I dunno, I thought Skyrim was pretty good on the performance side of things (once they were reminded that SSE2 optimization was kind of important).
Fallout 4 PC Ultra screenshots
- Thread starter RoboPlato
- Start date
I dunno, I thought Skyrim was pretty good on the performance side of things (once they were reminded that SSE2 optimization was kind of important).
Sodding_Gamer
Member
Not impressive but I'm super looking forward to what the mods can do. I think a normal playthrough first, then another playthrough once a load of mods have been made.
anyone?
Langdon Alger
Banned
I'm not seeing a huge difference between these pics and the console pics.
Vulcano's assistant
Banned
WAY better? ehhhhh...
I think there is a building blocking your comparison
ScepticMatt
Member
Looks ... average. Serviceable.
captjohnboyd
Member
Wait whats this? Flying vehicles?! I haven't heard about that at all is that actually in it? Super exciting if so. Do we have any shots or descriptions of the vehicles?
Visually I don't think the differences will be flagrant, I don't recall Bethesda really pushing PCs (one of the reason why I'm not optimistic the game will have any Nvidia Gameworks effects), but at least some PC gamers will not be stuck with the same laughable LOD.
That's a net positive already, on top of higher performance if Bethesda have spent any time on PC optimization.
That's a net positive already, on top of higher performance if Bethesda have spent any time on PC optimization.
Prime crotch
Banned
Not a fan of how everything looks smudged, and not in a gritty way, just some what blurry.
Floating characters while moving and soulless sub par animation is looking dated as hell no matter how you try to spin it. And if this is Bethesda idea of vast improvement over previous iterations of the engine, then once again it must be stated that Bethesda is probably living in the past.
If this was a small time developer, I would be completely understanding concerning the technical aspect of the game. But this is not a small time dev, its one of the leading players in the industry with tons of resources and a huge dedicated fanbase (ie guaranteed sales).
So when we are talking about such a developer, you can bet I am going to be very critical of this. And the excuses that "they prioritise design over visual" is rather getting old. They use pretty much same models from Fallout 3 and even some textures seem to be identical.
It is not something you should be expecting from a developer of this caliber and I am amazed that people still try to justify this one way or another.
Not really a looker is it, but I don't care, as long as the gameplay is great (which I'm sure it will be)! Modders will no doubt make the PC version look awesome in the future. I'm going PS4 first then I'll pick up the PC version in 1+ years time when there's all the mod support for it. I also need the PC one to fit in the anthology case 
Solid Samus
Banned
did you watch the E3 showing? here's a short video that features it for a moment, and also some power armor jetpacking toward the end
WAY better? ehhhhh...
You can't see LOD, view distance and shadow distance differences using only near objects.
What I can see here is PC shot has some kind of indirect lighting that is missing in PS4 shot. Maybe is only different TOD.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
It seems to me the all round AA coverage is fairly serviceable. Although tbf there might be some downsampling going on here (don't laugh).
captjohnboyd
Member
Doh! Yeah I watched it just totally forgot. Plus for some reason I assumed the flying vehicle comment referenced vehicles we could pilot ourselves (I don't really count the power armor in that). Either way I can't begin to explain my hype for this game and that's even on lowly graphical step child consoles!
Solid Samus
Banned
Bethesda has a much smaller team than CDPR does. Fallout 4 has a dev team of somewhere around 100 people, iirc. And I think you're being very hyperbolic with your reasoning toward this game. I mean, I have seen no instances, outside of isolated Dogmeat shenanigans, of characters with wonky' ice skating' movement, nor any instances of reused textures or models, and would be very interested to see whether or not you can produce examples of either for the sake of your argument. As far as I can tell from having watched all of the leaks so far, the game has very little jank compared to the previous Fallout games. I'm disappointed in the hit reactions I've seen from some enemies, and the facial animation and conversation animation could be better, but in terms of animations I like what I've seen pretty much everywhere else. And the player, NPCs, and enemies alike have movement animations that generally make them look a lot more grounded and weighty than before.
Youtube 4k 60fps would be better
At the time I had a Phenom X4 955 (yes, once upon a time I had an AMD CPU but we all make mistakes in our lives) and an MSI 570.
Skyrim ran really bad, my CPU was struggling and the game just did not look anything special.
I believe optimization was clearly not the focus and I don't think Fallout 4 will be a different case.
Regarding those screenshots, AO is unfortunately not great. Damn what I would not give for this game to support HBAO+.....
Guess I am the only one then
icecold1983
Member
its all he posts
Of course and I myself am only speaking from what I have seen through the leaks. And all the things I mentioned (floating chars, sub par animation) are there. It seems I am not the only one who noticed either. Perhaps I am spoiled? Dont know. But I have come to expect certain standards when we are talking about big releases of such caliber.
Now if there is a day 1 patch, or if the properly released version corrects all the above, of course I will revert with proper praise.
Thing is, the game looks dated overall in terms of the presentation. Its not like Bethesda hasnt ever been about pretty games... Fallout 3 and especially SKyrim and Oblivion were pretty much benchmarks in their respective genre, when they were released back in those days. So I dont get how they are getting a free pass this time around.
I dont hate Fallout, I dont hate Bethesda, I just dont like sloppy jobs, coming from such big developers.
The whole opening scene of Fallout 4 with all NPC interactions, is pretty hard to watch in 2015. Maybe thats just me, but believe it or not, I am not even a gfx whore.
SpacePirate Ridley
Member
It looks bad, but nothing that modders cant fix.
I have more problems with the gameplay and subpar animations, that are harder to fix, to be frank.
I have more problems with the gameplay and subpar animations, that are harder to fix, to be frank.
Marvel
could never
Indeed
Was expecting a huge leap, there's no need to purchase the PC version it seems at least at launch with vanilla. Will buy the console version after a price drop.
Looks below average even at the max presets, but again, that's what these games look like from Bethesda.
As long as it does the job gameplay wise, i'll pick it up easily.
The upside is that performance should be solid from a GPU perspective, i don't expect it to be taxing for people with mid or lower range PC GPU's.
As long as it does the job gameplay wise, i'll pick it up easily.
The upside is that performance should be solid from a GPU perspective, i don't expect it to be taxing for people with mid or lower range PC GPU's.
That's the combined effect of relatively low poly models, low res textures and dynamic lighting.
Eddie_Khaled
Member
Please be good and less buggy on the xbox one 
I don't understand this logic at all. So a AAA game developer can simply not develop quality graphics because they know modders will improve them? How is that acceptable? I really don't like how people keep saying "looks fine and modders will improve it", I don't think it's appropriate for a game/developer of this size to rely on its community to make the graphics on par with today's standards.
Solid Samus
Banned
Why do you think that I pointed out earlier that the only reason we're even having this discussion is because The Witcher 3 is a thing? Fallout 3 and Skyrim and Oblivion were 'benchmarks in their genre' because there were no other games that could claim that sort of scale with anywhere near that level of fidelity. There were no other AAA WRPGs doing anything even close to what Elder Scrolls and Fallout were doing. However, in terms of visuals, every single one of them was still heavily outmatched by contemporary linear or tech-focused games of that era. Now, The Witcher 3 has now given people the expectation, erroneous or otherwise, that every game that follows the same arbitrary checklist [*open world *role playing *quests], regardless of technological constraints, design priorities, or vastly differing underlying mechanics, should match or at least attempt to compete with its fidelity, as though that ought to be the paramount focus of any game that dares consider itself AAA! From what I've read and seen on this game so far it appears that Bethesda's main priority was packing this game with shitloads of content, and if that means iterating on an engine they're already familiar with in order to focus their lengthy development cycle on an expansive and intricate game, then I'm all for that. At any rate, I'm telling you man, the ice skating animations and reused textures/models absolutely aren't there, man, that's spreading some fud. And I still insist that as far as I'm concerned it's reasonable that I'm okay with the passable NPC animations, given the improvements made to how NPCs can animate and speak to each other during conversation, how you can move and do things during conversations, and that it's probably unreasonable to expect a fully mocapped world in a game of this scale.
I think it's mostly just the stylized PBR clashing with a lack of Ambient Occlusion, and that some of the houses are fairly low poly doesn't help. I imagine that once Ambient Occlusion is tweaked in (which should happen before the game is even officially released in America), the game will come to look a fair bit better on PC.
Yeah, that's GAF alright. If there's anything this community is notorious for, it's not criticizing Bethesda's shortcomings.
Yeah.
I don't think Bethesda does that specifically because they know modders will improve their own graphics.
They do it because they literally do not care about graphics to the extent graphics obsessed people do and care about the interactivity of their world a lot more. THey know that a majority of people will buy the game because a majority of those people also do not care about graphics in that manner.
The people who would actually abstain from buying the game when they were hyped because "graphics suck 1 out of 10" is painfully small. There are 3 SKU's of these games, they are not basing all their decisions around what one SKU cares about.
I also dont understand this. Gaming community (especially GAF) has proven time and again that criticism has produced good results in time. If people criticize Fallout 4's shortcomings and they voice their concerns (in a good manner always), then chances are higher that Fallout 5 will try to address said problems.
I dont like it that gaming community has become so passive and accepting in so many situations. It doesnt make sense to me.
It's like people not wanting to get an improved product in the future...
Maybe it's just me but the look of these reminds me a lot of Fallout 1/2. Not just in the 'it's a 50s apocalypse' sense, btw.Have some more
Yet another game where everyone speculates wildly before release, and has no bearing on reality when the game actually comes out. Same happened with Witcher 3, Skyrim, literally everything. At least here no one is saying 'OMG downgrade', which, imo, is actually better grounds to be annoyed.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
I wish we could go back to that Witcher 3 pre-release thread. That was some top GAFfing.
Solid Samus
Banned
Well there's not much to directly compare here since we're going off of a limited number of screenshots, but environments and far off buildings are properly shadowed and rendered at a higher lod at the very least, and people playing on high-end PCs can expect a bevy of improvements to be made to the visuals in short order - through the proliferation of drivers that improve performance and enable downsampling, the inevitable graphical tweaks and enhancements, and features like Gameworks. I think that most of the people reacting positively are just satisfied with what they're seeing here as opposed to implying a stark difference between most of the PS4 PNGs and this, because while there's clear lighting and LOD imprvements, there's very little to actually directly compare with any real scrutiny here.
That's what I've thought since E3, the game has a strange sort of 90s PC game CGI look to it that I kind of dig.
The art is really cool though.
CyberPunked
Member
Got a little excited sorry, dont normally get to see pc screens before a game is released.
At closer inspection the difference isn't too great.
Ultra high.
First of all let me clear something just so that there are no misunderstandings. I enjoy having this debate with you and in no way am I trying to make you change your opinion which I respect. I simply present my honest view and criticism in Fallout 4's technical department.
Having said this, I honestly dont think that my criticism over Fallout 4 gfx, stems from Witcher 3. Its not just Witcher 3 that has spoiled me. There have been quite a few pretty open world games out there. Yes Fallout 4 mechanics offer more freedom than most, I will agree and accept that a certain degree of gfx hit due to this is understandable.
But at the same time I dont believe that my sub par gfx/animation claim is to be considered FUD as you said. Perhaps it suits you and doesnt bother you, but for me it honestly detriments from being properly immersed with the game. It takes me off. (btw I dont consider W3 animation good either, at least Geralt's basic movement suite is rather robotic as well)
I dont want Bethesda to have Naughty Dog's mocap in their games. But at the very least to be somewhat convincing and not taking me off the experience. Similarly I am not expecting W3 fidelity (I am using W3 only because you mentioned it), but the difference between these 2 is enormous. It honestly looks like a different generation. I am certain they are capable (if they want) to close the gap. Hell how do modders do it?
We did have PC footage though.
I don't see any lighting improvement, at least not significantly, just LOD, which is expected like any open world game on PC, if people thought before that the game is ugly and now they are "eating crows" supposedly than I can't really understand it, visually it's still "ugly", fidelity is mostly the same as consoles and previous footage, these are just mandatory PC improvements, nothing to fuss over.