It's mostly about perspective. Their games can look impressive in places when people are subjected to fairly new visual tech and novelties they're not yet familiar with. Like the water shader in Morrowind, which could make up for stuff like the character animations which I flat out laughed at when I first saw them. Oblivion was also the introduction to distant LoD for many people, but I just noticed how shoddily executed it was since I had seen other games implement it more tastefully years before.
Fallout 4 PC Ultra screenshots
- Thread starter RoboPlato
- Start date
It's mostly about perspective. Their games can look impressive in places when people are subjected to fairly new visual tech and novelties they're not yet familiar with. Like the water shader in Morrowind, which could make up for stuff like the character animations which I flat out laughed at when I first saw them. Oblivion was also the introduction to distant LoD for many people, but I just noticed how shoddily executed it was since I had seen other games implement it more tastefully years before.
nkarafo
Member
I'm pretty sure a 3rd gen i5 + GTX 670 will smash anything the XBOX can deliver. Or the PS4. Assuming it's an above average port at least and not a completely shitty one.
Darkstorne
Member
PC version should easily match console settings for you, likely higher (or 60fps at console settings at least) and you can always upgrade to a GTX 970 later to max the game out at 60fps.
The explanation for this question has been given so many times it's not even funny. NPCs are all unique in Beth games (except bandits and the like) with their own clothing separate from their character models unlike the Witcher 3 with repeating NPC faces when you look for it and clothing a part of the character models; every item can be interacted with (whereas in the Witcher they're usually cemented to the environment or bulk meshes rather than individual items); and in Fallout 4 you can literally pull buildings apart and rebuild them elsewhere, creating your own settlements. It's just a much higher hardware overhead on world interaction than the Witcher 3 has, so less juice left over to dedicate to visuals.
I'd argue TES is their peacock to show off tech. There's only been one Beth Fallout and another with the same engine, both are reletively fugly. So that's the precedent
Well for one, Witcher has static NPCs as far as I could tell. Also no random encounters (I think). Also no radiant quests in which there are population shifts following quest completions.
To be fair, no-one has played Fallout 4 so we don't really know what it will achieve. It could be a giant turd for all we know. I know for a fact though, save it being beyond terrible, I will likely spend at least 3 times the hours in Fallout than I have Witcher. I genuinely couldn't muster the desire to finish Witcher and I was a good 40-50 hours in. Hell, I put more time in Dragon Age: Inquisition than Witcher, but I know Witcher is an excellent game, just not to my tastes in the end
DrROBschiz
Member
Same lol
Im only participating in the discussion out of boredom at work
Im sure the vast majority of fallout fans will play the game and have fun. Plus its been so long since the last fallout that we HAVE to scratch that itch
Something like this right? http://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/27043/?
We'll get them eventually.
Damn, that's awesome.
That seems like just an excuse. Tons of games that look better than Fallout 4 have debris/other objects that are affected by physics. And Bethesda games don't have that many interactive objects on screen at once when you come down to it. Maybe an average of 20-30 when you're inside a building.
CyberPunked
Member
He didn't say a last gen Bethesda game did he.
Yeah I completely agree................. /s
starchild excalibur
Member
I'm not seeing an overwhelming difference from the PS4 thread, but if GAF tells me they look better then I'll believe 'em.
Either way, the game looks plenty good for me regardless of platform. I'm excited.
Either way, the game looks plenty good for me regardless of platform. I'm excited.
Blue Ninja
Member
Gosh, I'm so conflicted. Go with PC, force 30 fps lock and hope I can run the game stable with my GTX 660, or go with Xbone and don't worry about anything until I pick up the PC GOTY edition after I've upgraded. Have both pre-ordered right now, will have to make a choice soon. Currently leaning towards the latter option.
True enough, I suppose. Way to make the choice even more difficult. :lol
True enough, I suppose. Way to make the choice even more difficult. :lol
CrichtonKicks
Member
Eh, I doubt it. FO3 was an eyesore because a couple of the key visual things that Oblivion really impressed with (trees and foilage) weren't present for obvious reasons. They just really had time realizing their concept art (which was quite pretty) in the engine at that time.
Bethesda, the developer, is the crown jewel of Bethesda the publisher and this is their first release in 4 years. It's too financially important to the company to have any sort of "Oh, this is just Fallout. No reason to put too much effort into this. We'll save that for TES 6".
Jesus_Christ_Almighty
Banned
Let's not forget that the people who complain about watered down graphics are the same people who complain about poor performance when their PC or console can't handle the load.
dont be so certain that console versions will be trouble free... Remember Skyrim on PS3? Or Fallout 3 console versions? (bugs glitches etc)
Turin Turambar
Member
Your i5 is surely more powerful than some i7s out there.
Allnamestakenlol
Member
"You know what's wrong with Skyrim these days?"
Sorry - that comment really stood out to me.
jim2point0
Banned
What's changed in Gamebryo whatever the version is now:
edit: better image
2015 and we still have games where the graphics options can't be changed INSIDE THE GAME. I hate this external config window bullshit. Especially since that usually means you can not change the resolution in-game.
AgentLampshade
Member
That UI looks horrible.
Bony Manifesto
Member
You seem to be implying there's some hypocrisy there, but really, visual quality and performance optimisation are both sides of the same coin.
Jesus_Christ_Almighty
Banned
No, you're over thinking it. I just meant that some people can't be satisfied. Some people will always find something wrong because that's just the way they live.
CrichtonKicks
Member
Personally I would say RDR and GTAV.
DrROBschiz
Member
PC, Xbox, and eventually PS4 all get mods
Probably going to get more bang out of PC mods unless a significant amount of the PS4/Xbone power isnt being maxed out.
Quality of graphics and quality of optimisation don't always go hand in hand. Game can look bad, but also run like utter dogshit at same time even if rocking latest HW. If game is well optimised and looker then people are fine with "poor performance" on older HW.
Not seeing in personally. RDR and GTAV are quite rough looking games now days, imo.
PulseONE
Member
Everyone's obsessed with dea-I mean graphics
DrROBschiz
Member
I hope Bethesda is looking to shake things up on the engine side going forward.
Nyteshade517
Member
well they say an i7-4790 is Recommended so that's what I was going by. I know that people think those requirements are completely ridiculous but until any sort of benchmarks (or people with those specs get the game early) it's all just a big question mark.
ISee
Member
Honestly? The Xbox ONE isn't quite a powerhouse when it comes to graphics. Your GTX 660 is a bit more powerful than the 'famous' 750Ti and for sure more powerful than Xbox ONEs GPU. So normally I'd at least expect a similar experience on similar settings. Of course there are other limiting factors one being your CPU/RAM and the other FO4's VRAM requirements.
callsignkrogan
Member
agreed. This all needs to be done in game. I don't understand why they wouldn't keep it in there.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
"Ultra"
Sorry but... Are you serious?
Cause Fallout 4 is not a looker for sure but it's still leaps and bounds over those two, especially RDR.
i think it looks great and has some very nice colors
okay i need someone to tell me what to do, I have a 4790 and 16gb of ram but a pure dogshit 745 gtx (don't even know if it can run it) do I buy the ps4 version because i can't afford a new vid card for about a month or 2 or do i buy pc version and play on like low settings for a month and pickup like a 960 gtx or something later on
okay i need someone to tell me what to do, I have a 4790 and 16gb of ram but a pure dogshit 745 gtx (don't even know if it can run it) do I buy the ps4 version because i can't afford a new vid card for about a month or 2 or do i buy pc version and play on like low settings for a month and pickup like a 960 gtx or something later on
Jesus_Christ_Almighty
Banned
I learned a new big word today... at this forum, actually... I'm going to use it now... it might not be right because I'm still struggling with the word... but I'd say these screenshots are... egregious.
They just didn't
DrROBschiz
Member
bootsthecat
Banned
Very happy seeing these new screenshots. I've had good luck so far at 1080p with most of the recent games I have played, maxed out on a GTX 960 (4gb) ...so here's hoping for some ultra lovin in F4. I'm not so much concerned about maintaining 60fps, as it being relatively smooth (~30 fps?).
CANNOT.WAIT. 1 more week! I haven't been this hyped since Mass Effect, and I was pretty darned hyped then.
CANNOT.WAIT. 1 more week! I haven't been this hyped since Mass Effect, and I was pretty darned hyped then.
The Albatross
Member
I get the compromise in graphics... Large open world game with many interactive elements, and that you'll get worse graphics, but some of those screenshots... Particular the Diner and the one in Concord look pretty bad. Really muddy blurry textures even close up. That air conditioner is just a blurry muddy red color and the details around the rest of this image are pretty poor... The quality of the texture and geometry on the door is lackluster.
Really doesn't compare well to other open world games released in the last couple years.
Grabbing from the screenshot thread in GTAV PC, the details of GTAV, another open world game, are considerably better to my untrained eye:
http://abload.de/img/gta52015-04-1323-02-5zxuij.png
Really doesn't compare well to other open world games released in the last couple years.
Grabbing from the screenshot thread in GTAV PC, the details of GTAV, another open world game, are considerably better to my untrained eye:
http://abload.de/img/gta52015-04-1323-02-5zxuij.png
Should be fine. That cpu should coast you easily (on reasonable settings, of course)
Darkstorne
Member
Depends how long you plan on waiting to upgrade? You might be okay with your GPU on console quality settings anyway - I'm not sure how that card performs. I can highly recommend a GTX 970 though: amazing bang for buck.
Jesus_Christ_Almighty
Banned
I get the compromise in graphics... Large open world game with many interactive elements, and that you'll get worse graphics, but some of those screenshots... Particular the Diner and the one in Concord look pretty bad. Really muddy blurry textures even close up. That air conditioner is just a blurry muddy red color and the details around the rest of this image are pretty poor... The quality of the texture and geometry on the door is lackluster.
Really doesn't compare well to other open world games released in the last couple years.
Oh dear god, here we go with the zoomed in screenshots from the game that hasn't even been released yet.
DrROBschiz
Member
I get the compromise in graphics... Large open world game with many interactive elements, and that you'll get worse graphics, but some of those screenshots... Particular the Diner and the one in Concord look pretty bad. Really muddy blurry textures even close up. That air conditioner is just a blurry muddy red color and the details around the rest of this image are pretty poor... The quality of the texture and geometry on the door is lackluster.
Really doesn't compare well to other open world games released in the last couple years.
Yup
that kind of stuff is everywhere and I am almost conditioned to expect it in every open world game
I mean what developer painstaking gives amazing lifelike detail to every single individual asset in the game?
None that I know of. That said there are clever ways to make things blend well together to avoid having eyesores in plain sight to the player
GTR R35_Supra RZ
Banned
Now thats yummi...pics. ( OP's )
Darkstorne
Member
Textures are the easiest fix ever. Meshes are easy to mod in Bethesda games too. This really isn't worrying for PC gamers.
Do we know if hair moves yet though? Please tell me it isn't STILL 100% static? Vagrant Story on the PSOne had moving hair...
Turin Turambar
Member
I agree with most of this post, except Skyrim. It was an improvement of Fallout 3, but mainly because the art was better, more polished. A example was the faces, for the first time they weren't horrendous.
DrROBschiz
Member
Textures arent the only issue
Look at Geometry. WAY too many simple shapes used for everything.
They design a lot of building, furniturem and other straight edged objects this way
reminds me a lot of the simplifications that hit Dark Souls 2 so hard