Fallout 4 PC Ultra screenshots
- Thread starter RoboPlato
- Start date
CrichtonKicks
Member
Relative to their peers at the time of release? Hell yes I deny that. With the exception of Fallout 3 all of Bethesda's games going as far as Arena have been near the top of the heap on visuals compared to their peers when released. Including Skyrim.
We will, thanks!
Solid Samus said:
This. Doesn't excuse graphical underachieving, but for those baffled why people are still hyped for what they feel are lackluster graphics, perhaps THIS is a reason? I mean, were you guys around bitching about Skyrim because in 2011, Arkham City (another open world game), LA Noire (open world game), and Deus Ex: HR (HUB game) were all released. And frankly, vanilla Skyrim didn't look as good as them. But it was a better game.
Krappadizzle
Member
I guess we'll just agree to disagree. I've been playing Skyrim with minimal texture mods(mostly game enhancements like Requiem/Frostfall/Hunterborn/Realistic needs and diseases) with no ENB's and keeping context in mind to what was released in 2011 alongside it and especially to what was released before it, it looks great. Animations, shadows, draw distance, world size are all substantially better than what came before. from New Vegas. FO4 doesn't look as impressive of a leap comparatively to FO3-->Skyrim was from same developer. IT LOOKS BETTER. It does. But I'm just not as impressed with the leap in technology. I don't buy the whole, "it's doing more behind the scenes, so it's okay it looks mediocre" that some of you are spouting, simply because they managed to make it do more behind the scenes with previous games as well as making it look substantially better in each iteration. I accept it. I absolutely do. I'll be there day one, excited as fuck to play it just like the rest of ya'. But it doesn't give it power armor from criticism.
Proof:
No enb:
I'll say I don't mind that we have a difference of opinion at all. I'd love to see a poll as to what the consensus here on GAF is.
johnnydrama
Banned
Even though it looks pretty average, I don't care how much better it looks than the console versions. I'm in it for the 60FPS goodness.
texhnolyze
Banned
Read my edit.
I know that Bethesda games have more stuff in them, that's why I love their games. The robust amount of content in Bethesda games require performance sacrifice so they have to tune the graphics for that need. But if we're talking about only the graphics, and dismissing the many other aspects surrounding it, why would anyone disagree that Fallout 4 is kinda fall short compared to other open world games?
old manatee
Banned
Skyrim? The game that uses the same engine as Fallout 4? The game that was broken on ps3 and couldn't be fixed? Yeah I don't remember anybody bitching about Skyrim.
I bought Skyrim on PS3 originally, played 40 hours and after the technical issues got bad I returned it and got the 360 version. It was my GOTY still *shrug*
texhnolyze
Banned
Skyrim was one of the best looking open world game in 2011. I was actually very impressed back then.
Yeah? Were you bitching about its GRAPHICS (love how you keep moving the fenceposts) back then? Because they weren't up to standard of other AAA games then.
Krappadizzle said:
Which ones?
Skyrim at ultra settings:
Solid Samus
Banned
I'm playing Skyrim, completely vanilla besides DLC and the high res texture pack, in another window right now. Fully maxed. And I'm just not seeing it. I mean, yeah, certain environmental effects are pretty impressive and the LOD is genuinely improved from Fallout 3, but the LOD still isn't that great, textures are visibly repeated from a distance, poly count is a lot lower than in Fallout 4, models and textures in general are significantly worse than they are in Fallout 4, the lighting is especially dated comparatively speaking, etc. etc. I really think that Fallout 4 is on the same level of advancement, especially considering that what I'm playing now isn't what Skyrim looked like 7 days before release, as is the case with Fallout here... it's what Skyrim looks like after 4 years of patching, driver improvement, newly introduced tech overhead, ini tweaking, and a high res texture pack. The game didn't look as good on even the highest end machine in 2011, as it very likely looks on your rig right now, even with minimal modding.
And at any rate, this is the problem with judging this game just based on screenshots. Going by the impressions and the videos that I've seen so far, this game seems incredibly dense with content. Players practically tripping over named, visually unique locations every other step of the way, in a huge map - not to mention a frankly giant number of houses and buildings that are integrated into the main world-space relative to those games, and buildings which themselves are much larger in scale and more intricate. There's not much to go on one way or another to determine how much more Fallout 4 is doing in the background relative to previous iterations of the game, but I don't know why people feel it's safe to assume it's not doing any more at all, especially given the footage available so far, especially the videos which take place in Boston's giant and dense downtown.
Krappadizzle
Member
Aside from what I posted, flora overhaul, SMIM.
I'm not saying Skyrim looks better than FO4. No way. I'm saying the leap from Fallout 3--Skyrim feel bigger than Skyrim-->FO4 does. Animations alone in Skyrim were miles better than Fallout 3, aside from everything else you already listed.
CrichtonKicks
Member
EDIT- Nevermind already covered.
PC Ultra to PC Ultra, Skyrim was a damn good looking game for late 2011 and held up to its peers better than FO4 does in late 2015.
That's not very minimal. Flora Overhaul is a massive improvement to vegetation and SMIM (though wouldn't be seen much in that shot IIRC with what it affects), does fix a good deal of geometry issues and textures.
Krappadizzle said:
THIS I can get behind with Trumpets though. I didn't think of FO3, but when I saw Skyrim for the first time, I compared it in my mind to Oblivion. Yeah, that was like 5 generations forward compared to Oblivion.
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
Kinda of disappointed in some of posters here.
You can have your own opinion but other people can have theirs. If they don't think it's up to their standards in comparison to other games then that's completely fine.
You can have your own opinion but other people can have theirs. If they don't think it's up to their standards in comparison to other games then that's completely fine.
KatamariOnTheRocks
Member
This is exactly what I've been saying all along, but fallout 4 isn't allowed to be critiqued.
You can't point out that it looks better than fallout 3 but not as good as it possibly could, that's simply insane and puts you on a high horse for expecting the same jump that we had from morrowind to oblivion.
Solid Samus
Banned
I know that's what you're saying, I'm disagreeing with that notion in particular.
And animations have seen a pretty stark improvement in Fallout 4, as well. Third person animations make the character actually look like they're weighty and grounded in the world. First person gunplay looks surprisingly enjoyable. And while the keyframed conversation animations don't compare favorably to other contemporary mo-capped games, they're absolutely a reasonable step up from Skyrim's (a quick direct comparison on Youtube backs this up), especially considering that you're still free to move and interact with the world during conversations now.
Call me crazy, but imo FO4 holds up better than most give it credit here.
Edit: TW3 picture is on PC, Ultra with HBAO+
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Curious about what you think can be done without a sacrifice to performance, especially on consoles.
Oh, bullshit. People in this thread have taken issue because there are posters calling it last gen and not better than FO3. I don't take issue with criticism, and not many else have. We've taken issue with the game getting called visual 'dogshit'. One would think you could challenge criticism or an opinion that specious.
Solid Samus
Banned
Very few games can replicate the same jump that we had from Morrowind to Oblivion, primarily because of the circumstances regarding the rapid advancement of 3D visuals toward pseudorealism during those days. And I absolutely do believe that this game represents a similar jump from Skyrim that we saw from Fallout 3 into Skyrim, as I've given reasons for. I don't think it's insane to think that this game could look better, and it will, in short order. I'm just urging people to consider context instead of just going "well this other thing is open world and therefore they might as well be mirror products I can compare at face value".
It's also worth considering that this game might be holding onto some performance overhead on consoles for the sake of mods over the next few years (and I'm not talking about graphical mods).
static NPCs with very little interaction and who have very simple routines - in Novigrad in particular where many appear to serve as scene dressing - and who are entirely a single asset or at most two or three (taking into account objects they may be interacting with) as opposed to a Fallout human who might be a character model with a shirt model and pants and a shinguard and a bandolier and a cowboy hat and a pistol with a dirty old supressor mod, who are being tracked and who feature full daily routines
Empty Space
Member
You're entitled to your opinion, but it doesn't make it right!
Krappadizzle
Member
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
That will be interesting to see because no other game is attempting that atm.
Power of the Cloud that shit.
TimeEffect
Member
I just realized that Witcher had amazingly huge cities and NPCs galore. I cant recall ever seeing that in Fallout. Maybe for FO4?
Power of the Cloud that shit.
Is he on a slow treadmill? Why is he moving backwards?
texhnolyze
Banned
The settlement, perhaps? No, I guess. It's called a settlement, not a city.
I'm not expecting big, bustling cities in Fallout 4, tbh. But if there's any, I'll be overjoyed.
old manatee
Banned
johnnydrama
Banned
Some of the comments in this thread are bordering on the insanity in that other Fallout 4 screenshots thread. So much for "gameplay over graphics".
Off topic here, but are you using a foliage mod? Which one and does it have a big performance hit? Do you have any other shots?
BLUElightCory
Member
I'm surprised no one has mentioned Dying Light as an obvious competitor/point of comparison for Fallout 4's visuals. It might be a bit smaller in scale but it's very similar to Bethesda's games in terms of structure, POV, open world, etc. To me it feels more like a BGS-style game than The Witcher and seems like a better point of comparison. I think it looks really nice and will be happy if Fallout 4 looks comparable in motion.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
We passed that border a couple pages ago.
D
Deleted member 325805
Unconfirmed Member
Dying Light looked great though.
Vincent Grayson
Member
A good burger is perfect when what you want is a delicious burger, even though steak exists.
There's no reason to say "this looks bad" simply because other things look better. It looks fine. Nothing amazing, but it does it's job, and it's an obvious improvement on the previous version, which is all I expect of any sequel.
Krappadizzle
Member
I literally just started a playthrough yesterday and I'm still in the process of whittling down my mod list as I get crashes ever 30 min's or so and don't have any other pics. But the flora overhaul is Skyrim Flora Overhaul and Verdant.
On topic:
Can you finally look down and see ya feet?
demosthenes
Member
Haven't really played a Fallout game before. For some reason I'm really psyched about this game. Am I going to get destroyed if I buy this game next week? Should I start on 3 or New Vegas?
Easton Dark
Member
The call to charge only $40 for Fallout 4 was the climax. All threads will be downhill until release after that.
This is an excellent question.
There's hardly any continuity between each game. You can start on 4.
Start on FO3 as most likely FNV will ruin FO3 for you. Being a buggier game aside it has various improvements such as Ironsights/hardcore mod as well as writing and the reputation system.
demosthenes
Member
Oh I know that, I was just thinking from an overwhelmed stand point.
texhnolyze
Banned
You can play Fallout games in any order you want. But I wouldn't recommend you marathoning through them all in one sweep. Just play FO4 first and play the older games later to appreciate the series.
And even then not really that comparable as the objects in that game don't react the same way as in fo4.
This is why pointing at other open world games and saying do that doesn't really work because of the amount of stuff the game legit remembers on physics based items.
If you wanted something at witcher 3 pic levels with this kind of thing the requirements would be obscen. (I imagine)
Krappadizzle
Member
You will be overwhelmed. That's a lot of game. Just wait till FO4.
Empty Space
Member
Skyrim and Fallout 3 both had great tutorials. I imagine this one will too its basically become a staple of a Bethesda game to have a starting area that's really linear that teaches you how to play the games. I wouldn't worry about it too much.
demosthenes
Member
Great, thanks!
Awesome, thanks. I'll have to install Verdant tonight.
texhnolyze
Banned
Console versions seem to be doing great, even in heavy actions.
That's somewhat a good sign for PC versin as well, I guess.
No.
But when the FO4SE or equivalent script extender comes out, there'll be another plugin that allows you to view your third person body in first person like past games.
PC ofc.
Krappadizzle
Member
I'll be a pretty happy camper if I can get 1440p/144fps. Might be a bit of a long shot, but hopefully.
Since Morrowind I've wanted them to show the feet, and be able to go into a building through a door with no loading. That's disappointing. You are right though, there will be the inevitable mod for the camera.