Xargen
Metal Gear
Kickin' names, taking ass.
Posts: 1,651
Now Playing: I PLAY THA VIDJA GAMES!
|
Post by Xargen on Jun 14, 2013 7:40:11 GMT -5
Have you guys even SEEN this? Look at it! It's frickin' BEAUTIFUL!
It's definitely swayed me a little more to get one of the next gen consoles...
|
|
|
Post by JMMREVIEW on Jun 14, 2013 7:57:04 GMT -5
I am not trying to be funny but when I seen this for the first time the video didnt have a title (it was a youtube ad)I thought to myself oh, look more DLC for BF3. This doesnt look very different form BF3 IMO it could be running on the 360 looks like it anyway!
|
|
Xargen
Metal Gear
Kickin' names, taking ass.
Posts: 1,651
Now Playing: I PLAY THA VIDJA GAMES!
|
Post by Xargen on Jun 14, 2013 10:51:45 GMT -5
I'm not really talking about graphical quality, it's more the fact that they noob-tubed a pillar and sunk a tank, and that building collapse, and the counter-knife, and the tablet based commander mode... It's just all so pretty in a non-visual way
|
|
|
Post by Blade Runner 07 on Jun 14, 2013 12:41:55 GMT -5
Non-visual way? Then why not just get it on Xbox 360 or PS3 and not blow your money on a Next gen console? Unless you can say this about say, 5 titles exclusive to the Xbone or PS4 then you don't need a new consoel just yet. Just puting that out there.
|
|
|
Post by JMMREVIEW on Jun 14, 2013 14:17:35 GMT -5
I thought about you Xargen when I seen commander mode I knew you would love that.
|
|
Xargen
Metal Gear
Kickin' names, taking ass.
Posts: 1,651
Now Playing: I PLAY THA VIDJA GAMES!
|
Post by Xargen on Jun 14, 2013 17:20:22 GMT -5
Damn right, I was always an awesome commander in Battlefield 2... Did Anthony ever tell you the tales of how nobody ever got away from my eagle vision? =p Also yeah, I don't plan on buying a next gen console anytime soon, but I'm sure I'll pick one up at some point if I'm ever swayed enough to do so
|
|
MMCC0203
Deepthroat
Posts: 658
Now Playing: Fallout 4
Favorite Game: LoZ: Majora's Mask
|
Post by MMCC0203 on Jun 14, 2013 21:46:08 GMT -5
I'd take that entire demo with a grain of salt. Sure the return of commander mode is great, but you have to remember that this demo was staged to look as good as possible. Destruction again looks very scripted/non-dynamic ala BF3, and knowing Dice the pillar and skyscraper they showed are the only two major structures that can be destroyed. Gunplay wise it also looks identical to BF3.
You also have to remember that a lot changed from alpha to retail with BF3. Personally I'd reserve any judgement for the beta.
|
|
|
Post by Blade Runner 07 on Jun 15, 2013 1:15:36 GMT -5
I don't know what it is but none of these "next gen" titles have been particularly jaw dropping. In fact the first time anything dropped my jaw this gen was Modern Warfare 2. Four years into the consoles life cycle. I thought "wow that is running on the Xbox 360?" I had been playing mostly Halo up until then but yeah.
This just looks like more Battlefield 3 which can look really good on Xbox 360 at times. Sure, if M$ keeps the 360 around till 2015 the difference is going to get clearer as the devs spend less time polishing last generations versions of the game but as of right now I'm not impressed by anything.
On that note: I remember being impressed by the GTAV trailers and thinking "that has going to be pushed to next gen. It looks too good to be current gen." and yet it's coming out exclusively on current gen after all and I'm still impressed. Really happy to see just how good 360 titles can STILL look.
|
|
|
Post by JMMREVIEW on Jun 15, 2013 2:56:26 GMT -5
Here is the problem previously when a new gen console came out we had things like. 16bit to 64bit 2D to 3D SD to HD Now we are going from 3D HD to 3D HD so there is no significant change.
|
|
MMCC0203
Deepthroat
Posts: 658
Now Playing: Fallout 4
Favorite Game: LoZ: Majora's Mask
|
Post by MMCC0203 on Jun 15, 2013 10:07:47 GMT -5
Here is the problem previously when a new gen console came out we had things like. 16bit to 64bit 2D to 3D SD to HD Now we are going from 3D HD to 3D HD so there is no significant change. I guess you could say consoles are going from HD to full HD (native 1080p), but a few games have already taken advantage of this on PS3. As someone who plays on PC in 1080p I can confirm what you're all saying. The graphical difference isn't huge. Granted games may look significantly better in a few years time with optimization. The graphical difference between the games that came out at the beginning of the 360's life cycle and the games we have now is quite big.
|
|
|
Post by Blade Runner 07 on Jun 15, 2013 13:53:55 GMT -5
I do wish they would make a better effort for photo realism. It seems lighting, animation, and art style are taking over where they should be trying to impress with just how realistic the games can look. I mean this for games like First-person shooters and racing sims. That strive for such technological goals.
This may be an off comparison but just look at Modern Warfare 3 vs Blck Ops 2. The graphics were supposed to be improving ac year but instead they are looking more muddy, less sharp. The color pallet is over saturated etc. I guess what I'm saying is after nearly 6 years after Crysis showed that we could have photorealistic graphics in less than a decade, we are progressing slower than expected and that's disappointing to say the least.
|
|
MMCC0203
Deepthroat
Posts: 658
Now Playing: Fallout 4
Favorite Game: LoZ: Majora's Mask
|
Post by MMCC0203 on Jun 15, 2013 14:21:03 GMT -5
I do wish they would make a better effort for photo realism. It seems lighting, animation, and art style are taking over where they should be trying to impress with just how realistic the games can look. I mean this for games like First-person shooters and racing sims. That strive for such technological goals. This may be an off comparison but just look at Modern Warfare 3 vs call of doody 2. The graphics were supposed to be improving ac year but instead they are looking more muddy, less sharp. The color pallet is over saturated etc. I guess what I'm saying is after nearly 6 years after Crysis showed that we could have photorealistic graphics in less than a decade, we are progressing slower than expected and that's disappointing to say the least. The reason we haven't seen much improvement since Crysis is because of the console hardware. I'm not trying to sound elitist, but optimization can only get you so far with 8 year old technology. With this new gen of consoles coming I'd say we'll definitely see significant visual improvements on all platforms. Perhaps devs will begin to approach photo-realism. Personally I don't know and don't care. Games don't need to be photo realistic imo. But really, does the market need photo-realism? That level of fidelity calls for even more money and resources in an industry that already demands too much from consumers. The last thing we need are more money hungry devs/pubs that struggle to even make a profit.
|
|
|
Post by Blade Runner 07 on Jun 15, 2013 16:43:54 GMT -5
I'm just afraid 60FPS, 1080p native, and particle effects are going to be the big advertizing buzzwords for the next couple years.
Games only NEED to be photo realistic if they are trying to be. Like Battlefield 4, people will always look at it and go "this looks great but it could look better" and that is the comment I expected to hear less of as the post-crysis world brought us better graphics.
Just so we are clear. I never expect, nor do I want Mario, Zelda, or any game where 90% of the game is made up of thinks simply not found in the real world like Goombas and giant pig monsters to be photo realistic. they don't need to be and I wish they only get more detailed like the threads in Marios denim. But Assassins Creed, call of doody, Madden, etc. will someday have no excuse for not looking closer to photo realism than anything else in the industry because most if not all of the games visual presentation can be recreated in the real world.
P.S. I did like the destruction in the trailer. Even if it looks scripted. I like the look of the game. It looks good. I'm just not impressed.
|
|
|
Post by JMMREVIEW on Jun 15, 2013 17:28:47 GMT -5
I play games to escape reality.
|
|
|
Post by Blade Runner 07 on Jun 15, 2013 18:07:56 GMT -5
All I'm arguing is that games trying to imitate reality should strive to look more realistic as technology allows. I said nothing about realistic gameplay and never will. If COD had realistic gameplay it wouldnt sell 6-8 million units every year. It would sell a hell of alot less. Reality sucks and rarely works in games. We want to play action movies and grand story book adventures. If The Godfather game was like the movie (reality) it would last last 3 hours max and ask you to press a botton every 5 minutes to advance the story. Instead, the developers distribute the most intense and action oriented parts of the film, multiplied them to strech 15 hours and turns them up to 11. That is more fun.
|
|