Best looking games of 2015 *spawn

[function]

The only thing that is always confusing is how people claim a game looks better because it's bigger "but open world", "but the map size", "but..." and so on and so forth.

I'm not confused by it. Not in the slightest. It's a personal preference.

Games give you (generally) some control over the camera and where you go. Some people - when thinking about their "best looking game" - will be drawn to that game with valleys and mountains and towns and castles, where they can explore and look at a single person up close or chose a mountain and wait for sunset so as to look at *everything* they know bathed in orange and black. Other people - when thinking about their "best looking game" - just love a shit-hot corridor.

A lot goes into what a person might think is the "best looking game". Or perhaps it doesn't. It all depends on the person.

 

[goonergaz]

I think small environment, linear games shouldl be expected to have the best graphics (nicest to look at) because they don't have to stretch so far. The moment you place on demands like epic draw distance, you have to make compromises elsewhere meaning less pretty pixels. Kinda like giving two artists two days to work on a painting each, one on a 3 foot by 2 foot canvas and one on a 30 foot by 20 foot ceiling. When viewing up close (equivalent to viewing the game world through the window of the screen), it's obvious which'll be 'prettier'.

Totally agree, I meant that too - linear and smaller environments, reminded me very much of how Uncharted (etc) worked with loaded 'small' areas and doors closing behind you (etc).

Really nice tho...didn't mind the game either, wasn't that bad (not great tho). I do need to play Until Dawn...

 

[L. Scofield]

Did you ever actually play The Order? Since day one (or even pre-release) you posting hefty critique and I am wondering if you ever experienced the game at all?

The same goes for Battlefront SW on PS4(!!!) if you want to compare it to The Order (and not some beefed up PC version).

Games are interactive. Imo, one need to experience them to realize all the nuances and the overall impression the graphics have. Best, on the typical gaming setup one is used to (own calibrated TV).

Looking at screenshots, looking at YT or even GS vids is imo not enough to judge...especially for someone who is very prominent in requesting real facts all the time!

So, on what material is your opinion based on...screenshots only? YT playthrough?

Just curious...

Translation: Shoot the messenger, not the message.

Also, why are PC games not allowed?

The first answer is that I tried using a highly precise single-frame FoV measuring technique, got something slightly greater than 90, but then had to consider that the subtle barrel distortion filter would skew the result very slightly high.
I really need to get around to doing a writeup on FoV measurement techniques so that I can be less cryptic...

The second answer is that you can get a somewhat rougher measurement via a more intuitive approach: Go to a spot where you're surrounded by highly-distant stuff*, level the camera at the horizon**, and do a full 360-degree rotation at constant angular velocity. Divide the time taken for the camera to pass one frame worth of stuff by the time it takes to do a full 360-degree rotation, and multiply the result by 360 to put the answer in degrees.

Here's a quick demo video I scraped together, where I'm doing some constant-speed rotation from 33 seconds to 85 seconds in the video. A full rotation takes around 36 seconds, and if you look at a skybox object on the left side of the image and measure how long it takes to get to the right side, it's about 9 seconds. (9/36)*360 -> 90.

//==============================

*Highly-distant stuff doesn't parallax much with third-person camera rotations, so its movement across the screen when you rotate is "purely" a matter of your rotation speed. For this method you need at least one frame in your rotation to have a highly-distant reference detail on both sides of the frame.

**In rectilinear perspective projection, this ensures that horizontal position on-screen isn't dependent on the y height of a detail in the game world. The already-mentioned barrel distortion breaks this somewhat, but only to the significance of a few pixels on the left-right sides of the screen, not enough to muddy the measurement all that much.

Interesting. I stand corrected

Still has a tiny vertical FOV

I think small environment, linear games shouldl be expected to have the best graphics (nicest to look at) because they don't have to stretch so far. The moment you place on demands like epic draw distance, you have to make compromises elsewhere meaning less pretty pixels. Kinda like giving two artists two days to work on a painting each, one on a 3 foot by 2 foot canvas and one on a 30 foot by 20 foot ceiling. When viewing up close (equivalent to viewing the game world through the window of the screen), it's obvious which'll be 'prettier'.

Except "nicest to look at" is completely subjective. Looking at a painting of a room might not be as nice as looking at a painting of an entire city

Likewise, looking at a very detailed (though blurry) realistic game might not be as nice as looking at a very artistic colorful game, like Ori.

It's a terrible definition.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Also, why are PC games not allowed?

Because this is the console zone?

 

[London Geezer]

Clearly the best looking game of 2015 is Crysis.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Clearly the best looking game of 2015 is Crysis.

Crysis. On console.

 

[Billy Idol]

Translation: Shoot the messenger, not the message.

Oh come on, this is a really childish response! I did not shoot you at all
So the translation of your response is: "no, I have never ever played the games and versions I am constantly commenting and comparing on" ;-)

Two further comments:

1.) there is a reason amazon introduced the "amazon certified reviews"...not because they want to shoot the messenger?!?

2.) It may come as a surprise to you, but I am one of the B3Der that actually values your opinions and discussion. And often I do agree with you. But since day 1, I completely disagree with nearly everything you say about The Order. That is why I was just curious, no shooting required (probably shooting belongs to the weapon and shooting in US of A thread??)...ha ha ha, always so defensive Mr Scofield!

Also, why are PC games not allowed?

Because it is super difficult to compare what we are really talking about imo! Which version? The "low" setting version...because this is the version everyone has access to? Or the super duper "very high" version with 4K res, which basically no one has access to? Or what about this specific mod, where only one guy has the source code and is using a rendering farm to generate 24 fps...and it is the best thing in the world?!?

On console you can easily compare: games on PS4 and X1 (they are close enough in specs imo).

 

[Billy Idol]

What about Halo 5 cutscenes? These are some mighty fine real time graphics on consoles...do they count towards game graphics?

Wrt Until Dawn, I was blown away in the end part

Spoiler

where you are in the hall and lots of those Vendigos are around...those creatures look non-real time CGIish to me

Furthermore, in contrast to NX gamer, I would place the new Tomb Raider game on place 2...it is really gorgeous to look at imo.

The other ranks are split between a lot of games like BF SW, W3 and so on imo.

 

[dobwal]

Can we get out of the "why my subjective opinion is better than yours" and into "this is why I opine that this game subjectively looks better than other visuals of note"?

That way we can freely have a discussion without getting into a back and forth of what "best" means technically or artistically?

Or we should first elect a B3DSOD (Standards of Definitions) commitee who technically defines terms like "best", "pretty", "ugly" and "atrocious" so that we can avoid these arguments in semantics.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

That way we can freely have a discussion without getting into a back and forth of what "best" means technically or artistically?

You're still full of that Christmas optimism and hope, aren't you!

 

[MrFox]

The animation/rigging in Until Dawn seems to help a lot. Some games have nice screenshots but in movement it's terrible.

Can we get out of the "why my subjective opinion is better than yours" and into "this is why I opine that this game subjectively looks better than other visuals of note"?

That way we can freely have a discussion without getting into a back and forth of what "best" means technically or artistically?

Impossible. You know this will obviously turn into a PC vs Console discussion again.

 

[dobwal]

You're still full of that Christmas optimism and hope, aren't you!

LOL. I guess I am.

Maybe we should create an algorithm.

Best = (FPS*REZ*AA*AF*GI*POM*DrawDistance) / (Scaling Artifacts)(LOD Artifacts)(GI Artifacts)(AA Artifacts)(Misc Artifacts)(Frame Drops)

I am sure there are a dozen or so other variables that may be included. The more the merrier.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Interesting post by the CTO of Ready at Dawn

http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=191125296

I can't disagree with that. To date I've yet to find a game that doesn't look better in an ultra wide fov. It's possible to force many games into one on the PC even with a 16:9 monitor which is something I always pursue. May make my next monitor a 21:9 aspect ratio.

And I can't help but wonder if the wide fov is colouring some peoples views of The Order. Had the game released in standard 16:9 and BF in 21:9, I wonder if more people would think differently. This video from the 50 second mark shows BF in 21:9. Can people seriously hand on heart watch this and say "nope, The Order looks better than that"?

Spoiler

 

[pjbliverpool]

The Order trumps anything else for artistic merit.

If you're talking purely artistic merit then I'd personally say GTAV trumps them all!

 

[Clukos]

This video from the 50 second mark shows BF in 21:9. Can people seriously hand on heart watch this and say "nope, The Order looks better than that"?

Yes, played Battlefront on PC maxed. The Order looks better imo. Even though Battlefront probably has better looking trees if that's your thing. And just to clarify, i am not saying The Order looks better than any game on every single thing. Just that the overall package, and the way it is delivered, is better than what other games offer, as a package, in 2015.

For example, i think Lara's facial animation in RoTR is better than all characters in The Order (even though TO is still top 3 easily) but the awful shimmering, inconsistent material shading and IQ hold it from being able to beat TO for me.

 

[London Geezer]

The Order has zero trees.

 

[MrFox]

It adds realism, it's in London.

 

[Clukos]

The Order has zero trees.

It has some trees (had to check)

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/570/21201217878_32830ed456_o.jpg
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1538/24140744536_e8328d8668_o.jpg

 

[pjbliverpool]

Because this is the console zone?

I think that just highlights the issue of the separation between the console and PC zones. The thread is a discussion of the NX gamer video which was indeed a review of all platforms, not just console. So I think this thread should include the same. But the problem then is, do we have two threads about exactly the same topic split across both forums? That sounds kinda dippy to me.

 

[Clukos]

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Some people play both console and PC games. But since the top 5, according to NX gamer, is either multiplatform games or console exclusives (timed or not), I think this section is more appropriate. Just because it's more likely that people played all of the games here than the PC section. "I watched a video on youtube and i didn't like it" doesn't say much imo.