748
It looks good and is technically impressive but Uncharted 4 looks better and considering it's running on significantly weaker hardware, it makes it far less impressive. When a console game looks as good as a maxed out and modded crysis screenshot running on a PC that costs 6 grand, doesn't that make PC look bad?
>>340737106
It doesn't look better though, especially in motion, and it's not graphically impressive in any way that I can tell. It's also being run on much more powerful hardware(Crysis was optimized for 2005 hardware) and it's linear + capped at 30fps.
Nice photomode bro but that looks like crap.
>>340737283
Why are you talking to him? Is he not being clear enough that he's trolling you?
>>340737402
>I was merely pretending
owned haha
has someone a photomode pic from MadMax?
>>340729923
I give it less than 20 years.
>>340729923
i didn't watch disney cartoons for a long time
is zootopia any good?
>>340737821
not bad at all, i r8 it an 8/10
>>340737821
Story is ok, what it really shines is the animation and the quality of the cgi which is gorgeous
>>340735859
The baked shit isn't bad tough. Look at mirror's edge, the baked lighting made it beautiful.
>>340738218
It's not impressive. Mirror's Edge has better visuals than Uncharted 4 too, what's your point?
>>340728830
Right now
Games are computer generated
>>340738538
That realtime lighting isn't as good as baked lightning yet and that baked lightning is an interesting technique for games. The lightning in the picture feels a lot more natural than the realtime light.
>>340731254
Can someone please tell me why games keep getting more and more washed out every year?
>>340730197
Oh come on man, toy story has pretty shitty 3d, people just give it a pass because they're toys. All the human models in those movies look like complete dogshit.
>>340737106
https://boards.fireden.net/v/search/image/iPKzqfIQ2SbxBrE7F1IQCw/
You pinning for that employee of the month award?
>>340729923
>that slight eye movement when she switches between which of his eyes she's focusing on
Oh my dick, that level of detail is succulent
>>340728830
when game budgets surpass the billion mark and you will have 95% of the game as DLC
>>340731843
Nope, this is just how Uncharted looks when it's actually playing and not in photo mode like the sonyggers keep posting.
Congratulations, your eyes have finally been opened.
>>340740315
The person responsible for photo mode needs to be lynched
I'd personally like to point out that Square Enix's CGI seems to have hit a fucking jumpoff since Spirits Within.
Too bad King's Glaive isn't an actual game.
I'd take FF XV or whatever with the ENTIRE protagonist cast supplanted by the Kings Glaive cast.
Fucking so tired of children in my goddamn JRPGs & japanese games in general.
Kojima needs to make me another middle aged protagonist.
