Best looking games of 2015 *spawn

What game had the best graphics in 2015?


  • Total voters
    58
I voted Xenoblade Chronicles X from that list.
XBCX might not be the technically most impressive but to my eyes it was the most pleasing and interesting, with more variety in it's open world than other games that come to mind. Witcher 3 is beautiful too (why not on the list?) but in my opinion a bit too repetitive and familiar (as in not fantastical enough) in it's environments, as is Fallout 4.

Other WiiU games deserve a mention too like Yoshi's Woolly World.

Best Graphics that look least like a console game but too dark and dull - The Order 1886
 
On a technical level, of course Xenoblade Chronicles X wont stack up to the best PS4/X1 games, but the world design and art direction make it a lovely looking game. Things like extreme pop in are going to be huge turn offs to some, but if that doesn't bother you, the environments outside of New LA are marvelous. Especially when viewed at reasonable distance. Get up real close to certain textures, and some textures can look low res, and textures load pretty late at times, but overall this is one of the best achievements I have seen on Wii U. I find the world they created to be more artistically pleasing than most of the other options on the list. Of course I am biased being a Nintendo guy. LOL :D
 
I voted The Order, but was in doubt against Star Wars. In global I think The Order is superior, but the results of Star Wars at 60fps are just amazing.
 
So far, it looks like the average gamer prefers pretty pixels packed into perfect, petite portions, with a smaller group of gamers prefering the graphical experience of a broader scape. What this really tells us is when asking what's the best graphics, there's a fairly clear subjective partition which never neds discussing again! Those who like high pixel quality (and maybe simulated cinema) no matter the cost can compare high-pixel quality games to find their best. Those who prefer clean, high framerate, open world titles can compare those games. And there's no need to try and compare across styles.

That's the take home point. Never again are to we have 'discussions' along the lines of "open world looks better/worse than corridor shooter".
 
So what do you guys think will win 2016!? We have a few potential early contenders;

Uncharted 4
Horizon
Tomorrow Children
No Mans Sky
Gears 4
Quantum Break
Crackdown
No man's sky has way more chance winning GOTY 2016 than best graphics. What I have seen of Gears 4 was good but far from being graphics award worthy.

Any others? I believe Dreams is Beta only so not included.
I think Battlefield 5 will be a serious contender if the game releases this year as rumored.

...

That's the take home point. Never again are to we have 'discussions' along the lines of "open world looks better/worse than corridor shooter".

Ha ha. You wish.
 
Even if Battlefront was 30fps on PS4, I still think it would be the best looking game on consoles. The fact that it's 60fps makes it look much much better in motion, to top things off. It's really a no contest for me.

Also, which cutscenes in Halo 5 were real-time? I thought they were all pre-recorded in-engine.
 
Also, which cutscenes in Halo 5 were real-time? I thought they were all pre-recorded in-engine.
The intro was pre-rendered. I think the scene with Blue Team focus firing was also not real-time. Final sequence at the end as well. The rest of the stuff should be real-time.
 
So far, it looks like the average gamer prefers pretty pixels packed into perfect, petite portions, with a smaller group of gamers prefering the graphical experience of a broader scape. What this really tells us is when asking what's the best graphics, there's a fairly clear subjective partition which never neds discussing again! Those who like high pixel quality (and maybe simulated cinema) no matter the cost can compare high-pixel quality games to find their best. Those who prefer clean, high framerate, open world titles can compare those games. And there's no need to try and compare across styles.

That's the take home point. Never again are to we have 'discussions' along the lines of "open world looks better/worse than corridor shooter".

Or we could discuss whatever we want :rolleyes:
 
I voted The Order but I think Star Wars Battlefront is jut behind far ahead of all other title.

I am not sure 2016 title will be better than this two title. Three title are ahead the pack Quantum Break, Uncharted 4 and Horizon Zero Dawn... Dreams and Tomorrow Children are very good too on exotic looking title...
 
Unfortunately, The Order 1886 has this cheap videocam look. Star Wars Battlefront and Until Dawn are looking much more like an analog film (especially Star Wars: Battlefront) . Many digital films and games as The Order 1886 have a manipulated picture with desaturated colors, color filters, narrowed contrast, coated white, restricted gamma curves or massive blur to cover up CGI etc! This is nowadays regarded as an "artistic look". I don't like this and prefer much more the "real" cinema style. A lot of These 2000 films are only cheaper "digital video scrap".
 
For me it is the exact opposite: TO has the cinema analogue look, BF and UD are too clean looking and super 'gamey' in comparison (except UD at the end, the particular scene I described earlier: this looks astounding to me).
 
So far, it looks like the average gamer prefers pretty pixels packed into perfect, petite portions, with a smaller group of gamers prefering the graphical experience of a broader scape. What this really tells us is when asking what's the best graphics, there's a fairly clear subjective partition which never neds discussing again! Those who like high pixel quality (and maybe simulated cinema) no matter the cost can compare high-pixel quality games to find their best. Those who prefer clean, high framerate, open world titles can compare those games. And there's no need to try and compare across styles.

That's the take home point. Never again are to we have 'discussions' along the lines of "open world looks better/worse than corridor shooter".

That sounds good in theory, but its inevitable that someone at some point makes a comment that such and such open world 60fps game is the best looking game they have ever played. This will sure result in someone arguing that it doesn't look nearly as good as such and such 30fps limited scope game. That's the life of a forum member, endlessly debating things that are a never ending cycle. LOL;-)
 
Or we could discuss whatever we want :rolleyes:
That sounds good in theory, but its inevitable that someone at some point makes a comment that such and such open world 60fps game is the best looking game they have ever played. This will sure result in someone arguing that it doesn't look nearly as good as such and such 30fps limited scope game. That's the life of a forum member, endlessly debating things that are a never ending cycle. LOL;-)
Except the moderators have the responsibility and power to manage discussion for the health of the board. And if there's any future game thread where someone says, "this is the best looking game," and someone comes along comparing it to an unrelated game with completely different subjective values, I have the power and inclination to end such discussion to save the thread getting derailed. Only like-versus-like or point-by-point technical comparison is worth allowing.
 
Except the moderators have the responsibility and power to manage discussion for the health of the board. And if there's any future game thread where someone says, "this is the best looking game," and someone comes along comparing it to an unrelated game with completely different subjective values, I have the power and inclination to end such discussion to save the thread getting derailed. Only like-versus-like or point-by-point technical comparison is worth allowing.

Absolutely, but I would hope the moderators have leniency and decipher the difference between a thread being derailed, and a thread that may seem like a broken record. In order to maintain an active community, there needs to be new members. Inevitably, those new members are going to create threads that may seem like a rehash of a long drawn out discussion from months or even years ago. I think its best to let threads either progress or die on their own, rather than declaring it a dead topic on sight. Ultimately my perspective is the mods are reasonable here, so it should work out fine.
 
Sure. Note I said "game thread", so specifically about the game discussions where a few screenshots get some people really excited and then the killjoys feel the need to say, "that game isn't that great because this other game does graphics differently with completely different priorities," and then we have a pointless back and forth. Any new members entering into such discussion will be politely informed as to the preference.
 
For me it is the exact opposite: TO has the cinema analogue look, BF and UD are too clean looking and super 'gamey' in comparison (except UD at the end, the particular scene I described earlier: this looks astounding to me).

35mm movies usually do not have this color filters etc. That came with digital movies (late 90s) into fashion. I still remember very well the green image of a Black Hawk Down
 
Except the moderators have the responsibility and power to manage discussion for the health of the board. And if there's any future game thread where someone says, "this is the best looking game," and someone comes along comparing it to an unrelated game with completely different subjective values, I have the power and inclination to end such discussion to save the thread getting derailed. Only like-versus-like or point-by-point technical comparison is worth allowing.
That's the problem. If this thread was intended to be purely subjective it should be named: "Favorite graphics of 2015". Instead, it's named "Best looking games of 2015" which implies objective discussion and that includes different viewpoints on which criteria to use to make that selection.
 
Back
Top