No. Even if you completely disregard IQ, there is tons of stuff (distant shadows, AO, clutter, vegatation) simply missing entirely from these new shots:
Well, the thread is about screenshots. (Also, everyone knows Bethesda's writing sucks
)Just the sheer number of objects that the player can pick up and throw for one. MGS can't compare in that regard. The fact that the world is undoubtedly more populated since at most you'd see a truck, or two guards walking around outside of bases in MGSV, tracking data like store vendors, way more asset variety etc etc.
I know i've found London, (and pretty much any other AC game) to way more atmospheric and believable than my time with MGSV. But this thread isn't about AC, I just find "MGSV looks betta and it's running at 60fps" to be a ridiculous argument since it does so by not doing that much with it's world to begin with. I man it's not even just taking stuff away, the fact that you can add a ton of stuff in a multitude of areas which attracts npcs overtime as well makes it a more complex game world.
But that complaining strategy doesn't seem to be super successful for you given the results.
Ughh, that's pretty fucking embarrassing for a 2015 big budget AAA title.
What you see is what you get.
7 years.
Not at console settings, far from it. Otherwise how surprising is it that much higher rendering settings are more expensive ?
Not sure why people are trying to take away from MGSV as if theres an argument over which is more impressive. I doubt Fallout will have a fight with a giant robot, helicopters and explosions and weather effects everywhere while maintaining a rock solid 60 fps. Heck, I just looked up Phantom Pain ps3 and it doesnt look much worse than Fallout 4 even.
Well, this is all speculation of course, but for me the most severe issues in these shots are draw distance, shadows and AO, followed by the blurry IQ.
