• 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

KainXVIII

KainXVIII

Member
CS4P01HWsAAtn12.jpg:large
 
X

Xtars

Member
boswell22 said:
I don't understand this logic at all. So a AAA game developer can simply not develop quality graphics because they know modders will improve them? How is that acceptable? I really don't like how people keep saying "looks fine and modders will improve it", I don't think it's appropriate for a game/developer of this size to rely on its community to make the graphics on par with today's standards.
Click to expand...

Solid Samus said:
Why do you think that I pointed out earlier that the only reason we're even having this discussion is because The Witcher 3 is a thing? Fallout 3 and Skyrim and Oblivion were 'benchmarks in their genre' because there were no other games that could claim that sort of scale with anywhere near that level of fidelity. There were no other AAA WRPGs doing anything even close to what Elder Scrolls and Fallout were doing. However, in terms of visuals, every single one of them was still heavily outmatched by contemporary linear or tech-focused games of that era. Now, The Witcher 3 has now given people the expectation, erroneous or otherwise, that every game that follows the same arbitrary checklist [*open world *role playing *quests], regardless of technological constraints, design priorities, or vastly differing underlying mechanics, should match or at least attempt to compete with its fidelity, as though that ought to be the paramount focus of any game that dares consider itself AAA! From what I've read and seen on this game so far it appears that Bethesda's main priority was packing this game with shitloads of content, and if that means iterating on an engine they're already familiar with in order to focus their lengthy development cycle on an expansive and intricate game, then I'm all for that. At any rate, I'm telling you man, the ice skating animations and reused textures/models absolutely aren't there, man, that's spreading some fud. And I still insist that as far as I'm concerned it's reasonable that I'm okay with the passable NPC animations, given the improvements made to how NPCs can animate and speak to each other during conversation, how you can move and do things during conversations, and that it's probably unreasonable to expect a fully mocapped world in a game of this scale.



I think it's mostly just the stylized PBR clashing with a lack of Ambient Occlusion, and that some of the houses are fairly low poly doesn't help. I imagine that once Ambient Occlusion is tweaked in (which should happen before the game is even officially released in America), the game will come to look a fair bit better on PC.



Yeah, that's GAF alright. If there's anything this community is notorious for, it's not criticizing Bethesda's shortcomings.

Yeah.
Click to expand...




If you look past the fact that this is a Fallout game and just see it as a game I honestly believe people would be pissed about the graphical fidelity in the game. Also if this was released by either EA or Ubisoft people would be in full riot mode right about now.
Just cause the mechanics and universe might be interesting shouldn't give a developer a free pass to neglect graphical fidelity, QA testing or polish. Especially if it is a AAA title that have been in development for 5 years.

I don't understand how people can defend this and say that the graphics are amazing. Compare it to other games that have been released lately (past 2 years) and notice the difference in Textures, Models, LOD levels, Shadows etc. I am baffled that they release a title as big as this without proper use of AO or better textures.

Also the argument for that "mods will fix this" is not valid. A new AAA game that you buy should NOT be fixed by the community. It should look good and up to standard when it's released. That's what I'm paying €60 for, a full game, with story, gameplay AND graphics. The best analogy of this is you wouldn't buy a new car that's have hayballs for seats and no paint job. Sure the car would work and run but it looks like crap and the ride is not comfortable.
 
K

komplanen

Member
Looks noticeably better than the console screenshots but it's still several years behind what I would have wanted a AAA PC game to look like in late 2015.

Even if I played this on a console, I'd be a happy camper because the gameplay looks to be solid. I'm all in for the new dialogue system as well.
 
L

Lucifon

Junior Member
Xtars said:
I agree with you guys 100%.

If you look past the fact that this is a Fallout game and just see it as a game I honestly believe people would be pissed about the graphical fidelity in the game. Also if this was released by either EA or Ubisoft people would be in full riot mode right about now.
Just cause the mechanics and universe might be interesting shouldn't give a developer a free pass to neglect graphical fidelity, QA testing or polish. Especially if it is a AAA title that have been in development for 5 years.

I don't understand how people can defend this and say that the graphics are amazing. Compare it to other games that have been released lately (past 2 years) and notice the difference in Textures, Models, LOD levels, Shadows etc. I am baffled that they release a title as big as this without proper use of AO or better textures.

Also the argument for that "mods will fix this" is not valid. A new AAA game that you buy should NOT be fixed by the community. It should look good and up to standard when it's released. That's what I'm paying €60 for, a full game, with story, gameplay AND graphics. The best analogy of this is you wouldn't buy a new car that's have hayballs for seats and no paint job. Sure the car would work and run but it looks like crap and the ride is not comfortable.
Click to expand...

The game isn't an unknown quantity though. Some games just aren't that impressive visually, it doesn't stop them being great games. Fallout has never particularly been a looker other than large vistas. I'm not sure it's 'getting a pass' other than people knowing what they're getting into from a gameplay perspective and therefore not being bothered that the graphics aren't particularly impressive.
 
S

Solid Samus

Banned
valkyre said:
First of all let me clear something just so that there are no misunderstandings. I enjoy having this debate with you and in no way am I trying to make you change your opinion which I respect. I simply present my honest view and criticism in Fallout 4's technical department.

Having said this, I honestly dont think that my criticism over Fallout 4 gfx, stems from Witcher 3. Its not just Witcher 3 that has spoiled me. There have been quite a few pretty open world games out there. Yes Fallout 4 mechanics offer more freedom than most, I will agree and accept that a certain degree of gfx hit due to this is understandable.

But at the same time I dont believe that my sub par gfx/animation claim is to be considered FUD as you said. Perhaps it suits you and doesnt bother you, but for me it honestly detriments from being properly immersed with the game. It takes me off. (btw I dont consider W3 animation good either, at least Geralt's basic movement suite is rather robotic as well)

I dont want Bethesda to have Naughty Dog's mocap in their games. But at the very least to be somewhat convincing and not taking me off the experience. Similarly I am not expecting W3 fidelity (I am using W3 only because you mentioned it), but the difference between these 2 is enormous. It honestly looks like a different generation. I am certain they are capable (if they want) to close the gap. Hell how do modders do it?
Click to expand...

I honestly don't think that Fallout 4 and Witcher 3 even look a generation apart, especially on consoles where Fallout 4 enjoys cleaner IQ and a more intricately populated world. (Witcher 3 looks better regardless but I'm just disputing your phrasing.) I think it's perfectly reasonable to be underwhelmed by these graphics and animations, I just think that expectations have been skewed in a way that undermines this game's stronger points and focuses, which appear to be more grounded in giving the player a huge and densely packed world to explore, than prioritizing an industry-leading visual suite. And I was disputing the specific claims you made regarding FO3/NV-esque slidey animations and especially re-used textures and models in the game, which I still insist isn't the case.

Xtars said:
I agree with you guys 100%..
Click to expand...
you sure you quoted the right post? o_O
 
B

Breads

Banned
potatohead said:
Serious question but why is the sky blue after a nuclear holocaust?
Click to expand...

1: 220 years after the bombs fell.

2: Fallout's in world nukes were decidedly weaker than ours. (200-750 kilotons)

3: How do you even know that the sky would change? After a couple centuries of rain cycles what particles do you think would still be tinting the air?
 
M

MaxiLive

Member
Guessing I'm in the odd boat that thinks it looks pretty good :p

I'm not a Fallout fan and won't be picking up the game anytime soon but I really like the look of this, especially compared to the older titles! No technical marvel but still looks decent enough for a RPG.
 
D

Denzar

Member
That does look pretty good to me. I expected mediocre but functional graphics, as in the previous games, but this exceeds my expectations.

My i7, 970 and body are ready!
 
S

Solid Samus

Banned
Gurish said:
I don't see any lighting improvement, at least not significantly, just LOD, which is expected like any open world game on PC, if people thought before that the game is ugly and now they are "eating crows" supposedly than I can't really understand it, visually it's still "ugly", fidelity is mostly the same as consoles and previous footage, these are just mandatory PC improvements, nothing to fuss over.
Click to expand...

I don't think there's a lot of those people besides those who only saw the compressed leak footage or the first round of screenshots beforehand. I noticed that in the PC shots, the bloom effect isn't pixelated at all, but that's about the only lighting improvement I've observed besides the LOD enhancements, I suppose. Like I said earlier, there's not a lot here to use for making meaningful direct comparisons. At any rate, those 'mandatory PC improvements' go a long way, and the game's pre-release Ultra preset is only the tip of the iceberg. There's Gameworks to consider, as well as downsampling, ini tweaks, ambient occlusion, etc. etc.
 
X

Xtars

Member
Solid Samus said:
I honestly don't think that Fallout 4 and Witcher 3 even look a generation apart, especially on consoles where Fallout 4 enjoys cleaner IQ and a more intricately populated world. (Witcher 3 looks better regardless but I'm just disputing your phrasing.) I think it's perfectly reasonable to be underwhelmed by these graphics and animations, I just think that expectations have been skewed in a way that undermines this game's stronger points and focuses, which appear to be more grounded in giving the player a huge and densely packed world to explore, than prioritizing an industry-leading visual suite. And I was disputing the specific claims you made regarding FO3/NV-esque slidey animations and especially re-used textures and models in the game, which I still insist isn't the case.


you sure you quoted the right post? o_O
Click to expand...

ha. Nope. Well edited my post now =)
 
V

valkyre

Member
Solid Samus said:
I honestly don't think that Fallout 4 and Witcher 3 even look a generation apart, especially on consoles where Fallout 4 enjoys cleaner IQ and a more intricately populated world. (Witcher 3 looks better regardless but I'm just disputing your phrasing.) I think it's perfectly reasonable to be underwhelmed by these graphics and animations, I just think that expectations have been skewed in a way that undermines this game's stronger points and focuses, which appear to be more grounded in giving the player a huge and densely packed world to explore, than prioritizing an industry-leading visual suite. And I was disputing the specific claims you made regarding FO3/NV-esque slidey animations and especially re-used textures and models in the game, which I still insist isn't the case.


you sure you quoted the right post? o_O
Click to expand...

I believe I understand and accept your reasoning and I think you hopefully understood mine. We can agree to disagree on this, since I believe we pretty much argued extensively about it.

Just one last note, in no way my criticism undermines Fallout 4's strong points (although I do have a big ? regarding the dialogue system). When I am criticizing the technical aspect of a game, I am strictly referring to this only, that is why I make it clear a lot of times in my posts.
 
C

chromatic9

Member
Xtars said:
The best analogy of this is you wouldn't buy a new car that's have hayballs for seats and no paint job. Sure the car would work and run but it looks like crap and the ride is not comfortable.
Click to expand...

That's a poor analogy. Fallout is hardly bails of hay and more like a standard car. People will then mod the car by adding all sorts of things that they think looks good and fit some Recaro seats.

In video game terms this Mini is a modded game with sweetfx applied

mini-cooper-s-gets-cool-make-over-at-restyleit-photo-gallery-medium_1.png
 
V

Vanmunt

Banned
Can I wait until Tuesday to get this on PC (i7 970) or do I crumble and get it from my local independent game shop and get it early (Sat) for PS4.......

modern dilemma's! .
 
R

RipperGrim

Member
Breads said:
1: 220 years after the bombs fell.

2: Fallout's in world nukes were decidedly weaker than ours. (200-750 kilotons)

3: How do you even know that the sky would change? After a couple centuries of rain cycles what particles do you think would still be tinting the air?
Click to expand...

Well wouldn't it depend on just how many nukes were used? It's commonly believed that dust clouds after an asteroid hit the earth killed the dinosaurs, even Volcanoes exploding leave massive clouds of dust and debris in the air for months depending on how big the explosion was.

Anyways I'm glad for the blue sky and the more developed looking establishments in the Fallout universe now, it allows for a more greater artistic direction instead of just shads of brown.
 
kraspkibble

kraspkibble

Permabanned.
Vanmunt said:
Can I wait until Tuesday to get this on PC (i7 970) or do I crumble and get it from my local independent game shop and get it early (Sat) for PS4.......

modern dilemma's! .
Click to expand...

I'd just wait. Is it worth sticking with 1080p 30fps and lower quality graphics just to get the game a few days earlier?
 
S

Sarcastico

Member
chromatic9 said:
That's a poor analogy. Fallout is hardly bails of hay and more like a standard car. People will then mod the car by adding all sorts of things that they think looks good and fit some Recaro seats.

In video game terms this Mini is a modded game with sweetfx applied
Click to expand...

More like a Pontiak Aztek.
 
D

daxy

Member
Vanmunt said:
Can I wait until Tuesday to get this on PC (i7 970) or do I crumble and get it from my local independent game shop and get it early (Sat) for PS4.......

modern dilemma's! .
Click to expand...

I'm biased, but PC offers better IQ, kb/m controls, more fine-tuning options, probably better mods selection, etc. Unless you're all about dat comfy couch and don't have the setup to stream/extend a cable to your TV. Also, better season pass/DLC deals in the future most likely.

With a modern i7 and a 970 you would probably be able to cruise through performance hiccups if there are any serious ones early on.
 
L

lazygecko

Member
There's still no FoV slider in the settings, right? None of Bethesda's past games ever have them. You can set the FoV with console commands but it has a tendency to constantly reset so you have to redo it and t's one of their biggest failings with their PC versions. Usually you have to wait for a script extender mod to be able to actually save your FoV settings.

I had massive headache problems with both Morrowind and Oblivion on widescreen monitors before I even figured out what FoV was. After Zenimax Online had the courtsesy of adding the option (with different settings for third and first person to boot) to TESO then there's really no excuse on Bethesda's part any more.
 
K

Kezen

Banned
Vanmunt said:
Can I wait until Tuesday to get this on PC (i7 970) or do I crumble and get it from my local independent game shop and get it early (Sat) for PS4.......

modern dilemma's! .
Click to expand...

You know I think you should wait for performance reports...Although with Steam refunds being a thing I suppose the risk is not high.
 
M

Mifec

Member
Mediocre, better LOD and shadows than the console but everything else is just as bad. I don't plan on waiting for extensive mods either so eh.

lazygecko said:
There's still no FoV slider in the settings, right? None of Bethesda's past games ever have them. You can set the FoV with console commands but it has a tendency to constantly reset so you have to redo it and t's one of their biggest failings with their PC versions. Usually you have to wait for a script extender mod to be able to actually save your FoV settings.
Click to expand...

I sure as hell hope we get one, because the current FOV isn't acceptable to me.
 
Windom Earle

Windom Earle

Member
Lucifon said:
The game isn't an unknown quantity though. Some games just aren't that impressive visually, it doesn't stop them being great games. Fallout has never particularly been a looker other than large vistas. I'm not sure it's 'getting a pass' other than people knowing what they're getting into from a gameplay perspective and therefore not being bothered that the graphics aren't particularly impressive.
Click to expand...

With the game seemingly being dumbed down a lot on the gameplay/mechanics front, I think we shouldn't give it a pass till we have it in our hands.
 
C

CyberPunked

Member
Kezen said:
I guess this is from a review copy.

It's very strange Bethesda recommends a 780 for what does not really look like a game capable of pushing it, unless of course specs are for 1440p.
Click to expand...
Recommended specs are virtually useless these days. They don't tell us what resolution, fps, or settings the hardware is recommended for. If recommended is for 1080p 60fps ultra with 8xmsaa, then it's not that strange. But like I said, we never know.
 
kraspkibble

kraspkibble

Permabanned.
Kezen said:
You know I think you should wait for performance reports...Although with Steam refunds being a thing I suppose the risk is not high.
Click to expand...

I'll be getting it day one but if it runs like shit on my 290 then I'll be doing a Steam refund and buying it on PS4.
 
R

rudieboy77

Member
CyberPunked said:
Recommended specs are virtually useless these days. They don't tell us what resolution, fps, or settings the hardware is recommended for. If recommended is for 1080p 60fps ultra with 8xmsaa, then it's not that strange. But like I said, we never know.
Click to expand...

Didn't CoD Ghosts ask for a 680 before it came out? Everyone knew that was BS.
 
X

XenogearsX

Banned
Graphics are amazing considering the world is huge and doesn't have a lot of loading screens. To the people complaining the graphics aren't 4k resolution top tier AAA graphics, I don't think they're factoring this in
 
N

Neverforget

Member
Looks like Skyrim without the mods. It's just OK, kinda last gen graphics but who cares? Hopefully the story and gameplay will be good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Fallout 4 next gen update out April 25th also PC ultrawide and more
14 15 16 17 18
878
50K
intbal replied
Fallout 4 jumps to No.1 across Europe following TV show launch
Sales-Age 2 3
103
4K
Alexios replied
Fallout 4 achievements are all currently broken on Xbox and won't unlock
Drama Community
29
2K
Bumblebeetuna replied
Fallout 4 players pissed that Next-Gen Update completely broke mods, corrupted saves, full of glitches
Drama Community 2 3
101
7K
recursive replied
  • Poll
Fallout 4 vs. Starfield: Which Is Better, and Why?
Opinion Poll 2 3
104
3K
Lunarorbit replied
Top Bottom