When it was revealed, MANY people did think that was gonna be the in game level of detail specifically because of how good ND are.
Am I the only one who feels like "the lighting is different" is going to become a new meme when defending obvious downgrades? You guys are giving the PR folks some great ammunition.
I almost feel like an asshole because I'm genuinely excited for this game and think it looks great, but saying that it looks just as good as the E3 teaser is a level of insanity that I can't hang with. Then again, I guess we saw the same kind of posts when the gameplay footage of Killzone 2 was finally revealed and we had some crazies saying it looked even better than the E3 reveal.
I just feel that if this happened in an Ubisoft or EA thread, people would be flipping their shit and grabbing their pitchforks and torches.
Oh, well. It's really not worth fighting over.
I can say the same thing for the UC zealots. And AC:Unity isn't the only game that looks better than this demo.
Since last generation mid twenties frame rate on consoles has always meant the game runs well.
If you really try to spot the differences, they are clear. Less detailed facial geometry, lower quality hair.
People aren't going to get away with "time of day!" as an explanation for the difference this time.
LOL.
man you are insistent huh
The gameplay model don't look as good as cut scene model was a given.
If look at the end of demo the models look closer to the E3 one.
100.Am I the only one who feels like "the lighting is different" is going to become a new meme when defending obvious downgrades? You guys are giving the PR folks some great ammunition.
I almost feel like an asshole because I'm genuinely excited for this game and think it looks great, but saying that it looks just as good as the E3 teaser is a level of insanity that I can't hang with. Then again, I guess we saw the same kind of posts when the gameplay footage of Killzone 2 was finally revealed and we had some crazies saying it looked even better than the E3 reveal.
I just feel that if this happened in an Ubisoft or EA thread, people would be flipping their shit and grabbing their pitchforks and torches.
Oh, well. It's really not worth fighting over.
I was impressed. Looks like stealth works a lot better and I liked the new moves.
Maybe is the video compression, but the gameplay video is nothing great, really, and not to troll or something else, I love Uncharted games. But it seems only a little improvement of PS3 games.
Yeah, seems like the same character model to me, only different lighting.
The only thing that matters in Naughty Dog games are gameplay footage, because they pre-render all of their cutscenes.
The E3 footage was claimed to be running in real time on the PS4 in engine at 60 fps. That specific scene may very well have been. No AI or anything else to account for obviously doesn't stress the anemic CPU in the PS4, allowing for more to be done without sacrificing frames.
It doesn't really matter, though, since they'll almost certainly go the pre-rendered route for cut scenes again. They've got plenty of space and it helps them mask load times, so it's a win-win solution.
I think the in-game footage looks great, for the record. I'm excited to play it. But if your argument is that no one ever expected the gameplay footage to look like the E3 reveal (which they shouldn't have in the first place), well, then I guess I'm arguing in here with no one. I don't know why anyone would care about cut scene footage, though.
Did anyone actually expect it to look as good as the E3 showing?! Of course its not going to.
As mainly a PC gamer I was hoping uncharted 4 would blow me away, the only games I wished for on PC last gen were TLOU and Uncharted because even with the lower overall IQ in terms of aliasing and lower resolution they still looked fantastic to me, in terms of art and fidelity.
I watched this expecting to be wowed and came away very disappointed, I have seen better facial animations in recent games, more inspiring environments and sadly even better fidelity overall, this has either been hugely downgraded or Naughty Dog have dropped the ball.
Maybe because they are aiming for 60fps? I dunno, looks underwhelming to me.
It doesn't matter what was acceptable last gen. You're simply moving goalposts there. Just think about what they could do with visuals in this game if they chose to go for 900p and crappy framerate, if it already looks comparable to them at higher resolution and framerate. It also does animate better than anything other there, including AC:U, both in cutscenes and gameplay. What bothers me in AC:U gameplay animations is that stuff like running is still a very visible repeated loop, and doesn't look natural at all.Since last generation mid twenties frame rate on consoles has always meant the game runs well. I don't remember playing a whole lot of games last gen that ran anywhere close to 60. Most of the games this gen run 30 or less on console.
Nothing in this video is beyond any of the best looking games we have seen so far. Character models, PBR materials, lighting, animation, texture res, indirect lighting, etc. all looks in line with what has been shown in other technologically impressive games.
Its the ps3 all over again. Uc1 wasn't that impressive to what they did in uc2.Oh, I think the game itself looks awesome, which is great, but I was definitely hoping for something that would completely raise the bar on real-time visuals. Maybe not a fair expectation...
Yeah, doesn't look like a generational leap at all. Lol
4 vs 3
Couldn't get a close up enough shot of Drake in 4 in the daylight.
The only thing that matters in Naughty Dog games are gameplay footage, because they pre-render all of their cutscenes.
The E3 footage was claimed to be running in real time on the PS4 in engine at 60 fps. That specific scene may very well have been. No AI or anything else to account for obviously doesn't stress the anemic CPU in the PS4, allowing for more to be done without sacrificing frames.
It doesn't really matter, though, since they'll almost certainly go the pre-rendered route for cut scenes again. They've got plenty of space and it helps them mask load times, so it's a win-win solution.
I think the in-game footage looks great, for the record. I'm excited to play it. But if your argument is that no one ever expected the gameplay footage to look like the E3 reveal (which they shouldn't have in the first place), well, then I guess I'm arguing in here with no one. I don't know why anyone would care about cut scene footage, though.
4 vs 3
Couldn't get a close up enough shot of Drake in 4 in the daylight.
I feel the need to download the gamersyde video and make a webm of the scene where he's looking out in the distance with the birds, that was just insane.Did the people who are complaining about the graphics watch the ending?
It's literally like a CG movie near the end. And there are so much plants being lit realistically. That doesn't come cheap at all to render.
Since last generation mid twenties frame rate on consoles has always meant the game runs well. I don't remember playing a whole lot of games last gen that ran anywhere close to 60. Most of the games this gen run 30 or less on console.
Nothing in this video is beyond any of the best looking games we have seen so far. Character models, PBR materials, lighting, animation, texture res, indirect lighting, etc. all looks in line with what has been shown in other technologically impressive games.
What makes this game look great to me is the encounter set up. It looks very dynamic and fast. Similar to how games like Sunset Overdrive and Quantum Break focus on playing faster and being more dynamic than the stuff we saw last gen.
The only thing better than the graphics is the level design.
What an incredible combat scenario. There are different levels, multiple pathways, the option to go stealthy or full combat. It's huge and open ended. They've had levels like this in previous games but they've never been this big.
Get me aboard the hype train.
No it hasn't. We just put up with it.
4 vs 3
Couldn't get a close up enough shot of Drake in 4 in the daylight.