• 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.

Destiny screenshots

Splint

Member
Iron sights makes games look uninteresting. Thankfully it looks like you won't be forced to use them.

heh, thinking the same exact thing. Iron sights are terrible in sci-fi shooters (at least imo), just so dull. But in the gameplay, the hip firing looked pretty accurate which gives me hope. Hyped for this game over any other FPS. It seems like it will be a legit purchase full of content. ($60)?
 

patchday

Member
gameplay didnt look super impressive too me however I really, really love the world, background (that was revealed), and the look of it. Plus, I've always had a blast with Bungie games (Halo 3 series). It's a must buy for me
 

Dennis

Banned
I don't know.....

Destiny_40.jpg
 

Violater

Member
He doesn't believe it. Damn at those glimmering clouds.

The iq is good, but the textures look pretty normal to me, overall totally achievable.
Oddly enough most of the games we have seen for next gen don't suffer from aliasing issues.
But then I could be wrong as I am not super sensitive to these things.
 

Fi Fo Nye

Banned
Bungie is still bad at faces. Looks great otherwise.

Look at how great they still are at the guns though! If they're really trying to ape Borderlands, then Bungie's gajillions of guns are going to be way better, no doubt.

Speaking of which, does anyone know whether Destiny will actually have multiplayer modes and multiplayer maps, unlike Borderlands? Because I'd still want a true multiplayer game with real leaderboards and stuff, and to that extent, I feel Titanfall will have the unanimous edge if Respawn nails it like no other.
 

Portugeezer

Member
When I saw the vistas in the PS3 conference, the clean image quality, it was definitely one of the better looking games of E3.

I think there is a reason we haven't seen ps360 versions of games lol.

I am pretty sure we saw some early footage in an old vidoc, it looked shite with low poly's everywhere. It was early though, will probably look decent for a 360/PS3 game (technical graphics is not Bungies strong point IMO)
 
The iq is good, but the textures look pretty normal to me, overall totally achievable.
Oddly enough most of the games we have seen for next gen don't suffer from aliasing issues.
But then I could be wrong as I am not super sensitive to these things.

I'd say it all really depends on the scale of the game, but from what I hear it's supposed to be pretty damn big. But you're right, the textures don't look amazingly impressive. Everything else looks pretty top tier though.
 
The lighting is next-gen and just looks incredible. Lots of low-res textures, though. If this game is as huge as it's billed to be, having highly detailed high-res textures all over the place probably isn't a realistic scenario. It would take so much development time.
 

Dirtbag

Member
those are definitely bull-shots, why wouldn't they be.
All that matters is how it looks in-motion and in-person.. and so far so good
 
Looks kind of bland but I never enjoyed Bungie's aesthetics. And I'm really feeling the dreaded diminishing returns at this point. I'm sure the gameplay will be rock solid.
 

It doesn't look much better to me than what we already have. Technically they're obviously better but these screens have the feel of PS360 bullshots. Whereas there's no way I could look at a screen of Uncharted and think it could be a PS2 bullshot. So the giant leap in console graphics just isn't there. Not a big deal, I'm satisfied with these graphics, but just making an observation.
 
Kinda on-topic. The Destiny E3 trailer from last week has almost 5m views. By contrast, the Titanfall trailer has 222k (on their respective youtube channels).

The Bungie name holds so much weight, fuck.
 
It doesn't look much better to me than what we already have. Technically they're obviously better but these screens have the feel of PS360 bullshots. Whereas there's no way I could look at a screen of Uncharted and think it could be a PS2 bullshot. So the giant leap in console graphics just isn't there. Not a big deal, I'm satisfied with these graphics, but just making an observation.

The lack of jaggies alone nullifies the diminishing returns argument for this/next gen. Uncharted didn't have many jaggies, but then again Uncharted wasn't an open world fps. Remember what all the Halos looked like on 360 (with the exception of 4, which still isn't perfect)?
 
It doesn't look much better to me than what we already have. Technically they're obviously better but these screens have the feel of PS360 bullshots. Whereas there's no way I could look at a screen of Uncharted and think it could be a PS2 bullshot. So the giant leap in console graphics just isn't there. Not a big deal, I'm satisfied with these graphics, but just making an observation.

My friend, this game is being built with the requirement to run on the 360/PS3. They can't expand upon the development beyond what current systems can handle. It will only look prettier on One/PS4.

This is extremely early in what next gen consoles can do. Compare what early titles on 360/PS3 looked like to games later in their life like Uncharted, GOW, Halo 4, etc.

Can you look at a screen of The Dark Sorceror and tell me that can be a PS3 title?
 
Top Bottom