Graphical Comparisons: Don't go Chasing Waterfalls or Throwing Rocks at Cars *bifurcation*

It's 1080p 4xMSAA on base xb with settings and effects completely removed from it. That's why. Try running all ultra settings and see res drop

These are not minor visual bumps. They're actually extremely more computational. Many of the effects are double the quality over base. Some even 10x more. That's not a simple bump

• "in many games using SSR, there's a cut-off around the edges of objects in the way of a reflected surfaces...Xbox One X gets a 2x detail boost over the standard console"
• "The game runs with improved tessellation on deformable snow, rendered up to 10x the quality on Xbox One X compared to the representation on the base console."
• "SSAO is only enabled on Xbox One X in its quality mode"
• "motion blur rendering is boosted on Xbox One X"
• "dynamic night-time shadows from headlights are only an X feature while running at 4K and 30fps, and likewise for ambient occlusion"
• "textures get a boost on Xbox One X to take advantage of the system's extra memory"
• "To go alongside that, foliage density is increased by 50 per cent"

Again having more details isn't something the base console holds back on the X. Many games have already shown this with enhanced modes

 

I get it, but I don't see the visual return to go along with those numbers. It's just an accumulation of assets already there in the base version (aside from night lighting), not something completely removed from the base game.

I remember when guerrilla said killzone 3 was pushing 4x the geometry of killzone 2 (they literally said this here's us talking about it, but of course the original news posting is gone like everything I bring up LOL https://www.gamespot.com/forums/sys...llzone-3-uses-100-of-the-ps3s-power-27570801/) but could you tell? Shit no. I can't say they were lying, buuuut... Actually they ruined killzone with that game visually and gameplay wise vs. KZ2 but i'm rambling.

I will just agree that 4H4 is impressive for both pieces of hardware and leave it at that.

 

umm there's literally no pop in going on in the buildings. The youtube compression hurts it alot as well to see any clarity. But I'm in the city right now and there's no pop in going on. I'll post a vid of drone flying around

Thing about foliage in FH4 and hzd in fh4 all of it reacts and interacts with cars and wildlife. When a car drives over grass, it bends and stays bent. Where as hzd 90% of the foliage doesn't only the stealth bushes move with alloy model. The former takes a larger strain on memory to hold it's previous state

Far Cry 5 runs under 1080p at nearly 900p on base xb while ps4 runs at 1080p and X runs a 4k 99% of the time. Again your reason negates the fact bandwidth and memory allows the X's gpu to work more efficient running engines where it could be bottlenecked on ps4 while X can be easier to bypass.

 

Well one thing I would add is that x1x definitely has more memory bandwidth relative to the PS4 pro and their gpus. The bandwidth jump on pro is pretty small tbh and the x has a nice 384 bit bus. Soo yeah that is probably the reason why some multis have a larger than expected gap.

But no amount of bandwidth is going to let 1X run PS4 exclusives at native 4k.

 

X spends most of the time at 4k. PS4 spends most of the time at 1080p.

X lowest pixels very rare: 5531904
ps4 lowest pixels very rare: 1806336

3.06x difference

X pixel count majorly of the time: 8294400
Ps4 pixel count majorly of the time: 2073600
4x difference
1.8tf x 4 = 7.2tf

Just as you say ps4 can go above 1080p, I'm sure the X could go higher than 4k if allowed since majorly of the time it's comfortably at 4k with no issues. I only compare 1440x1080 and 900p since both push nearly the same pixels and base xb is going below that too. Either way this is going way off more than I want it to. But anyways just took some good pics will upload when done downloading

 

I do like the animations of the grass in your shot of hzd. This is something I think both games will do better than rdr2 from what I've seen

You can also see the grass pop in 10ft from alloy too in that gif though

Here's grass animation in fh4

 

Your percentages are throwing me off lol 4k vs 1080p is a 4x difference while you put 300%. Your percentage is implying it's only a 3x increase when it's 4x. I hate math. VGtech says X spends at 4k most of the time as well and DF had a hard time finding it drop so it's clearly at 4k majorly of the time

VGtech
"All four consoles often render at or near their maximum resolution,"

 

I'm not sure how demanding software is is relevant to a conversation about how pretty graphics are. I've coded "Hello World" in half a dozen languages and not gone farther in most, so as a terrible programmer I can confidently say that I could program a piece of software that's really demanding and produces terrible visuals. Mostly because I wouldn't be able to properly tune the software, thus putting more demands on the hardware.

The truth is we don't have exact metrics on the how demanding any game is, and there's a lot of stuff going on under the hood that can influence performance beyond what we can see. How accurate are the physics simulations in those games? Are they run on the CPU or the GPU? Which game's physics put more of a demand on the hardware? What about reflections? Spider-man uses a bunch of cube maps, while FH4 has many more screen space reflections. Those screen space reflections should be more demanding, right? But what if FH4's screen space reflections somehow leveraged ESRAM or some other Xbox specific hardware feature and are somehow less demanding on the hardware? On base consoles you could have a game that saturated the polygon setup engine on PS4 to 100%. That same piece of hardware is 10% faster on Xbox One, so it would only be 90% as demanding. In these hypothetical cases the arguments that because a game is more demanding on PS4 means that it can't be done on Xbox One is actually backwards, since they would be less demanding on Xbox and it would have an easier time with it.

At the end of the day, graphics comparisons should disregard all of the under the hood stuff and concentrate on results. Which produces a better looking image. It's an opinion, of course, but a game can be beautiful and not demanding at the same time, and certainly better looking than another game while also being less demanding, especially when comparing games from different genres.

 

I think it could depending on engine and how it’ll work with Xs strengths. Hzd is 1080p in base ps4, checkerboard 4k on pro so I think there’s a strong chance it’ll run at native 4k on X since games that have been checkerboard on pro ran native on X. Rdr2 is said to be like this which would be very interesting

 

The density of foliage in FH4 is nowhere near HZD's, nor is the LOD, texture quality, mesh quality or the volumetrics. They're relatively detailed for a car game but once you go into close scrutiny you see flaws far more prominent, it's as if it's running at medium or low settings compared to ZD's. Also the world of ZD feels far more tangible due to the use of volumetric cloud that deforms in real time as well as casting shadows to the ground and reacting to the light. Whereas in Forza it feels like a cardboard cutout sometimes. And the water gif really doesn't impressive me much, it's just 2d textures overlay done with a shader, certainly not a level above ZD. What impresses me about FH4 is the lighting and PBR in terms of realism, sometimes supersampled photomode shots can look pretty indeed. The season change is also very nice. But everything else in terms of foliage, geometry, particle effects, volumetric sims, detail in general are far more impressive in HZD judging from all the pictures here.

 

Spiderman is probably a more comparable game to Forza in terms of streaming load at a given time. But even then I don't see how FH4 is coming close to the level of detail and density at least in the city. It's pretty much ghost town vs a living breathing world.

 

You can't fill up a racing game with npc cars etc... Or it will become unplayable.

 

The buildings in spiderman are very low detailed across the street. That's one thing about spiderman that's not that great. The buildings don't exhibit high enough detail in distance as you can see in your shot. The water is not a 2d texture with shader it's tessellated and uses the same tech as Sea of Theives. Water moves and creates wakes as you drive through it. Also textures/mesh is not low quality vs hzd. Ps4 won't be able to run it with them hence 12gb vs 8gb ram. PG took advantage using the extra memory to add ultra textures

I have to wait till spring/summer to get dense foliage shots. Right now in fall about to be winter

PS most of my shots aren't supersampled they're not even processed just taken from console screenshot function. Other than that being 4k won't change it looking any different supersampled to 1080p or not as it does it ingame too

 

FH4 looks better then HZD overall to most ppl, fh4 is a recent game though. Personally dont like racing games so wont play it much, played it in a store besides spiderman and thougt fh4 impressed more graphically running on the one x. But they are complete different games? Shouldnt fh4 be compared to gt sport, how does gt sport hold up there.