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

Forums - Gaming - Fortnite Nintendo Switch (undocked), Galaxy S9+, iPhone X Graphics Comparison

Pemalite on 21 August 2018
Trumpstyle said:

Asphalt 9 cars has 90k polygons, Forza Motorsport 4 cars has 800k, lol at your asphalt 9 game, it's not even close.

You just moved the goal post which is a logical fallacy.
The comparison was with Halo 4, not Forza.

With that in mind, the number of Polygons a model has doesn't graphics create, but nice try... But you are still extremely wrong on your original assertion.


Trumpstyle said:

As I said before, yes newer architecture can do more advanced effects but it doesn't mean a better looking game. Asphalt 9 just pumps motion blur and some graphics effects to the max so you can't see the details of the game.

Asphalt 9 does more than that. You should actually check it out.


Trumpstyle said:

I actually downloaded that game to my phone as soon that video from digitalfoundry got out. It was the most ugly looking mobile game I ever played, image quality is hilariously bad and pumped with so much aliasing I gave the worst looking mobile game I ever played, also average fps was about 20 (my guess). But it's probably runs better on latest iphones (iphone8/X).

Halo 4 isn't exactly a pretty game anymore either.
Stop shifting the goal post and dodging the point.

Trumpstyle said:

About Skyrim, betheasda game developers for fallout and elder scrolls just can't do good graphics. Switch hardware is probably a lot easier to fully use than xbox 360.

False. When Morrowind released it had some of the best water a game could have.
When Oblivion released it's visuals were absolutely leading the industry.

Trumpstyle said:

Edit: forgot sources

https://forzamotorsport.net/en-US/games/fm4/features

"The Xbox 360 meets its graphical apex with Forza Motorsport 4. Experience an unprecedented level of detail with 800,000 polygon cars and some of the most beautiful environments ever seen"

Your source is irrelevant. You demanded the comparison to be between Halo 4.

Trumpstyle said:

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-asphalt-9-legends-is-one-of-the-most-beautiful-mobile-games-weve-seen

"The cars themselves are rich in detail, with some models featuring in excess of 90,000 polygons."

You do realize there is more to a rendered scene than the number of polygons featured in a model, right?
What-if hypothetically a developer decided to create a very simplistic model and then leverage N-Patches to create more subdivision to give the impression of more mesh complexity?

Trumpstyle said:

Fast RMX is just a car game, those game just give an illusion of good graphics, when you stop and look at the details(characters, ground, grass) graphics goes back 10 years. I admit Outcast 2 looks better than Halo 4 but nothing is happening in that game, you just walk around in the dark.

The game or genre said game is in... Is irrelevant, you look at the rendering pipeline.

Trumpstyle said:
A better comparion would be Halo 4 and Doom on portable switch. About the assets, yes ofc xbox 360 has 512 mb of ram so they gonna be low.


Here we go, now you admit that the Xbox 360 is hindered and it's assets will be low quality, now you are agreeing with us.

Doom on Switch is technically superior to halo 4 as well.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

Around the Network
Trumpstyle on 22 August 2018
curl-6 said:
Trumpstyle said:

Fast RMX is just a car game, those game just give an illusion of good graphics, when you stop and look at the details(characters, ground, grass) graphics goes back 10 years. I admit Outcast 2 looks better than Halo 4 but nothing is happening in that game, you just walk around in the dark.

A better comparion would be Halo 4 and Doom on portable switch. About the assets, yes ofc xbox 360 has 512 mb of ram so they gonna be low.

FAST RMX does not "go back ten years", it's using visual effects that didn't even exist in gaming 10 years ago. On a purely technological level, it outclasses what's possible on the Xbox 360.

As for Doom vs Halo 4, in terms of graphics, Doom is basically a generation ahead of Halo 4, retaining pretty much a full suite of PS4-standard techniques like PBR, GPU accelerated particles, volumetric lighting, subsurface scattering, temporal supersampling, bokeh depth of field, etc.

Oh wow look at those advanced graphics effects. Dude I played Doom through 2 times on my PC and 5 times on my ps4 pro, the game doesn't beat battlefield 3 and Crysis 3, so no it's not a next-gen graphics it's last gen graphics. It barely beats mass effect 3 on my pc. Depth of field, bokeh and motion blur is not positive it's a negative. I rather just play 60fps and no blurs.

About temporal supersampling, it's good and bad, aliasing is almost gone but the side effects of a much softer image combined with color degration, I rather have SMAA or MSAA, but we all got different opinions. 1440p with 2xSMAA give the best image/performance combo in my opinion.

You can't compare Fast RMX to halo 4, it's a car game. I don't play car games but from my experience they usually have much worse graphics than it seems, they just give an illusion of good graphics. I can't find the polygons count on fast RMX to compare with Horizon motorsport 4, likely cause they are low.

About halo 4 vs doom portable, I made my analysis, Halo 4 has better graphics, better resolution and better frame-rate.

Last edited by Trumpstyle - on 22 August 2018

6x master league achiever in starcraft2

Beaten Sigrun on God of war mode

Beaten DOOM ultra-nightmare with NO endless ammo-rune, 2x super shotgun and no decoys on ps4 pro.

1-0 against Grubby in Wc3 frozen throne ladder!!

Trumpstyle on 22 August 2018
Pemalite said:
Trumpstyle said:

Asphalt 9 cars has 90k polygons, Forza Motorsport 4 cars has 800k, lol at your asphalt 9 game, it's not even close.

You just moved the goal post which is a logical fallacy.
The comparison was with Halo 4, not Forza.

With that in mind, the number of Polygons a model has doesn't graphics create, but nice try... But you are still extremely wrong on your original assertion.


Trumpstyle said:

As I said before, yes newer architecture can do more advanced effects but it doesn't mean a better looking game. Asphalt 9 just pumps motion blur and some graphics effects to the max so you can't see the details of the game.

Asphalt 9 does more than that. You should actually check it out.


Trumpstyle said:

I actually downloaded that game to my phone as soon that video from digitalfoundry got out. It was the most ugly looking mobile game I ever played, image quality is hilariously bad and pumped with so much aliasing I gave the worst looking mobile game I ever played, also average fps was about 20 (my guess). But it's probably runs better on latest iphones (iphone8/X).

Halo 4 isn't exactly a pretty game anymore either.
Stop shifting the goal post and dodging the point.

Trumpstyle said:

About Skyrim, betheasda game developers for fallout and elder scrolls just can't do good graphics. Switch hardware is probably a lot easier to fully use than xbox 360.

False. When Morrowind released it had some of the best water a game could have.
When Oblivion released it's visuals were absolutely leading the industry.

Trumpstyle said:

Edit: forgot sources

https://forzamotorsport.net/en-US/games/fm4/features

"The Xbox 360 meets its graphical apex with Forza Motorsport 4. Experience an unprecedented level of detail with 800,000 polygon cars and some of the most beautiful environments ever seen"

Your source is irrelevant. You demanded the comparison to be between Halo 4.

Trumpstyle said:

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-asphalt-9-legends-is-one-of-the-most-beautiful-mobile-games-weve-seen

"The cars themselves are rich in detail, with some models featuring in excess of 90,000 polygons."

You do realize there is more to a rendered scene than the number of polygons featured in a model, right?
What-if hypothetically a developer decided to create a very simplistic model and then leverage N-Patches to create more subdivision to give the impression of more mesh complexity?

Trumpstyle said:

Fast RMX is just a car game, those game just give an illusion of good graphics, when you stop and look at the details(characters, ground, grass) graphics goes back 10 years. I admit Outcast 2 looks better than Halo 4 but nothing is happening in that game, you just walk around in the dark.

The game or genre said game is in... Is irrelevant, you look at the rendering pipeline.

Trumpstyle said:
A better comparion would be Halo 4 and Doom on portable switch. About the assets, yes ofc xbox 360 has 512 mb of ram so they gonna be low.


Here we go, now you admit that the Xbox 360 is hindered and it's assets will be low quality, now you are agreeing with us.

Doom on Switch is technically superior to halo 4 as well.

How am I moving goalpost? I didn't even mention Halo 4 to you, you just replied to my reply to ryan. You mention asphalt 9 to me ( a car game) obviously I respond with a car game. If you gonna compare graphics you need to have similiar games ofc. You saying game or genre doesn't matter is ridiculous, are we gonna compare rts games to Detroit: Become human??

The discussion about Asphalt 9 and Forza motorsport 4 is over, it's not even close.

I wrote this to Ryan, but Halo 4 has better graphics, framerate and resolution in my analysis against portable switch.

 



6x master league achiever in starcraft2

Beaten Sigrun on God of war mode

Beaten DOOM ultra-nightmare with NO endless ammo-rune, 2x super shotgun and no decoys on ps4 pro.

1-0 against Grubby in Wc3 frozen throne ladder!!

Pemalite on 22 August 2018
Trumpstyle said:

How am I moving goalpost? I didn't even mention Halo 4 to you, you just replied to my reply to ryan. You mention asphalt 9 to me ( a car game) obviously I respond with a car game.

Your original claim was about Halo. Not Forza. It's as simple as that.
Changing your original claim to be something different is by it's very definition... Shifting the goal post, which is a logical fallacy, who your original claim was towards is ultimately irrelevant.

Trumpstyle said:

If you gonna compare graphics you need to have similiar games ofc. You saying game or genre doesn't matter is ridiculous, are we gonna compare rts games to Detroit: Become human??

No you don't need to have similar games.
You need to look at the actual rendering pipeline to actually have an appropriate gauge of what effects are going on, otherwise everything simply becomes personal opinion, rather than fact.

If a game like Halo Wars 2 for example (An RTS) is leveraging say... Global Illumination, then we can effectively assert that it's lighting model is superior to that of Halo 2's.

If you are only taking a look at the overall visual representation of a game from a simple screen-grab, then Art is going to be playing a massive role and will falsely skew your opinion.

Trumpstyle said:

The discussion about Asphalt 9 and Forza motorsport 4 is over, it's not even close.

There was no discussion to begin with.

Trumpstyle said:

I wrote this to Ryan, but Halo 4 has better graphics, framerate and resolution in my analysis against portable switch.

Nope. Doom 2016 on Switch mobile is technically superior to Halo 4.
Asphalt 9 on Android is technically superior to Halo 4.

In every angle, your original claim has been debunked. - Mobile has eclipsed Halo 4.

Halo 4 has absolutely terrific Art direction which manages to cover up allot of the deficiencies of the Xbox 360 hardware, but that's about as far as it goes.

You should start taking a look at how games are rendered, the effects that are being employed, what they mean and what influence they have on a scene rather than taking a subjective approach which is skewed by artistic flair.







www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

curl-6 on 22 August 2018
Trumpstyle said:
curl-6 said:

FAST RMX does not "go back ten years", it's using visual effects that didn't even exist in gaming 10 years ago. On a purely technological level, it outclasses what's possible on the Xbox 360.

As for Doom vs Halo 4, in terms of graphics, Doom is basically a generation ahead of Halo 4, retaining pretty much a full suite of PS4-standard techniques like PBR, GPU accelerated particles, volumetric lighting, subsurface scattering, temporal supersampling, bokeh depth of field, etc.

Oh wow look at those advanced graphics effects. Dude I played Doom through 2 times on my PC and 5 times on my ps4 pro, the game doesn't beat battlefield 3 and Crysis 3, so no it's not a next-gen graphics it's last gen graphics. It barely beats mass effect 3 on my pc. Depth of field, bokeh and motion blur is not positive it's a negative. I rather just play 60fps and no blurs.

About temporal supersampling, it's good and bad, aliasing is almost gone but the side effects of a much softer image combined with color degration, I rather have SMAA or MSAA, but we all got different opinions. 1440p with 2xSMAA give the best image/performance combo in my opinion.

You can't compare Fast RMX to halo 4, it's a car game. I don't play car games but from my experience they usually have much worse graphics than it seems, they just give an illusion of good graphics. I can't find the polygons count on fast RMX to compare with Horizon motorsport 4, likely cause they are low.

About halo 4 vs doom portable, I made my analysis, Halo 4 has better graphics, better resolution and better frame-rate.

What you personally think looks better is one thing; we all have our personal preferences when it comes to art direction.

But the only objective measure of graphics is technology, and the facts simply do not support your case. Switch is objectively more graphically capable than the Xbox 360. It has a GPU a decade more advanced, 6 times as much RAM, and its games show this as they use more modern and advanced rendering methods.

Personally, I think Muramasa The Demon Blade and Kirby's Epic Yarn on Wii look better than Horizon Zero Dawn, because I prefer the aesthetic style of the former. But Horizon is still technologically superior. Likewise, Doom on Switch is technologically superior to Halo 4 whether you prefer the look of its visual techniques or not.