I'd say it looks a bit better than BotW. To me, what's important is the amount of polish, content, game mechanics, world interactivity and level design.
Especially for $70 on their bread and butter game they know people will buckle over. In the same gen. Not even a next-gen tax excuse.
Wow, that's a lot of stuff I didn't say, imply or even know what the hell you're talking about, but go ahead and cancel, I mean block, me.
No I'm saying the reviewer did. I don't agree though.
He hasn't in my book, first GOW is barely a functional game in many aspects, if that game releases today it would be smashed into hell as soon as it shows up, far from an all time classic, far from playable for any average gamer and not even because of difficulty, it's just a dated design full of collision bugs. He has no right to say a thing about other's work when his isn't on par to anything good. His game didn't survive a single gen and it came at the end of it, it tells you everything.
It's the framerate mostly I think the visuals are decent enough
It looks so much better on my OLED 65" then it does on that tiny little screen.
Well, Sony fans seem to care a lot... Their priorities are: Graphics > Story (can be switched) > Tech tech tech >>>>>>>>>>> anything else >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gameplay (yet optional).
I'll talk about it on my streaming show later today. I'm amazed people think I was saying something controversial. I make it clear I really like the game and am playing the shit out of it. I'm just saying the visuals are fine but in some places they are downright ugly by today's standards (including switch standards) and I was just mentioning it's weird we're not seeing more chat about it.davidjaffe explain yourself
Sony fans are happy with pretty games with limited functionality, so they see things with a superficial lens most of the time. As long as it look gud, they all happeh.
You don't get to control the argument. TotK looks good for the hardware it's on. Cope more.
Better/on par with Witcher 3?
Putting his lipstick on. He's through 2 and just hit the bottom lip.
This is obviously a secret plot to help Elon Musk break even on his $44 billion purchase.
Why is it shocking? PS5 games get praised even when they're just PS4 games with extra bells and whistles.
It's funny that people have brought up Rockstar in this thread saying Rockstar could do better graphics in the PS3 era because they have a lot more devs. Well, Rockstar didnt pass the costs down to the consumer. They charged us $60 for GTAV and RDR2 and will charge $70 for their next game.
This is on my 65 in Bravia OLED....my eyesight is just fine and i bet his is too.
This is true. There was a thread here yesterday about how Ratchet is arguably the best looking game on the PS5 despite releasing two years ago during the launch window. We are almost 3 years in, and games are releasing looking like PS4 games, worse PLAYING like PS4 games, and devs are handing out 88s and 95s with gay abandon. Standards have become so low and expectations from next gen games are so low that no one really knows what to expect from PS5 games.
It literally is a handheld. It uses mobile processors like handhelds. I could hook up my Vita to the TV, that does not make it a console. It's PR blurred lines reserved for mental gymnastics.
It is just that when you do have 6 years between titles and you have a lot of the core of the game done you can tweak and change but you are not starting from scratch there are some things that can be improved for a 10/10 sequel to a 10/10 game that builds upon that quite a bit.
davidjaffe
posted, do you see the texture tiling on the water surface? Not talking about real-time GI here, but with some minimal impact to the graphics devs the texture artists should be able to hide this more.
SlimySnake straight spitting facts.
I was just talking to my friend about it the other day. Nintendo doesnt get that all their hardcore fans are now in their mid to late 30s if not older and can easily afford to pay $399 or $499 for a switch pro. They fucked up big time by not releasing a pro console. Easy money wasted there. I am not even a nintendo fan and i wouldve gladly paid $399 for a switch pro. maybe even $499. Not because i want it, but simply because i can afford to.
I wouldn't say that. Kids love the switch. bieng portable is a huge deal in that demographic. PS and XBox and losing that demographic to tablets. Its why its the best selling console of all time. Why would they want ot cater to a few old people an d not the other 100 million switch owners?
Kids are the main demographic, but the hardcore nintendo fanboys are people who roam these forums. The PS4 Pro had a ratio of 20%. Id say 20% when you are sellng 100 million units is a sizeable chunk. Especially if they could sell it for a profit.
