I'm not so sure about that, I remember playing Quake 3 at god knows what the framerate counter only goes up to 999 and it felt strangeThere’s no good enough when it comes to fps.
I'm not so sure about that, I remember playing Quake 3 at god knows what the framerate counter only goes up to 999 and it felt strangeThere’s no good enough when it comes to fps.
I didn't say they weren't important, just that if using the latest graphics tech was your main filter for which games you'd play, you'd probably be playing mostly junk.
I'm not so sure about that, I remember playing Quake 3 at god knows what the framerate counter only goes up to 999 and it felt strange
How would you feel about using MFG to get to 240Hz?For me, I'll lower graphics to whatever point I can live with to get as many frames as I can up to the refresh rate of my monitor (240). There is a point where graphics look too shitty to live with, but upscaling is always an easy way to get more performance with minimal issues. It's pretty much automatic that I'll turn it on, unless I'm playing some game where I can hit 240 without it, which is rare.
Most of the big RT tech demo games aren't all that great and will be forgotten within a few years. Some exceptions of course(Metro Exodus EE, however I still think while its graphically the best of the trilogy, it is the worst in most other ways, Cyberpunk after about 2-3 years of patches, maybe Control?), but many of the big UE5 showcase titles are completely forgettable.Hmm I don’t know about that. Some of the best games aren’t graphical masterpieces for sure. But that doesn’t mean most good looking games are junk. I would guess most crappy games also look like crap.
Most of the big RT tech demo games aren't all that great and will be forgotten within a few years. Some exceptions of course(Metro Exodus EE, however I still think while its graphically the best of the trilogy, it is the worst in most other ways, Cyberpunk after about 2-3 years of patches, maybe Control?), but many of the big UE5 showcase titles are completely forgettable.
I have fond memories of all of your examples.The vast majority of games aren’t memorable though so saying most RT games aren’t memorable isn’t surprising. I don’t think being pretty makes games less memorable. If anything it’s the exact opposite - e.g. crysis, doom 3, HL2.
i still remember the thumping stomping noises of the big baddies reverberating through the jungle and being really scaredFar Cry
How would you feel about using MFG to get to 240Hz?
New Monster Hunter game:
IMO this is the geatest technical failure of the generation. It's actually so bad that I won't play it. It makes KCD2 look like a technical masterpiece.
This engine is a complete mess for open world games. I think it was developed for a Resident Evil game, but RE Engine does not stand for Resident Evil Engine... anyway Resident Evil has very different requirements compared to a game like Monster Hunter.The benchmark demo is horrible. No amount of tweaking stops the grass from being a pixelated mess. My advice, do NOT play the benchmark until the end when people eat. The food is so gross looking I almost hurled.
At the beginning of the demo someone rubs their face, but you can’t see any contact at all. It’s just a hand making a motion in front of their face. Terrible.
The only thing in my head when I see this on a 4090 is PS4 console crap.
The benchmark demo is horrible.
I didn't say this. I said filtering out all games with outdated graphics means you will miss a lot of good ones. It is also generally true that most of the cutting edge graphic marvels are rather uninspired (they make up for being boring or poorly written with graphics, which is fine there’s room for everyone).I don’t think being pretty makes games less memorable.
I think it’s telling that all your examples of groundbreaking games that also had groundbreaking graphics and tech were from two decades ago mostly.
I said filtering out all games with outdated graphics means you will miss a lot of good ones.
It is also generally true that most of the cutting edge graphic marvels are rather uninspired (they make up for being boring or poorly written with graphics, which is fine there’s room for everyone).
I think it’s telling that all your examples of groundbreaking games that also had groundbreaking graphics and tech were from two decades ago mostly.
I think if you listed what you think are the 'fantastic playing games of this gen' I'd probably disagree with most of them.Come on man. Do we really need to list the fantastic looking and fantastic playing games of this generation? I’d expect someone posting here to be up to date on these, am I wrong?
Sure, I can get with you on this. That said, uninspired bland looking games are ignored entirely, while good looking but poorly written games end up in the news cycle for a few weeks.You keep saying this but most games in general are uninspired. You’re implying that graphically advanced games are less inspired which is simply not true.
Tbh I can't think of any recent classics. I think we are in a horrible drought of genuinely good games. The last really good game I can think of would be RDR2 or TLOU2, but both were fair graphically impressive for their time, and neither particularly recent. Both came pre-RTX so they were really the last and the best of the raster only gen.Well in order for a game to be considered memorable it does have to be a bit old. What are some of the recent classics with outdated graphics in your opinion?
Give me the list!Come on man. Do we really need to list the fantastic looking and fantastic playing games of this generation?
Give me the list!
For real I'm starving for good games from the last 4 years. The last game with really good graphics I tried was Hellblade 2 and I quit after 20 minutes of walking around doing nothing. I can still hear the voices![]()