texhnolyze
Banned
Serious question, will you still accept gamebyro engine for TES VI and Fallout 5?
-
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.
Fallout 4 PC Ultra screenshots
- Thread starter RoboPlato
- Start date
Serious question, will you still accept gamebyro engine for TES VI and Fallout 5?
Blue Ninja
Member
I would say "no", but we both know it's still going to be that engine and we're still going to play it.
Will I accept a heavily modified gamebryo for those titles? Probably
texhnolyze
Banned
IcyRhythms
Member
How would one even play the game this early on PC? It has to be activated on Steam, correct?
Better animation blending would go a long way to making it look better.
I would guess offline review copies
exmachina64
Banned
Why is that something to get worked up about?
The rendering aspect of the engine's been gutted at least once and every part of it's probably been modified by this point. At what point do we just accept that it's become a different engine?
Different SKU for the Steam key, i.e. not "Fallout 4 Retail Key."
KZXcellent
Member
Getting it on PS4 but I plan to jump on the PC train in year or two to get the modded experience for the game. Been doing that since 3.
Mostly the same graphics but 60fps on consoles would be the best outcome for TES VI (if we stay realistic). I don't care which engine they use, honestly.
Individual packages rather than the app itself can have a release state override. These days, when an app is uploaded to Steam, the backend automatically generates three packages: a store/retail key package for regular users, a beta testing package, and a developer package; the latter two have release state overides.
https://steamdb.info/sub/69992/
https://steamdb.info/sub/69993/
My problem is not that this game looks ugly, but that it looks like what I've played twice already before and looks bad enough to take me out of the experience. Its ugliness is distracting and cripples whatever art direction is left.
A game does not have to look like AC:Unity or Ryse or ______ to pass commercial muster (the belief otherwise has popped up here as a common lie), I just feel this is rather far in the other direction. I could forgive considerably more if there were major gameplay changes. Unfortunately this is a good example of Bethesda's design rut since Oblivion, and it's become the elephant in the room. Alternatively if this had superb visuals, it still wouldn't be on my buy list.
It's been almost ten years since ES IV. Time to branch out.
A game does not have to look like AC:Unity or Ryse or ______ to pass commercial muster (the belief otherwise has popped up here as a common lie), I just feel this is rather far in the other direction. I could forgive considerably more if there were major gameplay changes. Unfortunately this is a good example of Bethesda's design rut since Oblivion, and it's become the elephant in the room. Alternatively if this had superb visuals, it still wouldn't be on my buy list.
It's been almost ten years since ES IV. Time to branch out.
Blue HUD and green pipboy???
Didn't the HUD color setting apply to the pipboy interface in 3 and NV?
You can customize them separately in Fallout 4.
Neat.
texhnolyze
Banned
I'm quite aware of that. I'm no tech expert, but I believe no matter how much improved it is from the original engine, there'll be some kind of limit at how much it can do. I mean, we can still easily spot Bethesda games' trademark bugs and jankiness from these leaks.
I'd take a game that looked like Morrowind (no mods) if it could meet or surpass what it achieved, but that isn't even realistic anymore. Something as simple as quest markers are now seen as a given. When such things are no longer questioned, but viewed as necessary qualify of life and convenience factors, there is little to be done to change it, despite the serious repercussions they bring.
exmachina64
Banned
Truly, the blood quantum law of game development.
Lightning Count
Member
My PC has an i7 5820k and a 970, so I should be able to match this come release date.
How is the game running though with that hardware?
How is the game running though with that hardware?
Unplayable.
Well you exceed Bethesda's own recommend specifications and the game's graphics are utter garbage.
I can only speculate but my guess is that you'll get 20 fps on low settings.
I really do wonder at these kind of posts.
We can't say. We don't see the future.
That should run well though, 60fps at console settings, no idea about max.
I have a 5960x and 3 Titan X's myself, I don't think I'll get past medium, what with all the advancements they've made in the graphics.
Dictator93
Member
Please tell me that is not from the PC version of FO4.Yeah but it better be a kickass toaster:
OminoMichelin
Member
That's from either FO3 or new Vegas.
Starfield
Member
Omg are you serious?
It's from a NV dlc
I Wonder if some of u People here even touched a fallout game ever in your life
Bethesda couldn't create a sociopathic toaster character even if the whole world would depend on it. It's obviously NV.
Dictator93
Member
I do not play the fallout games beyond having tried out the first 2 (and I once rented brother hood of whatever for og xbox).
Starfield
Member
nortonff
Hi, I'm nortonff. I spend my life going into threads to say that I don't care about the topic of the thread. It's a really good use of my time.
It's FO4 maxed out on PC, 8k downsampled.
Dictator93
Member
Impulsor
Member
I have a 4790K, 16gb of RAM and a 980ti. Also I plan on playing on a 3440x1440 screen.
I'm worried Im gonna be playing a slideshow at maybe 13 fps max with this crappy computer.
WTF dude? Seriously?
OminoMichelin
Member
I'd urge you to fix this. FO3 and new vegas can run on toasters these days, both are worth playing if you are interested in FO4 at all (which I guess you are, since you are posting in here).
This game probably has the most useless implementation of PBR that I've ever seen. PBR gives materials definition, and it works even on games with a rather cartoony style (such as R&C or Sunset Overdrive). So it should work with Fallout 4 too even with it's sort of cartoony retro look, but it doesn't.
The lighting still feels flat and areas lit up by your flashlight just look wrong, what good is PBR if it cannot even make the materials look like what they are suppose to look when under a direct lightsource? Then there is the issue of how objects are lit when there is little lighting available.
Lighting and shadowing (and by extension AO) should be the first thing developers should think of when making a game these days as it can make or break the game's look in an instant. I mean this isn't 2005 anymore so expecting objects and characters to look like they belong on the surface they are resting on is not an extraordinary thing to ask for.
Then we have the animations...uughh
The lighting still feels flat and areas lit up by your flashlight just look wrong, what good is PBR if it cannot even make the materials look like what they are suppose to look when under a direct lightsource? Then there is the issue of how objects are lit when there is little lighting available.
Lighting and shadowing (and by extension AO) should be the first thing developers should think of when making a game these days as it can make or break the game's look in an instant. I mean this isn't 2005 anymore so expecting objects and characters to look like they belong on the surface they are resting on is not an extraordinary thing to ask for.
Then we have the animations...uughh
Dictator93
Member
I am mainly interested in graphics regarding this game atm and have a pc that is hopefully better than a few toasters.
But you are right. One day I will probably play NV as that seems more my kind of game design than fo3 vanillia.
As long as you overclock that shitty CPU to 5ghz+ and overclock the core of the 970 to 1600mhz then you should be good for 1080p/30fps at Ultra Low settings.
paperspace
Member
Why would it be the PC-version?
It more and more looks like they used the same strategy as with skyrim: build for console and in their case, Xbox) and release the same assets on PC with a specific build of the engine for PC (so it runs on windows and has win32 dialogs). With skyrim they shipped simply the 360 assets on PC and it looks like they did the same here (XBO/PS4 assets on PC). It's cheaper of course, but also doesn't really utilize the extra power / memory available on PCs. I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't need more than 4GB memory as well. (except perhaps when their leaky memory manager spills enough beans to keep the pool growing)
Perhaps they'll release a high-res texture pack later, but as consoles nowadays already have the ability to run reasonable high-res textures they'll likely skip it.
TerryLee81
Member
Not sure, his CPU is a real bottleneck....
Definitely is. An i7-5820k is practically worthless.
Oh nothing major. They just forgot to compile the game with SSE instruction support. When it was finally patched a few months later, my framerate went from 35 to 60fps in some locations.
SliChillax
Member
I feel dumb but is this sarcasm?