Have GG started an assault on ND's title as the Sony 1st party to beat?

1. For ultra graphics this game needs 5-6 Teraflops at 1080p/30fps.
2. Ultra graphics stands out clearly compared to other video games, where mostly only minor visual differences between very high and ultra exist.
3. Thereby the game stands out graphically from everything which I have seen so far on PC. The system requirements have increased enormously as before from last console gen to current console gen.
4. I do not understand what is surprising that a game which needs 5-6 Teraflops for 1080p/30fps has more advanced graphics than a game that needs 2 Teraflops for 1080p/30fp

Unfortunately, the game goes to medium graphics at 1440p. 1080p and very high graphics would have been much better. Too much rendering power is consumed for the pixel count.

 

Why are you comparing HZD to a game running on a 3x more powerful PC?

 

1. The question is whether Horizon is the most technically impressive video game on the PlayStation 4
2. While it looks very good and I even prefer the optics compared to Uncharted 4, it has less interaction options than Zelda on Switch/WiiU or many PlayStation 3 games.
3. Thats why I'm unsure if they have surpassed Uncharted 4.
4. It is said that this game would use the hardware of the Playstation 4 Pro best. But how is the difference in the CPU calculations? Much higher
viewing distance? Why is no player physics to the vegetation added? Even Battlefront Endor has it and it runs at 60fps on the base PlayStation 4 with 40 players and fast vehicles.

Why Wildlands? The performance of the Switch console was mentioned. This is not an argument because Zelda, despite the WiiU as a target, has more basic interaction possibilities than Horizon. And Wildlands manages it with faster CPUs to create a extremly dense, much greater viewing distance and it still has physics.

 

higher texture resolution
Debatable especially character models, trees and rocks.
-more realistic lighting
Hardly, the day and night cycle looks much more realistic with much finer color gradation, more volumetric lights too.
-more accurate GI (for example character does not light up aggressively orange when standing on orange rock)
Doesn't look to be any better or worse to me.
-higher shadow resolution
Maybe
-much higher density while player can move much faster
Hardly, Horizon could just be as dense with better quality foliage to boot
-much higher draw distance
It is higher but not by much
-higher resolution AO
Maybe
-much better displacement mapping
Nope, plenty of POM in Horizon with really good quality
-player model gets wet after rain, in water or by going trough bushes
Same in HZD
-more realistic surfaces/materials
Nope, HZD handily has that beat.

On top those the volumetric cloud deformation is way superior, GRW doesn't even do volumetric clouds.


That's not to mention million polys of dinobots roaming in good numbers, much better particles, much higher quality character models and animation.

 

You said Ratchet and Clank would have a better graphics than any game on the PC. Also, you said the vegetation in Wildlands has an extremly low vegetation quality. With this attitude, I can not take you seriously.

 

We can all sit here and dissect all the negatives in any game running on any platform - especially a £300 one. But to suggest that Horizon is not one of the most stunning and advanced games running on PS4 is a bit of a stretch.

 

Of course it is one of the best looking games. I have not claimed anything else here. But it has a few weaknesses which make me unsure about whether it's better than Uncharted 4 on the PlayStation 4.

I especially praised the new interaction possibilities in Uncharted 4 compared to the predecessors of the series.

 

Uncharted 4 is a linear game (although with some very open areas) and it's much easier to control and have expectations about performance levels. Especially so when the enemies in the game are not the size of buildings.

 

^ this too

 

Do refresh my exact wording please, maybe the best at the time? Tho I believe I said it looked the most Pixar like including pc games. the vegetation quality in wild lands does look low res, especially compared to hzd's.

 

People seem to have no problem comparing Zelda to Horizon even though the same caveat applies.

 

Yeah that is also not a valid comparison h/w wise.

 

GR Wildlands is nowhere near the graphics quality of Horizon. I am surprised that this is even argued. Of course there are some trade- offs, especially limited interaction with foliage or water, but compared to Wildlands everything else is superior.
Resolution and draw distance is not everything

 

I think that, whatever you think of Uncharted, TLOU and Horizon - I'm loving HZD - the undeniable fact is that this one game, as good as it is and as successful as it might be, does not and will not invalidate the much more solid and consistent track record ND have over GG. We're talking about one very good game against a developer who has released hugely successful games for decades. Critically and commercially.

 

This is true. Guerrilla will have to keep this up to be compared against ND, but HZD is a step in a very good direction, game is excellent.

 

Pecking order among Sony, or among gamers? If gamers, that explains why the comparison between a first title and a second title, as you're talking just about who's generating the most 'OMG That's Amazeballs' per week.

So importantly, this discussion is really aimed at those who feel that way about ND and how their feelings are about GG. Given it's a highly subjective opinion, I have nothing to add. ND are definitely good but I don't know that they deserve the special attention or attribution of 'number one bestest' that some afford them.

Well, you presently put ND on a pedestal in the Number One position, and are talking about replacing them with GG.

 

I doubt this was a technical limitation when, as you stated yourself, such interactivity was possible on much less capable hardware.

It's more likely the case that since interactive environment physics is a core gameplay element of BotW, it receives much more priority. It was sort of the point of the 8-bit style mock-up to show these systems.

Whereas Horizon didn't include the same level of environmental interaction since its core gameplay revolves around hunting and interacting with mechanical beasts. I'm willing to bet Death Stranding will have much more robust physics systems given Kojima's record of obsessive attention to detail.

 

True, but then again, the more realistic graphics look the more jarring it is when stuff fails to react to basic interactions. In that sense ND > GG:



Biggest sin for me is no water rippling (Zelda fails at this too).

 

I played UC4 online for the first time yesterday, playing coop with a friend. I can't honestly see why ND are held in such high regard after that experience. The interface is shockingly ugly and somewhat confusing, the visuals aren't all that pretty and the framerate was atrocious. Motion blur had to be whacked up full to disguise the janky mess of the frame pacing. Camera was stupid leading to situations where you're hammering the melee buttons wondering what you're hitting (if anything) as it's off screen. Coupled with lacklustre overly-complexified gameplay versus UC3 and a clearly microtransaction-fuelled money-grab strategy in the balancing, I see ND's position as far from unassailable.

SWBF has far nicer visuals at 60 fps and that's multiplat. It also doesn't have radioactive glow-in-the-dark rocks.