The Post-Processed Graphics Comparison Thread for The Order 1886 *beard split*

[szymku]

That's because you're playing cutscenes in TO It's true that TO is more consistent, however, at its best ACU is better than TO at its best.

And you know this how? When you apparently haven't play the game...

Actually if you pay close attention the hair of the woman in TO's screenshot it's actually floating over her head. The hair isn't even worth mentioning when it's just a low detail lump of polygons with basic shading. This actually looks like hair:

It's not even close.

Please explain how blurry, lame textures, in the background and simplified objects, where every element stands out like a sore thumb can be considere superior to TO. It is beyond my understanding...

Not really. Every single screenshot is blurry. Kinda defeats the point of being native 1920x800 in the first place.

TO has a certain "soft" look, no doubt about it. But it is obviously intentional design decision and from where I'm standing it adds to overall graphics quality. Everything looks more natural, more life-like and say what you want, but I think it is the direction where future games are heading

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Please explain how blurry, lame textures, in the background and simplified objects, where every element stands out like a sore thumb can be considere superior to TO. It is beyond my understanding...

There's so much subjectivity to this discussion, I don't know why anyone's bothering to continue it. You can have two very different looks in the character faces, and some prefer orange + waxy, and others prefer grey and blotchy. Holding aloft one's preference and saying 'this is clearly superior' is obviously never going to convince the opposition because they literally don't see the same thing you do.

Screenshot wars isn't a discussion. The only sense in it is if individuals state what they prefer about a particular image/game.

 

[szymku]

There's so much subjectivity to this discussion, I don't know why anyone's bothering to continue it.

Unless we make a poll out of this

But of course it is all very subjective. Nevertheless I'd like to think that I have some background to judge graphics advancements, because I followed them since ZX Spectrum era .

 

[Globalisateur]

But of course it is all very subjective.

At least we have learned one thing very objective in this thread.

We know now that @Shifty Geezer has pink ears.

 

[AlNom]

I don't know why anyone's bothering to continue it.

Hi, welcome to Console Forums. Enjoy your stay.

 

[L. Scofield]

Please explain how blurry, lame textures, in the background and simplified objects, where every element stands out like a sore thumb can be considere superior to TO. It is beyond my understanding...

Explain how a perpetually blurry game like TO is better than ACU. I can play that game too.

TO has a certain "soft" look, no doubt about it. But it is obviously intentional design decision and from where I'm standing it adds to overall graphics quality. Everything looks more natural, more life-like and say what you want, but I think it is the direction where future games are heading

More life-like? Real life has plenty of color and unless you have cataracts it also looks very crisp.

There's so much subjectivity to this discussion, I don't know why anyone's bothering to continue it. You can have two very different looks in the character faces, and some prefer orange + waxy, and others prefer grey and blotchy. Holding aloft one's preference and saying 'this is clearly superior' is obviously never going to convince the opposition because they literally don't see the same thing you do.

Screenshot wars isn't a discussion. The only sense in it is if individuals state what they prefer about a particular image/game.

No, the argument was about tech.If we're talking purely preferential arguments we could even include Wii U games and indie games.

 

[Jcustom]

How can you guys judge the graphics without have played the game (Unity or the Order)? I don't think a walkthrough on Youtube is enough, most of them just focus on progress the story without even looking around.
I drop here an environments video from Gamersyde that at least shows something: http://www.gamersyde.com/hqstream_the_order_1886_environments-34085_en.html

 

[MrFox]

I think they both look good, and my opinion stops there.

Still, it's not enough to succeed, others must lose! To arms!

 

[iroboto]

How can you guys judge the graphics without have played the game (Unity or the Order)? I don't think a walkthrough on Youtube is enough, most of them just focus on progress the story without even looking around.
I drop here an environments video from Gamersyde that at least shows something: http://www.gamersyde.com/hqstream_the_order_1886_environments-34085_en.html

I've 2 friends that work generated graphics for architecture firms. They're responsible for the renderings for their clients. They work with trying to generate these images so much they can spot everything. They are meticulous because their clients are as well, not to mention their demands.

So to answer your question, it's very apparent to some individuals just by looking at stills, and for others it won't be because you don't know what to look for.

 

[L. Scofield]

I think they both look good, and my opinion stops there.

I agree with this, however not everyone does and so there's people who in an effort to elevate their current favorite purchase end up shitting on the competition.

My aim in challenging those opinions is preventing them from becoming dogmas.

 

[Jcustom]

I've 2 friends that work generated graphics for architecture firms. They're responsible for the renderings for their clients. They work with trying to generate these images so much they can spot everything. They are meticulous because their clients are as well, not to mention their demands.

So to answer your question, it's very apparent to some individuals just by looking at stills, and for others it won't be because you don't know what to look for.

But here lots of people know what to look for, the problem is that with a video you can miss a lots important things and of course you don't actually watch the whole game on youtube so the judging will be different in favour of the game you actually played.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

No, the argument was about tech.

No it's not. You present the tech of crisp, sharp, colourful visuals and say it looks better. Someone else presents the tech of cinematic, stylised, realistic visuals in a very different art style and says it's better. You look at faces with one shader and say it looks better. Someone else looks at a different face with a different shader and says that one looks better.

As the measurement for the tech is 'which one looks best to me', the discussion is subjective. The only way to have a pure tech discussion is either one-for-one feature comparisons (does game x have feature n of game y) and/or complete comparative GDC-style breakdowns of the engines.

 

[iroboto]

But here lots of people know what to look for, the problem is that with a video you can miss a lots important things and of course you don't actually watch the whole game on youtube so the judging will be different in favour of the game you actually played.

True without playing all the way through yourself you wouldn't know. It's not all encompassing looking at other peoples screenshots or videos.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Unless we make a poll out of this

But of course it is all very subjective. Nevertheless I'd like to think that I have some background to judge graphics advancements, because I followed them since ZX Spectrum era .

That wouldn't be remotely objective unless you also state what system you own and the results take that into account. There's a clear tendency to elevate exclusives above multi-platform games for.... some reason.

 

[L. Scofield]

No it's not. You present the tech of crisp, sharp, colourful visuals and say it looks better. Someone else presents the tech of cinematic, stylised, realistic visuals in a very different art style and says it's better. You look at faces with one shader and say it looks better. Someone else looks at a different face with a different shader and says that one looks better.

As the measurement for the tech is 'which one looks best to me', the discussion is subjective. The only way to have a pure tech discussion is either one-for-one feature comparisons (does game x have feature n of game y) and/or complete comparative GDC-style breakdowns of the engines.

This started because of statements of the game looking better than PC games. And when it came to specifics it was about lighting, materials and so on. It's about tech.

 

[pjbliverpool]

How can you guys judge the graphics without have played the game (Unity or the Order)? I don't think a walkthrough on Youtube is enough, most of them just focus on progress the story without even looking around.
I drop here an environments video from Gamersyde that at least shows something: http://www.gamersyde.com/hqstream_the_order_1886_environments-34085_en.html

I'm pretty damn confident I get a very good idea of the games visual from a video such as the one you posted. There's virtually no difference between that and playing the game for yourself. In some ways it's even better because it allows you the time to focus on the visuals rather than the gameplay - it also highlights all the best bits while avoiding all the average ones. That said, from the video you posted I must admit The Order looks amazing. It's obviously restricted and I don't think it contains the density of detail that AC:U does, but in terms of that pure pre-rendered look it's quite amazing. I'm unconvinced that it beats Ryse in that regard though. Take this video from 10:35 for example:

Clearly a direct and objective comparison is very difficult but I'm not seeing anything in TO that clearly stands above this.

 

[VFX_Veteran]

Ryse, The Order, and AC:Unity all look astounding in some way or another. I'm not sure why the console zealots have to elevate their game just because it's an exclusive (which is the crux of these kinds of threads). I can't say one is better than the other and speak with universal acclaim. There are some things I love that the Order is doing and others that Ryse is doing or AC:Unity.

 

[zed]

I'm unconvinced that it beats Ryse in that regard though. Take this video from 10:35 for example:

had a quick look from 10:25 onwards looks to dip under 20fps then 10:35 onwards seems to be a cut scene? Ain't it.

I think I'll leave Digital Foundry to sum up what they thought of the order

the most impressive example of real-time graphics on a console to date.

 

[pjbliverpool]

had a quick look from 10:25 onwards looks to dip under 20fps

XB1 framerate doesn't really concern me. On my PC this game is locked at 30fps at this point while running at higher settings (including, but not limited to 1080p) than are shown in this video. All on a quite modest GTX 670.

then 10:35 onwards seems to be a cut scene? Ain't it.

No it aint. Watch for longer, the majority of the scene is gameplay and the entire scene is real time. It's also not a particularly great showpiece for that scene. I may make my own shortly just for the hell of it.

I think I'll leave Digital Foundry to sum up what they thought of the order

If you prefer a third party to draw conclusions on a subject for which the same source evidence is available for you to view with your own eyes then I guess we're done.

 

[bgroovy]

This started because of statements of the game looking better than PC games. And when it came to specifics it was about lighting, materials and so on. It's about tech.

No, your arguments have universally been about what you find pleasing to look at, nothing more.