Flappy Pannus
Veteran
"I agree with it"
He discounted CB2077 from the list due to the gameplay bugs, not due to the graphics. Which for a ranking of the best graphical games is pretty silly IMO, but hey ho, I'm sure he has his reasons.
nah, nxgamer list is much better one
It certainly caters to a particular high volume segment of the market that's doubtless healthy for page hits.
NXgamer has allways been playstation. Its not the biggest market though, and his subscriber amount is much lower then say digital foundrys.
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
It's not silly at all. Many of the bugs in CP2077 manifest with its appearance and performance. Those are part of the presentation.
In fact the leap might be higher from PS4 to PS5 than it was from PS3 to PS4. You rely to much on paper specs, and only one part of the specs.
We should examine the cross gen games.
Last gen we saw a jump of 2.25x in resolution in games like GTA4, a game that even got one more year of cooking for the PS4 version, better details, 2.25 jump in resolution, but still targetting 30fps.
Same for another big game like Destiny.
Now we have games like spiderman which target a native 4k with better details, RT, and 30FPS, so a 4x jump in res with other things added on top, or even a dynamic 4k with double the framerate from PS4.
We also have games like Tsushima which target 4K and 60fps, same for Days Gone.
So for now at the very least, even without highly optimised engines for the PS5, the gap is greater.
And not talking about data management, speeds assets loading etc..., there the gap is even bigger, more like a jump from PS1 to PS2 i think.
So, while obviously not reaching the new mid range cards performance from Nvidia, this new gen of console still has enough power to entertain and amaze us for years to come.
Last edited:
snc
Veteran
Its technical achievement list also and cyberpunk technicalyn due to bugs, ai and optimisation problems is below avarage so its not silly (and imho graphic are not as insane as some here try to imply). Everything ok with nxgamer list, its not what title has most havy rt
(more silly was not putting ghost of tsushima in top10 but still its just preference list)
Last edited:
BillSpencer
Regular
Spiderman looks cleaner (too clean IMO) and the reflections seem to cover kilometres, whereas in cyberpunk the world is much more visual dense with the RT reflections never show beyond a few 100 meters.
I personally prefer 2077, even on PS5 like I played it yesterday at 1.00 (which is PS4 capped at 30 D: it needed 45GBs of 1.06 but I needed to play the game), but I can see why people would prefer other titles, even if I don't personally agree
I personally prefer 2077, even on PS5 like I played it yesterday at 1.00 (which is PS4 capped at 30 D: it needed 45GBs of 1.06 but I needed to play the game), but I can see why people would prefer other titles, even if I don't personally agree
It's kinda weird to see people so handily dismiss "next gen" before it even starts.
To me it's strangely equivalent to the beginning of last gen, I recall many moments where people
didn't think we'd get visuals like TLOU2, Order 1886, Gears Of War 4/5, God Of War Reboot etc.
I think the jury is still out on what the next gen consoles are or aren't capable of, especially
when we're essentially benchmarking "old" tech on next gen GPU's/CPU's whether that's on PC or Console.
Wouldn't a better representation of "Next gen" actually be true "Next Gen" software ?
I mean judging off of the performance of TLOU1 on Ps4 or Battlefield 4 on Xbox One, most
wouldn't be shocked (at the time) if someone handily wrote off the tech demos to follow like the Uncharted 4 reveal
or the initial gameplay of Doom or Battlefront as "impossible".
Why not revisit this discussion when something ACTUALLY next gen comes out ?
Also speaking of NX Gamer didn't he do some great videos which detailed that PC to Console is not 1:1 ?
And that for example GPU's which should have equivalent performance based
on paper specs actually performed worse due to for example a lack of vram or bandwidth ?
To me it's strangely equivalent to the beginning of last gen, I recall many moments where people
didn't think we'd get visuals like TLOU2, Order 1886, Gears Of War 4/5, God Of War Reboot etc.
I think the jury is still out on what the next gen consoles are or aren't capable of, especially
when we're essentially benchmarking "old" tech on next gen GPU's/CPU's whether that's on PC or Console.
Wouldn't a better representation of "Next gen" actually be true "Next Gen" software ?
I mean judging off of the performance of TLOU1 on Ps4 or Battlefield 4 on Xbox One, most
wouldn't be shocked (at the time) if someone handily wrote off the tech demos to follow like the Uncharted 4 reveal
or the initial gameplay of Doom or Battlefront as "impossible".
Why not revisit this discussion when something ACTUALLY next gen comes out ?
Also speaking of NX Gamer didn't he do some great videos which detailed that PC to Console is not 1:1 ?
And that for example GPU's which should have equivalent performance based
on paper specs actually performed worse due to for example a lack of vram or bandwidth ?
Indeed. People were stating Witcher 2 and the Metro titles were already ahead of what the gen 8 consoles would be outputting.
BillSpencer
Regular
I think those games look horrible, however, if you compare metro PC to metro PS4, I am sure that on PC there are some effects not present in the PS4 port.
to me, they both look like sh*t (no offence to the developer), but there will be people who believe, and claim that the bloom and motion blur of the PC version makes such a big difference that the PC version is a generation ahead. Even though there are much better looking titles on PS4 than even the PC version of Metro Redux, back then people would still go "PS4 does not even have the power to render motion blur LOL, a 750ti can do it but PS4 can't, so much for 'next generation' haha".
Its technical achievement list also and cyberpunk technicalyn due to bugs, ai and optimisation problems is below avarage so its not silly (and imho graphic are not as insane as some here try to imply). Everything ok with nxgamer list, its not what title has most havy rt
CB2077 is bad on the base consoles certainly, but in his reasoning for not including it he says he's not talking about those versions. And there's nothing wrong with performance on any of the other 5 consoles or PC (provided you have sufficient hardware on the PC). A few non game breaking gameplay or technical bugs (which are common in RPG's particularly these days and are already being rapidly dealt with through patches) shouldn't exclude a game from being considered in a list of best graphics, especially when millions are enjoying the game and the PC version at least has a strong 86 rating on Metacritic. Why not just include the PC version of the game in the list if he has issues with the consoles? He didn't have a problem including FS2020 for example which also has very high system requirements to look it's best.
He did, it was number 5 in the list. 4 out of his top 7 "best graphical and technical games" including all of the top 3 were Playstation exclusives. And curiously FS2020 with all it's amazing weather and world simulation tech, coupled with easily some of the most photorealistic graphics available today, failed to even break the top 3.
Everyone will define "next gen" differently. To me it's not about waiting 2-3 years for a game that fully leverages everything the next gen consoles have to offer, but rather about any game that offers an experience clearly beyond what the previous gen was capable of (therefore making it by definition, the next gen). The first such games of a generation will naturally be exceeded later on in the generation but I don't see why that means they can't be considered "next gen" if they weren't possible on the "last gen" without transformational compromises.
If they have a lack of vram or bandwidth then they don't have equivalent performance based on paper specs. I recall a video a while back comparing the 750Ti to the PS4 on the basis of TFLOPS alone. I can't remember if that was an NXG video or not, but it that's the one you're referring to then the point of it was simply to demonstrate that you can't compare two different graphics architectures on the basis of the TFLOPS alone.
I've not seen anyone making such claims about CB2077.
TLOU2 is with RDR2 the biggest art, tech art(shading) and attention to detail achievement of the generation and one of the best technically from an engine perspective but some next-gen games, cross gen games or PC games have better technology.
Full raytracing in Cyberpunk 2077, Geometry density in Demon'soul's and unified ligthing, strand hair technolohy in FIFA 21 or a bit less good from a physics perspective Spiderman MM. Reflection raytracing in Spiderman MM or other game with raytracing.
http://advances.realtimerendering.com/s2020/NaughtyDog_TechArt_TLOU2-final.pptx
This is the reason ND talked mostly about tech art and animation where they are the best. Rockstar animation is very realistic but it paid by gameplay input lag and tedious control.
I hope ND will do dynamic/realtime GI on PS5, strand hair too, mpre geometry and improve the character face during gameplay.
Best graphics/technology is a mix of art, tech art, animation, rendering technology.
Full raytracing in Cyberpunk 2077, Geometry density in Demon'soul's and unified ligthing, strand hair technolohy in FIFA 21 or a bit less good from a physics perspective Spiderman MM. Reflection raytracing in Spiderman MM or other game with raytracing.
http://advances.realtimerendering.com/s2020/NaughtyDog_TechArt_TLOU2-final.pptx
This is the reason ND talked mostly about tech art and animation where they are the best. Rockstar animation is very realistic but it paid by gameplay input lag and tedious control.
I hope ND will do dynamic/realtime GI on PS5, strand hair too, mpre geometry and improve the character face during gameplay.
Best graphics/technology is a mix of art, tech art, animation, rendering technology.
Last edited:
Rootax
Veteran
Differents people will be impressed by differents things in the end... RDR2 is a joke too me, while others think It's a big deal (while I still believe W3 is incredible) so... When tech and art are so intertwined, there is no right or wrong answer imo. If a game is not doable on a "old gen" system, but look like sh*t, is it a leap in graphics ?
Maybe with mod is different but vanilla The Witcher 3 graphics looks dated imo, same for Horizon Zero Dawn. I find technology not mature enough in 3d videogames to not look dated a few years later. After the art is good in TW3, We probably approach the point where we can represent every assets with a good level (fur, beard, hair, vegetation were lacking before but I like a lot Ghost of Tsushima and TLOU2 vegetation and hair in FIFA21 and spiderman MM).
After I agree it is a matter of taste.
Last edited:
In hardware, from PS4 to 5 is the smallest leap yet in the history of playstation. Thats the specs, the numbers.
Comparing cross-gen games, but from ps3 to 4, we didnt have such thing from AAA sony exclusives. One can angle it however you want i think.
Look at Killzome shadowfall, Order 1886 etc, what did we get at launch. That was a huge leap. Now the best on PS5 is Demon souls in graphics. Its nowhere the leap that SF and order 1886 graphically brought.
DF noted this too in one of their videos, that the graphical leap is smaller then ever between a transition. Its clearly due to smaller increases in hardware, which obviously happened.
GoT, days gone, they are last gen games, it would rather shock anyone if those could not be uppressed and have a higher fps.
The gap being smaller though doesnt mean they cant entertain us (they already do?) with amazing graphics. Its just that the leaps cant be as big as before due to lesser hardware 'evolutions' or whatever to call it
The jump to 4k and higher framerates didnt help either. And then we talk about 2013 consoles. Many have already accustomed to '4k' with the Pro. For them, the gap is even smaller.
Anyway, digital foundry themselfs have shared the idea too that gaps arent as big as they used to be. Its quite evident in launch titles for PS4 as opposed to PS5 launch titles native for the systems.
Thing is, spiderman only does reflections, which at 60fps are rather low quality and lack reflection in reflections. CP2077 does so much more then just reflections, all the while normal rasterization is at a higher notch (on pc).
Its a fact the hardware is leap is the smallest ever, heck, for every generation, leaps have been getting smaller. From PSX to PS2, kinda obvious. From PS2 to PS3 was huge too, but less so. From PS3 to PS4, a 10 times increase in GPU power, massive in main ram and ALOT in bandwith, while targetting close to the same resolution.
PS5 got a mere 5x increase in GPU power, not as huge of a CPU upgrade (yes, its true, its not far off), and doubled the amount of ram. In pure hardware terms, its a much and much smaller leap. Throw in 4k and mid gen systems and the gap narrows even more.
About IO, when we went from disc based to HDD, that wasnt a small leap either back then. Latencies and all.
Comparing AMD to AMD, a 7870 is damn close even today to what the base PS4 does. Never before have GPUs in the PC space held up so well. Guess optimization made its way there too then.
Going by what i read above, yes, i can say GTA4 looks heaps better then spiderman, its as outrageous as some other claims in this thread.
Doubt it. But ofcourse they say they are the best
As DF noted in their best graphics of the year video (2020), the witcher 3 wasnt really designed around the PC and they got flak for it. Witcher 2 was according to them. CP2077 in turn is a pc designed game, 'through and through' from Johns mouth.
If someone actually manages to place last of us 2 before DS in a graphics list, ye, its really a matter of strange taste.
BillSpencer
Regular
I think the streaming tech in 2077 is not getting any credit, now that I have experienced it for a little bit, I believe that 2077 is how the games will be that use the SSDs to the max, it really has the visual density of TLOU2 but up close and 100 times bigger in scale.
So the streaming is next generation as well
So the streaming is next generation as well
In hardware, from PS4 to 5 is the smallest leap yet in the history of playstation. Thats the specs, the numbers.
Comparing cross-gen games, but from ps3 to 4, we didnt have such thing from AAA sony exclusives. One can angle it however you want i think.
Look at Killzome shadowfall, Order 1886 etc, what did we get at launch. That was a huge leap. Now the best on PS5 is Demon souls in graphics. Its nowhere the leap that SF and order 1886 graphically brought.
DF noted this too in one of their videos, that the graphical leap is smaller then ever between a transition. Its clearly due to smaller increases in hardware, which obviously happened.
GoT, days gone, they are last gen games, it would rather shock anyone if those could not be uppressed and have a higher fps.
The gap being smaller though doesnt mean they cant entertain us (they already do?) with amazing graphics. Its just that the leaps cant be as big as before due to lesser hardware 'evolutions' or whatever to call it
The jump to 4k and higher framerates didnt help either. And then we talk about 2013 consoles. Many have already accustomed to '4k' with the Pro. For them, the gap is even smaller.
Anyway, digital foundry themselfs have shared the idea too that gaps arent as big as they used to be. Its quite evident in launch titles for PS4 as opposed to PS5 launch titles native for the systems.
.
I think you're very wrong but at least we are all free to have our own opinions here, as long as we share them in peace
BillSpencer
Regular
And it’s BS to compare the PS4 to 7950 or whatever it PS4 has both lower bandwidth as well as the bandwidth being shared with the CPU. Under certain operations memory bandwidth would drop beneath 80 if I recall. Whereas the full PC GPU has more available and at all times.
the fact that for 399 you can run 2077 even in its current PS4/60fps state is really overlooked. If you spend the PC money on a fat OLED, projector and or home theatre system then I am pretty sure the result will be better.
of course the PC will always have higher specs
“omg LOL this 500 dollar SSD has higher throughput than the 399 PS5!! Lol so much for next gen, console are teh weak!!!11”
the fact that for 399 you can run 2077 even in its current PS4/60fps state is really overlooked. If you spend the PC money on a fat OLED, projector and or home theatre system then I am pretty sure the result will be better.
of course the PC will always have higher specs
“omg LOL this 500 dollar SSD has higher throughput than the 399 PS5!! Lol so much for next gen, console are teh weak!!!11”
Absolutely. Its nothing strange with disagreeing with someone. And as it seems, when it comes to graphics, people can really have different views on whats great looking, next gen, last gen etc
as long as we share them in peace
Cant agree more, its the utter most important factor to consider. Talk and disagree with the platform, game, graphics, the tech. Not the user/person posting it. Thats why there is forums for, people agree and disagree on the content and challange it and share why they think different. In a healthy discussion, you see posters like you on this page.
Hm, dunno, maybe. But, the 7950 came spring 2012, it wasnt the highest end even then, nor the most expensive. PS4 came late 2013. 1.5 years between them. A 7950 (R280 by then i think?) wasnt all that expensive anymore. R9 290X was the top dog in amds catalog (and a beast at that).
Anyway, i mentioned a 7870 in my previous post, that thing is rather close for being what it is. AMD's fine wine as some call it, but still.
Well, yes, its a great value for 400 dollars, if you can get one, at that price. Here the discless goes for more then that. Anyway, my 2018 system does the game fine, better then the PS5 does. I didnt need to upgrade and i probably wont have to for the rest of the gen.
Similar threads
