Support NeoGAF

[SABRE220]

It looks pretty damn good at times. Way better than their last gen output. So they did update their graphics engine.

I just dont know why they didnt do anything about the constant loading. Why do they even need to load the interior of a ship? Its two rooms lol. how big can they be? 1GB? 2GB? Why cant they stream that in?

You're being far too lenient on starfield compared to how harsh you are in terms of visual standards towards other games. It seems like Starfield is your spiderman 2(chiefdata)/forspoken(rofif). Even in earlier trailers, I think you got sucked in by the panning vistas which are relatively easy to pull off.

 

[GymWolf]

Not my fault they downgraded the shit out of this from not just last year but from literally two months ago in their E3 showing.

What was shown at the time was gorgeous. Release is trash.

Indoor sections still look good though.

That said, this completely destroys my Avatar defense that its too late to downgrade it. If starfield can get downgraded 2 months before launch then avatar which releases 6 months after its e3 trailer is probably going to get downgraded twice. my only hope is that they showed PS5 footage whereas starfield was shown running on a PC this whole time. still, im sweating for avatar and space marine 2 now.

P.S Why wouldnt I call this next gen?
From E3 last year.

Sorry, we don't take backsies, What was showed was cherry picked places that look even better in gif form, your fault for even thinking that bethesda was about to release a fully nextgen looking game with that absurd scope, some of us knew better.

Even a control egomaniac like drunkman let journalists try that condo section in tlou2 as a preview where we saw the good and the ugly parts of the game, never trust someone who doesn't release any "normal" footage but just a deep dive, no matter how long it is, it is always super controlled and cherry picked unless it's rockstar, and even them did some sketchy shit with gta5.

Next 2 are outlaws and space marine 2, can't wait to be right for these 2 aswell

The game of course still looks great maxed out on pc, but great is not nextgen.

 

[SABRE220]

Sorry, we don't take backsies, What was showed was cherry picked places that look even better in gif form, your fault for even thinking that bethesda was about to release a fully nextgen looking game with that absurd scope, some of us knew better.

Next 2 are outlaws and space marine 2, can't wait to be right for these 2 aswell

Hey come on now those games are going to be great, let me dream!
The emperor protects.

 

[Lethal01]

Dude, you started the whole argument by saying that Space Marine 2 has weak lighting because it doesn't have ray tracing, but now you're backtracking,

Spoiler: nope

I'm really hoping this is with raytracing off, the lighting inaccuracies are pretty glaring, would look a lot better if shit wasn't constantly glowing.

Oh look, it's me starting this by acknowledging that Space Marine has raytracing and pointing a specific issue with their current lighting engine, that could be improve via said raytracing, never calling it bad or anything. but maybe you meant after that.

Spoiler: nope

Oh, if this is PS5 footage it looks nice actually.
but if it's on PC the lighting is looking really meh, Screen space reflections, no shadows, no/extremely innacurate AO.

Oh look it's me saying that for a console game it looks nice(not groundbreaking but not bad) and again pointing out several issues that can be improve upon without raytracing, maybe you meant my first reply to you?

Spoiler: nope

I said that it's lighting wasn't impressive and didn't look next gen, in what way am I wrong? I haven't seen anything about it's lighting system that puts it above games with raytracing. I even said that it's impressive if it's console footage but I'm dissapointed if it's pc footage.

Nope, still me saying it looks impressive for a console footage, but not better than other current gen games with raytracing, You are the one who specifically and repeatedly claimed that it's more next gen

lol. We'll let DF settle this when they speak of how impressive the lighting in the game is

I really don't care, I think the game looks fine and will be ecstatic for it to release looking great, they could call it the best 60fps ps5 game out there,
But I'll still only ever see you as the kid who had to desperately invent reasons why they can't just go "it's got tons of dynamic shadow casters" because they were to embarrassed to say that they have no idea why they think it looks better and are just going with their gut.

I remember calling Lethal, VFX in disguise lol. He reminds me so much of him!

I'm happy that I remind you of someone who actually worked making 3d rendering software, instead of reminding you the hordes who have zero idea about anything they are talking about but love to pretend they know more than "flop make game pretty"

 

[Edder1]

Regarding Starfield. Don't have the game myself, but after quickly going through YouTube playthroughs on PC max settings the game looks as good as it did in previews and footage we've seen before, so all the bad screenshots posted here must have been from console versions or lower quality settings. I'm not seeing any downgrade with game being maxed out on PC. If there's downgrade, it's not very obvious.

 

[Edder1]

Oh look, it's me starting this by acknowledging that Space Marine has raytracing and pointing a specific issue with their current lighting engine, that could be improve via said raytracing, never calling it bad or anything. but maybe you meant after that.

Oh look it's me saying that for a console game it looks nice(not groundbreaking but not bad) and again pointing out several issues that can be improve upon without raytracing, maybe you meant my first reply to you?

Nope, still me saying it looks impressive for a console footage, but not better than other current gen games with raytracing, You are the one who specifically and repeatedly claimed that it's more next gen


I really don't care, I think the game looks fine and will be ecstatic for it to release looking great, they could call it the best 60fps ps5 game out there,
But I'll still only ever see you as the kid who had to desperately invent reasons why they can't just go "it's got tons of dynamic shadow casters" because they were to embarrassed to say that they have no idea why they think it looks better and are just going with their gut.


I'm happy that I remind you of someone who actually worked 3d rendering software, instead of reminding you the hordes have zero idea about anything they are talking about but love to pretend they know little more than "flop make game pretty"

And like I told you many times no game on PC does accurate lighting as no modern game uses path tracing, so your argument is mute in this case as well. The only thing you bring up that has some validity is Cyberpunk and even that has plenty of issues as DF pointed out since it's not using full on path tracing.

 

[GymWolf]

Hey come on now those games are going to be great, let me dream!
The emperor protects.

I'm just talking about nextgen graphic factor.
I think space marine is gonna end the best one because it is a small ass restricted tps and not an open world or even sandbox game, harder to fuck up.

 

[Lethal01]

Sorry, we don't take backsies, What was showed was cherry picked places that look even better in gif form, your fault for even thinking that bethesda was about to release a fully nextgen looking game with that absurd scope, some of us knew better.

Even a control egomaniac like drunkman let journalists try that condo section in tlou2 as a preview where we saw the good and the ugly parts of the game, never trust someone who doesn't release any "normal" footage but just a deep dive, no matter how long it is, it is always super controlled and cherry picked unless it's rockstar, and even them did some sketchy shit with gta5.

Next 2 are outlaws and space marine 2, can't wait to be right for these 2 aswell

The game of course still looks great maxed out on pc, but great is not nextgen.

Don't forget Avatar, Dada is gonna have a field day when all these games end up looking worse than Spiderman 2.

 

[GymWolf]

Don't forget Avatar, Dada is gonna have a field day when all these games end up looking worse than Spiderman 2.

The thing is, i can understand where slimy see the nextgen aspect in avatar, some parts of the trailer looks frankly incredible.

With the other 2, not so much.

Spiderman just look the worst of the bunch tbh, not even funny to shit on that one.

Again, another great looking game, no ugly games in this topic except when N fanboys post zelda screens, but it gives the strong impression of not being much better than morales, a fucking crossgen.

Slimy is right, cut the 4k native bullshit and use your checkboard tech that is eons better than fsr, gimme 1800p native, just don't waste every resource on 4k native, these consoles are weak trash, they are not ready for 4k.

We have our pc for 4k60 gaming, console have to push graphic at lower res if they wanna show a generational jump.

 

[Lethal01]

And like I told you many times no game on PC does accurate lighting as no modern game uses path tracing, so your argument is mute in this case as well.

Okay, I yes we agree that no game has totally accurate photorealistic lighting, I don't think I ever said one did.

I said that you can still have one game be more accurate than another even if it's not 100% accurate.

Now, what specific thing about this games lighting do you think is putting this games lighting on a whole other level than Horizon, Forbidden west or plagues tale.

 

[Edder1]

Okay, I yes we agree that no game has totally accurate photorealistic lighting, I don't think I ever said one did.

I said that you can still have one game be more accurate than another even if it's not 100% accurate.

Now, what specific thing about this games lighting do you think is putting this games lighting on a whole other level than Horizon, Forbidden west or plagues tale.

Horizon has very inaccurate lighting lol, it's extremely stylised. See, this is why I cannot take your opinion seriously. It's a pointless convo, not sure why you feel the need to keep it going.

 

[Lethal01]

Horizon has very inaccurate lighting lol, it's extremely stylised. See, this is why I cannot take your opinion seriously. It's a pointless convo, not sure why you feel the need to keep it going.

Yes, I never said Horizons lighting is totally accurate, I asked what specific thing is Warhammer doing better.
Or let me rephrase, in what way is the lighting more technically impressive.

If you want feel free to use COD or plagues tale instead

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

I said just about, you could find an outlier like cyberpunk maxed out on pc but generally its pretty much top tier in terms of fidelity in terms of games released this gen. The matrix demo was a carefully designed and well-crafted quasi vertical slice, yes It was in real-time but lacked the full game logic and repeating said fidelity and assets in a full game is a daunting prospect. When we see games reach matrix quality on this gen, I will gladly take back my skepticism as nothing would make me happier but we have had several ue5 releases and they are nowhere near said quality from the demo and are running at ps3 resolutions.

The matrix demo wasn't as simple iirc. From what I heard the vastly increased traffic simulations were quite taxing, reducing traffic amount to that seen in other games would free up notable resources.

 

[Portugeezer]

dat draw distance

What I expect from Pokemon on the Switch 2.

 

[Edder1]

Yes, I never said Horizons lighting is totally accurate, I asked what specific thing is Warhammer doing better.
Or let me rephrase, in what way is the lighting more technically impressive.

If you want feel free to use COD or plagues tale instead

I'll let experts review the game's lighting when it comes out and then take a sip of your tears.

 

[Edder1]

What I expect from Pokemon on the Switch 2.

At this point I think people are just taking screenshots of the game running on low settings just to take a piss out of it.

 

[Lethal01]

I'll let experts review the game's lighting when it comes out and then take a sip of your tears

so you don't know, got it, I'll block you and move on now.
I will be ecstatic when reviewers praise it's lighting and will play it with raytracing on and be wowed, but it will never make me not see as someone just couldn't admit that they had no idea what they were talking about

 

[roosnam1980]

 

[Edder1]

so you don't know, got it, I'll block you and move on now.
I will be ecstatic when reviewers praise it's lighting and will play it with raytracing on and be wowed, but it will never make me not see as someone just couldn't admit that they had no idea what they were talking about

Block me? Lol, it's me who should have blocked you long ago for all the ridiculousness I had to face, lol. So much ridiculousness that I typed to 'lol' twice in the last sentence. Nobody in this thread agreed with you so you just getting salty at this point. So long, you shall not be missed in my timeline.

 

[amigastar]

I mean it already looked subpar even in those presentations and now it looks even worse? Well, color me surprised!


I don't expect anything, I stopped expecting!

Actually, i've said the same some time ago(i don't expect any graphics, i expect games), but playing RDR 2 made me realize how good it looks so i'm looking forward to GTA VI.

 

[PeteBull]

Just for comparision Chloe on ps4 from Detroit: Become Human

Dat nextgen feel on 1,8tflop ps4 tho, not even from top tier dev studio =D

 

[SlimySnake]

You're being far too lenient on starfield compared to how harsh you are in terms of visual standards towards other games. It seems like Starfield is your spiderman 2(chiefdata)/forspoken(rofif). Even in earlier trailers, I think you got sucked in by the panning vistas which are relatively easy to pull off.

This is going to sound weird and honestly I am kinda baffled by the game.

Played it last night on PC, and it looks stunning. At least indoors. The lighting is way beyond anything Bethesda has done. Its honestly on par with Dead Space and callisto which is crazy because this is an open world game. There is an almost the order like detail in the game's interior sections. Remember those awful interior shots I posted of FF16, this is the complete opposite. Every object in the level seems to be fully modeled instead of a bad texture. The third person animations are surprisingly good for a bethesda game. There is no jank here that made Fallout 4 and Skyrim TPS modes pretty much useless. And then there are the suits. Easily the best space suits ive seen in a game. They look thick with detail and feel like they have weight to them. When they put the helmet on, you can see the heads inside lit by a small light and it honestly feels 3d in ways other space suits simply dont.

But then you go outside and its obvious that aside from the lighting, everything has been downgraded to oblivion. I havent reached the full open world yet, but i played the demo area from last E3 and its like they removed all the geometry and terrain detail. Fog is everywhere. I havent gotten to the fugly areas that have been posted in this thread but i noticed the downgrade immediately.

Then you inside the ship and its immaculately lit and detailed. Where it differs from Spiderman 2 is that it is a massive upgrade over Bethesda's previous games. I can respect the effort they made to improve their visuals. Yes, they ultimately failed since they had to downgrade the open world, but my biggest issue with Spiderman 2 is that insomniac didnt even try.

 

[SlimySnake]

Sorry, we don't take backsies, What was showed was cherry picked places that look even better in gif form, your fault for even thinking that bethesda was about to release a fully nextgen looking game with that absurd scope, some of us knew better.

Even a control egomaniac like drunkman let journalists try that condo section in tlou2 as a preview where we saw the good and the ugly parts of the game, never trust someone who doesn't release any "normal" footage but just a deep dive, no matter how long it is, it is always super controlled and cherry picked unless it's rockstar, and even them did some sketchy shit with gta5.

Next 2 are outlaws and space marine 2, can't wait to be right for these 2 aswell

The game of course still looks great maxed out on pc, but great is not nextgen.

Have you played the game yet? The 2nd mission is that outdoor level they showed at E3 last year and it looked way better back then. It wasnt just fake cinematic vista shots. I made these two gifs from the same demo and I dont see a downgrade in interior lighting and asset quality. Its clear that they were running the game on some card from the future because iirc it was struggling to hold 30 fps last year. Probably a 3090 Ti. Part of me hopes that they had released an Ultra+ setting to future proof this game or for people like me who are ok with playing games at 30 fps. Game feels surprisingly smooth in both third person and first person mode even when framerate dips to 45 fps.

There are ugly parts in every game, but they have done a downgrade to the parts they already showed. And its a big one in terms of detail. Lighting is mostly the same. But yeah, they never showed the ugly parts and now the internet is going to eat them alive. Especially since they are an exclusive.

I havent reached the full open world yet so Im hoping against hope that they havent downgraded these worlds they showed at this years E3 too much, but that first open area from last years e3 demo is a clear downgrade.

P.S Those GTA5 trailers were clearly running on the ps4 lol. They were way to clean to be running on the 360 or PS3.

 

[arkhamguy123]

So starfield is pretty far from the next gen showcase that the xbox needed and was being hyped as. Honestly, outside of Panned Vistas I never found the games fidelity that impressive and the release seems decently worse than earlier footage still . What is even worse is the sheer Peter Molenyeux levels of dishonestly todd implemented when selling us the game. Empty barren planets with most being gas giants that are unexplorable, no planet landing, no flight in the atmosphere and worse of all invisible walls and the last gen roots are pretty damn clear in their engine...with rotating trees straight out of oblivion and loading for entrances.

Honestly this seems like a last gen game that was delayed to launch on the next gen consoles, they need to ditch this engine so badly but they are afraid of the hard work assoctiated. I wish they made a new engine and wowed us like oblivion at the xbox360 launch but gamebyro will persist until todds retirement.

Series S

 

[arkhamguy123]

Don't forget Avatar, Dada is gonna have a field day when all these games end up looking worse than Spiderman 2.

I don't think people realize how low the bar is for Spider-Man 2.

Like starfield fable avatar may come out and underwhelm but to me they're still ahead of insomniacs madden/fifa/COD levels of iterative garbage. They literally took Spider-Man 2018 and just kinda… I dunno put some touch ups on it I guess. I say I guess because it actually looks worse in some spots. (Water)

 

[SlimySnake]

Some shots from the intro. Game makes a great first impression.

Not my screenshots.

EDIT: i was googling starfield gifs and saw the Horizon gif musilla posted above and it took me to a forum that apparently has all the banned ex-gaffers lmao. so many iconic names. Still fighting the good fight. What a blast from the past!

 

[TheRedRiders]

EDIT: i was googling starfield gifs and saw the Horizon gif musilla posted above and it took me to a forum that apparently has all the banned ex-gaffers lmao. so many iconic names. Still fighting the good fight. What a blast from the past!

neo-neogaf

 

[shamoomoo]

Just for comparision Chloe on ps4 from Detroit: Become Human

Dat nextgen feel on 1,8tflop ps4 tho, not even from top tier dev studio =D

While the character model are comparable, each games environment are different in scale. Starfield play area is relatively bigger than Detroit:Becoming Human.

 

[arkhamguy123]

Chiming in on gta 6

Honestly I'm skeptical. A lot of the guys that made gta v and RDR2 look so damn good for their base hardware even today have moved on from rockstar. And the leaks (I know I KNOW it's pre alpha) looked like rdr2 modern urban edition. It's so early but I mean there was a lot of footage from basically finished areas that didn't look next gen at all

I'm fact, nothing in the leaks impressed at all except there seems to be a next gen push to outdoor nighttime lighting. Now will the game look much better when it's finished? Of course it will. Much better. But will it jump from Gta v PS5 version basically to the matrix demo? Hell no. Despite the damage control what you see is kinda what you'll get. It's just too low of a base to have the final product look like a generational leap.

 

[PeteBull]

While the character model are comparable, each games environment are different in scale. Starfield play area is relatively bigger than Detroit:Becoming Human.

To me character models in starfield look much worse from top ps4 games character models, and i dont mean overall ugliness(altho ofc its visible too), but actual less complexity/worse skins, i didnt even link how characters look in death stranding coz it simply wouldnt be fair, but we talking next gen here, not ps4/xbox one, u would think they at least shouldnt be worse from cp2077 npcs, and in my books they are.

About overall complexity, lets compare it to rdr2, here how game looks maxed on pc, proper last gen game, open world, not some corridor shooter, just so its all fair console footage ofc coz back then it was only avaiable on consoles.

If we got all out and look at pc max settings its extremly bad comparision vs starfield but at least u can make a point about pc costing k's of usd, but that footage i linked is all from xbox one x.

 

[SlimySnake]

Chiming in on gta 6

Honestly I'm skeptical. A lot of the guys that made gta v and RDR2 look so damn good for their base hardware even today have moved on from rockstar. And the leaks (I know I KNOW it's pre alpha) looked like rdr2 modern urban edition. It's so early but I mean there was a lot of footage from basically finished areas that didn't look next gen at all

I'm fact, nothing in the leaks impressed at all except there seems to be a next gen push to outdoor nighttime lighting. Now will the game look much better when it's finished? Of course it will. Much better. But will it jump from Gta v PS5 version basically to the matrix demo? Hell no. Despite the damage control what you see is kinda what you'll get. It's just too low of a base to have the final product look like a generational leap.

they were still using PS4 devkits to make the game in 2019. This shit is going to be last gen as fuck. Even if they manage to upgrade to the latest tech, it will not look that great because it started dev literally 9 years ago. See immortals which is a UE5 game using nanite but simply doesnt show because they upgraded mid development.

They are going to waste all their time on scripting details no one will notice in game but people will make tiktoks on for years. the fact that they refuse to show the game just tells me that they have no faith in their game and know it looks dated.

To me character models in starfield look much worse from top ps4 games character models, and i dont mean overall ugliness(altho ofc its visible too), but actual less complexity/worse skins, i didnt even link how characters look in death stranding coz it simply wouldnt be fair, but we talking next gen here, not ps4/xbox one, u would think they at least shouldnt be worse from cp2077 npcs, and in my books they are.

About overall complexity, lets compare it to rdr2, here how game looks maxed on pc, proper last gen game, open world, not some corridor shooter, just so its all fair console footage ofc coz back then it was only avaiable on consoles.

If we got all out and look at pc max settings its extremly bad comparision vs starfield but at least u can make a point about pc costing k's of usd, but that footage i linked is all from xbox one x.

Lighting is way better in starfield. Its a clear upgrade over rdr2. Interiors are far more detailed than rdr2 as well.

 

[CamHostage]

And like I told you many times no game on PC does accurate lighting as no modern game uses path tracing...

Okay, I yes we agree that no game has totally accurate photorealistic lighting, I don't think I ever said one did.

I said that you can still have one game be more accurate than another even if it's not 100% accurate.

I believe the two of you are arguing vehemently while sort of being on the same page...

There's technical accuracy and then there's tricks to simulate physical phenomenons (or just add things in which look better than they would if they were missing, foregoing the reality for the sense of reality) in order to get it to the point of "it looks like I think it should". Realtime applications are bags of tricks desperately working to get the best notion of "reality" out as possible every 1/60th of a second. We're getting into power levels of possibilities that the bag may include some logical methods of tracing rays, introducing "accuracy" through mathematic simulations which come from our understanding of real-world behavior; we're doing the work from the source rather than working from the result and trying to reproduce it. (On a long enough timeline, I'm sure the "accuracy" will be scoffed at as far as how many rays and bounces and physical property parameters were sufficient to recreate "reality", but this is where we are today.)

Seems like one of you is saying that nothing is special about this Space Marines 2 game because it's employing technology seen before elsewhere (done really well here, at least, but with familiar downsides,) the other is saying that everything is special about how Space Marines 2 does things its own way and that it doesn't have to be dismissed solely on the grounds that it doesn't use some of the fledgling technology which promises "accuracy" but may still not be to the point (or possibly in capacity of power) of surpassing what's done here with the best use of these advanced-albeit-familiar approaches. Which is not a disagreement, just a different way of talking about the situation.

And I think the common ground is that the notion of, "Next-Gen starts with Space Marines 2 & everything else is the product of lazy developers huffing their own farts!!!!", that is, er, misrepresentative.

 

[proandrad]

Jesus

This is why you never should believe PR bullshit when they say they're targeting 30fps because the visual fidelity is so high. 30fps this generation has just become an excuse for shitty game engines.

 

[GymWolf]

Have you played the game yet? The 2nd mission is that outdoor level they showed at E3 last year and it looked way better back then. It wasnt just fake cinematic vista shots. I made these two gifs from the same demo and I dont see a downgrade in interior lighting and asset quality. Its clear that they were running the game on some card from the future because iirc it was struggling to hold 30 fps last year. Probably a 3090 Ti. Part of me hopes that they had released an Ultra+ setting to future proof this game or for people like me who are ok with playing games at 30 fps. Game feels surprisingly smooth in both third person and first person mode even when framerate dips to 45 fps.

There are ugly parts in every game, but they have done a downgrade to the parts they already showed. And its a big one in terms of detail. Lighting is mostly the same. But yeah, they never showed the ugly parts and now the internet is going to eat them alive. Especially since they are an exclusive.

I havent reached the full open world yet so Im hoping against hope that they havent downgraded these worlds they showed at this years E3 too much, but that first open area from last years e3 demo is a clear downgrade.

P.S Those GTA5 trailers were clearly running on the ps4 lol. They were way to clean to be running on the 360 or PS3.

I'm about to play the thing in a couple of hours, hopefully i don't have to use fsr or low resolution...

 

[PeteBull]

they were still using PS4 devkits to make the game in 2019. This shit is going to be last gen as fuck. Even if they manage to upgrade to the latest tech, it will not look that great because it started dev literally 9 years ago. See immortals which is a UE5 game using nanite but simply doesnt show because they upgraded mid development.

They are going to waste all their time on scripting details no one will notice in game but people will make tiktoks on for years. the fact that they refuse to show the game just tells me that they have no faith in their game and know it looks dated.


Lighting is way better in starfield. Its a clear upgrade over rdr2. Interiors are far more detailed than rdr2 as well.

So parts are better, parts are worse, overall 4k 30fps rdr2 on 6tf xbox one x looks better from starfield on 12tf xbox series x, (running in 1440p 30fps), lets not even compare it to the matrix demo ofc, which is true benchmark for next gen, but rdr2 on xbox series x is close to max/ max what could be done on last gen consoles(not pc, coz thats maxed rdr2 or maxed cp2077) and still starfield looks worse here(better in some aspects, worse in many more).

Edit: Its open world vs open world too, not expecting starfield to have as high quality as corridor shooter ofc.

 

[alloush]

Damn, that's one ugly looking game!

 

[Edder1]

I believe the two of you are arguing vehemently while sort of being on the same page...

There's technical accuracy and then there's tricks to simulate physical phenomenons (or just add things in which look better than they would if they were missing, foregoing the reality for the sense of reality) in order to get it to the point of "it looks like I think it should". Realtime applications are bags of tricks desperately working to get the best notion of "reality" out as possible every 1/60th of a second. We're getting into power levels of possibilities that the bag may include some logical methods of tracing rays, introducing "accuracy" through mathematic simulations which come from our understanding of real-world behavior; we're doing the work from the source rather than working from the result and trying to reproduce it. (On a long enough timeline, I'm sure the "accuracy" will be scoffed at as far as how many rays and bounces and physical property parameters were sufficient to recreate "reality", but this is where we are today.)

Seems like one of you is saying that nothing is special about this Space Marines 2 game because it's employing technology seen before elsewhere (done really well here, at least, but with familiar downsides,) the other is saying that everything is special about how Space Marines 2 does things its own way and that it doesn't have to be dismissed solely on the grounds that it doesn't use some of the fledgling technology which promises "accuracy" but may still not be to the point (or possibly in capacity of power) of surpassing what's done here with the best use of these advanced-albeit-familiar approaches. Which is not a disagreement, just a different way of talking about the situation.

And I think the common ground is that the notion of, "Next-Gen starts with Space Marines 2 & everything else is the product of lazy developers huffing their own farts!!!!", that is, er, misrepresentative.

We're definitely not on the same page, lol. No matter what you with rasterisation it will never give you the same result as path tracing. The only way to come close is for devs to employ path tracing renderer in their engine and then try to use it as template when doing raster lighting. As for arguing that this or that method when it comes to raster is more accurate is just silly since we won't know untill it's compared to path tracing side by side. Also he was trying to imply that games like Horizon have better lighting while the game is extremely inaccurate when it comes to lighting, hence why I found the whole argument stupid and baseless. And bringing up last gen games like Death Stranding and claiming it has better lighting just made the whole thing laughable.

 

[SlimySnake]

So parts are better, parts are worse, overall 4k 30fps rdr2 on 6tf xbox one x looks better from starfield on 12tf xbox series x, (running in 1440p 30fps), lets not even compare it to the matrix demo ofc, which is true benchmark for next gen, but rdr2 on xbox series x is close to max/ max what could be done on last gen consoles(not pc, coz thats maxed rdr2 or maxed cp2077) and still starfield looks worse here(better in some aspects, worse in many more).

Edit: Its open world vs open world too, not expecting starfield to have as high quality as corridor shooter ofc.

I think its clear that after the downgrade, the open world level of detail, foliage quality, draw distance and general terrain is much worse than RDR2. I honestly am shocked at how poor the open world looks in DF and NX Gamer reviews.

The lighting is its only saving grace here but it seems to be coming at quite the cost. Thankfully interiors still look great.

 

[Mobilemofo]

Just got atomic heart on discount, and I will say, some of the reflections are absolutely beautiful. Nice looking game overall..

 

[Lethal01]

Seems like one of you is saying that nothing is special about this Space Marines 2 game because it's employing technology seen before elsewhere (done really well here, at least, but with familiar downsides,) the other is saying that everything is special about how Space Marines 2 does things its own way and that it doesn't have to be dismissed solely on the grounds that it doesn't use some of the fledgling technology which promises "accuracy" but may still not be to the point (or possibly in capacity of power) of surpassing what's done here with the best use of these advanced-albeit-familiar approaches. Which is not a disagreement, just a different way of talking about the situation.

Not at all, what's happening is I'm asking what about Warhammer he thinks is "more technically impressive", what about it is giving a better result pushes it to a far higher level than something like Plagues tale or HFW. I've said many times that you can improve lighting without raytracing, it could be something as simple as higher res shadows, or more light sources, already stated all I mean when I say accurate is in the way that a game having a shadow is more accurate than it having none.

But she couldn't actually point out anything so he had to write a few page of "it's so obvious that I won't even tell" to cover it up.

E: It looks better
M: How so?
E: EVERYTHING
M: Such as.
E: it's so obvious
M: Tell me then.

She's pretending the problem is the word accuracy even though I've also asked, how's it better, how's it more impressive, because she aware she has no idea and needs someone else to tell him so that he can feel correct. So don't bother spelling it out for her, she's just pretend she knew it all along.

 

[CamHostage]

We're definitely not on the same page, lol...

Not at all, what's happening is...

Well, I tried.
I don't know, the whole argument reads like one of those conference moments where you get distracted for a bit until you look up from your phone and two in your group are arguing about something they saw along the way, and you go, "Hold up, what are you arguing about?", and they go into their case and some of it misses you but you don't really disagree with either side so you don't really get why there's a disagreement, and at some point you remember, "Oh, I saw that too, it seemed cool enough. But hey, did you see this other thing?"

Too bad in 195 pages that we probably don't have that other thing yet...

 

[Edder1]

Well, I tried.
I don't know, the whole argument reads like one of those conference moments where you get distracted for a bit until you look up from your phone and two in your group are arguing about something they saw along the way, and you go, "Hold up, what are you arguing about?", and they go into their case and some of it misses you but you don't really disagree with either side so you don't really get why there's a disagreement, and at some point you remember, "Oh, I saw that too, it seemed cool enough. But hey, did you see this other thing?"

Too bad in 195 pages that we probably don't have that other thing yet...

The guy is a total idiot, he even refers to me as she now. He's definitely someone who's immature and resorts to insults and petty remarks when he fails to make any sense. Not worth my time or even yours.

 

[Represent.]

I cannot. Fucking wait. Looks unreal.

Look at this fucking shit.

 

[Tomi]

Day 0 i tell ya

 

[Lethal01]

I cannot. Fucking wait. Looks unreal.

Look at this fucking shit.

It's just nice to see giant crowds of something that isn't zombies, granted these enemies aren't amazing or anything.
But literally anything is infinitely better than another zombie horde.

 

[CGNoire]

Starfield reviews are out. Looks good but loading holds the game back. It has A LOT of loading. Like for everything. Including entering ships and even interiors.

Its weird that they made SSDs a requirement but couldnt update their engine to have seamless loading. Typically i think loading is overblown but this game seems to be doing a lot of it.

Loading when entering ships sounds like shit.

 

[CGNoire]

Starfield interior and exterior seems was made up different teams. It can look really good in interior with nice lighting but exterior and some parts especially looks completely unfinished or done as a college or university project instead.

The lighting in interiors like the ship is vastly superior to outside areas for sure.

 

[SlimySnake]

Loading when entering ships sounds like shit.

its not as long on pc as nx gamer showed on xbox. like maybe a second on my 7.5 GBps ssd. im guessing on ps5 it would be a fraction of a second so im guessing xbox architecture is holding them back here.

however, they SHOULD have updated their engine to stream in interiors in realtime instead of loading them in. i know devs have reasons and we dont know what the engine looks like in the backend, but when you are taking 8 years to make a game and are specifically targeting next gen consoles and ssds, surely you can rework your engine to take advantage of these new streaming techniques. star wars jedi survivor has some terrible fucking stuttering in hub worlds but they let you inside your ship and in taverns with dozens of NPCs without loading.

i know spiderman had some loading when going into certains interiors but i would be very surprised if they do it with spiderman 2. rockstar resolved this shit with gta5. i think gta4 was the last game to have loading when going into apartments. bethesda had 8 years to implement this.

 

[Edder1]

• The indoor aeeas of Starfield are definitely an improvement from what was shown before release, the lighting and the level of detail are impressive.

• The outdoor areas are somewhat barren and definitely feel like a step down compared to indoors. Hopefully we'll see updates that will bring more life and detail to outdoor sections.

• The lack of cinematic camera when talking to NPCs and constant loading screens make you feel like you're back to an archaic era of gaming.

 

[draliko]

Engines got so complicated that a lot of software houses lost track of the inner works I think. Starting from scratch is difficult due to cost and time constraints, ia is still not good enough to help with real time graphics optimization, and still to make something similar to starfield theoretical scale you'll need an ad-hoc engine, the problem is the time you spend on an engine you don't spend making the game, and to make assets, systems and script you need to know the engine dynamics. Hw has really evolved while SW side we just brute forced our way with smoke and mirrors, we didn't optimize streaming assets we used better storage, etc... Anyway sorry for the rant, while waiting for the path tracing version without vaseline of graphic engines I think we'll only see real improvements with smaller scope games. As for starfield outside looks.. they need to redo the terrain part of the engine for sure, but other than that make something beautiful procedurally generated is very hard, and this is the ideal field to leverage Ai work.