-
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.
Graphical Fidelity I Expect This Gen
- Thread starter ResetEraVetVIP
- Start date
Bojji
Member
Still think Intergalactic has the better faces.
DS2 looks great, but there is something straight up.... waxy about them. Like there isnt enough detail in the skin. This straight up looks better.
I'm not a big fan of DS2 skin shaders but design is 1000x better than this atrocity.
GymWolf
Member
So you understand what i say?
I'm not a big fan of DS2 skin shaders but design is 1000x better than this atrocity.
I thought i was going crazy.
Bojji
Member
Yep, I have the same issue with DS1.
GymWolf
Member
I guess we really are the crazies because 98% of this forum think these faces are excellent.
How was your morning today? Did they let you eat breakfast without the straight jacket?
GymWolf
Member
I bet 100 gaf social points that those rocks are not gonna look the same on close inspection #ReadyForMush
The question is, how much do you have to get close before they turn into mush, for hb2 it was unnatural zoom that you can't see in normal gameplay without photomode, let's see if decima can do a good imitation of nanite or if they are gonna fall short.
The question is, how much do you have to get close before they turn into mush, for hb2 it was unnatural zoom that you can't see in normal gameplay without photomode, let's see if decima can do a good imitation of nanite or if they are gonna fall short.
Last edited:
Balducci30
Member
I can give DS2 a pass on stuff like skin shaders cus the art direction is leagues above both HB2 and Horizon. And it’s open world with an actual fluid simulation happening.
Bojji
Member
I bet 100 gaf social points that those rocks are not gonna look the same on close inspection #ReadyForMush
The question is, how much do you have to get close before they turn into mush, for hb2 it was unnatural zoom that you can't see in normal gameplay without photomode, let's see if decima can do a good imitation of nanite or if they are gonna fall short.
Weak texture or DOF?
Hahaha. Skin in DS1 (and DS2 trailer) look more to me like wax figures, it's too smooth. Maybe they wanted to make actors look younger/better. IDK.
Horizon doesn't look like that. I didn't pay much attention to the discussion so it was probably already said.
GymWolf
Member
Horizon tertiary npcs with a couple of lines, 3 years old crossgen with a probably 10x times bigger cast, bigger maps and way more content
Weak texture or DOF?
Hahaha. Skin in DS1 (and DS2 trailer) look more to me like wax figures, it's too smooth. Maybe they wanted to make actors look younger/better. IDK.
Horizon doesn't look like that. I didn't pay much attention to the discussion so it was probably already said.
The game must be tired of so much winning for 3 years straight.
People really lose their mind everytime the wannabe movie director make something new, only miyazaki get more ball sucking from gaf.
Last edited:
Bojji
Member
Yep, ue5 must be trembling in fear...
Fucking lmao.
Horizon tertiary npcs with a couple of lines, 3 years old crossgen with a probably 10x times bigger cast, bigger maps and way more content
The game must be tired of so much winning for 3 years straight.
People really lose their mind everytime the wannabe movie director make something new, only miyazaki get more ball sucking from gaf.
Yep, gameplay graphics in HZ still looks better.
DS2 looks very good but it definitely isn't the next Crysis. I'm sucker for Kojima games (MGS2 is the best game ever IMO) but DS1 had MANY flaws when it comes to gameplay.
MGS5 - great gameplay, shit story
DS - mediocre gameplay, "kojima" story
I think DS is much better Hideo Kojima game than MGS5. This time around game looks like a bigger and better version of DS1.
Last edited:
GymWolf
Member
I don't wanna go there, i refuse to believe that a nextgen only game with the same engine can look worse than a crossgen one, but to be even in a position to make a comparison...
I think ds2 is gonna end looking better overall, better light system, mayne better materials, probably more even textures in the open world, but this is not the engine to beat ue5, at least in its current state.
Last edited:
Bojji
Member
Jungle part of DS2 trailer is interesting but other than that world of DS is barren and empty with little npcs. This is by design of course.
But PC version of DS was much less demanding than (even fixed by patches) Horizon ZD port, Horizon is doing a lot more.
Last edited:
Represent.
Represent(ative) of bad opinions
This is a graphics thread, not a Hairstyilst thread
I'm not a big fan of DS2 skin shaders but design is 1000x better than this atrocity.
Her model looks immaculate.
Bojji
Member
Clothing is very high quality but character itself is nothing special IMO.
GymWolf
Member
Do you think she looks a generation better than ellie during cutscene?
that is your answer.
This is what i expected from ND nextgen only characters
Btw this dude also completely smash any model in ds2, dude is the end goal of character rendering.
Last edited:
Not sure what all the simping over DS2 is about. The game looks impressive in cutscenes sure, but outside of that it doesn't look better than some of the cross gen games we've seen. The characters while impressive all look like they're Madame Tussauds' wax figures come to life. The game has impressive geometry in gameplay I'll give it that, but surely that's not hard to do when your gameplay revolves around a single character walking on screen for 95% of the time and only 2-3 NPCs being on screen the rest of the time. Also pay attention how the battle sequences with massive creatures always take place in environments where there isn't a lot of geometry. Overall people are tripping themselves over because it's a Kojima game and because of fancy shmancy cutscenes, but beyond that there's really nothing technically impressive here.
Last edited:
GymWolf
Member
Jesus dude and i thought i was the negative one
I think you are selling the game short but on the other hand, when i read people saying new best graphic i remain perplexed to say the least.
The truth is always in the middle, the game is probably gonna be top 5-10 best graphic.
Last edited:
People were tripping over the first game's graphics when it came out, but looking back nobody is gonna say it was a visual masterpiece beyond some high tier cutscenes (I'm sure Kojima fanboys would though).Jesus dude and i thought i was the negative one
I think you are selling short the game but on the other hand, when i read people saying new best graphic i remain perplexed to say the least.
The truth is always in the middle, the game is probably gonna be top 5-10 best graphic.
This isn't even being hateful towards Kojima Productions, that studio has proven they can make top tier looking games, but I just think the concept of the game is flawed and won't allow them to push technology to a point where the game is a visual masterpiece.
Last edited:
GymWolf
Member
Doesn't the concept of a single character in a barren location actually help to achieve the best graphic possible for an open world?
Also, i think ds1 was pretty darn good when it released, it improved on decima and horizon was already considered one of the best open worlds.
Solarstrike
Gold Member
Saw this on X. Amazing stuff
Last edited:
Yes you can be impressed on a visual level by something that pushes visuals hard with little action going on, but you would never call that a technical masterpiece because you know they're only achieving those visuals as a result of restricted game design. This is kind of why PT clones can never be in discussion for best graphics of the year no matter how good they look, because it's a lot easier to push photorealism in that kinda game design.
Having said that, DS2 isn't even that impressive outside of cutscenes. The only thing that stands out in gameplay is Nanite tier geometry, but beyond that it's not showing anything else we haven't seen before. People are free to change my mind and I'm one of those people who rates Kojima Productions very highly when it comes to technology, but DS2 doesn't blow me away whatsoever. I would go as far to say that parts of DS2 gameplay remind me of last gen.
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Nah, from what I recall, the PS5 version is simply the PC version's max settings ported to PS5.
There are three modes. All 60 fps. Widescreen which is a locked 60 fps because it doesnt have to render the area hidden by black bars. But it does have a higher FOV. And two full screen modes. Performance is 1800p, and quality is 4k but it can drop to 50 fps during big battles. On Pro it should be a locked native 4k 60 fps. I played on widescreen back in 2021.
I also downloaded the Epic Game store version that I got for free last night. Graphics look good but they have definitely aged. DS2 looks a generation apart.
Sometimes I feel like your one of the very few here with any real intergrity.I bet 100 gaf social points that those rocks are not gonna look the same on close inspection #ReadyForMush
The question is, how much do you have to get close before they turn into mush, for hb2 it was unnatural zoom that you can't see in normal gameplay without photomode, let's see if decima can do a good imitation of nanite or if they are gonna fall short.
Last edited:
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
jesus christ stop with this torture.HB2 is still on another level.
Ok you win, whatever your point is.
Just stop with this bitch ass ugly face fullscreen.
Wrinkled ass zombie face whatever the fuq it is. Have mercy.
Wow a character who is one of 3 characters in a 5 hour long cutscene game looks better. yeah they took em like 7 years we get it.
Sorry, is this thread about discussing which girl looks more like a plastic surgery face? oh sorry my bad.
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
I get it. graphics. but It's hard looking at her stupid wrinkeld burned face whatever. Is there a screenshot of her not making a face like her feet are currently not on fire?
She is heavily characterized and it's hard to judge because no real person looks like this. Forbidden West characters look better imo.
BUT
And since people are mentioning that hellblade 2 got the best looking teeth? good luck with that.
What about some Forspoken shots?
Best teeth:
Best random (no dialogiue even) NPC
Actually nice, realistic portrayed face without oversharpening
In-gameplay, real emotions
And all of that on basic ps5. not even pro. Good luck beating that.
(Ok I got what I needed out, you can continue posting hellblade 2
)Schmendrick
Member
Represent.
Represent(ative) of bad opinions
we will be lucky to have characters that good maybe by the end of next gen. thats on a whole other level. with these fools pushing 60fps, itll take longer than ever to get there
Kaiserstark
Member
It's funny because this short movie was made with the exact same tech from 3Lateral then the one who is also used in DS2.
There is reason that even the games who use the exact same tech don't look anything like this because it's a short movie with no gameplay and we don't even know if it's running in real time or pre-rendered using Unreal Engine's offline rendering mode because the only thing they said that this film was rendered in Unreal Engine.
There is no point in hoping for something like that in current games, the best results will be obtained in productions like Hellblade 2 but we are closer to the fairly limited Interactive experience than to a real video game.
It's like when people expected to see a level of in-game photorealism equivalent to Unreal's Rebirth demo, and six years later, we're still nowhere near it.
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
I am playing DS1 again and the first few shots of the game look virtually identical to the Rebirth demo. They are clearly pre-rendered and i was hoping to see that kind of fidelity by kojipro on a console 7x more powerful.
Character models do look better, but honestly, i was expecting photorealism like HB2 because during cutscenes its not like they have to run gameplay logic and when they zoom into character faces, they dont have to worry about having other stuff in the vram and can spend all the GPU horsepower on rendering the most detailed version of the character's face. My guess is that they were limited by their pixel budget. HB2 is like the Order 1886 in that it doesnt have to render fullscreen which gives them 40% more GPU to push pixels. They are also targeting 1440p (3.7 million) and drops to 1296p in widescreen so its pixel budget is somewhere between 1080p (2.1 million pixels) and 1296p (2.7 million). My guess is that DS2 is targeting native 4k and with drops to 1800p like in Spiderman 2. which is roughly 3-4x more pixels the GPU has to render. Thats the only explanation i can come up with. If the game is 1440p in its 30 fps mode then yes, maybe they have hit a wall with the hardware and this is the best we can do.
With all that said, i took some screenshots of the characters last night and the difference is night and day. Guillemo Del Toro, Old Lindsay Wagner and Amelie all look plasticy in comparison to the new trailer. Sam looked amazing already so his difference isnt night and day.
DanielG165
Member
Not to mention the amount of resources and sheet power to achieve this. Though, we’re getting closer and closer with the likes of HB2 and Callisto leading the charge. The reality of playing games that look like offline renders is still far yet, but we’re getting there.
On another note: VERY excited for the fully current gen BF7 so far from what I’ve seen of the early leaked footage. There already looks to be things like physics based smoke, the destruction in both the teaser and leaked gameplay looks incredibly complex, and the map looks densely packed. I believe I even heard that falling debris can harm both players and vehicles. Still early days for the game, but I’m hopeful to see a proper current gen Battlefield that is a mix of BF3 and BF4 in grit, look, and feel, and the likes of BF1/BF5 in how smooth the gameplay is.
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Well, i will give it a shot.
First of all, it's one of the best trailers Kojima has ever made which makes every kojima fan tingle and feel things they havent felt in years. Having Snake make a cameo literally made me hard. That kind of nostalgia and 'feels' makes everyone gloss over the technical details. There is also only 1 minute and 40 seconds of gameplay footage in this starting from 2:40 to 3:30 then from 4:30 to 5:30. 90% of the trailer is cutscenes so people are judging the graphics based on what they saw for 9 of the 10 minute trailer. Couple that with the incredible cinematography for those 9 minutes, and its easy to see why the trailer garnered such acclaim.
As for the technical details, while i think the game is lacking nanite level ground detail, there are quite a few things its doing technically well:
- Water. The way the water flows in the stream is by far the most realistic looking water ive seen.
- Materials. Interiors and materials on characters look perfect. I cant see any need to use nanite here.
- Lighting. It's beautiful. There is ample bounce lighting off mountains, interiors look well lit, and trees dont look wrong like they do in many cross gen games.
- Scale - Very few games have this kind of scale, and not just fancy vistas, but also boss fights, and setpieces.
- Mountains look great even if the rocks on the ground dont look as detailed.
- Forest looks great and it can burn down.
- Avalanches, forest fires, sandstorms, floods, honestly, the interactivity is refreshing.
I also hold kojima to a much higher standard, and i will always call out any obvious technical flaws, and especially targeting 60 fps on base consoles, but Kojima sold out when he made MGSV cross gen and 60 fps. DS1 looked great at the time, and was my graphics goty that year, but Days gone had it beat in several areas, so did Control. But when you look at its scale, its cutscenes, the incredible WW1 and WW2 setpieces, and a half of a dozen biomes compared to very samey looking Control, it was an easy win for DS that year.
Same was true the year prior when RDR2 cleaned up despite GOW and Detroit beating it in character models, asset/texture quality and even lighting which wasnt GOW's strongest suit, but Detroit had exceptional lighting. However, RDR2 had the scale and these same beautiful vistas that made a much more lasting impression. Same thing is happening here.
It's shot after shot after shot of exceptional cinematography.
Your first paragraph was basically you telling us how you're a fanboy of Kojima so I'll ignore it.
Now to what impressed you. You mentioned cutscenes in DS1 and how impressive they were. I already mentioned that the cutscenes in the second game are also very high tier, my actual criticism comes with gameplay part of the visuals.
- Water. Hard to impressed by water after seeing what Valve did with water with Source 2. This falls under environments which I'll discuss below.
- Materials. Nothing groundbreaking or mindblowing here.
- Lighting. Nothing that has my jaw on the floor, in fact lighting in gameplay was par the course and what you'd expect from AAA game in 2025. Lighting in cutscenes is nice though.
- Scale. Are we serious? We are now impressed by scale in a game where you have single character on screen for overwhelming majority of the game? As for epic boss fights then plenty of games like Shadow of Colossus have done it before, on PS2 mind.
- Forest burning down... I find it hard to impressed by something like that after all the systems I've seen in RDR2.
- Environment interactivity. Again, I'm not sure this is much of a technical achievement as it is just environmental attention to detail. It's something they have to do anyway in a game like this since you will be hiking alone in this game for 95% of the game, the least they can do is make the environments and interactivity with those environments impressive. Again, after RDR2 on last gen consoles this attention to detail isn't anything mindblowing.
I guess I would be far more impressed if the game was more dense and had a lot more going on with more NPC interactivity, but it's a game that mainly consists of you walking through barren land for overwhelming majority of the game. They have to do a lot more for me to be wowed by their technical prowess, which I don't doubt they can deliver, but the game design of DS will always restrict them.
Tell me, would you be as impressed by Cyberpunk 2077 if it was a game that had larger but empty world and with barely any NPCs and just revolved around you going alone doing deliveries? How would you feel if this was the case for RDR2 world? Imagine RDR2 world without NPCs, without all the animals, with limited systems, with very few living quarters. I'm sure you'd say it looks nice, but it would be hard to crown a game like that for its technical achievements.
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
90% of RDR2 is a large empty world with a few deers and rabbits running around. It's a vista game just like Death Stranding, Horizon, Metro Exodus, Witcher 3, Ghost of Tsushima, Far Cry, and well, 99% of open world games released in the last decade or so. The only difference is that it has no cities or villages with NPCs that serve as merely hub worlds in most games.
I could understand if RDR2, Kingdom Come, Wukong, Outlaws and Horizon had herds like we saw in the Halo Infinite reveal, but not a single game has come close to having that kind of wild life. RDR2 does it better than most, but having a few deers, rabbits and crocs isnt comparable to this or that very first horizon zero dawn gameplay reveal where you saw massive herds of dinobots moving together.
I dont need NPCs packed in every game. I thought Spiderman 2's NPC tech was pretty damn good, but I dont think it made up for its lack of visual fidelity. DS2 looks better than all those last gen games, and on par with the best current gen open world games like Outlaws, Avatar, and Kingdom Come 2. I think it's in good company with its own strengths i mentioned above.
As for materials, i think they are rather impressive in the way they work with the lighting, and boast realistic reflective properties.
You seriously not comparing all those open world games to DS, right? Those game actually have moment to moment gameplay, plenty of NPC interactivity and exchanges, plenty of ongoing game systems. All these ganes are also far more dense, have far more interactivity.90% of RDR2 is a large empty world with a few deers and rabbits running around. It's a vista game just like Death Stranding, Horizon, Metro Exodus, Witcher 3, Ghost of Tsushima, Far Cry, and well, 99% of open world games released in the last decade or so. The only difference is that it has no cities or villages with NPCs that serve as merely hub worlds in most games.
I could understand if RDR2, Kingdom Come, Wukong, Outlaws and Horizon had herds like we saw in the Halo Infinite reveal, but not a single game has come close to having that kind of wild life. RDR2 does it better than most, but having a few deers, rabbits and crocs isnt comparable to this or that very first horizon zero dawn gameplay reveal where you saw massive herds of dinobots moving together.
I dont need NPCs packed in every game. I thought Spiderman 2's NPC tech was pretty damn good, but I dont think it made up for its lack of visual fidelity. DS2 looks better than all those last gen games, and on par with the best current gen open world games like Outlaws, Avatar, and Kingdom Come 2. I think it's in good company with its own strengths i mentioned above.
As for materials, i think they are rather impressive in the way they work with the lighting, and boast realistic reflective properties.
In RDR2 you have tons of things going on around you and at any moment can be engaged with the world, its NPCs, animal life, etc. Comparing this moment to moment gameplay to DS is a crime. There's actual gameplay and interactivity, but apparently you're more impressed by swaying winds and forest fires...
Saying you don't need a game packed with NPCs while comparing that to a delivery simulator where you're alone for 95% of the actual gameplay is not solid argument. You can do better than that.
You're bringing up cutscenes as a point of impressive materials, which again is supposed to impress who? I can name you a dozen games that do very impressive things in cutscenes on a toaster that is PS4. Cutscenes have long stopped being some kind of industry standard for visuals, almost any AAA studio with big enough budget can do impressive cutscenes these days.
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
The materials in cutscenes are identical ingame. Kojima never uses pre-rendered cutscenes. Every single asset you see here will look like that in game. thats the whole point of realtime cutscenes.
I dont understand why you think DS doesnt have moment to moment gameplay. So you can hunt rabbits in RDR2, Far Cry, Kingdom Come 2, and Ghost of Tushima. Who cares? Literally 90% of the time, you are by yourself in a world where you'd be lucky to run into an NPC.
I am simply saying I dont need NPCs in a game to appreciate its graphics. Witcher 3, Ghost of Tsushima, Horizon, RDR2, and more recently KCD2 are all games ive admired for their graphics and they are literally empty open worlds that all devs switched to last gen in unison presumably to chase trends, or after seeing just how shitty the jaguar CPUs were. Regardless, i loved the graphics in those games despite the lack of NPCs and was critical of Spiderman despite its impressive NPC and traffic simulations. So why would I now all of a sudden dock points from DS2?
If anything, DS has far more moment to moment gameplay because the entire ground is geometry that can trip you up whereas other games are a flat ground mostly covered by grass or foliage. The game has enemy outposts. It has lakes, streams, mountains, snow, deserts, and all kinds of biomes you see in other games. i have no idea why DS1 let alone DS2 which is far bigger in scale cant be compared to these other games set in empty wilderness with a few villages and hub worlds that ds lacks.
Now gta6 is in a league of its own, and at the end of the year, i have no doubt i will give it my graphics goty over ds2 because it IS doing far more with the NPCs who are everywhere from the beaches to strip clubs, street racing circuits and all the densely populated city streets. Thats 90% of the game with probably 10% of the game set in the wilderness. But RDR2 and virtually every modern game set in the wilderness? they are all practically empty when you actually start exploring.
Last edited:
Yes of course, the only thing you can do in other open world games is chase rabbits..
Gotta love how you try to bring an example like this to make DS look good, lol. How the heck are worlds in Witcher 3, Ghost, RDR2, KCD2, etc. empty? How did you come to a conclusion that the worlds and interactivity in these games are in any way comparable to DS? I'm truly baffled by this.
How in the world does DS have more moment to moment gameplay than those games? I have seen reviewers give original DS 10/10 and even they would not say such a thing. You have truly lost me.
I guess your avatar should have been the clue all along
Last edited:
Balducci30
Member
I don’t understand. What’s the point of RTX then? This looks dynamic
Last edited:
Balducci30
Member
I don’t get why we’re saying DS2’s character models don’t look good - they look like the actual actors. I think it’s largely art style that makes them look a bit different than Horizon.
I also have to say Horizons models looked awesome graphically, but aesthetically they looked like they came from a bad syfy channel tv show or something, the lighting in those scenes where you talk to them just looks weird. DS2 does not have this problem.
I didn’t even play DS1 but this trailer sold me.
I also have to say Horizons models looked awesome graphically, but aesthetically they looked like they came from a bad syfy channel tv show or something, the lighting in those scenes where you talk to them just looks weird. DS2 does not have this problem.
I didn’t even play DS1 but this trailer sold me.
I have to disagree on NPC’s. At least in KCD2 there’s a lot of them in the big cities and I run across them on the roads quite a bit. It feels pretty lived in as far as open worlds go.
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
We are discussing graphics. What exactly are these empty worlds in RDR2, Kingdom Come 2, Ghost of Tushima doing that gives DS an edge to push its visuals or disqualifies it from being discussed in the same breath? Literally the only difference is animals which DS does not have. And its not animals like in Halo Infinite or HZD's original demo. It's literally a few tiny things running around. No fancy simulation taking up the CPU or GPU. No huge NPC count that could take away gpu cycles. Outside of cities and towns which make up a tiny portion of the overall game worlds in all these games.Yes of course, the only thing you can do in other open world games is chase rabbits..
How the heck are worlds in Witcher 3, Ghost, RDR2, KCD2, etc. empty? How did you come to a conclusion that the worlds and interactivity in these games are in any way comparable to DS? I'm truly baffled by this.
How in the world does DS have more moment to moment gameplay than those games? I have seen reviewers give original DS 10/10 and even they would not say such a thing. You have truly lost me. This is akin back to your defense of Spiderman 2.
I guess your avatar should have been the clue all along
i do remember chasing a fox and a pigeon in ghost of tsushima so I guess 50% of the GPU went rendering those two things which now means I cannot compare DS1 to GoT.
I have criticized Spiderman 2 in the previous three consecutive posts for its visual shortcomings. I guess I am not allowed to give it credit for its NPCs and traffic simulations. Something you seem to think all these last gen games set in the wilderness were populated with.
here are the things DS2 is doing that GoT, RDR2, Witcher 3, Kcd2 and 99% of other games dont do.
- Earthquakes that reshape the environments. Literal mountains.
- fire that burns down forests. I dont know what RDR2 you played, but its extremely limited.
- floods that actually break your bridges.
- realtime blooming and decaying of small plants
- realtime water/fluid physics - this is actually in the first game too
- realtime changing of the environment after you get caught by BTs as the liquid tar goo floods the area on demand
- massive towering boss fights
All of these things hit the GPU far more than having a couple of NPCs on horseback pass you as you go from one town to the other. Or a few deers and rabbits.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Kutenberg is a city. I am talking about the open world which makes up 90% of these games. Having an NPC pass you by or being ambushed by bandits on the side of the road is no different than running into the many Mules in Death Stranding. When talking about the graphics impact of having a few animals or NPCs by the side of the road, it is minimal at best. especially when DS is doing so many other things that these games are not. Of course DS is comparable to other games in the genre.
Horizon FW actually has far more wild life, birds, and robots populating its open world than RDR2 and other open world games set in the wilderness. Should we stop comparing it to those games?
You talk about graphics yet fail to see that DS has far bigger frame budget due to it being barren. It's less impressive than other open world games as other games are far more dense, have far more going on.
You saying that DS has more gameplay than other open world games will go down as one of the most wild things I have heard in this thread. People truly cannot be objective when criticising something that they are a fanboy of, this is a clear example of that.
You argue how you're impressed by weather effects in DS while dismissing NPC and world interactivity in other games is another banger from you.
I could mention thousand things that other open world games do that DS just doesn't, but apparently you are more impressed by weather simulation than anything else.
Dude, we've seen those massive towering boss fights in plenty other games on far weaker hardware, common.
Anyway, I think it's best to move on from this argument, I don't think I care enough about DS and its graphics to keep talking about it.
Last edited:
Balducci30
Member
I think you can graphically compare - the scale is not nothing (as evidenced by what’s possible in HB2 where you can’t explore a large area whatsoever) but I just disagree that they are “empty” worlds - they have a lot going on imo.
As I’ve said I haven’t played DS1 so I don’t know what it does in this area but none of those open worlds have water or environment changes on the level in the trailer either - so to me it’s a wash.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Quick question, have you played DS1?