By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Can we agree that PS4 graphics are in another level!

Zero999 said:
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
Zero999 said:

first, watch it.

second, when I look at MK8, I do not think: "the resolution should be higher" or "it needs AA" or "it needs better AI". I personally beleive that people wouldn't notice the increase in resolution, let alone this "no AA" because there I can't see Jaggies, although its clearly noticable on screenshots.

Now answer: if I can't notice jaggies, why are you complain about lack of AA? if the resolution is amazing as it is, why complain it's not higher (when I think wouldn't even be noticed)? Thus, I don't believe and don't want to believe those areas  were compromised.

Corrected

Quotee Tree Shortened and User Moderated - Conegamer

I don't play screenshots.

Well, in a sense you do.



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

Around the Network
Areaz32 said:

Did you just say that openworld games having worse graphics than linear was a thing of the past? Thats bs. It is all about how much is rendered on the screen at once.. open world games need to render way more stuff at any given time.

It IS becoming a thing of the past ... 

Linear games won't be able to push much higher primitive densities due to the fact that a lot of GPUs have trouble rendering quads past 4x4 tiles. LOD transitions will be a lot more smooth due to the fact that memory bottlenecks aren't much of an issue anymore so an open world games are just as capable of having just as good graphics as linear games on the same distance. 

What exactly are your reasons for believing otherwise ? 



Scoobes said:
TheBlackNaruto said:


Yeah that makes sense and I can agree to that. MMOs are indeed VERY huge without a doubt as well. And I know it shouldn't be compared the way I did but I am pretty sure it usually is even if I don't agree with the comparison just like you don't. I don't do any MAJOR gaming on my pC but I love Steam and all the games I can get on it lol. 

Where are you getting your stats from? Globally, PC gaming is bigger than console gaming.

Revenue from 2010:

Software revenue per year up to 2013:

No. of users:


I was only going by software via VGchartz. Just used that when I made those statements. 



The absence of evidence is NOT the evidence of absence...

PSN: StlUzumaki23

fatslob-:O said:
Areaz32 said:

Did you just say that openworld games having worse graphics than linear was a thing of the past? Thats bs. It is all about how much is rendered on the screen at once.. open world games need to render way more stuff at any given time.

It IS becoming a thing of the past ... 

Linear games won't be able to push much higher primitive densities due to the fact that a lot of GPUs have trouble rendering quads past 4x4 tiles. LOD transitions will be a lot more smooth due to the fact that memory bottlenecks aren't much of an issue anymore so an open world games are just as capable of having just as good graphics as linear games on the same distance. 

What exactly are your reasons for believing otherwise ? 

Look at the Order, in the streets. People spawn and move in a pre-generated environment. There is absolutely nothing dnamic going on. Everything is scripted, there is no need to generate new objects dynamically and control them. It's not just memory, it's also how many tasks that need to be handled. 

Even Kojima has said that open-world games are much harder to optimise visually than linear ones, and he's a respected developer.



                                                                                                               You're Gonna Carry That Weight.

Xbox One - PS4 - Wii U - PC

VanceIX said:

Bullshit. There's a big difference between accounting for the amount of objects in a dyncamic, open-world game and in a cinematic game where everything is stationary and pre-determined for the most part. 

And no, Skyrim with the best mods available does have better lighting and textures. Neither Infamous nor Ryse can manage 2K or 4K textures the way a modded Skyrim does.

And ENB lighting >>>> Infamous. 

I'm not going to argue this with you though. If you played Skyrim on a powerful PC with a 4K monitor, you wouldn't be saying what you are.

I liked how you used the word "cinematic" rather than "linear" because you self defeated your point that linear games aren't just as dynamic ...

@Bold No it doesn't ... Skyrim's lighting doesn't even account for energy conservation like infamous or ryse and the materials don't even react properly to the lighting either. 

Textures are another thing altogether but making objects look good requires more than high resolution textures and neither infamous nor ryse are behind a modded skyrim in this department plus Skyrim lacks material layering compared to infamous or ryse.

Skyrim's lighting is straight up shit and the reason why your not going to argue with me is because you have no actual arguments so go get your eyes checked before you say more ignorant things. 



Around the Network
VanceIX said:

Look at the Order, in the streets. People spawn and move in a pre-generated environment. There is absolutely nothing dnamic going on. Everything is scripted, there is no need to generate new objects dynamically and control them. It's not just memory, it's also how many tasks that need to be handled. 

Even Kojima has said that open-world games are much harder to optimise visually than linear ones, and he's a respected developer.

Just because everything is scripted does not mean that an open world game can't do the same such as isolating an event where people are far from the on screen action that's happening.

@Bold Like I said you can isolate the event in an open world game ... Open world just refers to the scale of game, not how demading it is ...

That maybe true for last gen games where they have a clear memory limitations but for next gen consoles that's less of an issue. 



fatslob-:O said:
VanceIX said:

Bullshit. There's a big difference between accounting for the amount of objects in a dyncamic, open-world game and in a cinematic game where everything is stationary and pre-determined for the most part. 

And no, Skyrim with the best mods available does have better lighting and textures. Neither Infamous nor Ryse can manage 2K or 4K textures the way a modded Skyrim does.

And ENB lighting >>>> Infamous. 

I'm not going to argue this with you though. If you played Skyrim on a powerful PC with a 4K monitor, you wouldn't be saying what you are.

I liked how you used the word "cinematic" rather than "linear" because you self defeated your point that linear games aren't just as dynamic ...

@Bold No it doesn't ... Skyrim's lighting doesn't even account for energy conservation like infamous or ryse and the materials don't even react properly to the lighting either. 

Textures are another thing altogether but making objects look good requires more than high resolution textures and neither infamous nor ryse are behind a modded skyrim in this department plus Skyrim lacks material layering compared to infamous or ryse.

Skyrim's lighting is straight up shit and the reason why your not going to argue with me is because you have no actual arguments so go get your eyes checked before you say more ignorant things

You yourself said that Infamous has better textures, when it clearly doesn't. Now you're saying that textures are another thing altogether? OK.

And you're completely wrong on the lighting, period. There are so many mods that make use of reflections and lighting so that all of it is seamless in the environment. If you think that some of the best ENBs combined with more realistic lighting mods "look like shit", then you obviously have not played Skyrim in its full glory. On a 4K monitor, ENB, realistic lighting mods, the game looks fantastic in ways that Infamous and Ryse cannot compare.

And yes, I said cinematic games, not linear. I said this because the prettiest games are all cinematic linear games (other than Infamous SS, which has tons of difficulty rendering energy-based lighting when a player is not directly looking at objects, resulting in annoying pop-ins. Not to mention that Sony utilised low-quality textures in order to acheive the lighting and reflections.).

And another thing that you seem to convinently forget is that Second Son runs at 30fps, compared to the 60fps+ Skyrim can run, even with mods, which provides a much more stable experience overall.

Like I said, you can't compare Skyrim w/ mods and Second Son. Second Son is locked to 1080p @ 30fps, while Skyrim can go up to 4K @ 120fps, with MUCH better textures and amazing lighting, especially considering it's a last-gen game.



                                                                                                               You're Gonna Carry That Weight.

Xbox One - PS4 - Wii U - PC

VanceIX said:

You yourself said that Infamous has better textures, when it clearly doesn't. Now you're saying that textures are another thing altogether? OK.

Infamous may have better textures but I say that's attributed to material layering ... You need more than texture quality to make surfaces look better and you still don't understand. 

And you're completely wrong on the lighting, period. There are so many mods that make use of reflections and lighting so that all of it is seamless in the environment. If you think that some of the best ENBs combined with more realistic lighting mods "look like shit", then you obviously have not played Skyrim in its full glory. On a 4K monitor, ENB, realistic lighting mods, the game looks fantastic in ways that Infamous and Ryse cannot compare.

How am I completely wrong about the lighting ? Do yourself a favour and start explaining ... Mods can only go so far when it's clear that there are limitations in place of the awful blinn-phong shading model. You can only go so far using blinn-phong when it's quite apparent that metal's are more suited towards using cook torrance specular highlights. Hence why I said that the lighting in skyrim is shit.

And yes, I said cinematic games, not linear. I said this because the prettiest games are all cinematic linear games (other than Infamous SS, which has tons of diffuculty rendering energy-based lighting when a player is not directly looking at objects, resulting in annoying pop-ins. Not to mention that Sony utilised low-quality textures in order to acheive the lighting and reflections.).

How exactly does infamous second son have "tons" of difficulty with energy conserved lighting when it's framerate is usually north of 30fps ? Pop-ins are few and far in between compared to last generation systems and just how exactly are the textures low quality when a modded skyrim doesn't even take the cake ? 

And another thing that you seem to convinently forget is that Second Son runs at 30fps, compared to the 60fps+ Skyrim can run, even with mods, which provides a much more stable experience overall.

What does "FRAMERATE" have to do with "GRAPHICS" ? 

Like I said, you can't compare Skyrim w/ mods and Second Son. Second Son is locked to 1080p @ 30fps, while Skyrim can go up to 4K @ 120fps, with MUCH better textures and amazing lighting, especially considering it's a last-gen game.

What a lie ... 

Oh why the hell am I even arguing with you if you aren't going to make a valid point!

Do me a favour and get your eyes seriously checked ... PLEASE! Mind you this is coming from a PC gamer too.



meh



didn't read through the thread so may have already been said. but

Thank you PS4!

But your Graphics are in
another Level!