Archive Thread of Screenshots of Ridunkulous Quality and Size [2007-2015]
- Thread starter Neb
- Start date
- Status
Those daytime shots look fantastic. 
It brings up an interesting question, though, which also relates to a lot of these other mods I've seen in this thread. Since the game engine is obviously capable of that level of lighting, why can't the developers seem to do it? Why are the game's players the ones that make the game look as good as it can? A lot of the best mods I've seen in this thread seem to address nothing more than the lighting. C'mon.. how hard can it be to just make 'em look this good out of the box?
It brings up an interesting question, though, which also relates to a lot of these other mods I've seen in this thread. Since the game engine is obviously capable of that level of lighting, why can't the developers seem to do it? Why are the game's players the ones that make the game look as good as it can? A lot of the best mods I've seen in this thread seem to address nothing more than the lighting. C'mon.. how hard can it be to just make 'em look this good out of the box?
Those daytime shots look fantastic.
It brings up an interesting question, though, which also relates to a lot of these other mods I've seen in this thread. Since the game engine is obviously capable of that level of lighting, why can't the developers seem to do it? Why are the game's players the ones that make the game look as good as it can? A lot of the best mods I've seen in this thread seem to address nothing more than the lighting. C'mon.. how hard can it be to just make 'em look this good out of the box?
Exactly, exactly.. EXACTLY!
I always scratch my head seeing these high-tech games with advanced tech and then loosing a lot of visual IQ on pure artistic design for colors/lighting. Such a thing that really aint hard to get right or pretty and yet many devs fail on that. And on top of that it comes with no perfomance hit!
For example Stalker COP could have looked far better by just having better set values for colors/lighting. Reducing hemisphere color value and some other small tweaks that would have added a lot more visually. Purely artistically.
Or take NFS: Shift that in vanilla looks good but some very small tweaks to TODs and it is unmatched visually as the tech is already there but to much 'bleeding-bloom' instead of just set to reasonable levels with well set HDR intensity and well balanced tone-mapping. Proof? Just look at my screenshot for that game... pure digital eye sex. :smile:
Or how about Crysis?
Sure it looked amazing in vanilla form but some TOD tweaks or even just some HDR/SSAO/eye-adaption values. Made YSFX TOD mod becouse it was fun and shit does it look uncanny and even more stunning and base stuff to get the visuals is perfomance free. In SSAA mode you could fool people it is postcards from your vacation...
http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/483/crysisysfx1.jpg
http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/9981/crysisysfx2.jpg
http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/8962/crysisysfx3.jpg
http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/8505/crysisysfx.jpg
And GTAIV already sports heavy tech, msot dont realise it but few games touches it on a technical level but sadly it fails on the artistic front regarding TODs. Seeing how much better and realistic it looks by mods is a testimonial. And also stupid decision to have the "P" blur filter PP system being lowres (only DOF effecton AFAIK) PC like console version. It destroys a lot of the increased detail PC version sports.
Same answer as many, sometimes unrelated questions here on Beyond3D: most game artists suck. One of the reasons is that the good ones can get better paid, and sometimes more rewarding jobs in the movies/FX industry.
Most of the times they don't even need to have additional effect, its just a poor [or different ] artistic choice.
IIRC those GTA4 lighting mods too barely have any performance hit yet R* seemed to have gone with a different look.
There was this RE5 enb mod which made the visuals realistic by just changing the color vaules, though the visuals looked a lot closer to "Realism" it actually looked quite worse than the the stylized green tinted original version. So I guess its down to the artist thinking what looks great & what doesn't.
] artistic choice.IIRC those GTA4 lighting mods too barely have any performance hit yet R* seemed to have gone with a different look.
There was this RE5 enb mod which made the visuals realistic by just changing the color vaules, though the visuals looked a lot closer to "Realism" it actually looked quite worse than the the stylized green tinted original version. So I guess its down to the artist thinking what looks great & what doesn't.
wth ? I thought after the patch GTA4 ran better than before but I see no performance improvement. I can barely get playable framerates & there's mad fluctuations to below 20FPS and this is after having all settings at medium, shadow density turned to zero & all three meters set to 33...on a 5850 !! And since the framerate is already so terrible I can't even enable the enb config. let alone even talk of a super sampling mod.
Something tells me this shouldn't happen.
Something tells me this shouldn't happen.
brain_stew
Regular
CPU?
GTA4 depends on the CPU more than the GPU (unless you enable ENB of course) and you're going to have performance issues (though not nearly as bad as the icky console versions) on even the fastest dual core.
Ah looks like that's my problem, my CPU is Q6600 (stock
) but well never felt a need to oce before lol. Anyways I never had issues with performance in console version. [especially xbox 360]Must be some other problem in his case as my E8400@3.6GHz doesn't drop that low even at near very high settings. It is rare for me to hit 20fps and 25-40fps is the norm. His Q6600 should perform better.
Ah looks like that's my problem, my CPU is Q6600 (stock
Unless you avg around 15-20fps then the perfomance shouldn't be a problem if it aint on console for you as consoles fluctuate all around 10-30fps and avg quite low (depending on situations), especially in more hectic situations. IIRC DF had framerate analysis in controlled situations. Considering your settings and that some you named are not CPU bound it looks like an issue besides HW capabilities for this game. I know game access HDD quite some for streaming so if you have antivirus active and GTAIV folder/EXE not excluded as in check opened files then it might be creating lots of choking points.
EDIT: Also by having ENB series installed it is enabled in anyform regarding if you enable it by command or disable it it still is soaking up perfomance. You see by just having it installed it will make some buffers for game SSAA like post-processing and vegetation rendering res and more giving a quite big perfomance hit depsite you not enabling it ingame.
I have taken screenshots of several choke points, in action etc with settings menu and framerate some long time ago. Those screens are in this thread and might be used to gauge perfomance results.
Btw I found out some time ago that disabling shadows boosted perfomance so much on my 4890 I could do 2x2SSAA 1440x900 smoothly and almost full settings... of course shadows are important sooooo..
Last edited by a moderator:
Well I don't recall Xbox 360 version running that bad it was smooth sailing [even the analysis had its average around 29.xx]...PS3 did went to low 20s & averaged around 27FPS but I don't think it goes any below than that. Regardless its all OT, now I must figure out whats the problem with my machine as its chugging even with console settings.
The avg dont say much when you look at the analysis video framerate progress by the second in ingame play parts. It fluctuates wildly except cutscene analysis videos but then they are cutscenes. But yes OT but I made some comments about things that could impact perfomance (ENB etc). :smile:
Last edited by a moderator:
^What I mentioned before was the case when i didn't even kept the enb config file in the directory. Sure its smoother as it is by default but it still has mad amount of framedrops. I kept everything at high [except textures] & remember the first time you come out of your safehouse & the game mentions about food & shows a hot dog/burger vendor ? yea ,that's where my framerate dropped to like 15s & while gameplay its barely 25FPS. when I turn everything to medium I still get drops to teens every now & then.
Please, bear in mind though, you will need a very powerful PC to get playable performance and still look like those screens. My fps fluctuates between 10-30 and it can be sluggish at times. My tolerance of low fps is quite good but others may be really bothered.Looks fantastic
I want to swap GTA IV X360 to PC version so much now
Looks fantastic
I want to swap GTA IV X360 to PC version so much now
How much SSAA you got as I see your images are 1680x1050. I know from my experience that 1680x1050 with 2x2 SSAA forces me to lower draw distance to very very low levels if I want to have high texture detail and rest on very high and balanced car amount, LOD scale etc. Else I run out of VRAM with lots of choke points with my 4890 1GB. And even then I run out of VRAM.
- Status
Similar threads
