HintHRO said:
Watch Dogs get praised for its 4fps drop on PS4 while the graphics aren't that much better compared to PS3 and the resolution being 900p (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g950RU3EQGA) and MK8 gets critized for its 1fps drop. Its like they really want something to complain about. |
You really need to learn about the context of praise/criticism. They never criticized MK8 for being 59fps, they criticized it for essentially very briefly freezing once a second. Though they "criticized" it, they were also pretty clear that for most the issue was no minor they wouldn't even notice. It's their job to report anything they notice, even if it was something a unbelievably tiny as a game being 1079p.
With WD, they praised an open world game with a advanced physics engine for only dropping by a small degree during a heavy stress test. Somewhat different. Despite that, they had an awful lot more criticism for WD than they did MK8.
For MK8 they said it had a shitty IQ (due to the 720p, no AA and sub par filtering) and the stutter issue. That was about it. With WD they said it had uneven textures across the city, over saturated lighting during the day, sub par texturing filtering and occasional screen tearing. They also said that its facial animations, effects and IQ didn't live up to the standards set by inFamous. And, on top of all of that, they said WD had a pretty murky input lag (something they praised MK8 for, even in the 4 player split screen).
The only game they've had almost no visual criticism for was inFamous, but even then they had plenty of criticism for the game itself (describing it as a last gen game with next gen visuals). Does that make them biased against Sony too lol?









