• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Consoles screenshots thread (PS4/Xbone/WiiU) [Up: Thread rules in OP]

TAJ

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
I don't see the lack of AA people are talking about. Looks like there is clearly a FXAA solution being used to me.

The CA makes it harder to tell, but the more I look the more sure I am.
 

-griffy-

Banned
The CA makes it harder to tell, but the more I look the more sure I am.

It just doesn't look sharp enough for me to believe there is no AA. The whole image looks soft in the way a post AA solution produces. It doesn't look all that off from BF4 for instance.

I mean, Wolfenstein:TNO is a game with no AA, and it SHOWS:
wolfenstein-comp2-2.png
 
I'm cool with racing photo modes. At the end of the day, it's part of the game and adds to my enjoyment of it.


*edit*

That first Lambo shot above is amazing.
 

TAJ

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
It just doesn't look sharp enough for me to believe there is no AA. The whole image looks soft in the way a post AA solution produces. It doesn't look all that off from BF4 for instance.

I mean, Wolfenstein:TNO is a game with no AA, and it SHOWS:
wolfenstein-comp2-2.png

CA and DoF make games look softer, too.
It just has way too many obvious jaggies on edges that would be easy for any AA solution to deal with effectively.
 

Shin-Ra

Junior Member
Alien clearly has some sort of postAA. Just lots of specular aliasing and harshly lit sub pixel edges it can't cope with.

Skylanders IQ looks very similar to inFAMOUS. And Parallax Occlusion Mapping!
 

stryke

Member
keyword: IMO
a lot of people, myself included, love chromatic aberration

It's not merely an opinion. CA objectively destroys detail, therefore it's shit for image quality.

Of course, you can prefer it for aesthetic reasons, much like how some people like to put sharpening filter on full throttle.
 

23qwerty

Member
It's not merely an opinion. CA objectively destroys detail, therefore it's shit for image quality.

Of course, you can prefer it for aesthetic reasons, much like how some people like to put sharpening filter on full throttle.

Hey you're the one who said imo.
 

Pjsprojects

Member
I don't really like them when they aren't representative of the game's image quality (like most racers' photo modes), but I don't think it's prohibited.

Are we 100% sure photo mode changes the picture quality? It looks the same as in game to me.

Infamous did the same thing and that had loads of pictures in here.
 

Caayn

Member
Are we allowed to post FH2 photos in here then? I thought posting photos that aren't representative of gameplay was frowned upon. FH2 looks good in game but the photomode IQ is definitely noticeably better.

If so I have about 30 of my own that I can pick from....
I don't see why not. People post pics that aren't representative of gameplay all the time. Forza isn't the only game, that's posted, with a photo mode that allows people to alter the image (DoF, filters, strange camera angles, etc)

Also I don't see any major differences in the photo mode shots unlike with Forza 5 for example.
 
Are we allowed to post FH2 photos in here then? I thought posting photos that aren't representative of gameplay was frowned upon. FH2 looks good in game but the photomode IQ is definitely noticeably better.

If so I have about 30 of my own that I can pick from....
I think there is an easy solution. Just state "photomode" when posting. If that's too much trouble, then well....
 
It's not merely an opinion. CA objectively destroys detail, therefore it's shit for image quality.

Of course, you can prefer it for aesthetic reasons, much like how some people like to put sharpening filter on full throttle.

I like CA. I think it looks pretty awesome when its implemented right.

I like all of the extra effects- motion blur, CA, bloom (when used right). I think they all had to the style of the image and make things look awesome. Sue me!
 

stryke

Member
I like CA. I think it looks pretty awesome when its implemented right.

I like all of the extra effects- motion blur, CA, bloom (when used right). I think they all had to the style of the image and make things look awesome. Sue me!

I'm not even sure what you're trying to contend with what I said.
 

thelastword

Banned
I don't see why not. People post pics that aren't representative of gameplay all the time. Forza isn't the only game, that's posted, with a photo mode that allows people to alter the image (DoF, filters, strange camera angles, etc)

Also I don't see any major differences in the photo mode shots unlike with Forza 5 for example.
I really believe it defeats the purpose of the thread. I'd really like to see how good a game can look whilst I play. Most of the games which have a photo mode have their own thread for photo shots.

Anyway, I'm really impressed by shadow of mordor, some people say it's cross gen, but to me it looks like the most impressive cross-gen game released and it's open world too. Skylanders always had great IQ, does anyone know what type of AA it uses, it's flawless.
 

Sande

Member
I really believe it defeats the purpose of the thread. I'd really like to see how good a game can look whilst I play. Most of the games which have a photo mode have their own thread for photo shots.
I agree. If someone wants to know how good FH2 looks, this thread isn't the place for them at the moment. The IQ is clearly improved in photo-mode shots.
 
I agree. If someone wants to know how good FH2 looks, this thread isn't the place for them at the moment. The IQ is clearly improved in photo-mode shots.

yeah i agree. but this discussion has been going on since the beginning.
I think most people agreed they would leave photomode in. I also think people might mistake the game actually looks that way. And while i say this i realise all the "but but infamous uses the same assets and doesn't use any extra AA". Yes, we allllll know. But the viewpoints, certain image effects (like black and white, depth of field, etc)it's not what you see when you play the game. It's not to downplay the game or the photomode, it's just to keep the thread a clean gameplay screenshot thread. There are photo-mode-threads.


If not, the very least you can do as a service to other GAF members is to put a disclaimer in the title of your post stating (photomode).
 

Pjsprojects

Member
Photo-mode shots are supersampled I believe. They're visibly cleaner than how it looks in-game to me.

Fair enough you believe it but proof would help,I honestly can't tell the difference.

Lets face it it's not like Xbone owners can simply snap an in game shot like on PS4. Also don't recall this topic popping up when we were all posting Infamous shots.
 

nbnt

is responsible for the well-being of this island.
We should allow photomode pics too, it's not like the screenshots in the PC equivalent thread are at very playable framerates either.
That's what I was about to say. This discussion has been going on for far too long.

Some of you need to check out the PC thread, which predate all the console threads, people take screenshots at resolutions they don't/can't play at just for the sake of IQ. And if we're talking about camera angles, most PC games can be altered to have free cams (some with controllable effects like DoF), so pretty much photomode for every game, and the PC thread is full of these screenshots and everyone is ok with it.

If a game swaps assets when it's in photomode, that's different. But even then, I think just putting "photomode" alongside the title is enough.
 

TheMoon

Member
Just label photo mode shots as photo mode shots to not confuse people and be done with it. If it basically excludes anyone not owning a capture card from posting X1 shots, what's the point of even having this multi format thread?

Until X1 gets a proper screenshot feature, just let people post photo mode shots if an X1 game supports that as its only means of exporting screenshots.
 
Fair enough you believe it but proof would help,I honestly can't tell the difference.

Lets face it it's not like Xbone owners can simply snap an in game shot like on PS4. Also don't recall this topic popping up when we were all posting Infamous shots.

now you're making it consolewar related again. See, it's a neverending story without any rational behaviour.
Tiresome.

That's what I was about to say. This discussion has been going on for far too long.

Some of you need to check out the PC thread, which predate all the console threads, people take screenshots at resolutions they don't/can't play at just for the sake of IQ. And if we're talking about camera angles, most PC games can be altered to have free cams (some with controllable effects like DoF), so pretty much photomode for every game, and the PC thread is full of these screenshots and everyone is ok with it.

If a game swaps assets when it's in photomode, that's different. But even then, I think just putting "photomode" alongside the title is enough.

Exactly. That's about as much trouble as using a traffic indicator while driving a car. A small gesture to others to make everything clear to everyone..
 

Caayn

Member
Why not make it into a rule of the thread that if you post a photo-mode shot (no matter the alterations) require a disclaimer at the top. Just like the three pics per post and the name of a game rules.
We should allow photomode pics too, it's not like the screenshots in the PC equivalent thread are at very playable framerates either.
PC shots I've posted on GAF have always been at playable fps(60+). Can't speak for everyone though, there's a separate thread for 1fps shots but that one seems to have been forgotten.
 
Fair enough you believe it but proof would help,I honestly can't tell the difference.

Lets face it it's not like Xbone owners can simply snap an in game shot like on PS4. Also don't recall this topic popping up when we were all posting Infamous shots.

The proof is in the screenshots. Just because you can't see a difference, it doesn't mean it isn't there. Both Forza 5 and FH2 apply extra AA in photo-mode. It's not a huge difference, as FH2 already uses 4XMSAA, but there's definitely a difference in IQ between photo-mode shots and in-game shots that people have taken from a capture card.

And yes, this topic did come up when Infamous' photo-mode was patched in. Just like it was when TLoU:R released. I'm not sure why bringing up PS4 games is relevant, though.

And just to be clear, I have no problem whatsoever with people posting FH2 photo-mode shots.

Just label photo mode shots as photo mode shots to not confuse people and be done with it. If it basically excludes anyone not owning a capture card from posting X1 shots, what's the point of even having this multi format thread?

Until X1 gets a proper screenshot feature, just let people post photo mode shots if an X1 game supports that as its only means of exporting screenshots.

.
 
I'm not even sure what you're trying to contend with what I said.

Not really contending, just giving my opinion that effects like CA I think add to the style and beauty of the image when they are implemented well. You said CA "objectively destroys detail and is shit for IQ", but myself and others don't agree with that. I'm not even sure I know what that means.
 

le-seb

Member
Not really contending, just giving my opinion that effects like CA I think add to the style and beauty of the image when they are implemented well. You said CA "objectively destroys detail and is shit for IQ", but myself and others don't agree with that. I'm not even sure I know what that means.
Chromatic aberration is an optical aberration, something that doesn't exist in real life.
You can subjectively like the "oh, it's like in movies!" effect but it clearly and objectively destroys image quality by replacing some colours with others, adding fuzziness to an otherwise clean image.
 

stryke

Member
Yep, IQ is more of a discussion of how clean the image is rather than what's aesthetically pleasing to your personal eye.
 
Top Bottom