Crysis 3 literally has a better, more robust, more extensive array of visual effects, techniques and presents superior graphics on 7th gen consoles.

This isn't "subjective". This is fact. CryEngine is technically more proficient than the RAGE engine.

If you can find where GTA5 is visually more technically impressive than this... I will eat my hat... Until then. You don't have an argument.

Open world games were a dime-a-dozen on 7th gen. I already listed a heap... So I will repeat myself yet again and make a notable mention of titles such as GTA4, Oblivion, Skyrim, FarCry, Fallout, Borderlands and more.

GTA5 isn't special in this regard.

This is bullshit.

You can have some very technical 2.5D games like Links Awakening on Nintendo Switch with it's material shaders, depth of field and smart use of specular highlights, which is arguably more technically proficient than say... Mario Odyssey.

The "type" of games and how they are presented is thus irrellevent, the underlying technology is what's important.

Case in point... Gamebryo powered Oblivion... A sprawling open world game with ample use of shader model 3.0 features and bloom... Yet that same engine powered another "2.5D" game like Defense Grid... Which ironically deployed the same visual effects, but just in a different manner.

Technically same feature visual sets, artistically and mechanically very different.

And before you ask, I have very low-level understanding of Net-Immerse turned Gamebryo turned Creation Engine as I have done a ton of modding and reverse engineering of shaders.

Because apparently... Qualifications and experience means everything to you, but doesn't apply to you.

No one in the history of this thread has ever said that GTA5 lacked ambition or scale.

This argument is redundant.

Isn't the point of all open world games is to have an explore-able world?

Isn't the point of all games in general is to have a new world to explore?

Different scales and scope, but that tends to be the entire point of a video game environment.

Many games list everything you list on 7th gen. I mean shit... FarCry had fire propagation and moveable foliage.

I would argue Breath of the Wild was more interactive with significantly more simulated aspects that you can interact with.

Same goes for many other open world games like... Again. FarCry... And ironically Minecraft even.

Do you even understand how they enabled such draw distances with such seamless LOD transitions? They used a technique called "impostering" where essentially they use a 2D photo of the 3D asset... This technique got popularized with Halo: Reach and was a massive efficiency boon.

I.E. This is another cutback from Halo 3 to Halo: Reach/Halo 4, where they abandoned the use of high quality geometric assets.

I am going to call you out on this lie.
Houses in Mirror Park are duplicated with some tweaks, they are the same model.

But unique assets isn't a technical achievement, it's a time/money limitation, not an engine limitation.

GTA5 is an impressive game, but it's not the most technically impressive on 7th gen, not by a long mile.

You said red dead is more of a show case  then GTAV which almost no one would agree with. Even a average joe can look look at both games and tell which one is doing more technically more demanding. My main point which you seem to cant understand is this subjective. every game engine is doing mutiple things that no one can really confirm which is techically more demanding just by looking at game unless one really blows the other away, crysis 3 pushed the most advanced tech for sure but it's not  replicating living breathing city with traffic, huge number of npc's that react accodingly  and the level of detail, scale and even the ai GTAV had is still better then most open world games today. yes open world games are dime a dozen but GTAV blows every single one away on 7th it's not even close. This is big budget open world  game that came out in 2020 and GTAV NPC's are still way more advanced.  if you can't see why many people think it's near the top of most impressive games that just your opinion and stop tring to act like your opinion are facts. It's probably that you never played GTAV when it came out because it was leaps above evrything else.

I think the biggest proof of what i'm saying is true is Wiiu. You had all these people that were very knowledgeable about graphics Tech making claims that all these games were far beyond ps3/360 and using a much more powerful and advanced 352 gflops GPU when it reality was not. also the most techically advanced game crysis 3 runs better on 360 so does that make 360 more powerful? like i said my method for judging console power is the best most logical method and even by the end when most developers had enough time to get used to the ps3 which was 7 years its was pretty damn close with them trading blows, so i would say ps3/360 is on par, but i would still say 360 is the superior platform for playing most games which is a fact.

You said red dead is more of a show case  then GTAV which almost no one would agree with. Even a average joe can look look at both games and tell which one is doing more technically more demanding. My main point which you seem to cant understand is this subjective. every game engine is doing mutiple things that no one can really confirm which is techically more demanding just by looking at game unless one really blows the other away, crysis 3 pushed the most advanced tech for sure but it's not  replicating living breathing city with traffic, huge number of npc's that react accodingly  and the level of detail, scale and even the ai GTAV had is still better then most open world games today. yes open world games are dime a dozen but GTAV blows every single one away on 7th it's not even close. This is big budget open world  game that came out in 2020 and GTAV NPC's are still way more advanced.  if you can't see why many people think it's near the top of most impressive games that just your opinion and stop tring to act like your opinion are facts. It's probably that you never played GTAV when it came out because it was leaps above evrything else.

I think the biggest proof of what i'm saying is true is Wiiu. You had all these people that were very knowledgeable about graphics Tech making claims that all these games were far beyond ps3/360 and using a much more powerful and advanced 352 gflops GPU when it reality was not. also the most techically advanced game crysis 3 runs better on 360 so does that make 360 more powerful? like i said my method for judging console power is the best most logical method and even by the end when most developers had enough time to get used to the ps3 which was 7 years its was pretty damn close with them trading blows, so i would say ps3/360 is on par, but i would still say 360 is the superior platform for playing most games which is a fact.

You really have no clue how advanced gtav engine is it shits on uncharted 3 ans crysis 3 and just talking pure speculation 

https://youtu.be/8vABIrxoZ-k?si=UhpQXYM0LKTpOtLJ

Maybe watch this video and see how crazy advanced this game. You probably never even played the game.

Graphics, lighting, volumetric clouds, draw distance, object density, even underwater is fully modeled, NPC density and complexity, you could knock people's guns, hats and glasses off, great AI, NPC interactions, real-time cutscenes with seamless transitions to gameplay and vice versa, facial animations, horse muscle simulation, car physics and deformation that no other AAA game could reach and more. That's all in last gen games on PS3/X360 sorry it's shit on every game and your opinion is not gonna change my mind.

Ok how this run on 360/ps3. It's run terrible and sub HD . Gtav is replicating a whole city as realistic as possible with actually believable world is , just the traffic simulation alone is more complex then anything in botw which just barren waste land.