When are we gonna reach photorealism in games?
>>343316475
PT was pretty close
when consoles stop holding back technology
>>343316475
5-10 more years, hopefully.
Wasn't there some old prediction stating that we'd reach that level by 2024?
>>343316475
Ever played driveclub?
>>343316475
We can already have it in some limited games with mostly static environments, but having it in most games will take a long time. The gap between photorealism and just good looking graphics is big, and although we've made progress it will be at least 20 more years before we can reach that level barring a major surprise.
>>343317482
Consoles aren't holding back technology, price is. When photorealism is possible on a $400 machine, we'll achieve it, be it on console or PC.
>>343317482
>consoles hold back technology
>meanwhile the most photorealistic games are on ps4
Why would you want to play something that looks like real life?
>>343320427
Once photorealism is achieved, you'll finally understand the purpose of the graphics race. Imagine Skyrim looking like this.
>>343320427
Why wouldn't I? Fucking retard.
>>343316475
Is that even a game or something I can render off blender?
>>343320871
It's a UE4 tech demo, runs at 90fps on a 980.
>>343320871
It's a UE4 free tech demo called unreal paris
>>343320871
Here's a better tech demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9h0hVZ3WIs4
Literally indistinguishable from reality.
>>343321267
Until you see those shitty trees
>>343316475
UE4 can do it right now if you own a PC, but GPU hardware isn't quite good enough to handle it reliably at the consumer level.
>>343321506
Nah, still close enough.
>>343320427
So you can alter "real life" to your liking.
>>343321548
>in games
Does anyone else not want graphics to improve to photorealistic levels?
I feel like it'd drag away from the actual gameplay and it'd make playing older games feel like eating expired milk
>>343321818
UE4 is a game engine, anon.
>>343317482
>he thinks companies would exclusively make high budget games specifically for basement dwellers with overpriced GPUs
>>343321908
Yet there is still no game on it that reaches photorealism, and probably won't be for a long time.
>>343321818
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcGQpjCztgA
>>343321831
idiot, people still play shitty n64 looking games and have tons of fun despite games like battlefront existing
>>343322057
Not sure you're thinking these responses through. All someone would have to do is publish a game with those graphics. That can be done right now. It could have been done yesterday. Just because no one has done it that does not somehow mean that it's impossible.
>>343322057
there wont be because the hardware isnt capable of rendering it in real time in an actual gameplay environment. unless its some shitty walking simulator where it only takes place in a tiny location.
we already reached it
I feel like photorealism will kill anything interesting with gaming. We've already seen it happen somewhat. When perfect photorealism happens, people will want to make nothing but interactive movies exclusively in mostly realistic settings, with only human characters and no fantasy or aliens, or robots, or anything.
>>343316475
why? Most games attempting photorealism ive seen looked garbage. I'd rather have games that just try and look good than try and look realistic.
>>343321267
Reflections on surfaces not moving smoothly enough runs it all though
>>343322321
There have been plenty of tech demos that reached photorealism, you're retarded if you think that means an actual game can do it because of that.
>>343322406
What about non AAA studios? Who would be forcing them to do that kind of work? Dumb statement.
>>343322524
>runs
ruin
>>343322524
If you didn't know it was a tech demo you wouldn't have noticed.
>>343322594
It's mostly non AAA shit studios who try to make the most realistic looking survival horror game
>>343322583
You have no idea what you're talking about. Ignorance is forgivable. Stupidity is not. What you just said was stupid.
>>343322406
The reason we see games like that is because consoles can't handle anything more while pushing those graphics. Crysis manages to look better than or on par with those games while having a deep amount of dynamism and interactivity, because it was developed as a PC exclusive that actually wanted to show what the platform is capable of.
GTA6 could look far better than modded GTA4. Will it? Fuck no, consoles will hold it back.
>>343316475
I just want dynamic persistent environments, but that's gonna take a LOT of power to achieve. I can't wait until damage physics really starts to get better. We need more games to follow Red Faction: Guerilla's thought process. That game was so fucking under appreciated for what it did.
>>343322824
Give an example?
>>343322990
Nice argument. As I thought, you're a fucking retard.
>>343323008
>literally 10fps
>>343316475
When consoles stop existing
>>343321818
>>343322057
>>343322337
>>343322583
Only reason games aren't up to that level yet is consoles. Neo and Scorpio, assuming 980/980ti performance respectively, will be able to handle photorealism. Not just interior photorealism either, see pic related (also UE4, in real time).
Generally, tech demo visuals take 3-4 years to materialize in final products. So we're looking at 2019 or 2020.
>>343323015
I know cloud processing is a meme but it might be the only way in our lifetime to get super dynamic physics and environments with a game that still looks good.
>>343322687
I would have, especiallysince at first i couldnt tell what it was, i just saw some sort of stuttering and thought it was the vid loading slowly, then i looked closer and saw everything moved smooth except reflections.
Mind, i'm not saying i could tell otherwise, i couldnt, but that stuttering reflections really give it away.
>>343319397
10 years after Crysis is in 2017
next year expect photorealism
>>343316475
What's the point though?
>>343323247
70fps on a 4 year old PC.
>>343323371
Considering the rest of the consoles are still weak as fuck and those upgrades are memes, no.
>>343316843
it wasn't
>>343320316
already possible, devs are just shit
>>343320416
>proving his point
>>343323553
>rest of the consoles are still weak as fuck
Well, yeah, obviously. That's why I said 2019 or 2020, whenever MS and Sony allow Scorpio/Neo exclusivity.
>>343323375
I've got high hopes for Crackdown 3 honestly.
>>343321267
>Literally indistinguishable from reality
lol no
>>343323527
What's the point of living? Kill yourself.
>>343323371
>Only reason games aren't up to that level yet is consoles
>its the consoles fault meme again
no. not even exclusive PC games look like that either.
its not the consoles fault. its incompetent developers.
>>343323910
Competent developers don't release PC exclusive games.
>>343323730
I wouldn't, that looks fake as fuck.
>>343323730
Their making a third one? I hope we can still be an oppressive fist of facism, to many games make you play the freedom fighter
>>343323910
There aren't any high budget PC exclusives because of consoles.
See: Crytek
>>343323662
I mean the rest of those 'new' consoles are weak.
>>343324032
>because of consoles.
No, because PC sales aren't enough to warrant high budget exclusives.
It's safe to say that there isn't really a technological constraint anymore, nor a hardware-related one. Plenty of tech-demos out there showing, that in principle, you can already build (and render at sufficient fps) environments that are somewhat indistinguishable from video recordings.
There's obviously the issue of character animation etc., but these are just details.
The more limiting factor is time and money - and I don't really see an advantage at the moment in having a hyper-realistic-looking game. Apart from the technical finesse, a good game doesn't 'need' it. Considering the recent rise in indie pixel-bloaters, it seems that the gaming community prefers their games to look like games.
>>343323995
Try reading the comments before you post
>>343323995
>>343324009
We will see. One can be hopeful though.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efrHuznT9lQ
>>343323910
>not even exclusive PC games look like that either.
Unreal Tournament is in the works. People are still playing with UE4 and can produce some really nice results. One of the first games to feature photorealism will probably be some kind of room sim. Not too many people are doing much with it though due to the workload. Making even something simple like this and what OP posted takes months.
>>343324181
Crysis 1 sold more than 2 and 3 combined, being exclusive while the others were multi-platform. Even Skyrim sold the most on PC.
So no.
>>343324376
Just because you're retarded enough to believe in cloud magic doesn't mean I do.
>>343324458
>>343323910
Wrong image.
>>343324032
>There aren't any high budget PC exclusives because of consoles.
yeah because developers know that PC is a shit platform to develop games for because games simply dont sell on it.
stronger hardware means fucking nothing.
>>343324295
"Time and money" isn't a limiting factor either. Assets have actually gotten easier to craft since current gen started, PBR pipelines really speed shit up.
The limitation is unfortunately still hardware. Once Neo and Scorpio exclusives hit we'll reach photorealism. Or at least, near-photorealism.
>>343324181
>>343324559
Not to mention PC has a lot of high-budget MMOs with good graphics but these don't count right?
>>343324513
Yeah they sold more during sales, at like $10 per copy. That means literally nothing.
Ask yourself why there are high budget console exclusives but no high budget PC exclusives.
>>343324559
http://www.pcr-online.biz/news/read/pc-games-have-surpassed-console-games-globally/033849
And then reality goes and spoils your fantasy.
>>343323861
Seriously can you quantify the gains in immersion vs. the cost of the hardware requirements?
I'd prefer if they used the computing power for something more useful like better physics engines or AI.
>>343324631
>high-budget
Wrong
>good graphics
Wrong
>>343324595
>>343324595
>"Time and money" isn't a limiting factor either.
I'd say that crafting assets to withstand the test of photorealism is still a bit more expensive than to pass them off for XBone / PS4 targets. In the sense that it does not pay off - not that it would be a huge investment, but it's still an investment without return. I'm guessing the most expensive environments we can see nowadays are in Star Citizen and Assassins Creed - and photorealism would probably require a bit more work and heavy usage of photogrammetry or the like..
>>343316843
Not even remotely
Non photorealism will always age better
>>343320416
>sony niggers actually believe this
>>343323553
>>343323008
Too bad GTA4 is outdated and only looked slightly photorealistic in overcast weather.
Here is what a real modded GTA5 looks like.
>>343324595
>"Time and money" isn't a limiting factor either. Assets have actually gotten easier to craft since current gen started, PBR pipelines really speed shit up.
Every publisher and developer I've seen talk on this has said the most expensive part of video game development is creating the art and audio assets. It's so time consuming they often outsource huge chunks of it to multiple separate studios in order to not have a development cycle of close to a decade.
It IS time consuming and it IS expensive.
>>343325021
NEVER EVER PKEK
>>343325034
>Ford GT
>on some country road in the middle of the winter
Your screenshots are as retarded as you are.
>>343323375
Cloud processing does absolutely nothing that actually helps over a strong local machine when it comes to real time calculation of a videogame, stop with this meme. It's an excuse to have DRM.
>>343322583
If we have evidence that graphics can be photorealistic that means we could make it, just means it would most likely need computers that cost a fucking fortune to run, you underage retarded cunt.
You don't need ridiculously shiny cars
>>343324823
And how much is that revenue from hats in TF2?
>>343325158
>that fucking tree
>>343324914
I suspect photorealism will come from lighting improvements, not further detailed assets. A ray-traced version of Uncharted 4 would probably be indistinguishable from reality (the environments anyway, character models/animations are a totally different beast.
>>343325127
I wasn't disputing that. All I'm saying is, costs haven't gone up since the new gen started. They've actually gone down.
Photorealism might be achieved, but it actually takes an immense amount of time to draw out the high-resolution graphics, and an immense amount of money for a PC that can actually run it properly.
People blame consoles for holding back technological advances in videogaming. They're wrong. Consoles don't just magically appear and say "lol (gpu-producing-company-name) you suck, now that we appeared you now suck badly and you suck and now i am result of videogame industry being held back". They mostly use already-existing hardware.
The only thing actually holding technological advances back in videogaming industry is that we're getting closer and closer to be forced to use larger hardware to accomodate all the capability of processing information. The thing we should start researching is quantum computing, which can allow multiple states to function. The regular processing is based on 0 and 1. The quantum computers can theoretically hold processes with values unlimited by 0 and 1. It can allow 2, 3, 4 and so forth. Too bad the quantum field is extremely unpredictable. Expect quantum computers between year 2040 and year 2050.
Anyway, we will eventually require much more bigger computers in order to accomodate for the growing-in-size hardware. Due to this, however, consoles will have to sacrifice portability for size in order to keep up in the "race".
Another challenge that will be encountered will be keeping graphics realistic and fancy-looking. Technological advances make it easier to use shadows, allow even more complex mechanics and so on, but graphic designers will have to struggle more and more, having to draw textures with bigger and bigger resolution...and there is no solution for that, yet.
>>343325034
>and only looked slightly photorealistic in overcast weather.
It looks exactly the same in other weather except the sky isn't gray.
GTA5 looks like shit, modded Watch Dogs has better graphics.
>>343325192
Really autistic of you to call it retarded because of that. My screenshots are as good as GTAV gets. I doubt you have the required hardware to even render all of that.
>>343325034
Too bad that doesn't look photorealistic at all, and GTAV never looks photorealistic, overcast weather or not.
>>343325260
I find it really funny that GTA4 with mods is better looking than GTA5 with mods.
>>343320558
Can I get a good game looking like that instead?
>>343325421
>Watchdogs
>Better graphics
Eww.
>>343325361
>All I'm saying is, costs haven't gone up since the new gen started. They've actually gone down.
Every publishers disagrees with you on that point.
>>343325290
Enough to sink both consoles and every single one of their exclusive shit piles :^).
>>343325421
The sunny weather in that webm looks very cartoony. The other half of the webm is the same overcast weather again. GTA4 looks like shit compared to GTA5, face it. It's outdated as fuck.
>>343325250
We only have evidence that graphics can be photorealistic without an actual game to process, which means nothing. Kill yourself shit for brains.
>>343324757
>Yeah they sold more
>That means literally nothing.
![winter-hohnstein-germany-europe[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/28lJwOo.jpg "winter-hohnstein-germany-europe[1].jpg")
>>343320558
Tfw visiting Windhelm
>>343325518
GTA5 looks really cartoony and muddy compared to GTA4.
I'll never understand why.
>>343321548
That looks blurry as shit
>>343325518
Wait a year and then we'll see.
As of right now, GTA IV with mods shouldn't look as good as it does.
It looks better than any modern release.
Something is wrong with this industry.
>>343325518
Except it's not. GTA4 has really bad textures and lighting.
>>343325546
With mods it does.
>>343325564
Ok kid.
>>343325421
overcast looks incredible desu senpai
>time and money isn't a factor
>lighting is more important than materials, textures, and other accurate representations of life like animation and accurate models
>quantum computing will solve it
>most of this thread knowing about game dev
>>343320316
>Consoles aren't holding back technology, price is.
>>343325550
Well, I guess you're misinformed. PBR workflows cut down pretty heavily on asset creation time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WirF2bV8iNk
>>343316475
You could already achieve photorealism if you locked down the cameras with prerendered backgrounds and only had the character's rendered in real time.
But photorealistic graphics with uninteractive environments isn't that interesting. It'll be a very long time before we get both a high level of interactivity + photorealism.
Even In OP's pic, the lighting is completely baked and so are the reflections. It looks damn good but I can't even move that table.
I wish convincing animations, good lighting, and other little things were more important to people than muh polygons and textures.
>>343320316
You literally just contradicted yourself.
>We can have photorealism when it's possible on consoles
>>343316475
I hope never, because GRAFFIX are killing video games.
>>343316475
its already possible. your pic would run with atleast 30 fps even on consoles with some proper mip-mapping and LOD settings. all you have to do is literally just find a place you want in your game and take high resolution pictures of them. then you tell your first year art degree guy to create the mesh for you and youre done.
too bad game developers are lazy cunts and can get away with it thanks to their audience which has to be one of the dumbest, most gullible audiences out there.
>>343316475
>Those curtains
>That vase
These graphics are SHIT
>>343316475
>I only want to play walking simulators: dbythe post
>>343325829
wrong pic
pic related is what I actually wanted to post
>>343324631
>high budget mmos
like what?
>good graphics
im assuming youre talking about something like Black Desert?
only the character models are good looking.
everything else,especially the environments looks bland and shitty.
>>343325704
Your character has cataracts
>>343316475
When a single consumer machine becomes as powerful as a massive server farm made to render CG movie frames
When a genius comes along and makes approximations that are extremely accurate and easy to compute
When some artsy dude makes a game using just assets from a videocamera
>>343325764
>>343325849
Why should publishers cater to $1000 hardware? It doesn't make sense economically. When $400 machines (PC or console) can handle photorealism, we'll get it. Graphics are fucking expensive and devs literally can't afford developing games exclusively for $750+ hardware.
>>343320558
There's no point of this if it's gonna run on a shitty engine with the most unrealistic animations. The thing that annoys me about games with good graphics, is when the gameplay doesn't make up for the realism in the graphics
>>343325546
>>343325379
>The regular processing is based on 0 and 1. The quantum computers can theoretically hold processes with values unlimited by 0 and 1. It can allow 2, 3, 4 and so forth.
You don't quite understand how computers work.
0 and 1 and not the numbers zero and one, they are states. Quantum computers also have the two states of 0 and 1, it's just it can be both at the same time.
>>343326218
Looks like a literal ps2 game
>>343325728
It's been out for a year and clearly nobody cares to or is able to make it look better. Watch Dogs already got the crazy visual overhaul it needed to look decent.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44M7JsKqwow
soonthe issue with photorealism is that i can be achieved but at a 24-30fps cap like most films out there60fps photorealism isn't gonna be a thing until 15 years from now
>>343326152
reminds me of LA Noir.
they did so much with the face mapping technology, they forgot to have the same production values with everything else.
the heads of the characters looked so disconnected with the bodies because of how robotic they moved. im sure it was all motion captured too but it just didnt look right.
>>343325290
and is still a big difference compared to consoles.
>>343326218
The ubsioft gloss makes me want to puke. Literally the second coming of the CoD "grit"
>>343326270
Most of the screenshots in here aren't photorealistic, but they're pretty good
What's with the people in these threads?
>>343326135
Why should developers cater to $400 paper weights?
>>343316475
Never I hope.
Technology should be developed to help humanity.
Not your stupid fucking faggot time wasting boxes.
>>343326518
>>343326518
Because that's what most people have. If consoles didn't exist, it would probably still be the case.
>>343316475
When the planned obsolescence of consoles ceases and is either up to par with PC technology or the console is abolished all together allowing for greater emphasis of PC game development.
>>343326135
Omfg stop being retarded, my point was that if it's not economically possible to make powerful hardware and sell it to every social class then the fucking consoles are the problem.
Since their economical strategy relies on them being low cost, it's fucking slowing down the development to high tech sh*t in the industry.
On the other hands R&D are focused to optimize what can be done on 1000$ PCs so it can also be done on a 400$ machine.
But really consoles have only been a hindrance to the industry past gold age nintendo.
>>343324595
I've already heard that about the PS4 and the "Xbox720" or whatever the memers called it before it was announced
As long as we have polygons, shit is going to stay pretty static.
>>343326808
Uhhh
You know CGI is still made in polygons, right? There isn't anything inherent about polygons that make the environments static.
>>343326518
Because that's what the vast majority of people can afford.
>>343326268
Processes work on states of 0 and 1. From what I knew, at least, quantum computing could allow multiple states to happen, not only 0 and 1. My apologies for not knowing properly, and thanks for clarifying.
>>343326963
Someone hasn't heard of UNLIMITED DETAIL
1.) Developers get better at optimizing games
2.) Hardware prices come down (We are already seeing this with 1060 and rx 480)
3.) When there is a demand for it
The real question is when will we stop this blind insistence on realistic graphics that hardly produce anything but non-games that pretend to be movies.
Graphicsfags are shackling the industry to hardware jews and forsaking what actually makes games worth the time.
Too uncanny valley, personally.
>>343326963
I mean in terms of technology. We're getting to a point where we're reaching diminishing returns.
The moment consoles or pcs can run realtime raytracing that's when
You cant reach photorealism with the tech ingames now. You can get close. But the best approximation is. Film raytracing.. and that is prob long ways off.
>>343327224
Always that one retard that complains about good graphics being the cause of bad gameplay without realizing it's an illogical and moronic statement.
>>343326752
Your point doesn't make sense. PC hardware still advances at the same rate as always, only difference is games have become prohibitively expensive to make. If high-end PC exclusives were cheap enough to develop (meaning publishers could recoup the cost), we'd be seeing photorealism already.
The 'problem' is, games are expensive to develop and there isn't a large enough market of people willing to spend more than $500 on a gaming machine, period. Only reason why PC exclusives were superior visually in the 90s is that game development was still relatively cheap, and so niche markets of high-end PC owners were still viable for economic success.
>>343326461
did you think this would look good lol
>>343327539
The last high-end game that had anything close to decent gameplay was Crysis back in 2007
The rest of this bullshit is just console ports.
When your entire focus is graphical quality, its a given that everything else will fall short, from game length to level design. If you think this isnt true then you havent been playing many games.
>>343327076
I'm going to admit the technical details are all well above my head but my understanding is that the multiple states is not the result, it is the process. The final state for a "bit" in a quantum computers will always be a 0 or a 1 too.
It's not a new answer, it's a different way of getting the same answer and theoretically a lot better at it. Given sufficient processing power a traditional computer can do anything a quantum computer can do, there's no magic to be found there.
>>343324557
This is such a fun game. I wish people played it.
>>343327727
>>343316475
We are going to get photorealism by 2020:
http://on-demand.gputechconf.com/gtc/2016/video/S6750.html
>>343327746
You're assuming that AAA games nowadays have bad gameplay because of their focus on graphics. You're wrong. Modern gameplay and level design are very deliberately made to cater to the lowest common denominator in order to appeal to a mass audience. They are literally making bad gameplay on purpose.
That kind of technology would be scary. If someone hated you enough they could make a photo realistic video of you fucking children or something and get you arrested.
>>343328493
I can buy that, sad shit but either way the results are piss poor.
I just wish the industry actually showed it cared more about things other than graphics, because I'm not really seeing it beyond a handful of devs. So far its just graphics and 'story'.
>>343328629
Thanks for the idea
>>343328493
True, but the reason they need such broad appeal is because they are so expensive to make nowadays and the reason they are so expensive to make is because of the demand for high quality graphics.
Back in the day selling 2 million copies was a huge success, nowadays that won't even come close to covering the development costs of a AAA game.
And no, they don't spend all of their development budget on marketing. On average maybe a third of the total development cost is marketing, at most. Particularly high profile games, like GTAV, might go so far as to spend half their total budget on marketing. Utterly retarded publishers, like CDPR, will spend 60% of their development budget on marketing and then turn around and say the game would never have happened without consoles.
>>343327727
>>343328629
people can tell apart photoshop from actual photos. People aren't that stupid....sometimes.
>>343329183
Or you know, it's because they're borrowing their publisher's money to fund their game, so they lack creative control. Maybe studios should start taking responsibility to fund their studios without publishers.
>>343329231
Holy shit, GTAV looks so much worse. How is this possible?
It doesn't matter, the first truly photorealistic games are going to be cleverly disguised corridors with limited engines and 5 hours of gameplay. The industry has a lot more issues than graphics right now
>>343329368
It was made with the 7th gen in mind at first.
>>343327632
You don't get it, R&D aren't working on photorealism because consoles couldn't make it run. This is the point I'm making.
>>343329267
i don't own any consoles
i don't understand why people are so ready to defend ugly fucking games, the modded gta 4 and 5 look clearly better
>>343329452
But so was GTAIV
>>343329368
It only looks that way because the backdrop and road textures are not custom made such as the ones LordNeophyte made for GTAIV. The lighting in GTAV is far superior to GTAIV but the game is still very much new to modding. Give it another year and you will be saying the opposite.
>>343324935
>p.t. didn't look photoreal
I have seen real photos that looked less real than p.t.
>>343329302
>Maybe studios should start taking responsibility to fund their studios without publishers.
Where the fuck are they supposed to find the $50+ million it costs to finance a AAA quality game?
Why do you think the current model exists in the first place?
>>343316475
when someone master the art of lighting
>>343329759
PT didn't look like that, that's a photoshopped image.
>>343326518
Not everyone is a NEET with no responsibilites living off of autismbux
Some people have families, houses, bills, pets, or other responsibilites that only allow them to buy a 400 dollar console.
>>343329759
To be fair that filter is working wonders for it.
>Silent Hills will never be a thing
Dynamic lighting has a way to go.
>>343323008
GTAVI will look better than V but thats it
>>343329664
Yeah, but >>343329231 uses a mod.
>>343329781
How about deferring instant gratification and spending some time working in an industry that will let you get that kind of money?
Then again, what should I expect from people in the "video game" industry; they're not exactly people who solve the world's toughest problems in academia or industry.
>>343329992
Pretty baseless since GTAV runs at 20fps on next-gen.
>>343329951
>Silent Hills will never be a thing
I'll never get over this. Never.
I would say we've reached it with the UE4, just gotta wait to see what Valve do with Source 2
>>343329759
wow PT is soo realistic..... how does hideous kojeema do this?
syke
>>343329936
>>343329702
Except it's not the textures that look better, it's the lighting.
>>343330065
yeah it uses the basic fucking enb that boris made once and never updated, along with reshade over the base game
>>343330065
What's your point? It looks worse.
>>343330198
I can make it and i have bettter ideas than Kojima but currently i'm working and i don't have time :(
>>343330107
How about you grow up and start living in the real world?
If it was so easy to make millions of dollars everyone would be doing it. Not to mention your investment of tens of millions into a niche game at the end of that "rainbow" is almost certainly just going to incur nothing but a massive loss.
>>343330112
Not trying to be a consolefag here, but on "next-gen" that shit was a stable 30.
>>343316475
photorealism is cancer tbqh
>>343329613
In what way do they look better?
>>343330918
You definitely are a consolefag for thinking this is stable.
>>343316843
PT used a film grain effect so heavy it rivalled L4D to hide the textures.
>>343330826
It sounds like you made some bad decisions in life that won't allow you for total financial freedom.
There are career options that will allow you to attain ~1mil/year. It's just that you probably lack the intellectually capacity or qualifications for those careers.
>>343326461
>>343331385
Modded Watchdogs?
Beautiful looking, shame the game was shit.
>>343331549
And I'm sure you would be making all that money yourself "if you felt like it", right?
>>343331790
Creative control is a strong motivator.
>>343331727
Yeah
>>343329485
Photorealism doesn't need to be "researched", we've known how to achieve it for many decades. Only thing limiting us is hardware.
>>343332351
>>343331727
shame it looks like shit too
>>343330112
That's not how this shit works. Every gen goes through incessant stages of optimization, this time will be no different. GTA IV ran like shit on consoles and GTA V still blew it out of the water visually. GTA VI will probably rival The Order 1886/UC4, assuming it releases in 2020 or so.
>>343332402
Whatever you say kid
>>343325158
that's not bloodborne. Plus the drake games are wannabe movie gear games
I like my games looking like games not this photo realistic bullshit
fuck you
>>343330386
That's because the specific picture/enb you are showing was made for cloudy weather. Show me that same picture in daytime weather (13:00) and we can compare it with one for GTAV.
I will show you some pictures in different times as well for sunny weather, you can show me the same in GTAIV and we'll compare which looks best. Using the taxi for reference.
>>343332517
This generation is different, developers do not have tricks to learn with this new hardware and the graphics APIs they are using.
You ignorant retard.
The vanishing of Ethan Carter is the best looking game we got.
Will take a pretty long time for games to look like those UE4 demos
Now this next picture is in cloudy weather (not overcast) and the back of the car is just as reflected as the one in the GTA4 picture you guys posted earlier.
This is one year into GTAV modding, whereas it took 4 years to get GTAIV to look anything like that. Give it one more year, I guarantee you GTAV is the best looking game ever made. I can make this shit look like projectCARS with a bit of DoF and some high quality car models.
>>343332867
see
>>343320558
Games aiming for photorealism should be able to achieve it. Once they can actually get there, you'll be singing a different tune.
Even cartoony games will look better once Pixar-level graphics are achieved. Most games honestly look terrible.
>>343333010
Wrong. Xbox 360's architecture wasn't exotic by any means and there was still a vast difference in visual quality by the end of the generation.
Even 2013 launch titles look mediocre already.
>>343322342
>all those jaggies and blurs
REEEEEEEEEEEE
best enb for gta v?
>>343333425
fuck off it looks real
>>343333080
It didn't take that long for GTA4, the mod you're talking about was based on something years older.
Someone has looking to british church from Valve Destination?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TPkQReJX-s
Another variation of sunny weather, this in the middle of the day. Sky is more blue in certain areas. GTA4 cannot look this good.
>>343333556
Have you seen some of the earlier GTA4 enbs/timecycs? Geez.... go take a look.
>>343333080
That looks like utter shit
how about some good fucking gameplay that ain't stale as fuck first
>>343333738
>using mods to alter the graphics
The vanilla is superior in every aspect!!!
>>343333909
Still waiting on your GTA4 daytime screenshotUntil then i can't take you seriously.
Also, please show up on the GTAForums screenshots thread located in the Mod Showroom board and post your shit, lets see how much people like it LOL
>>343323730
That building falling looks like a miniature
>>343316475
Clearly you guys are forgetting about the Unlimited Detail engine providing the most realistic graphics.
>>343333738
I posted them in this thread, they look better than the ENB you're talking about.
>>343334030
The last gen version looks kinda comfty
>>343326152
The Crew is like that. The handling is awful. Thankfully it was free on Xbox live and I didn't buy it
>>343334084
>he's from gtaforums
That explains the underage and shit taste
This is a game from 1993. Maybe point and click ist the solution for a game with the best possible graphics
>>343330250
>>343329759
>filmgrain
>blur
>dof
>CA
No.
>>343334302
You haven't posted any screenshot, just a shitty webm in 480p quality.
>>343334383
nigga i'm from everywhere and gtaforums is where all this modding originated, thanks to russian and ukraine modders
>>343334084
>Still waiting on your GTA4 daytime screenshotUntil then i can't take you seriously.
Already posted and that isn't even the same poster you were talking to earlier.
Here's an entire video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIMHT51C1f0
You're a sad little man with an inferiority complex.
Why are you niggas getting so angry at such a simple question?
>>343322406
There will always be Nintendo for this.
>>343316475
Actual photorealism is far, far off. Real life has too many polys for any computer to run.
>>343334657
>You haven't posted any screenshot
nigger please stop shitposting it's pathetic.
>>343334525
it's from 2001 tho
>>343334084
Not him but here's one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnZ4BpBcW88
best graphics ever
too bad game will never be completed
>>343334767
>>343334084
BOTH OF YOU SHUT THE FUCK UP, YOU ARE WORSE THAN /S4S/ FOR FUCK'S SAKE. Are you going to do this until we hit bump limit you faggots?
>>343334152
I can't tell if this is really good or just terrible
>>343334767
Well that screenshot does not look better than the GTAV one. I don't have an inferiority complex, I just can't stand idiots like you who still think GTA4 looks better than GTAV. You have to be really dense to believe that or you just haven't experienced GTAV at the current maximum potential....or just don't know how to mod it properly since retarded american.
>>343334990
*stabs you in the balls*
Don't you ever yell at me kid
>>343333865
Don't act like a toddler if you don't want to get in trouble, I guess.
>>343335132
Too bad that was my lost twin, hahaha
*teleports behin you*
Think you are good enough for me, kiddo?
*stabs you into million peices*
Dont you ever try that sh*t again
*rips your heart ou*
*spits on your ashes*
>>343335132
you have to be over the age of 18 before calling someone a kid
check urself m8
>>343325480
>typical nerd response
>>343333865
>it's impossible that a janny passed by and saw you acting retarded
>>343335079
>he says this while posting a screenshot that looks worse than his
top kek this eurocuck is retarded
>>343334889
Fug
>>343335079
Doesn't look better at all, you just blur everything in the distance lol
>>343335353
stop somefagging and get your eyes checked out, i understand health insurance isn't free in america but if you're not an underage jobless neet then you can surely afford it
