• 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.

[Digital Foundry] Are Current Generation Graphics A Bit Of A Let Down?

Ozzie666

Member
I'm more than happy with graphics level of PS4 or PS5 level. Don't care about PC and maximizing graphics. Developement times are going to increase to 10-15 years at this rate, unless tools or catch up fast enough. Develpoers closing at a record pace, this is a uselss pusruist right now. Nice to leave something to the imagination in terms of visuals.

Game performance is more important than increased visual fidelity.
 
I think as some get older they naturally begin to dislike gaming but they are afraid of getting older so they get peter pan syndrome and invest heavily in gaming even though they no longer enjoy it and can barely bring themselves to play it. Yet they don't want to lose such a strong tie to their youth so they are gamers in name only. GINO. If you think about it, this HAS to be a thing right? We are just arguing about the number of people it affects.

I think you’re onto something there.

I’m finding myself buying new games only to get bored and drop them about half way through.

However I’m enjoying my old games from the 90s and early 00s as much as I ever did.
 

yogaflame

Gold Member
Because DF is so hung up with Ray tracing, that makes it obligatory that a game in order to be consider technically great is to have ray tracing.
 

rofif

Can’t Git Gud
What's the point of being overwhelmed when it turns into a blur fest that just feels bad at 30 in motion

60 is fine, but consoles definitely don't need to be focusing on beyond 4K 60 any time soon, we probably jumped to 4K too early when we weren't even close to photorealistic graphics at FHD

I don't really get wanting more graphics at 30 when the motion resolution is so, so much worse, personally
I preferred me graphics at 30 on previous consoles.
But graphics are so good nowadays even at 60, that it’s not a sacrifice anymore.
 
The current consoles are quite capable but there are only a handful of teams that have enough financial backing that can afford to max out the visuals anymore.

That’s the real limiter we are starting to run up against. Every gen there are fewer and fewer games that could only run on the new technology. It’s not because of lack of new hardware ceilings it’s because it’s economically unviable to spend this much to make games.
 

Soodanim

Member
I'm happy with PS2 textures at modern resolutions, framerates, and IQ. Any graphical improvements are bonuses to me, but if I can't hit a decent fps then it's a trade off I don't like making.
 

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
No, the problem is that there are too many cross gen titles.

This is inevitable due to development timescales.

To build a title "from the ground up" for any sort of hardware needs devs to start fully aware of what its capabilities are. This projected level of performance is then factored into the design, and then that design is executed with any changes required along the way to hit the intended targets.

This process takes years.

And you can't really short-cut it because if you are just "shooting in the dark" you're either going to be overly conservative and stick with safe tweaks like minor adjustments to things like res or frame-rate, or risk digging yourself into development hell by over committing.

Add to this that the best way to gain experience and understanding is to go through an entire project cycle, then do a post-mortem, and carry the results forward when planning the next thing. Which of course is doubling up on multiple years of effort!

There's no easy solution because although dev cycles have increased something like 4 fold over the last 20 years, product generation lengths have remained mostly the same because of hardware manufacturers/platform holders sticking to more or less the same cadence.
 
Top Bottom