sc94597 said:
1. Stand corrected there, I forgot that the Wii U version dropped to 1152 x 648 in a select few locations. 2. All post-processing AA is very weak. I personally prefer not having it (opting for a sharper image.) The relevant question is about whether or not it is demanding (using a lot of resources) in either game, which it isn't. Post-processing AA has very little affect on game performance. 3.
Any difference in shadow quality is pretty minimal. The GTA V shadows have sharper edges, but BoTW's shadows are definitely more geometrically accurate, which is due to its superior lighting system. Both are pretty low quality compared to what can be achieved on PS4/XBO and even other Switch titles though. 4. Can you provide me some examples of where you think "shading is much better?" 5. If all other things are equal, sure, but this is not something which translates across games with different methods of shading. But yeah, if BOTW were aiming for more realism it would need to make more calculations within its deferred shading system and the converse is true of GTA V (360.)
|
its very evident GTAV has better shading but, it's obvious you need that to have realistic looking material vs cell shaded. also your pics of zelda is the switch version which is 900p, not a fair comparison, but looking at GTAV 360 vs wiiu zelda, direct feed pics, i can't understand how anyone thinks zelda looks better.
