And the detail are still being discovered
UC4: Best looking gameplay? *SPOILS*
- Thread starter RenegadeRocks
- Start date
-
- Tags
- uncharted 4
- Status
I speak of the 60fps games. Uncharted 4s multiplayer has 60fps. Battlefront has 60fps too.
For me it looks much better than Uncharted 4s 60fps multiplayer. Just look at the quality of the effects in DOOM.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Perhaps more diversity is introduced later but from what I've played of Doom, the environments are largely static. It does look good, though.
Only the PS4 version... Uncharted 4's multiplayer doesn't drop to almost 720p...
You are comparing the single player vs the multiplayer... anyway, Uncharted 4 is mainly a singleplayer game. They likely didn't put a lot of resources in their multiplayer.
On the PlayStation 4 DOOM has 1080p the most time.
The singleplayer of Uncharted is compared here with Battlefront and The Division. Both of them are multiplayer titles.
It depends on what is meant by static. The geometry in DOOM is static, while the lighting is very dynamic.
Seriously ?
The main mode of Battlefront/Division are their multiplayer mode... so this comparison is completely valid.
The main mode of Uncharted 4 is its single player mode. The main mode of Battlefront/Division are their multiplayer mode. So, where is the problem ?
Indeed, it's a more fair comparison but you have to keep in mind that ND put most of its resources in their single player mode...
Not a great comparison when one is clearly built as a single player experience, with multiplayer added as a nice extra. And the others are built from the ground up as multiplayer games. Budget, time, all a bit different. But hey, compare away!
This isn't really an apples to apples comparison thread (not that there ever is!). Open world versus linear world versus tiny corridors, 60 fps versus 30 fps. It's really just 'what's best looking to me'.
rockaman
Regular
I can find much worse ones (and I really mean much, much worse looking ones lol) than even the one I posted that actually even more highlight the deficiencies of the lighting on Drake's face in gameplay, but it doesn't mean he stands out like nearly that much most of the time. The face model is way more complicated than any other part of his body, like in most games, direct lighting in gameplay is always going to show some doll-like look and gameplay lighting weaknesses here.
It's just a matter of which lighting conditions we are talking about in gameplay. He doesn't stand out that much 90% of the time, it's only when the light source is very direct on his face in gameplay, because there isn't really high quality self-shadowing on his nose, more just T&L.
It's not universally that bad, I only took that pic because it was close up and had the eye shadows, and shows off the animation of his eyes turned. When there is a strong direct light source gameplay models always end up looking worse.
When there is mostly just ambient lighting on the character it doesn't stand out at all, the shading looks as good as the rest, and that says a lot for the face detailing overall.
It's not just the face, but the clothing and peripherals. There are no shadows at all.
Of course it's not, and we can find worst-case images for any game. Your subsequent images have AO around the clothing detailing. That's why I said it looked like a bug. I think it's just more a limit of current rendering tech by and large. We just need someone to take lighting forwards as far as ND have taken AA in UC4!
Then you can also just compare similar scaled scenes. Like the driving sequence from Madagascar to 20 vs. 20 Endor in Battlefront.
No very linear spot.
The amount of detail, the quality of the detail and the sheer scale of it is absurdly good in UC4, I don't see Division, Doom or Battlefront coming close to match it honestly.
http://i.cubeupload.com/vFK6c2.jpg
http://i.cubeupload.com/lVkVdf.jpg
http://i.cubeupload.com/4TdZX2.jpg
http://i.cubeupload.com/vFK6c2.jpg
http://i.cubeupload.com/lVkVdf.jpg
http://i.cubeupload.com/4TdZX2.jpg
- Status
Similar threads
