It's becoming extremely clear your Playstation references are highly influencing your takes here, to put it lightly. Totally would have nothing to do with your rabid and completely unreasonable takes against Starfield, of course.
Are current games less effectively executed than previous generations? *spawn
- Thread starter iroboto
- Start date
- Status
I'mDudditz!
Newcomer
Just going off of youtube gameplay captures, Starfield often looks not so great especially as a current gen only game. I'm kind of baffled by the praise the game gets for it's visuals but because so many level headed people whom I respect are saying so, I just assume that it's one of the games that don't translate well unless playing first hand in the comfort of your home. And there have been a lot of these situations lately.
I will quickly tell you that LOU 2 graphics were great for 2019 but is showing it's age in MANY graphic areas (animation is still first class). With that being said, the game has NEVER looked that bad on my OLED display. Not even close.
I will quickly tell you that LOU 2 graphics were great for 2019 but is showing it's age in MANY graphic areas (animation is still first class). With that being said, the game has NEVER looked that bad on my OLED display. Not even close.
Im literally trying not to laugh but i just had to cause your now sounding like u work for bethesda's pr team, your explanation is no better than mine and still fails to explain how such a scene cant work on a ps4 for the same reasons i outlined earlier ''loading screens'' the ship is detailed yes one of the reasons how is because you get to the ship via a loading screen meaning the engine dumps data it doesnt require to allow ram to be filled with enough data inside the ship this is totally possible on ps4, so the so called object density is really over hyped here theres plenty of games on ps4 with alot of physics being applied not to mention the early havok tech demos showing millions of objects with rigid physics on a scene and games like just cause 4, ex machina.
About RTGI although a fancy technique realtime GI has been done on ps4 on a number of games notably the tomorrow children though not sure its been done in a title as big as starfield RTGI aside, is the point of a game to actually look good or to brag about using a graphics technique check box cause again starfield fails to impress me against ps4 titles that used baked GI so whats the purpose of the RTGI other than a checkbox in this particular game, i didnt even notice starfield had realtime gi until a few days ago where as i notice gi easily in games like demon souls remasterd, fortnite ue5, even some baked gi games like ac unity do a good job fooling people into thinking its realtime than starfield does.
Your the unreasonable one here and thats clear since youve failed to explain anything substantial and use baseless examples, and are now claiming that im using playstation references where ive time and time again compared modern games to arkham knight, shadow of war and cod, i also didnt pick on starfield as i mentioned redfall, baldurs gate and other games but somehow you only see playstation and starfield, its you who posted the starfield photo and im responding to that so who exactly is being rabid and unreasonable?
To be technical, I don't think GI is the key difference here. The reason the first pic looks horrible is because of lacking of 1. proper SSAO; 2. local light shadows; 3. high quality PBR materials.Meanwhile, back on the actual PS4 in real life ....
You honestly can't see how the compute intensive GI in the picture below is a generational leap?
Starfield's GI looks pretty basic to me. It doesn't really have high frequency details, and it's just all plain and bland everywhere. Light leaking is common to see, and subtle light bounces are not there to catch. In shadow areas where surfaces are mostly lit by indirect lighting this is more pronouned and almost look unshaded. At least to me, it feels mostly just sky lighting and a single capture of surrondings. Doesn't even look PRT GI to me. (admittedly this is still a leap from FO4, which even have manually assigned fake cubemaps at points).
I think the most next gen features in Starfield are the ultra high quality assets (so many details) and depth of fields (kinda insane that you still can't spot "holes" in a bokeh of that large radius). However, given the performance and resolution targets, it seems devs don't use any new gen tech here, but rather brute force pulling up the parameters.
It's like the FF16 condition. Assets are cranked up to filmic quality, but the lighting and other techniques supporting it are more last gen -- or even mediocre last gen.
lol i had that exact question before. they mean realtime gi.
This discussion is a bad take on a good discussion I'd like to have. There are bad faith actors in operation and erratic engagements that are falling into the pitfalls we've had before, including the "screenshot wars" of 2011. We lost many people back then and I don't want a repeat.
I will begin a new thread with clear rules of engagement when I've decided what they are.
I will begin a new thread with clear rules of engagement when I've decided what they are.
- Status
Similar threads
