• 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.

FF16 is the first true next gen game

Hugare

Member
Assuming there’s no downgrade at launch? Yes this is the first true full next gen game with its micro/macro detail and large scale battles.

landscapes_of_ffxvi_-h8ihp.jpg

landscapes_of_ffxvi_-30ezv.jpg

landscapes_of_ffxvi_-xmcwx.jpg

The first screenshot is moody, but you cant see shit

What's impressive about screenshot 2? The .JPEG of a city in the background? Or the 2 meters distance of LOD for grass?

Screenshot 3 is even worse. No ambient occlusion for the grass on the left, fake looking rain, no geometry at all on the ground, copy and paste trees ....

FF XVI:

KiFxoKj.jpg


i3QZvU7.jpg



FF XV:

I8IZrlY.jpg



Some stuff is better, obviously, but I dont see these 2 games being one generation apart
 
Last edited:

Variahunter

Member
Its not always about graphics that make it next gen, but what next gen brings to the table. Seemless transitions, quick load times, more terrain detail.
Terrain detail is not graphics ?
And I know that, I have talked about it, with the rift transition in Ratchet.
 
Looked incredible start to finish while running buttery smooth with RT and barely any loading times.

It felt like a first glimpse of what we can expect of next-gen, but instead we went back to poorly optimized cross-gen.
That statement applies to plenty of 8th gen games patched to run, load and run better on PS5.
 

Minsc

Gold Member
Maybe my impression will change when I play it, but nothing looks appealing about this game to me. Definitely the least excited for a FF I've been, and I mean below FFXIII and FFXV as well.
 

Fbh

Member
It's my most hyped game of the year but I don't think the graphics are anything incredible.
Horizon came out a year ago, it's a true open world and looks substantially better. If Rockstar would bother to release a 60fps mode for RDR2 it would probably look nicer too.

Also LOL at people saying Ratchet looks almost the same as the 2016 remake:
 

Variahunter

Member
The first screenshot is moody, but you cant see shit

What's impressive about screenshot 2? The .JPEG of a city in the background? Or the 2 meters distance of LOD for grass?

Screenshot 3 is even worse. No ambient occlusion for the grass on the left, fake looking rain, no geometry at all on the ground, copy and paste trees ....

FF XVI:

KiFxoKj.jpg


i3QZvU7.jpg



FF XV:

I8IZrlY.jpg



Some stuff is better, obviously, but I dont see these 2 games being one generation apart
oI1ip8Q.jpg


qguZX2M.jpg

DbpsUwd.jpg
rDDJY4Z.jpg


Yeah really similar to FFXV.

Tom Delonge Wtf GIF


Plus you're cherry picking the worst quality possible for FFXVI and the windows edition for FFXV.



Michael Jordan Lol GIF
 
Last edited:
It's my most hyped game of the year but I don't think the graphics are anything incredible.
Horizon came out a year ago, it's a true open world and looks substantially better. If Rockstar would bother to release a 60fps mode for RDR2 it would probably look nicer too.

Also LOL at people saying Ratchet looks almost the same as the 2016 remake:

For a 5 year gap spanning across a different generation there should be a much bigger difference.

Case in point: Into the Nexus vs 2016





Way bigger leap.
 
The first screenshot is moody, but you cant see shit

What's impressive about screenshot 2? The .JPEG of a city in the background? Or the 2 meters distance of LOD for grass?

Screenshot 3 is even worse. No ambient occlusion for the grass on the left, fake looking rain, no geometry at all on the ground, copy and paste trees ....

FF XVI:

KiFxoKj.jpg


i3QZvU7.jpg



FF XV:

I8IZrlY.jpg



Some stuff is better, obviously, but I dont see these 2 games being one generation apart
then you aren't looking that hard. The difference iin the small details is huge, right down to the skin, rocks, and sharpness of the backgrounds.

The days of huge leaps in graphical fidelity are over, now it's about performance, fast loading, and small details. People expecting the IQ jump of PS2 to PS3 are being unreasonable. I'm far more enthused about Quality of Life improvements than I am about graphics. I have a PC with 4090 and laptop with a 4080, obviously the idea that " only next Gen can do this" is ridiculous, but you're using low res screenshots to make an argument that there are no improvements. Look at both of these scenes on a 4k screen from the original source (the games), instead of randomly grabbed screenshots, and the visual difference would be much bigger.

Just how much more blur is used in these FFXV shots should tell you everything you need to know. XVI isn't using extreme blur to smooth out transitions from one texture to the next. and like I said, look at the texture of the beast clive is fighting, which is just a regular monster, and then look at the textures on the last shot. Even in screen grabs, the texture improvements are massive.

I'm completely convinced a lot of people don't know what they are looking for when comparing graphical fidelity. Also, I think too many people don't see the optometrist enough (because that shit is expensive, and the decline of sight happens so slowly people don't notice, not because I think people are idiots or anything).
 

Shifty1897

Member
Numbers spraying all over the screen like a free to play slot machine app and QTE's straight out of Asura's Wrath. Looks like another modern FF misfire to me.
 
Last edited:

Vblad88

Member
This game better kikaz in cutscenes to justify it's crazy gameplay to cutscene time ratio. That one is definitely from PS2 era (Yakuza and MGS)...
 

Dutchy

Member
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to all the classic FF stuff removed from XVI.

It may be good or bad on its own but it won’t be anything close to previous FF games for sure.
Looks good on it's own for sure. But nothing has quite scratched my turn based jrpg itch since oldschool FF
 
This game better kikaz in cutscenes to justify it's crazy gameplay to cutscene time ratio. That one is definitely from PS2 era (Yakuza and MGS)...
I mean, are you pretending you know what that ratio is? Because like EVERY FF, there will be many hours of gameplay for every hour of cutscene. Also, it's a JRPG. I don't get the comments where people are upset that JRPG's are what JRPG's have always been.
 

Oof85

Member
crazy how they live rent free in your head
Not at all.

I always kinda forget they're still a thing because it's such inept game design imo.

But tbh I don't really play games with press A for awesome mechanics.
It's just not attractive to me.
 

RaduN

Member
imagine being a release title for the machine and still being the top tier dog for graphics showcase
The Bouncer on ps2.

Launch title, and while it was not a good game, it had gorgeous graphics and special effects. I mean, they literally threw in everything the ps2 was able to do (high poly count, 60 fps, advanced particles, depth of field, bloom...oh the BLoOm, motion blur, etc).


It's true that in terms of fine details, it's not top tier, bu FF16 looks very good, and i expect a lot of madness on screen and (mostly) realtime cutscenes, with movie-level direction.
 
So basically a PS4 game with minor resolution, practically unnoticeable graphical tweaks like ray tracing and faster loading times?

I mean there are countless PS4 games ported to PS5 where they bumped the frame rate and decreased loading times. I guess say inFAMOUS Second Son and Horizon Zero Dawn are now "next gen" games by you rlogic.
What are you talking about? What PS4 has anything to do with Ratchet on PS5?
 
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to all the classic FF stuff removed from XVI.

It may be good or bad on its own but it won’t be anything close to previous FF games for sure.
Ive been playing FF since 1989. It's far past time shitty turn based combat dissapeared.
final fantasy rly went from being my fav turn based jrpg to 3d monster battles lol
No, it didn't. They were very clear the Eikon battles are parts of major story beats.
Like the OP was full of hyperbole, but so are these nonsense hot takes.
Remember when bosses in Final Fantasy used to involve strategy? Now it's "Slap the button fast BRO!!!".
You mean like never in the history of mainline FF? Also, if you think DMC is "Slap the button fast bro", you definitely don't understand DMC. You can get by doing that, but you'll never actually get good at it.

If you're pretending turn based games took strategy, then we have a different idea of what strategy entails. The only FF games that ever required strategy were online (and even then, very little).
 
Last edited:
The Bouncer on ps2.

Launch title, and while it was not a good game, it had gorgeous graphics and special effects. I mean, they literally threw in everything the ps2 was able to do (high poly count, 60 fps, advanced particles, depth of field, bloom...oh the BLoOm, motion blur, etc).


It's true that in terms of fine details, it's not top tier, bu FF16 looks very good, and i expect a lot of madness on screen and (mostly) realtime cutscenes, with movie-level direction.
how is a game released a year after launch a launch title?
 
Last edited:

sloppyjoe_gamer

Gold Member
Ratchet and Clank was the 1st true next gen title.

It looked and played fantastic and ever since then, we've really only had mostly shinier PS4 looking games. My guess and hope is it's because devs are still doing this crossgen bullshit when making their games, and that once everything is truly PS5 only, we'll start to see things look more as they should in this gen.
 
Top Bottom