When will you realize that the level of graphical quality possible on a platform is now greatly dependent on the amount of effort the developers put into the graphics and that most devs don't put in much effort?
This has always been the case
That said, your pic couldn't have possibly run on a PS3/360, regardless of 'effort'.
>>342708601
You forgot to mention the fact that the order is a corridor shooter. Developers can hide imperfections and use tricks to make the game look better when they can funnel the player down linear hallways and control exactly what they see.
The ps4 wouldn't be able to have those kind of graphics in a more open game.
>>342709030
Yet Naughty Dog pulled Uncharted 2 on the motherfucking PS3, and we all know devs can pull something better than Uncharted 2, on the PS4/XBONE.
But hey, kids nowadays want open world games, right?
>>342709030
Yes there are still limits, especially given 10 year old hardware like PS3 but within reason the limits for more modern hardware aren't as great as people here tend to say
>>342709649
That pic doesn't look anywhere near as good as the OP's. Low poly everywhere, worse textures and 720p.
While to a degree what you are saying is true they basically had to sacrifice a shitload just to make it run and I would personally rather take a game that is actually a game that looks worse.
>>342710358
u wot m8
>>342708601
you cant make consoles render more than 20 feet around you regardless of your effort.
>>342709649
>This whole post
>>342709268
You make that sound like a bad thing.
If you're obsessed with graphics why not allow devs to cut corners in order to maximise focus on graphics?
Same shit happened with Isolation, it's mostly corridors/vents/modular rooms yet it looks amazing, because of the minimal load it uses.
Not every game HAS to be open world with side quests and dungeons.
If a dev has a story to tell why not let them focus on the story and make everything look nice?
>>342710395
English not your first language?
>>342708601
Replace "effort" with "time" and you're mostly closer to the turth.
Graphics (the geometry and texture side) get better the longer the artist responsible fine tunes them, but if you do it for too long it drags out the development process and the details become so miniscule as to not be noticeable anymore and not worth the time invested.
>>342710370
PC gamers wouldn't
>>342708601
that game runs at 1920*800 and at 24fps. that alone is going to free lots of resources so you can have nicer effects and shit.
also, every single part of that game is scripted, so they can optimize it a fuck ton.
>>342711508
>at 24fps
No.
>>342708601
It's also greatly dependent on what graphical technology can pull off, new advances in software included. The Order looks so good because it's using Physically Based Shaders that simulate the effects of light on a wide range of surface types more realistically.
This is really noticeable on PS2. Once you leave the established "good games" and even some classics like GTA 3. Absolute shit everywhere. But then you have Silent Hill 3 running on he same machine.
>>342711106
Assets in current AAA titles are still baked down from source assets at pretty much the same level of detail as the sort that were used in, say, early Unreal 3 Engine tites. That's nearing ten years ago now, and the software used to make game assets is only getting faster and easier to use.
Regardless of how much time a bad or mediocre 3D artist puts into their work they're never going to be able to make anything as convincing or good looking as an expert who puts the effort in to know the technology and create a coherent and good looking artstyle. The assertion that studios that make good looking games are doing so just by putting more "Time" into their assets is fucking retarded.
