Support NeoGAF

[TheExodu5]

For me, it's Dark Souls. Edges out The Witcher 2 by just a tad, possibly due to the fact that I can run it without a hitch with massive supersampling.

The lighting isn't on the level of The Witcher 2, but it's also much more consistent. The Witcher 2 has some beautifully lit scenes, while in others everything is glowing like it's radioactive.

Besides that, there are just a ton of things that come together to make Dark Souls such a fantastic looking game on my system: insane IQ thanks to supersampling, some of the best texture work and modeling for any game, a massive interconnected world with unlimited view distance. It's really something quite special.

 

[Reiko]

Not port begging, genuinely curious, isn't Halo 4 getting a pc port? I remember seeing that somewhere and thinking it was weird because of 3, Reach and ODST not having one.

No PC PORT for you!

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

Halo 4 looks absolutely stunning. Man I love the atmosphere we keep seeing.

 

[TheExodu5]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aapBZBZNkp0

There is a full HD vid you can see them tiny gifs.

Would look great at high resolutions. Lighting looks awesome. Sadly, even that video shows off insane amounts of aliasing that just immediately breaks any sense of immersion. Also, even the video shows off that there are a ton of low resolution textures in use...look at the walls of the cave...pretty terrible.

Here's hoping for a PC port. Though that probably won't fix the texture issues.

note: the texture resolution complaint isn't a slight against the artists...it's mostly due to limited disk space...they need to keep assets in check to fit what they can on a DVD.

 

[nOoblet16]

My understanding was that this was because the polygons were in the fucking huge environments. I don't care about up-close quality--I care about the consistency of the scene, so long draw distances have always been important to me. I hate it when games like Call of Duty and Uncharted have these really silly, low-quality skyboxes masquerading as mountains or whatever.

Uncharted never had any low quality skybox, as for draw distance it always uses polygon based 3D objects. For example check this video (00:33 on wards)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad-p4qFRonI

The city you see, has quite a large draw distance and everything is being rendered instead of being just a 2D backdrop. Honestly speaking Uncharted games are top of the line in terms of tech and art, there's almost nothing to complain about, it looks good because the tech is indeed damn good and superior to almost everything out there and having world class artists work on it makes it even better.

Alan Wake's actually fucking incredible when it comes to both lighting (I believe it has both volumetric and dynamic lighting or something, which, in my understanding, hasn't been done on any other console game barring, perhaps, Metro 2033) and draw distance of several miles, and my understanding is that the 360 is actually rendering stuff that's not actually shown in-game, based on the old open world that they'd made some time ago. The main reason the assets aren't super high quality is because they didn't have enough disc space due to... I think the uncompressed audio? Plus, the game was developed by a very small team and they put a lot of work into having the game smartly generate terrain (if road, then ditch; if ditch, then plants appropriate to ditch, etc) so they wouldn't have to do work on all of it--Alan Wake's world is, after all, far larger than Uncharted's very guided experience.

No game does real time volumetric lighting (If I am correct Little Big Planet 2's irradiance slice is the closest we've ever gotten). What Alan wake does is use a shadowmap technique to emulate the cone of light and it being blocked by objects/characters. And here's a surprise Uncharted 3 does it too in a much more pronounced way (a lot more light sources like that at any given time than Alan Wake).

 

[Reiko]

Would look great at high resolutions. Lighting looks awesome. Sadly, even that video shows off insane amounts of aliasing that just immediately breaks any sense of immersion.

Here's hoping for a PC port.

720p & FXAA

That's as good as IQ can get on consoles without taxing the framerate.

 

[Uncharted Waves]

I am playing UC3 again right now and nothing absolutely nothing on consoles touches it.

1. Crysis 2 (360)
2. Killzone 3
3. Gears of War 3

I just named 3. The first two look better especially on a technical level. The last one is at least on par and depending on your artistic taste you can also make an argument that Gears 3 looks better.

People keep saying uc3 but what saves it are the colors and art direction. As far as graphics go it has poor anisotropic filtering, some 2d looking water in some spots especially on the shipyard level and the cruise level when the water is crashing aboard the cruise ship.

It also has some bad jaggies and the tree tech is terrible looking. Crysis 2 on pc AND yes even on consoles has far better tree tech.

Nothing in uncharted 3 tops Crysis 2. Go play the seat of power level in Crysis 2 and then come back and say nothing touches uc3.

Look at all of the fantastic particle effects, the explosions, the lighting, the god rays even peering through underwater in crysis 2. LOL uncharted 3 explosion, fire, smoke effects are terrible. Just talking about these effects it's clear that uc3 doesn't come close to Crysis 2 (360).

Uncharted 3 looks great but it is not the best. And saying no console game touches it is ignorant.

 

[scitek]

For me, it's Dark Souls. Edges out The Witcher 2 by just a tad, possibly due to the fact that I can run it without a hitch with massive supersampling.

The lighting isn't on the level of The Witcher 2, but it's also much more consistent. The Witcher 2 has some beautifully lit scenes, while in others everything is glowing like it's radioactive.

Besides that, there are just a ton of things that come together to make Dark Souls such a fantastic looking game on my system: insane IQ thanks to supersampling, some of the best texture work and modeling for any game, a massive interconnected world with unlimited view distance. It's really something quite special.

Don't you have an SLI setup? You can't downsample the hell put of TW2 and maintain 30fps?

 

[Neiteio]

I'm a PC/PS3/Wii/3DS gamer, so no 360 and no Gears, though I love Bulletstorm, and holy shit at that monster. Superb creature design. Links to YouTube video please?

 

[TheExodu5]

Don't you have an SLI setup? You can't downsample the hell put of TW2 and maintain 30fps?

I have a GTX 680...sold my GTX 570 SLI setup.

I could do that, but The Witcher 2 feels really choppy at 30fps. It suffers from stuttering issues, which Dark Souls does not. And hey, as much as I like good graphics, playability always comes first, so I strive for 60fps whenever possible. Dark Souls is one of the first games where a 30fps cap has not bothered me in the least.

 

[StuBurns]

I hate the art of Gears and Bulletstorm, I really hope we see The Samaritan turn into a real game, because other than the Samaritan itself, I thought that video looked really great, much better than the UE4 demo.

 

[TheExodu5]

Indeed. Gears 3 was a greenish brown mess. And holy hell one of the most heavily aliased console games I've ever played.

 

[Neiteio]

I hate the art of Gears and Bulletstorm, I really hope we see The Samaritan turn into a real game, because other than the Samaritan itself, I thought that video looked really great, much better than the UE4 demo.

The meathead character design might not be for everyone, but I have a hard time believing you don't like the lovely pastel-streaked, almost Seussical landscapes of Bulletstorm's resort world. Mountains like jagged shards of glass, thundering waterfalls, corkscrew trees -- it's just gorgeous.

 

[lowrider007]

I get that Gears is technically impressive but I'm just not a fan how the unreal engine looks in general (outside of Mirrors Edge of course )

 

[StuBurns]

The meathead character design might not be for everyone, but I have a hard time believing you don't like the lovely pastel-streaked, almost Seussical landscapes of Bulletstorm's resort world. Mountains like jagged shards of glass, thundering waterfalls, corkscrew trees -- it's just gorgeous.

Buildings are usually quite nice, but all the enemies, characters, vegetation, etc, are all terrible.

 

[TheExodu5]

I don't really think Gears 3 is technically impressive at all. Pushes nicer lighting than Gears 2 at the expense of anti-aliasing. And it has motion blur. That's about it. There are a lot of better looking console games out there.

 

[Reiko]

I don't really think Gears 3 is technically impressive at all. Pushes nicer lighting than Gears 2 at the expense of anti-aliasing. And it has motion blur. That's about it. There are a lot of better looking console games out there.

You have got to be kidding.

 

[dude]

Shadow Of The Beast on the Amiga.

RIP Psygnosis.

Had nothing on Another World! It also aged considerably worse.

 

[xJavonta]

Good job with the Halo 4 downsampled bullshot gif spam. Maybe you should be Microsoft's marketing agent.

Wheres the load of jaggies that I'm going to see when the game is actually run on my TV upscaled to 1080p?

Unless you sit directly in front of your TV, jaggies won't be a problem. Which is why the comfy couch PC gaming crew tend to turn of AA for better performance.

The only time AA is needed is when you're sitting less than 4 feet away from a screen, IMO. Other than that, AA is a luxury that I turn off when I'm on my couch and not at my desk

(I PC game from my couch quite frequently.)

upscaled to 1080p.....hmm

The game will be upscaled. We don't really know what the native res is yet (I'm thinking 1152x720 with 2x AA like Reach), but I think we can safely assume it's not going to be native 1080p.

Regardless, the game looks damn good.

 

[Neiteio]

I don't really think Gears 3 is technically impressive at all. Pushes nicer lighting than Gears 2 at the expense of anti-aliasing. And it has motion blur. That's about it. There are a lot of better looking console games out there.

*reads this post, then looks at the jaw-dropping monster gif again*

Something doesn't match up here!

 

[TheExodu5]

You have got to be kidding.

Nope. I bought the game on release and complained about it in the Gears 3 thread. I was extremely unimpressed.

Now, keep in mind I sit about 2.5 feet away from a 32" 1080p TV, so huge IQ flaws like a complete lack of anti-aliasing really stand out.

*reads this post, then looks at the jaw-dropping monster gif again*

Something doesn't match up here!

That's the key word here.

a 416x234 gif.

Blow it up to 1080p and it looks awful.

 

[Interferon]

In technical terms (on consoles at least) I'd go for Uncharted 2/3, and GT5 -- yes I know it can get very ugly at times, but pick a premium car, take it to Nrburgring/Spa with dynamic time/weather and few games come close.
In artistic terms I love Mirror's Edge. It's not advanced technically, but boy was I blown away by the demo back in 2008. It stacks up well even today on a PC because of amazing art design.
Overall in technical terms in PC area I'd vote for Crysis, Witcher 2 and BF3. Metro 2033 was also really impressive, artistically and technically. Can't wait for Crysis 3 after the CryEngine3 vid...

 

[JLuke2600]

This is an excellent thread analyzing Wind Waker: http://www.polycount.com/forum/showthread.php?t=104415
Just wonderfully designed visuals. Stuff like baking the shadows into the textures and the way the water is rendered (of course) is really artful.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

1. Crysis 2 (360)
2. Killzone 3
3. Gears of War 3

I just named 3. The first two look better especially on a technical level. The last one is at least on par and depending on your artistic taste you can also make an argument that Gears 3 looks better.

People keep saying uc3 but what saves it are the colors and art direction. As far as graphics go it has poor anisotropic filtering, some 2d looking water in some spots especially on the shipyard level and the cruise level when the water is crashing aboard the cruise ship.

It also has some bad jaggies and the tree tech is terrible looking. Crysis 2 on pc AND yes even on consoles has far better tree tech.

Nothing in uncharted 3 tops Crysis 2. Go play the seat of power level in Crysis 2 and then come back and say nothing touches uc3.

Look at all of the fantastic particle effects, the explosions, the lighting, the god rays even peering through underwater in crysis 2. LOL uncharted 3 explosion, fire, smoke effects are terrible. Just talking about these effects it's clear that uc3 doesn't come close to Crysis 2 (360).

Uncharted 3 looks great but it is not the best. And saying no console game touches it is ignorant.

I think Gears 3 and KZ3 both look fantastic but are ultimately really inconsistent. On a whole I still think UC3 easily outclasses both.

 

[Neiteio]

That's the key word here.

a 416x234 gif.

Blow it up to 1080p and it looks awful.

Hmm, well, I haven't seen that scene in person, so I guess I can't say. Shame if it looks ugly from a technical standpoint, since the creature design and animation certainly looks strong.

 

[TheExodu5]

I actually thought both UC2 and Killzone 2 looked better then either sequel.

Hmm, well, I haven't seen that scene in person, so I guess I can't say. Shame if it looks ugly from a technical standpoint, since the creature design and animation certainly looks strong.

Oh no doubt it would look great. The animations are pretty fantastic.

 

[Reiko]

Nope. I bought the game on release and complained about it in the Gears 3 thread. I was extremely unimpressed.

Now, keep in mind I sit about 2.5 feet away from a 32" 1080p TV, so huge IQ flaws like a complete lack of anti-aliasing really stand out.



That's the key word here.

a 416x234 gif.

Blow it up to 1080p and it looks awful.

Blow up any PS3 exclusive not named GT5 (1280x1080) and it looks terrible. Even more that the PS3 has a worse upscaler than the 360.

 

[Y2Kev]

I actually thought both UC2 and Killzone 2 looked better then either sequel.

UC2 I think is actually a matter of IQ. I felt the same way when I first played UC3, but I went back to 2 and then switched between them here and there. The lighting model in 3 is a lot more advanced. I think 2's got a more interesting (read: colorful) setting and better IQ.

KZ3 I think towers over 2. I was stunned playing them back to back. The postprocessing is more pronounced in 2 though and leaves a stronger overall impression.

 

[TheExodu5]

Blow up any PS3 exclusive not named GT5 (1280x1080) and it looks terrible. Even more that the PS3 has a worse upscaler than the 360.

I didn't realize this was a console war thread. I don't know why you're trying to turn this into one.

UC2 I think is actually a matter of IQ. I felt the same way when I first played UC3, but I went back to 2 and then switched between them here and there. The lighting model in 3 is a lot more advanced. I think 2's got a more interesting (read: colorful) setting and better IQ.

KZ3 I think towers over 2. I was stunned playing them back to back. The postprocessing is more pronounced in 2 though and leaves a stronger overall impression.

UC2...you're probably right on that one. Though their "fake" SSAO seemed really weird in places in UC3.

Killzone 2...I've actually only played the demo portion, and I've only played a few segments in Killzone 3. I may have made up my mind too early.

 

[Reiko]

Unless you sit directly in front of your TV, jaggies won't be a problem. Which is why the comfy couch PC gaming crew tend to turn of AA for better performance.

The only time AA is needed is when you're sitting less than 4 feet away from a screen, IMO. Other than that, AA is a luxury that I turn off when I'm on my couch and not at my desk

(I PC game from my couch quite frequently.)


The game will be upscaled. We don't really know what the native res is yet (I'm thinking 1152x720 with 2x AA like Reach), but I think we can safely assume it's not going to be native 1080p.

Regardless, the game looks damn good.

Frankie has told everyone on here and Eurogamer that Halo 4 is 1280x720. The first HD Halo.

 

[gaming_noob]

Hmm, well, I haven't seen that scene in person, so I guess I can't say. Shame if it looks ugly from a technical standpoint, since the creature design and animation certainly looks strong.

Gears 3 is certainly amazing looking in person. Great lighting, textures and the aliasing seems to be hidden very well compared to the first 2 games.

 

[StuBurns]

KZ3 I think towers over 2. I was stunned playing them back to back. The postprocessing is more pronounced in 2 though and leaves a stronger overall impression.

I think I just don't like MLAA. It adds this horrible shimmery look to edges, it was beautiful in GoW3, and horrible in everything since.

 

[Reiko]

I didn't realize this was a console war thread.

You should realize that I'm posting common sense. The best looking PS3 games are all 720p native, like Gears 3...

Since the PS3 doesn't have a dedicated upscaler like the 360 most of the time these games will look even worse upscaled to 1080p on PS3.

 

[TheExodu5]

MLAA can add a lot of temporal aliasing in certain scenes. Any distance straight edges turn alias pretty badly in motion.

You should realize that I'm posting common sense. The best looking PS3 games are all 720p native, like Gears 3...

Since the PS3 doesn't have a dedicated upscaler like the 360 most of the time these games will look even worse upscaled to 1080p on PS3.

I'm just not sure why you felt the need to bring the PS3 in a discussion about Gears?

"I don't think Gears 3 looks very good."

"Well! Well! PS3 games don't look very good!"

 

[Doctor Decimate]

wind waker

 

[TheMink]

Im seeing a lot of people posting aesthetics over actual graphical prowess.

I always considered the best graphics to be the most realistic possible. (crisis, uncharted 3 although the people still have a cartoony feel to them the landscapes still look stunning, battlefield 3)

But wind waker just has a really cool aesthetic, its not convincing me the water could be real


EDIT:

So is this thread asking what game comes the closest to looking real/clean?

Or are we just saying what aesthetics we enjoy the most.

 

[Reiko]

MLAA can add a lot of temporal aliasing in certain scenes. Any distance straight edges turn alias pretty badly in motion.



I'm just not sure why you felt the need to bring the PS3 in a discussion about Gears?

Because you mentioned that a native 720p game looks "awful" when upscaled to 1080p... The best looking games, well according to many on here (Or other forums) are majorly on PS3 and also are 720p. So I don't see how those games being upscaled doesn't bother you but Gears 3 does.

 

[xJavonta]

Frankie has told everyone on here and Eurogamer that Halo 4 is 1280x720. The first HD Halo.

Really? Awesome, it's going to play at my TV's native res lol (32" 720p. Got it for cheap)

Because you mentioned that a native 720p game looks "awful" when upscaled to 1080p... The best looking games, well according to many on here (Or other forums) are majorly on PS3 and also are 720p. So I don't see how those games being upscaled doesn't bother you but Gears 3 does.

Because it has no AA. No AA at his distance can be really distracting and ugly.

 

[Y2Kev]

You should realize that I'm posting common sense. The best looking PS3 games are all 720p native, like Gears 3...

Since the PS3 doesn't have a dedicated upscaler like the 360 most of the time these games will look even worse upscaled to 1080p on PS3.

But he's specifically saying he doesn't think Gears looks good blown up, not making a comment on other games. He probably feels the same way about the others, though G3's AA scheme might hurt it more than some.

 

[TheExodu5]

Because you mentioned that a native 720p game looks "awful" when upscaled to 1080p... The best looking games, well according to many on here (Or other forums) are majorly on PS3 and also are 720p. So I don't see how those games being upscaled doesn't bother you but Gears 3 does.

My point about Gears 3 isn't even the fact that it's a 720p title. That's the case with 99% of console games and I've learned to live with that. My point is that it has no anti-aliasing. None. That should eliminate any title from the running, IMO.

 

[Reiko]

But he's specifically saying he doesn't think Gears looks good blown up, not making a comment on other games. He probably feels the same way about the others, though G3's AA scheme might hurt it more than some.

Well Gears 3 doesn't have any AA at all. So he's right in saying the IQ is terrible.

 

[Y2Kev]

Well Gears 3 doesn't have any AA at all. So he's right in saying the IQ is terrible.

That's what I'm talking about. The lack of AA hurts it more than some blown up.

But I don't have a 1080p TV set so I like that.

 

[StuBurns]

Really? Awesome, it's going to play at my TV's native res lol (32" 720p. Got it for cheap)

There are almost no native 720p TVs, what is it?

 

[danwarb]

Nope. I bought the game on release and complained about it in the Gears 3 thread. I was extremely unimpressed.

Now, keep in mind I sit about 2.5 feet away from a 32" 1080p TV, so huge IQ flaws like a complete lack of anti-aliasing really stand out.



That's the key word here.

a 416x234 gif.

Blow it up to 1080p and it looks awful.

The game still looked pretty good on a 40" monitor, with fairly typical console image quality. IQ isn't everything.

 

[TheExodu5]

There are almost no native 720p TVs, what is it?

He probably doesn't realize his TV is likely 1366x768.

The game still looked pretty good on a 40" monitor, with fairly typical console image quality. IQ isn't everything.

IQ does mean a lot, though.

vs

Same art assets. Different rendering resolutions.

 

[Raven77]

My God, please tell me what this is? I have a deep deep love for ocean based games like Endless Ocean and Aquanaut's Holiday (PS3 - see below for screens)

 

[Grisby]

Man, I'm playing some Gears MP again and the maps are so gorgeous. Game is a technical feat on the 360.

I was a bit hesitant when they said Gears was going sunny but I think it worked out really well. So many colors.

 

[Trunchisholm]

I don't really think Gears 3 is technically impressive at all. Pushes nicer lighting than Gears 2 at the expense of anti-aliasing. And it has motion blur. That's about it. There are a lot of better looking console games out there.

A lot? Are you kidding me? I doubt you can seriously name A LOT of console games that are better examples of graphically accomplished games than GoW 3. I'm not even a fan of the game or of the art style, but technically it is really good. The AA was borked in the first two anyway, and it missed a lot of edges. It would have been better if they had implemented FXAA, but it is still far from the jaggy fest some people here are making it out to be. The DoF and the fantastic motion blur help a lot to clean the jaggies, to the point that I didn't find them distracting at all.

 

[dude]

I don't accept that Graphical Prowess (Realism) vs. Stylized dynamic. Every game is stylized, it's just a different art style, I don't think I've ever seen a graphically "realistic" game. Sure, the rock may have some realistic qualities or the environments my look somewhat real, but there's an art style there at the end of the day - What's the saturation level? What colors did they choose? etc. Even the most "realistic" games like Crysis have a very clear art style and they look pretty much nothing like anything I've ever seen in real life.
The question is, how well did they execute this art direction and how well does the game actually looks. It's about what you feel and appreciate when you look at the game.

 

[TheExodu5]

I was a bit hesitant when they said Gears was going sunny but I think it worked out really well. So many colors.

I guess it gets more colorful in later chapters? I was early in Chapter 2 and it was still pretty much exclusively brown.

A lot? Are you kidding me? I doubt you can seriously name A LOT of console games that are better examples of graphically accomplished games than GoW 3. I'm not even a fan of the game or of the art style, but technically it is really good. The AA was borked in the first two anyway, and it missed a lot of edges. It would have been better if they had implemented FXAA, but it is still far from the jaggy fest some people here are making it out to be. The DoF and the fantastic motion blur help a lot to clean the jaggies, to the point that I didn't find them distracting at all.

Maybe I exaggerated a bit. I'll admit it's technically accomplished, has great lighting, depth of field, and great animations. I actually really like UE3.5. I just feel the lack of AA, in my situation, really destroys any sense of immersion to the point where I'd rather give up some of the bells and whistles for a more coherent image.