I dont what people are talking about by saying theres been games like this on PC already. Yes theres been plenty of games with great graphics and textures and all that, but nothing that has physics on this level where everything small and big like the car doors to its tires get effected by gameplay and player interaction with them.
I mainly play on PC but havent seen a game this stunning. Not even crysis 3 or witcher 2. Textures and anti-aliasing isnt everything. This engine brings game physics to a whole new level.
This.
It'e because people just look at the textures.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Originally posted by flizzer Ive always disliked the cartoon/unrealistic WoW look and always favored a more realistic approach. This looks amazinig.
I've always like well executed graphics. Well executed stylized graphics are superior to poorly executed 'realistic' approach. If graphics are well executed, then it really depends on the style of the game itself. Wizard 101 would look weird with realistic graphics. Bioshock Infinite would look horrible with heavily stylized graphics, even if they were well executed.
The Division looks like the kind of game that benefits from well executed realistic graphics.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I dont what people are talking about by saying theres been games like this on PC already. Yes theres been plenty of games with great graphics and textures and all that, but nothing that has physics on this level where everything small and big like the car doors to its tires get effected by gameplay and player interaction with them.
I mainly play on PC but havent seen a game this stunning. Not even crysis 3 or witcher 2. Textures and anti-aliasing isnt everything. This engine brings game physics to a whole new level.
This.
It'e because people just look at the textures.
And even the textures still do look amazing in this as well. I just want people to do some side by side comparisons when they compare games.
Many elements are already there, and back then it was only DirectX 9.
A demo is not a RUNNING game. You literally proved your own point wrong by trying to use this as your example.
The textures and physics in that were horrid, there was nothing reactive there just a simple static demo. Really this hurts your argument FAR more than it helps and if you were being honest then you would admit Cryengine does NOTHING close to what was displayed.
Be impartial, try it out, instead of your normal "I have to be right for no other reason than because I say so." approach.
Just because every car has similar features doesn't mean that Ferraris are copies of Model Ts. Progress requires failure and refining.
Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard ATI demo from 2005... yes 2005.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRDeOAzVs2UMany elements are already there, and back then it was only DirectX 9.
I dont what people are talking about by saying theres been games like this on PC already. Yes theres been plenty of games with great graphics and textures and all that, but nothing that has physics on this level where everything small and big like the car doors to its tires get effected by gameplay and player interaction with them.
I mainly play on PC but havent seen a game this stunning. Not even crysis 3 or witcher 2. Textures and anti-aliasing isnt everything. This engine brings game physics to a whole new level.
This.
It'e because people just look at the textures.
Personally I look more to the resolution of the image. Especially when consoles are the topic. It's here that they often show weakness. While overall texture work can still look stunning, it's the blurriness of outlines that is most apparent. Case in point the police car in one of those Division screens, the blur on it is rather noticeable. It's here, as the new tech is further explored that they will improve. We need to remember in many cases strides are hindered by the console power at the time. The more limits that drop there, the further along graphics will move, enter these the first line of games for the next gen. Think they look stunning now? Wait for the games designed 4-5 years from now.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Originally posted by Jean-Luc_PicardATI demo from 2005... yes 2005.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRDeOAzVs2UMany elements are already there, and back then it was only DirectX 9.
Sorry, tech demo is not a game. Try again.
I haven't seen any gameplay in that video posted in the thread title post. Looks like a tech demo of that Snowdrop engine.
So what was your point?
Heres some gameplay for ya. Its the exact same thing
Many elements are already there, and back then it was only DirectX 9.
Sorry, tech demo is not a game. Try again.
I haven't seen any gameplay in that video posted in the thread title post. Looks like a tech demo of that Snowdrop engine.
So what was your point?
I just say: take that 2005 demo, increase texture resolution appropriately since today's graphic cards have much more horsepower, and there you go, you have 99% of that video posted in the OP. All is already in, those reflections, the weather, the lights in the puddles, etc...
Hell, that was 8 years ago.
So you said initially you saw something just as good years ago, show us a horrible tech demo that doesn't even come close on ANY level and then want us to "imagine" what it would be like if we made it just as good. Well played!
Just because every car has similar features doesn't mean that Ferraris are copies of Model Ts. Progress requires failure and refining.
I dont what people are talking about by saying theres been games like this on PC already. Yes theres been plenty of games with great graphics and textures and all that, but nothing that has physics on this level where everything small and big like the car doors to its tires get effected by gameplay and player interaction with them.
I mainly play on PC but havent seen a game this stunning. Not even crysis 3 or witcher 2. Textures and anti-aliasing isnt everything. This engine brings game physics to a whole new level.
This.
It'e because people just look at the textures.
Personally I look more to the resolution of the image. Especially when consoles are the topic. It's here that they often show weakness. While overall texture work can still look stunning, it's the blurriness of outlines that is most apparent. Case in point the police car in one of those Division screens, the blur on it is rather noticeable. It's here, as the new tech is further explored that they will improve. We need to remember in many cases strides are hindered by the console power at the time. The more limits that drop there, the further along graphics will move, enter these the first line of games for the next gen. Think they look stunning now? Wait for the games designed 4-5 years from now.
PS4 can run games on 1080P native resolution and on 60 FPS. 4-5 years from now, developers will have mastered at optimization of the consoles hardware and games on them will look even better than they are now on them. Just look at the last gen consoles as an example and compare a games that came out at launch or a year from its launch to games 3-5 years from its launch like Metal Gear Solid 4, The Last of Us or Beyond Two Soul. So you can imagine how much better games will look on a PS4 and Xbox One years from now than the ones we are seeing on them right now.
Originally posted by Jean-Luc_PicardATI demo from 2005... yes 2005.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRDeOAzVs2UMany elements are already there, and back then it was only DirectX 9.
Sorry, tech demo is not a game. Try again.
I haven't seen any gameplay in that video posted in the thread title post. Looks like a tech demo of that Snowdrop engine.So what was your point?
Heres some gameplay for ya. Its the exact same thing sorry i forgot how to embed. if someone could do it that would be great
Thanks, I'm even less impressed now. Looks like just another urban shooter, character animation are stiff (look when that female soldier passes by at the beginning). That definitely doesn't look "photorealistic" to me.
I was way more impressed by the Assassin's Creed 4 videos from the same developper.
Thats fine you are definitely entitled to your opinion. I would just really like to see an actual game from 5 years ago that looks better than this like you said. Scratch that, I dont want you to get hung up on "better", just show me a game from 5 years ago that looks this good.
[quote] [i]Originally posted by Foomerang[/i] [quote] [/quote] [b]Heres some gameplay for ya. Its the exact same thing [/b] [b] [b]sorry i forgot how to embed. if someone could do it that would be great[/b][/quote]
Agreed Metro looks great, unfortunately it's still using very static effects. NPCs move through steam and other particle effects and it doesn't move/change, if you shoot next to it the lighting doesn't really get affected by the steam, things like that are what really are shining in the snowdrop engine.
I'll completely agree that there are games that *look* just as good, but it's the collaboration of physics and lighting, and graphics that are making this one amazing.
Just because every car has similar features doesn't mean that Ferraris are copies of Model Ts. Progress requires failure and refining.
I guess this ends the debate about "ohh by stylized lasts longer." Sorry peeps. This is photorealism now, which will never get old. We are close to the top of the line with this.
Photorealism? You have bad vision and/or a shitty camera?
ya i have been waiting for this game for quite some time now. in fact it is the only game i have been looking forward to all year.
i really hope they get the port over to PC done right.
"There are at least two kinds of games. One could be called finite, the other infinite. A finite game is played for the purpose of winning, an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play." Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
Comments
This.
It'e because people just look at the textures.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
I've always like well executed graphics. Well executed stylized graphics are superior to poorly executed 'realistic' approach. If graphics are well executed, then it really depends on the style of the game itself. Wizard 101 would look weird with realistic graphics. Bioshock Infinite would look horrible with heavily stylized graphics, even if they were well executed.
The Division looks like the kind of game that benefits from well executed realistic graphics.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
And even the textures still do look amazing in this as well. I just want people to do some side by side comparisons when they compare games.
another still of the video, honestly it looks mindbogglingly good
A demo is not a RUNNING game. You literally proved your own point wrong by trying to use this as your example.
The textures and physics in that were horrid, there was nothing reactive there just a simple static demo. Really this hurts your argument FAR more than it helps and if you were being honest then you would admit Cryengine does NOTHING close to what was displayed.
Be impartial, try it out, instead of your normal "I have to be right for no other reason than because I say so." approach.
Just because every car has similar features doesn't mean that Ferraris are copies of Model Ts. Progress requires failure and refining.
Sorry, tech demo is not a game. Try again.
Personally I look more to the resolution of the image. Especially when consoles are the topic. It's here that they often show weakness. While overall texture work can still look stunning, it's the blurriness of outlines that is most apparent. Case in point the police car in one of those Division screens, the blur on it is rather noticeable. It's here, as the new tech is further explored that they will improve. We need to remember in many cases strides are hindered by the console power at the time. The more limits that drop there, the further along graphics will move, enter these the first line of games for the next gen. Think they look stunning now? Wait for the games designed 4-5 years from now.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Heres some gameplay for ya. Its the exact same thing
gameplay shots
for me it is just above crysis games because of the way they do weather in the Division which looks amazing
you really feel the cold in the shots
So you said initially you saw something just as good years ago, show us a horrible tech demo that doesn't even come close on ANY level and then want us to "imagine" what it would be like if we made it just as good. Well played!
Just because every car has similar features doesn't mean that Ferraris are copies of Model Ts. Progress requires failure and refining.
Graphics mean nothing for me it's probably going to have shallow gameplay with a short campaign like all modern games sadly.
People all they care for is graphics now.
But to mention a great game the metro series looks incredible:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEIQs-TDv3g
You better go check it out if you really think that the game is going to be as you described. I lol'd....
PS4 can run games on 1080P native resolution and on 60 FPS. 4-5 years from now, developers will have mastered at optimization of the consoles hardware and games on them will look even better than they are now on them. Just look at the last gen consoles as an example and compare a games that came out at launch or a year from its launch to games 3-5 years from its launch like Metal Gear Solid 4, The Last of Us or Beyond Two Soul. So you can imagine how much better games will look on a PS4 and Xbox One years from now than the ones we are seeing on them right now.
Thats fine you are definitely entitled to your opinion. I would just really like to see an actual game from 5 years ago that looks better than this like you said. Scratch that, I dont want you to get hung up on "better", just show me a game from 5 years ago that looks this good.
[quote] [i]Originally posted by Foomerang[/i] [quote] [/quote] [b]Heres some gameplay for ya. Its the exact same thing
[/b] [b]
[b]sorry i forgot how to embed. if someone could do it that would be great[/b][/quote]
Agreed Metro looks great, unfortunately it's still using very static effects. NPCs move through steam and other particle effects and it doesn't move/change, if you shoot next to it the lighting doesn't really get affected by the steam, things like that are what really are shining in the snowdrop engine.
I'll completely agree that there are games that *look* just as good, but it's the collaboration of physics and lighting, and graphics that are making this one amazing.
Just because every car has similar features doesn't mean that Ferraris are copies of Model Ts. Progress requires failure and refining.
Photorealism? You have bad vision and/or a shitty camera?
Thank you for that.....and so true!
Just because every car has similar features doesn't mean that Ferraris are copies of Model Ts. Progress requires failure and refining.
We already saw this in the E3 preview but this video does a nice job of breaking down what is in the tech.
It looks pretty
ya i have been waiting for this game for quite some time now. in fact it is the only game i have been looking forward to all year.
i really hope they get the port over to PC done right.
"There are at least two kinds of games.
One could be called finite, the other infinite.
A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
Looks fantastic but is it a -real- MMO? or just a multiplayer lobby online shooter?