You did not read the thread rules. Maximum 2 pics per post and 3 posts of the same game consecutively. I'd add this rule specially applies to such ugly looking games like F4.Fallout 4 "3K" with CAS sharpening
I don't think KyoZz would mind a few discussions peppered throughout the thread from time to time, if he does and says so I will replace this post with yet another low quality Horizon 4 or modded Fallout image I think everyone here is pretty civil since console warring doesn't exist inside these glorious walls. We know we're better than them and thus see no need for petty bickering amongst ourselves. just kidding... I like my Switch...
TL;DR: I think it has a few areas that need improvement, but it is a huge improvement over the previous title.There is no such thing as being too harsh if you're just being honest, if you don't like something you don't like it. It's not like you're saying "This is shit", just that something looks off to you. I don't think you're being unfair as the things you point out are all true. I think it's a huge leap over Gears 4 in both lighting, textures, and environmental effects and I'm happy with it. Gears 4 had all the same things you mention but was much more flat, character models and facial animations were so far behind 5. I think the big difference is Gears 1-3 and most of 4 takes place in a ruined world that just had 80% of it's surface set on fire by satelite lasers covered in dirt, ash, and grime. Most of Gears 5 is set in new colonies with a lot of shiny shit all over using screen space reflections on almost everything, which doesn't mix well with ambient shadows and single-point, non-traced lighting. The starting area of Gears 4 had the same issue, everything was new construction and almost seemed "too shiny" for a Gears title. I remember by Gears 3 I was starting to wonder if Gears 4 would just be a solid brown screen
I definitely agree there are other games that have much better lighting engines. I played Metro with the RTX shit on ultra and though the game produced terrible screenshots to the point I just stopped trying, I did find the game looked amazing in motion. I haven't tried Control yet, but I imagine it's the very much the same. I think the Gears 5 would benefit from higher shadow contrast. There is an AO slider in the game, and using it will make the shadows below objects like the bowls stand out a bit more, but it also darkens the environments a bit too much for my liking.
I really like the way the forest looks in Blair witch. It actually feels close to a proper forest that I can get lost in. So many wooded areas in other games dont really have any density at all.Blair Witch
I really like the way the forest looks in Blair witch. It actually feels close to a proper forest that I can get lost in. So many wooded areas in other games dont really have any density at all.
I don't think KyoZz would mind a few discussions peppered throughout the thread from time to time, if he does and says so I will replace this post with yet another low quality Horizon 4 or modded Fallout image I think everyone here is pretty civil since console warring doesn't exist inside these glorious walls. We know we're better than them and thus see no need for petty bickering amongst ourselves. just kidding... I like my Switch...
TL;DR: I think it has a few areas that need improvement, but it is a huge improvement over the previous title.There is no such thing as being too harsh if you're just being honest, if you don't like something you don't like it. It's not like you're saying "This is shit", just that something looks off to you. I don't think you're being unfair as the things you point out are all true. I think it's a huge leap over Gears 4 in both lighting, textures, and environmental effects and I'm happy with it. Gears 4 had all the same things you mention but was much more flat, character models and facial animations were so far behind 5. I think the big difference is Gears 1-3 and most of 4 takes place in a ruined world that just had 80% of it's surface set on fire by satelite lasers covered in dirt, ash, and grime. Most of Gears 5 is set in new colonies with a lot of shiny shit all over using screen space reflections on almost everything, which doesn't mix well with ambient shadows and single-point, non-traced lighting. The starting area of Gears 4 had the same issue, everything was new construction and almost seemed "too shiny" for a Gears title. I remember by Gears 3 I was starting to wonder if Gears 4 would just be a solid brown screen
I definitely agree there are other games that have much better lighting engines. I played Metro with the RTX shit on ultra and though the game produced terrible screenshots to the point I just stopped trying, I did find the game looked amazing in motion. I haven't tried Control yet, but I imagine it's the very much the same. I think the Gears 5 would benefit from higher shadow contrast. There is an AO slider in the game, and using it will make the shadows below objects like the bowls stand out a bit more, but it also darkens the environments a bit too much for my liking.
I agree with some of you, Gears 5 is a mixed bag on a graphical perspective and I don't understand why Alex from DF praised it that much. Something looks really off in every screen and gameplay I watched. Yes, it is very well optimized but at the same time it looks like they cut off the triangle count to keep those 60 fps on console. Interiors look decent enough because of their linearity but in open spaces I see the same lack of details I saw in the previous chapter, which let me very disappointed as well. Nothing to complain about character models, even if I am not a big fan of the art style.
Dunno, might be a matter of taste and perception. I find other games like Control much more appealing, just to make an example.Just started on pc and right off the bat it looks amazing. Not sure where this is coming from tbqh.