Support NeoGAF

[nkarafo]

I was looking at some footage of Max Payne 3 on PC and despite being a last gen game, somehow, i was impressed with what i was watching. I actually did play the game on a 360 when it was released and thought it was the best looking game ever but today i was thinking that after all these years (and the next-gen consoles being released) it might not look that great to me. But i was wrong.

Its the same thing with the original GTA5. I still believe this game (not even the remaster) looks better than Watch Dogs on a PS4.

It seems to me that the reason of this is the way the world/backgrounds are designed. Sure, Watch Dogs have better graphics with more "modern" effects and such but why is that the city doesn't look that good? Is it because Rockstar designs better textures? (kinda like Valve?) Maybe its the geometry detail? I feel like GTA 5 still has a bigger geometry detail at any given scene than Watch Dogs. Is it the lighting? GTA4 had awful lighting but Max Payne 3 and GTA 5 look very natural. Is it because the towns look busier? Still, that doesn't effect Max Payne though.

I think its the combination of high geometry detail and the way Rockstar designs buildings and structures. Even areas that look boring in other games (offices, garages, tunnels, narrow alleys) look great in GTA5 or Max Payne 3.

Thoughts?

 

[HK-47]

Helps to have a massive blank check and creative freedom.

 

[Alienous]

Copying the real world and changing the billboards helps with that, I think.

 

[akachan ningen]

They're hardly original. They take bits and pieces and condense it all into a mini-city. Not that they're not good at it, but it's hardly world-building. More like world-copying.

 

[pa22word]

Helps to have a massive blank check and creative freedom.

Yeah, this.

It's like when people shit on GTA competitors for not matching up to GTA in every way imaginable in terms of raw polish and world details."Oh fuck that sleeping dogs game, the production values were so much lower", "oh that Saint's Row game? that game doesn't even look /half/ as good as GTA does", "Oh just cause 2? fun game, but damn they need to create more varied environments like gta" etc

So your telling me a game that was probably made on 1/20th of the budget (if even /that/) doesn't meet the same level of polish? Holy shit you should be a stock market investor bro!

 

[SJRB]

Copying the real world and changing the billboards helps with that, I think.

I'm sure you're joking, but it's not as easy as that.

What sets Rockstar apart from all other open-world developers is the immersion they provide. The insane attention to the tiniest details to make sure the player is fully immersed in the world.

 

[Vilix]

Monolith Soft seems to be better.

 

[Zolbrod]

I loved GTAV but you don't get points for copying a city that actually exists. They did an impressive job, but they "just" rebuilt LA.

By contrast, MonilithSoft is creating VASTLY more original worlds with their Xenoblade games.

 

[nkarafo]

They're hardly original. They take bits and pieces and condense it all into a mini-city. Not that they're not good at it, but it's hardly world-building. More like world-copying.

Original or not, its the end result that counts.

The insane attention to the tiniest details to make sure the player is fully immersed in the world.

Yeah, that too.

 

[Pinewood]

I'm sure you're joking, but it's not as easy as that.

What sets Rockstar apart from all other open-world developers is the immersion they provide. The insane attention to the tiniest details to make sure the player is fully immersed in the world.

Waiting for MGS V

I also think Naughty Dogs are really good at world building. Of course they have linear games vs open world, but still.

 

[Scrooge McDuck]

I'm sure you're joking, but it's not as easy as that.

What sets Rockstar apart from all other open-world developers is the immersion they provide. The insane attention to the tiniest details to make sure the player is fully immersed in the world.

That's basically "copying the real world with a huge budget," though. I think any developer would love to have the resource to get that kind of freedom.

 

[Antilurker77]

That's basically "copying the real world with a huge budget and resource," though.

Pretty much. I don't want to downplay how much work they put into their worlds, but it's more about execution over creativity.

 

[nkarafo]

I also think Naughty Dogs are really good at world building. Of course they have linear games vs open world, but still.

I only played half of TLOU but i still think Max Payne 3 environments have a more fancy design architecture. I don't know how to explain it.

I mean look at this pic. This indoor area looks like those fancy 3D graphic presentations architects do to promote their work. And it's just an early area in the game.

 

[Alienous]

I'm sure you're joking, but it's not as easy as that.

What sets Rockstar apart from all other open-world developers is the immersion they provide. The insane attention to the tiniest details to make sure the player is fully immersed in the world.

When you're trying to emulate photographs you have taken it's easier to have those tiny details.

When you are trying to create Gotham City it becomes impossible to match that level of detail. You're creating an entire virtual city.

 

[pa22word]

The insane attention to the tiniest details to make sure the player is fully immersed in the world.

You wanna know the difference between other open world devs and Rockstar in letting them do stuff like that? GTA sells more than any other open world game.

If games like Just Cause or Sleeping Dogs sold 20 million copies maybe we'd see some competition, but they don't so we don't. Those games keep getting made on a fraction of what GTA does and get called failures when they don't add up. It's a self defeating cycle that has and will in the future continue to cost people their jobs and the industry diversity in one of its star genres.

When you are trying to create Gotham City it becomes impossible to match that level of detail. You're creating an entire virtual city.

Oh I'm sure it could be done if rocksteady had an additional 50 million in development money to throw around, including hiring a team solely to design stuff like that. But they don't so they try and focus more on the bigger picture at the expense of the smaller details.

 

[nephilimdj]

LA Noire is still the most impressive for myself of the modern sandbox games, charm is insane.

 

[The Crimson Beast]

I'm sure you're joking, but it's not as easy as that.

What sets Rockstar apart from all other open-world developers is the immersion they provide. The insane attention to the tiniest details to make sure the player is fully immersed in the world.

the physics engine is pretty amazing and a big part of the immersion. i think gta 4 is a very hard game to hate

 

[Captain Smoker]

Well, depends on the genre. ^^

If we're talking about building open world cities they're certainly at the top, but if you look at something imaginative like Xenoblade Chronicles or Mario Galaxy I'd yet to see something like this by Rockstar, granted they're doomed to create realistic cities.

Now that I said this I'd like to see a fancy Sci-Fi GTA from Rockstar, wouldn't that be cool.

 

[piratethingy]

Yes, they are the best. You know how they got all that money? Being the best.

 

[Betty]

I only played half of TLOU but i still think Max Payne 3 environments have a more fancy design architecture. I don't know how to explain it.

I mean look at this pic. This indoor area looks like those fancy 3D graphic presentations architects do to promote their work. And it's just an early area in the game.

I really wish this game was playable with skippable cutscenes and shorter load times, it really kills replays.

And yes Rockstar are the best at world building, from Bully and Red Dead Redemption to all their GTA's, the worlds feel alive. No one compares.

 

[nkarafo]

Now that I said this I'd like to see a fancy Sci-Fi GTA from Rockstar, wouldn't that be cool.

I'm dreaming about this ever since GTA3 was released.

 

[pa22word]

Yes, they are the best. You know how they got all that money? Being be best.

Not really. It was mostly luck and timing, and the "Rockstar plan" that Take2 tried to implement across their studios mostly blew up in their face for everyone involved, including Rockstar (Max Payne 3 is probably one of the biggest bombs in the history of the industry, LA Noire bombing and being hell on devs, Red Dead being hell on the people working on it, for example) on several occasions.

 

[Alienous]

Oh I'm sure it could be done if rocksteady had an additional 50 million in development money to throw around, including hiring a team solely to design stuff like that. But they don't so they try and focus more on the bigger picture at the expense of the smaller details.

I don't think so.

GTA V absorbs the history and detail of Los Angeles. "Here's where buildings started being built", "Here are the oldest buildings", "Here's where you can subtly see the effect of gentrification in this area", "Here's where the road are too tight because city planners couldn't foresee the expanse", "Here's were a memorial statue was placed for some event". GTA V gets all that for free, and their talent is in virtualizing that detail.

That level of detail couldn't be met by a team designing a Gotham City unless they hired city planners from 100 years ago, and designed and iterated over the city for years to build up that inherent detail.

 

[Captain Smoker]

I'm dreaming about this ever since GTA3 was released.

They'd had endless possibilities for their creativity, I think they could come up with some realllly great stuff. ^^

Spoiler

We'll never get this...

 

[funkystudent]

They do have the benefit of basically having infinite time and money to work on their stuff which shows.

Under another publisher I am sure GTA's worlds would have become as bland and copy + paste-y as the cities in Assassins Creed games.

 

[danmaku]

You heard it on GAF: building open world maps takes ZERO skill. Jus copy photographs!

Rockstar are #1 at world building because they're absurdly good at it.

 

[pa22word]

I don't think so.

You don't think that with additional resources that Rocksteady couldn't pull in and adapt a history of comics that extend over 75 years and probably well over a thousand comic books, not to mention multiple movies, tv shows, and animated shows, and use that to more fully enrich their game world?

 

[Alienous]

You don't think that with additional resources that Rocksteady couldn't pull in and adapt a history of comics that extend over 75 years and probably well over a thousand comic books, not to mention multiple movies, tv shows, and animated shows, and use that to more fully enrich their game world?

It could never match 75 years of actual city.

 

[pa22word]

It could never match 75 years of actual city.

You didn't answer my question.

 

[antisoulless]

Helps to have a massive blank check and creative freedom.

They're hardly original. They take bits and pieces and condense it all into a mini-city. Not that they're not good at it, but it's hardly world-building. More like world-copying.

Yeah, this.

It's like when people shit on GTA competitors for not matching up to GTA in every way imaginable in terms of raw polish and world details."Oh fuck that sleeping dogs game, the production values were so much lower", "oh that Saint's Row game? that game doesn't even look /half/ as good as GTA does", "Oh just cause 2? fun game, but damn they need to create more varied environments like gta" etc

So your telling me a game that was probably made on 1/20th of the budget (if even /that/) doesn't meet the same level of polish? Holy shit you should be a stock market investor bro!

I loved GTAV but you don't get points for copying a city that actually exists. They did an impressive job, but they "just" rebuilt LA.

By contrast, MonilithSoft is creating VASTLY more original worlds with their Xenoblade games.

You heard it on GAF: building open world maps takes ZERO skill. Jus copy photographs!

Rockstar are #1 at world building because they're absurdly good at it.

Yes.

See this is just complete nonsense. How absurd are these posters? "meah..its easy just copy and paste posters and LA and oooo yeah but xenogearsaga is betters in all the ways"

Game's environment is gorgeous. Playing it first person makes you realize how great it is too.

Now...I wish there were more substance to the environment. More interactivity and things to find.

 

[Alienous]

You didn't answer my question.

Me: "When you are trying to create Gotham City it becomes impossible to match that level of detail. You're creating an entire virtual city."

You: "Oh I'm sure it could be done if rocksteady had an additional 50 million in development money to throw around, including hiring a team solely to design stuff like that. But they don't so they try and focus more on the bigger picture at the expense of the smaller details."


No, I have. Any fabricated Gotham City could not match the detail of transcribing a real city into a virtual format, even when the budgets are equivalent.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

Well I mean they definitely built the most comprehensive Western-themed world in video gaming, but in fairness nobody else has really tried all that hard.

 

[nkarafo]

Well sure, money helps a lot, but i don't think that its the only thing that counts. Ubisoft devs also have money but they don't come close. I think its a case of throwing money at the right, talented people.

 

[British Monsoon]

I think the mark of a good open world is when I can remember directions and routes from games I haven't played in years - Red Dead Redemption's a good example, I rode that route from the McFarlane ranch to Armadillo and beyond so much that it's engrained upon my memory. Or Morrowind, I could write you detailed directions for all the major routes on the entire landmass. A more recent example would be Dying Light, the game has such a great sense of movement that navigating the city is becoming second nature.

 

[Matush]

Well sure, money helps a lot, but i don't think that its the only thing that counts. Ubisoft devs also have money but they don't come close. I think its a case of throwing money at the right, talented people.

This.

People are "bashing" R* for creating real cities? Damn. Did they copied world of RDR or Bully? Yeah, I don't think so. They are best at creating open world, simple as that.

All the complainers should see this thread: http://neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=935062

 

[pa22word]

No, I have.

No, you haven't.

You conveniently dodge the question by pointing out that it's a "real city", as if that means anything in a world like Batman where the city has incredibly overt Chicago/New York overtones to the point you could carbon copy them with a batman coat of paint and no one would ever be able to tell the difference. Not to mention it's also assuming Batman is tied down to just gotham at all. Dude can and has taken a trip, and can fight baddies in more areas than just gotham.

 

[Cube]

I can't believe all the "They ONLY copied a city perfectly into a game, with every minute detail." like that isn't an amazing accomplishment or anything.

 

[bj00rn_]

Yeah, this.

It's like when people shit on GTA competitors for not matching up to GTA in every way imaginable in terms of raw polish and world details."Oh fuck that sleeping dogs game, the production values were so much lower", "oh that Saint's Row game? that game doesn't even look /half/ as good as GTA does", "Oh just cause 2? fun game, but damn they need to create more varied environments like gta" etc

So your telling me a game that was probably made on 1/20th of the budget (if even /that/) doesn't meet the same level of polish? Holy shit you should be a stock market investor bro!

So people can't prefer a more detailed better built world because something can be explained? I'm not sure what your point is? The story behind, money or whatever, doesn't change the fact that as world-builders they are superior in many respect. No one can point that out because it's "unfair"..? I don't get it.

I think Rockstar is immensely talented btw.

 

[snoopeasystreet]

Yes. The fidelity of their worlds puts other devs to shame.

 

[Alienous]

No, you haven't.

You conveniently dodge the question by pointing out that it's a "real city", as if that means anything in a world like Batman where the city has incredibly overt Chicago/New York overtones to the point you could carbon copy them with a batman coat of paint and no one would ever be able to tell the difference. Not to mention it's also assuming Batman is tied down to just gotham at all. Dude can and has taken a trip, and can fight baddies in more areas than just gotham.

To where? Metropolis? Keystone City?

You seem to think that you could transcribe "Welcome to Gotham!" billboards into a New York recreation and that would convincingly be Gotham City? No, world building for a fictional city like Gotham would take a lot more for that. "Where's Crime Alley located?", "Where is Bludhaven located in regards to the city?", "Where is Arkham Asylum located?", "Where is that obscure hospital in the Batman continuity located?". Alright, now I've painstakingly placed my hospital. "The location of this hopsital doesn't really make sense, the hospitals are too far apart in the city". That kind of subtle world realism is something that GTA V gets for free. All of the necessities of a city design, and all of the mistakes. Emulating that is pretty much impossible.

If GTA V has a doughnut store it is probably a doughnut store in the real-world Los Angeles too. They don't have to figure out where to place a doughnut store so it makes sense. They just have to faithfully recreate the city, perhaps make it smaller, and substitute everything with something more sarcastic.

I can't believe all the "They ONLY copied a city perfectly into a game, with every minute detail." like that isn't an amazing accomplishment or anything.

Of course it does. But being convinced for a single second that a world like Skyrim is lived in or has a history is, to me, a far greater accomplishment in 'world building'.

 

[pa22word]

I can't believe all the "They ONLY copied a city perfectly into a game, with every minute detail." like that isn't an amazing accomplishment or anything.

It is an incredible accomplishment, but I consider it foolhardy to unequivocally say they're the "best" at it when they have no competition on that scale due to no one else having both a blank check and unlimited time to do it. Ubisoft is the only one that can directly compare with the AC series, but even that can't really compare as it routinely suffers from being on a tight deadline as a yearly released series.

 

[nkarafo]

Everything i said in the OP applies to Max Payne 3 too. This is a more linear approach where "copying the real world" doesn't apply that much. But it still looks incredibly detailed and "natural"

 

[Zafir]

Depends on the type of open world you're on about really. They're the best at the style they are known for. They make a sandbox which perfectly connects with the game play they want to include. Which is fantastic for a GTA game.

I don't personally consider it world building or immersive though. Not compared to something like Deadly Premonition, or Shenmue, where it feels like they made the world first, you can talk to NPCs unrelated to the story, and you can go in buildings which you'll never need to go in for any mission. The NPCs will have their own schedules, too. Where as GTA, the buildings you can go in, are either there because of a mission, or there because of an activity you can do(Robbing petrol stations, for example). GTA, kind of feels hollow in comparison, and doesn't feel like it could be a real world. I think Bully came the closest to this kind of open world. Unfortunately for me, you don't see this style very often.

 

[xaszatm]

Well

1. It's world design you're talking about. World Building is a bit more than just making the city itself, it's the characters and the history and the culture of the world. World design does play a large role into that as well but it's not interchangeable.

2. It terms of World Design of a modern city in an open world environment, then yes, I would agree with you that Rockstar does it the best. There is an incredible attention to detail. However, in world building of a modern city in an open world environment I personally like Shemue more, though I'll freely admit that could be nostalgia talking. In world building and design in general I prefer Xenoblade Chornicles world and the detail (even with the bad graphics) it held over any of the GTA games but that's just personal preference. There is no denying the amazing detail the design team goes through when making their games.

 

[nkarafo]

World building (or design) is much more than just placing the right building in the right place. Don't focus only on that. Again, look at the way each area is designed, without taking into account what other areas are next to it.

 

[Ahasverus]

It's not just the buildings. Rockstars are masters in making the cities feel alive with tiny things, subtle wind moving, chatter, pedestrian actions, the hand placed litter on the streets, everything just fits.

And those saying they "have it easy because real world" forget that Red Dead Redemption is fictional and probably has the besf ambientation ever made.

Rockstar are talented, passionate and know what they're doing. No way around that.

 

[Seanspeed]

I think yes, they are the best. The amount of attention to detail they can put into a large, open world game is pretty insane. They've got money and time, which obviously plays a large factor, but you cant argue the end results are pretty much unmatched.

 

[Screaming Meat]

Helps to have a massive blank check and creative freedom.

They earned it.

Rockstar are talented, passionate and know what they're doing. No way around that.

Yup.

 

[UrbanRats]

Copying the real world and changing the billboards helps with that, I think.

Recreating a real place that looks both natural, but captures the essence of it without being a 1:1 copy, is pretty fucking hard.
Harder than creating a decent "Gotham City" simply because it's rendering something so familiar, that your eye will be much more critical of any little detail that doesn't fit.
Much like animating an alien monster it's easier than animating a convinging human.
-

I like the argument the Art Director of GTAV (Garbut) made about being concerned with "breaking right angles", i think that's a big part of what makes GTAV's (as well as GTAIV's and RDR's) world look so natural and organic, even in urban areas, there are very few perfectly symmetrical, vertical or horizonatal lines.
Telephone poles are bent, and don't go straight up, asphalted streets and sidewalks are bumpy and curvy, and so and so on.

 

[scoobs]

absolutely 100% yes. Unmatched and it isn't close. What really sets Rockstar apart is their attention to detail, especially in the people, not just the characters but the random pedestrians. Their reactions to what you do, and even just random conversations are incredibly detailed and usually hilarious.

Also their worlds feel logical. Like... it makes sense where cities are and suburbs, mountains, etc... the layouts are perfect.