Crowbcat - Gears 5 lacks weight and intensity

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
1,314
1,157
325
No, it's the whole package that makes it technically better: graphics on par with the best, 4K, 60fps, absolutely stunning HDR implementation...



Yeah, in perfomance mode, at 1080p.

When it runs with the highest resolution (which is 2K-ish), it drops below 30fps in combats.
Not even close to the best and it doesn't even maintain native 4K, it runs as a dynamic resolution.

God of War drops frames to 30s and it's not running on the best hardware.


It's obvious you don't know what you're talking about. lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: demigod

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
1,314
1,157
325
Comparing Gears 5 with GoW doesn't really makes sense. They have to drop the resolution to 1080p to have a variable 40-60fps.

Gears 5 manages to hold a higher framerate with much higher resolution which is a technical feat. Obviously it won't look as good as GoW running in Resolution mode, but the framerate difference is night and day.
You're not getting it.

Gears 5 runs at 60fps on the Xbox One X, which is more POWERFUL than the PlayStation 4 Pro.

Gears 5 runs at a dynamic resolution, which drops down to 1080p

As explained by VG Tech

Xbox One X uses a dynamic resolution with the lowest native resolution found being 1920x1080 and the highest native resolution found being approximately 3200x1800. A form of temporal reconstruction is used that can increase the pixel count to 3840x2160 and pixel counts at 3840x2160 are common due to this temporal reconstruction. The native resolution is higher for the 30fps real time cutscenes on Xbox One X with the lowest and highest native resolutions found during them being approximately 2773x1560 and 3840x2160 respectively.
You guys are acting like both games are running on the exact same hardware when they're not.


One is running on the Xbox One X and the other is running on the PlayStation 4 Pro. You're clearly going to get better performance and higher resolution running on the better hardware.
 

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
1,314
1,157
325
Why does the fact that Gears 5 is a good looking game trigger so many people? It's so fucking funny but I'm enjoying the show, so please carry on.
People agree that it's a good looking game, but calling it the best is just funny.

I'm sure more people are going to call the Last of Us Part II the best looking game and people in here are going disagree and still go with Gears.

And people are saying because it's an Xbox game - lol. No.

When I played Horizon 4, I was impressed and I literally said "Wow." I don't get that same feeling with Gears. Good graphics, but I wouldn't put it as the best looking.
 

Jon Neu

..he neus nothing
Jan 21, 2018
1,371
1,561
515
Republic of Catalonia
Not even close to the best
If you and thelastworld say so, I don't have any other option but to believe you.

God of War drops frames to 30s and it's not running on the best hardware.
Well, that's like... the point.

It's obvious you don't know what you're talking about. lol.
Thank God we have you to enlighten us.

I'm sure more people are going to call the Last of Us Part II the best looking game and people in here are going disagree and still go with Gears.
If TLOU2 is like the gameplay we have seen, it's going to be the best looking game by far. Much better than Gears 5.

See? Giving an opinion without thinking with your fanboyish mind it's actually easy if you try.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Godzilla Emu

Pallas

Gold Member
May 9, 2018
1,513
1,295
490
Tennessee
The game looks beautiful, as to say it’s the CURRENTbest looking game ever, I don’t know, RDR2 has probably been the most impressive game this gen, especially what it was able to accomplish on the Xbox One X. I also think it’s silly to compare it to TLOU2 which hasn’t even been released yet. I’d say compare it to a similar game on the PS4, but I’m not sure if there is one.

I will say the nitpicking is kind of funny because it’s from the typical crowd.
 

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
1,314
1,157
325
If you and thelastworld say so, I don't have any other option but to believe you.



Well, that's like... the point.



Thank God we have you to enlighten us.



If TLOU2 is like the gameplay we have seen, it's going to be the best looking game by far. Much better than Gears 5.

See? Giving an opinion without thinking with your fanboyish mind it's actually easy if you try.
No.

Just because people disagree with you, that doesn't mean someone has a fanboyish mind.

You're ignoring the fact that the game is running at 60fps on the Xbox One X and taking advantage of the improved hardware. God of War, which hits 60fps can in fact take advantage of the hardware, too. Both games running at 60fps wouldn't be technically impressive game since it's just running on superior hardware.

You're pointing to the game running at 60fps as being technically impressive, when there are many things other than higher res, hdr that makes a game technically impressive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: demigod

Jon Neu

..he neus nothing
Jan 21, 2018
1,371
1,561
515
Republic of Catalonia
No.

Just because people disagree with you, that doesn't mean someone has a fanboyish mind.
That's true, but I'm afraid that's the precise case we are dealing with here.

You're ignoring the fact that the game is running at 60fps on the Xbox One X and taking advantage of the improved hardware. God of War, which hits 60fps can in fact take advantage of the hardware, too. Both games running at 60fps wouldn't be technically impressive game since it's just running on superior hardware.
Again dude, that is just like... the point.

The Xbox One X has better hardware, so therefore can pull off a game that looks as good as the best so far, but also with higher resolution and fps than those.

And that's why the press is saying is the best looking game to date. It's not a conspiracy.

You're pointing to the game running at 60fps as being technically impressive, when there are many things other than higher res, hdr that makes a game technically impressive.
Precisely is the full package that makes it impressive.
 

VectorVictor

Member
Jun 6, 2016
582
166
285
I don't know about Gears of War 5 being *THE* best looking game this gen so far, but it's pretty damn close and in good company with Horizon: Zero Dawn, Dad of War, and Forza Horizon 3 and 4 (emphasis on the latter). And the game, save for glitches already mentioned, plays and runs smooth on a XBO:X and in 4K on HDR.

Frankly, I don't get what all the consternation is about--if Gears was a Sony exclusive, people would be doing cartwheels and bending over backwards to compliment how beautiful it looks. Is it such a stretch to these same gamers that Microsoft can not only have a great playing and great looking game? Hell, they put out some of *THE* best of them last gen...if anything, it's Microsoft getting back to form, and at a good time too (with the new console on the horizon).
 
Last edited:

Sky87

Member
Nov 27, 2015
513
12
260
You're not getting it.

Gears 5 runs at 60fps on the Xbox One X, which is more POWERFUL than the PlayStation 4 Pro.

Gears 5 runs at a dynamic resolution, which drops down to 1080p

As explained by VG Tech



You guys are acting like both games are running on the exact same hardware when they're not.


One is running on the Xbox One X and the other is running on the PlayStation 4 Pro. You're clearly going to get better performance and higher resolution running on the better hardware.
It's the comparison i don't understand. One game runs at 1080p 100% of the time and with framerates more unstable than the other game. The other game runs close to 60fps at all times and very rarely drops as low as 1080p. I'm not sure why GoW is even brought up.

If GoW is technically impressive, why isn't Gears 5?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: D_Dark

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
1,314
1,157
325
That's true, but I'm afraid that's the precise case we are dealing with here.



Again dude, that is just like... the point.

The Xbox One X has better hardware, so therefore can pull off a game that looks as good as the best so far, but also with higher resolution and fps than those.

And that's why the press is saying is the best looking game to date. It's not a conspiracy.



Precisely is the full package that makes it impressive.
They said God of War was the best looking game when it released.
They said the same when Red Dead Redemption 2 was out.
Called Metro Exodus Best looking open world game.

List goes on.

Seems like you're not aware that people generally shouting best looking game when a new game is released. But when the honeymood phase is over, people generally go back to what actually looks great and that's when you see HZD, UC4, RDR2 at the top of the list.


The game's physics are not on par with the others. We're talking about the physics in the environment, characters etc. Cut back in these aspects is what happens when you want to achieve stable frame-rate and makes things less technically impressive.
That's true, but I'm afraid that's the precise case we are dealing with here.



Again dude, that is just like... the point.

The Xbox One X has better hardware, so therefore can pull off a game that looks as good as the best so far, but also with higher resolution and fps than those.

And that's why the press is saying is the best looking game to date. It's not a conspiracy.



Precisely is the full package that makes it impressive.
lol

You don't realize is that the press is always shouting "the best" of something whenever something is released.

Metro Exodus the best shooter in years.

Said when God of War was released.

It happens, yet people still consider Horizon Zero Dawn as a better looking game than Gears.


Funny how people consider the Last of Us game the best game ever made, yet people on here would fuss and fight and call it one of the most overhyped\overrated games ever. But the difference is that way more people call TLOU one of the best games ever made way more than people who are calling Gears the best.

The Xbox One X has better hardware, so therefore can pull off a game that looks as good as the best so far, but also with higher resolution and fps than those.
Like I said before, they have made a lot of cuts to the environment. Physics are not on par. The geometry in the environment are less appealing than the games that I mentioned. With those cutbacks, you will get better performance.



If I do a comparing with the interior design of both titles, I cannot put Gears of War on par with this.

Starting at 55:00 shows an interior house

You can also compare this to the orphanage interior scene.
Gears of War looks flat in comparison to Uncharted 4, primarily due to the lighting.

The environment flows together because the art direction is better.

4K textures, HRD and Higher res doesn't make the environment more impressive. The lighting in ND games are just about the best in the industry and that's why many people compare games to UC4 and now TLOU 2.
 

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
1,314
1,157
325
It's the comparison i don't understand. One game runs at 1080p 100% of the time and with framerates more unstable than the other game. The other game runs close to 60fps at all times and very rarely drops as low as 1080p. I'm not sure why GoW is even brought up.

If GoW is technically impressive, why isn't Gears 5?
It's simple.

Gears 5 is running on the Xbox One X, which is SUPERIOR than the PlayStation 4 Pro. You're clearly going to get advantage of teaching a higher res and higher frame-rate. That alone does not make a game more technically impressive.
 

Sky87

Member
Nov 27, 2015
513
12
260
It's simple.

Gears 5 is running on the Xbox One X, which is SUPERIOR than the PlayStation 4 Pro. You're clearly going to get advantage of teaching a higher res and higher frame-rate. That alone does not make a game more technically impressive.
How about this then?

Uncharted 4/GoW/TLoU2/Horizon etc all run at 30fps, which affords a MUCH higher budget for fidelity, which is why comparing 30fps games with 60fps games makes no sense. If a game running at 30fps with good visuals is impressive, you can say the same for a game running at 60fps with four times higher pixel count. And it's not like Gears 5 looks way worse than any of the titles you've mentioned.

To start an argument with a poster just because he says Gears 5 is technically impressive and then proceed to use 30fps games to try and prove a point is weird to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pr0cs

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
1,314
1,157
325
How about this then?

Uncharted 4/GoW/TLoU2/Horizon etc all run at 30fps, which affords a MUCH higher budget for fidelity, which is why comparing 30fps games with 60fps games makes no sense. If a game running at 30fps with good visuals is impressive, you can say the same for a game running at 60fps with four times higher pixel count. And it's not like Gears 5 looks way worse than any of the titles you've mentioned.

To start an argument with a poster just because he says Gears 5 is technically impressive and then proceed to use 30fps games to try and prove a point is weird to me.
Those PS4 games are locked at 30fps.

The game is clearly capable of running at a higher frame-rate, but a stable 30 is better than an unlocked frame-rate that hovers around 40.

The game is running at a dynamic resolution, which goes all the way down to 1080p. There cuts made to achieve those 60fps and you're not getting that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thelastword

Sky87

Member
Nov 27, 2015
513
12
260
Those PS4 games are locked at 30fps.

The game is clearly capable of running at a higher frame-rate, but a stable 30 is better than an unlocked frame-rate that hovers around 40.

The game is running at a dynamic resolution, which goes all the way down to 1080p. There cuts made to achieve those 60fps and you're not getting that.
You seem to make a lot of judgments based on assumptions. You assume games are ''clearly capable'' of higher framerates that that they'd hover around 40fps. How could you even know this? And you also make it sound like 1080p in Gears 5 is a common thing. Do you know how many frames that actually will render at that resolution in a 30 minute gameplay segment?

I have played every game you've listed on an OLED and i can tell you that i'm more impressed of the technical feat they managed with Gears 5 when you consider both the visuals and framerate.
 

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
1,314
1,157
325
You seem to make a lot of judgments based on assumptions. You assume games are ''clearly capable'' of higher framerates that that they'd hover around 40fps. How could you even know this? And you also make it sound like 1080p in Gears 5 is a common thing. Do you know how many frames that actually will render at that resolution in a 30 minute gameplay segment?

I have played every game you've listed on an OLED and i can tell you that i'm more impressed of the technical feat they managed with Gears 5 when you consider both the visuals and framerate.

Like I said in my previous post. If a game is running at 1080p 30fps, it an in fact run better on superior hardware, which is a known fact.

So can anyone really argue that if a game is running at 1080p 30fps on base PS4, you won't get better frame-rate on the PlayStation 4 Pro?

The answer is obvious, you will get better frame-rate.

These games are also locked at 30fps, and not every area in the game is equally as demanding, which means it's capable of going a bit higher in less demanding areas.

I never said Gears 5 at 1080p was a common thing, you're trying to make people believe it's running at native 4K most of the time when it's not.

You're clearly going to get better performance with better hardware.

You're also trying to take my words out of context.

AROUND anywhere around that number, even 35fps. With UC4 mutliplayer, we can see that the engine is capable of hitting 60fps on both the PS4 and the PlayStation 4 Pro. The question is what would they have to cut from the game to make it run at 60fps during single player on the PS4 Pro.
 

gatti-man

Member
Aug 30, 2010
8,087
170
795
40
Anyone taking crowbat seriously lmao take a major L


He’s not wrong though. The lack of gun feedback and smoothly numb animations really hurt the game. It takes hours to get used to and doesn’t feel like gears at all. You’re supposed to be this big lumbering guy/girl and it feels like you’re dainty and light. Same thing with taking damage.
 

thelastword

Member
Apr 7, 2006
8,417
2,392
1,380
Well, unlike you, I have the capacity to be objective.

MS this gen have been utterly disgusting for the most part, they sold an underpowered piece of trash for a lot of money, betraying what always was the mark of the Xbox brand: graphical power. They also didn't make new games, they are just living on the legacy of the first Xbox and the Xbox 360.

But thanks to God, it seems they have learned from their mistakes; the Xbox One X is the best console by far and they are buying studios and creating others. Hopefully that translates into meaningful new IP's that can carry the brand.

I hope Scarlett follows this last steps and MS goes back to what make the Xbox brand great in the first place.
Being objective is conceding that DF and even Gaming Bolt got many stats and features wrong when they fellated Gears 5. That is undeniable and all the counter videos prove it. For some reason, some of you guys want to keep on pressing DF's conclusion and analysis as anything but a hoax, even if they got literally everything wrong.

Then the memes about "poor man's df", "VG Tech" who always puts df to shame relative to solid and objective data, where df has to update their writeups or apologize.......You can't be singing the praise of DF and their conclusions when their method to get there is so convoluted.....

Stop shaming smaller youtubers because they are consistently right, are more honest and do more thorough work. Stop calling DF "PROFESSIONALS", this is not "man on fire" professionalism is denoted by the quality of your work, how honest your work is.... Not the results you try to sway against the real facts because of your influence; ie... bigger youtuber, backed by Eurogamer, MS etc....


Literally nobody has said this.
I quoted you....

Well, in a sense, you are right. You are as transparent as an open book.

A book called: I'm the biggest Sony shill ever.



So far, the people that don't agree are exactly the same type of people.

I would be worried when a large amount of the other types of people disagree, but so far, the people who most oppose are the same type of people.
You use people or mobs to draw a conclusion, I use my eyes and call it how I see it. I use stats and objective data, that's why I support VG Tech and any one who could objectively make their case like King Thrash Gaming. These guys did not speak out their ass and season you with opinions, they showed you DF's folly in video form or used hard data........ Yet you want to sit here and talk about being objective....when you support wrong information.... Come on son...

Actually, what triggers some type of people is hearing that is the best looking game ever. Then they come with the conspiracy theories about why some of the most respected technical press of the medium praises the game in such manner.

The salty reactions against the game are being hilarious.
Nobody is triggered, people are just tired of persons making excuses for media outlets on the face of clear lies and inconsistent tech work.....

The more DF is proven to be sneaky and snakey with their reporting the more, "the same persons" try to boost the outfit's credibility by the same pen......

Tell me, if DF did such bad reporting with a Sony game, where physics and basic atd had gone awash, would you be here defending them just the same........ And before you say I'm a Sony Shill, I'll let you know, that I was one of the first posters who called Guerilla out on their reprojection technique, more so, what they pitched it as and how unbecoming they were with the details before launch, I was also the one who said the results were not ideal with lots of interlacing and being clearly blurrier than the main game and still not hitting 60fps in MP anyway. As I always tell folk, my post history is there. I stand by my word and I always try to be as honest as I can. Objective data trumps all...
 
  • Fire
Reactions: demigod

v1oz

Member
Apr 11, 2010
2,328
56
695
Gears 4 & 5 are different to Gears 1 - 3 in tone. The way violence/gore is animated is toned down and less visceral in the Coalition games. The Coalition is a different studio to Epic and they're doing their own take on the Gears formula with more of an emphasis on making the characters believable.

Think of it this way if someone else makes Metal Gear Solid games in future they'd be different to the ones made by Kojima.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nikolino840

NahaNago

Member
Aug 29, 2014
2,747
556
435
So why only knitpick what you deem to be negative about the presentation? Why not also give props where the physics excel? There are plenty of examples strewn throughout the campaign. This seems to be a fairly lopsided analysis and lacks even a modicum of objectivity
we are knitpicking a video that knitpicks a video, knitpicking a game , that a dev knitpicked over.

You took the bait, I saw it from a mile away......He wanted you to list the points in the video, just to counter against it, not out of genuine interest...….If he was interested in the video, all that time in which he's debating you he could have watched the video at least 3 times and form his own opinion and takes from a more solid point of reference.

In any case, this video was circulated in many threads very early yesterday, anyone who was genuinely interested to see what was highlighted would have done so by now......This poster just wanted a launching platform to dismiss the video, but approaches it as one "who has not watched" but wants to know the lowdown. Pretty cookie cutter bait tbh......
I was thinking that this was getting ridiculous. thanks.
 
Last edited:

Jigsaah

Member
Jan 31, 2018
2,139
1,382
440
we are knitpicking a video that knitpicks a video, knitpicking a game , that a dev knitpicked over.
This doesn't answer the question. If there's no alterior motive, wouldn't you pour over both the positive and negative details? Why only focus on what you feel is missing from the game?
 

NahaNago

Member
Aug 29, 2014
2,747
556
435
This doesn't answer the question. If there's no alterior motive, wouldn't you pour over both the positive and negative details? Why only focus on what you feel is missing from the game?
I didn't make the video , so watch it for yourself to make your own conclusions from it.
 

Explosive Zombie

Formerly 'ExplosiveZombie'
Aug 28, 2019
151
158
265
It's really weird how people are getting accused of just being console whores or something over this. But to add fuel to the fire, Gears 5 looks almost as good as Uncharted 2 to me. Really impressive, Microsoft, maybe by next gen you'll be making games at the PS4 level. I gotta say all this talk of framerates and resolutions is ridiculous, too, if you need so many qualifiers for why the game is impressive maybe it's just not?
 
  • Like
  • LOL
Reactions: demigod and Jon Neu

Clear

Member
Feb 2, 2009
9,002
2,015
980
Most of this stuff is just the nips and tucks that any dev needs to make in order to hit 60fps.
Effects being simplified or disabled on a per-instance basis in order to manage load, its the essence of optimization.

On one hand its admirable, but on the other I can understand why some might feel its a step back. The reality however is that as games are part-simulation and part illusion, its just how things are done. You cant simply rewrite stuff every time in order to make it faster.
 

Jon Neu

..he neus nothing
Jan 21, 2018
1,371
1,561
515
Republic of Catalonia
Being objective is conceding that DF and even Gaming Bolt got many stats and features wrong when they fellated Gears 5. That is undeniable and all the counter videos prove it. For some reason, some of you guys want to keep on pressing DF's conclusion and analysis as anything but a hoax, even if they got literally everything wrong.

Then the memes about "poor man's df", "VG Tech" who always puts df to shame relative to solid and objective data, where df has to update their writeups or apologize.......You can't be singing the praise of DF and their conclusions when their method to get there is so convoluted.....

Stop shaming smaller youtubers because they are consistently right, are more honest and do more thorough work. Stop calling DF "PROFESSIONALS", this is not "man on fire" professionalism is denoted by the quality of your work, how honest your work is.... Not the results you try to sway against the real facts because of your influence; ie... bigger youtuber, backed by Eurogamer, MS etc....
No, being objective is not being like you, who just come here with the most convoluted and trashy bullshit ever just to try and do damage control for Sony and not recognize that Gears 5 is a technical feat.

If all your "facts" are like this, I think we can all start to understand a lot of things.

You use people or mobs to draw a conclusion, I use my eyes and call it how I see it.
Mobs? It's not my fault most people can see your utterly embarassing act. Again, you are an open book and you can't fool anybody about your extremely fanboyish takes on everything MS/Sony related.

You are literally the person most full of shit of the entire forum. If DF and others were praising a Sony exclusive then you would use it till the end of times, you would be fucking ecstatic, but it's a MS exclusive and therefore "your eyes" tell you to come here and vomit all the stupid nonsense about conspiracies and "facts" just for trying to discredit the game.

Wow, that's a game?..... I thought that was real.......
:messenger_tears_of_joy::messenger_tears_of_joy::messenger_tears_of_joy::messenger_tears_of_joy:

The embarassment that keeps on and on and on.
 
Last edited:

Rolling_Start

Member
Jul 25, 2019
140
228
245
God damn. How the fook is a Gears 5 thread getting spammed by people spunking over shots of a PS4 exclusive? What kind of emotional deficiencies are driving this?

It's really weird how people are getting accused of just being console whores or something over this. But to add fuel to the fire, Gears 5 looks almost as good as Uncharted 2 to me. Really impressive, Microsoft, maybe by next gen you'll be making games at the PS4 level. I gotta say all this talk of framerates and resolutions is ridiculous, too, if you need so many qualifiers for why the game is impressive maybe it's just not?
Real time rendering means there are limits on the amount of maths you can do per frame. Double the frame time means double the maths. And with modern temporal reconstruction techniques, you can't even judge the output of one frame in isolation.

You may considerate it ridiculous, but ignoring the time component of real time graphics doesn't change the fact that time is an absolutely core and inescapable element of it!
 

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
1,314
1,157
325
God damn. How the fook is a Gears 5 thread getting spammed by people spunking over shots of a PS4 exclusive? What kind of emotional deficiencies are driving this?



Real time rendering means there are limits on the amount of maths you can do per frame. Double the frame time means double the maths. And with modern temporal reconstruction techniques, you can't even judge the output of one frame in isolation.

You may considerate it ridiculous, but ignoring the time component of real time graphics doesn't change the fact that time is an absolutely core and inescapable element of it!
This is about the weak points of the technical aspect of Gear of War 5.

PS4 exclusives are going to mentioned because they have been considered among the best, along with RDR2.

People need to stop getting defensive when this thread is ABOUT the best looking games in the industry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thelastword

Jon Neu

..he neus nothing
Jan 21, 2018
1,371
1,561
515
Republic of Catalonia
God damn. How the fook is a Gears 5 thread getting spammed by people spunking over shots of a PS4 exclusive? What kind of emotional deficiencies are driving this?
But they look real! Literally like real life!!1!

A good test for objectivity.

But to add fuel to the fire, Gears 5 looks almost as good as Uncharted 2 to me. Really impressive, Microsoft, maybe by next gen you'll be making games at the PS4 level.
Oh boy, I almost missed this absolute masterpiece.

Gears 5 threads are like a trap for the most crazy Sony fanboys.
 

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
1,314
1,157
325
Video was posted after I made my post.

It mentioned the cut-backs they had to make at the end.

The game does drop to low 50s during action sequences, along with having a dynamic resolution.

He also mentions the cutbacks they had to make to achieve that 60fps mark, in which he specifically mentions the physics and enemies moving at half the refresh rate.

Of course, I'm labeled fanboy for stating the obvious, which many people on here don't realize what has been done to achieve the 60fps mark.

 
  • Like
Reactions: demigod

Rolling_Start

Member
Jul 25, 2019
140
228
245
This is about the weak points of the technical aspect of Gear of War 5.

PS4 exclusives are going to mentioned because they have been considered among the best, along with RDR2.

People need to stop getting defensive when this thread is ABOUT the best looking games in the industry.
No, the thread is "Crowbcat - Gears 5 lacks weight and intensity".

But we're getting people debasing themselves over screenshots of an exclusive game from a rival platform. It's awful.

We're even getting particularly bizarre statements about framerate not being relevant in evaluating real time graphics. Which is all kinds of messed up, any way you try and look at the "technical aspects" (as you say) of Gears 5.
 

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
1,314
1,157
325
No, the thread is "Crowbcat - Gears 5 lacks weight and intensity".

But we're getting people debasing themselves over screenshots of an exclusive game from a rival platform. It's awful.

We're even getting particularly bizarre statements about framerate not being relevant in evaluating real time graphics. Which is all kinds of messed up, any way you try and look at the "technical aspects" (as you say) of Gears 5.
Maybe you should watch the video instead of whining.

Or at last you should've read the description of the video.

"Pay attention to gunplay, sound design, camera, animation and physics."


If you actually read the thread, people are talking about how this is the most impressive technically advanced game, but the video proves differently.

The cutbacks in the video is the reason why the game is able to achieve 60fps compared to other games with far better environmental effects, physics and animations.

People in here have stated that this is the best looking game this generation, and people disagree.

It's a discussion between the best games of the industry.
 
  • Fire
Reactions: demigod

Explosive Zombie

Formerly 'ExplosiveZombie'
Aug 28, 2019
151
158
265
"debasing themselves" wtf is this guy on about? Some outlets tried claiming Gears 5 is the best looking game ever, we're pointing out how it's not... at all. The best looking game ever these outlets espoused didn't come with qualifiers like "it mostly hits 60 fps" or "it's mostly 4k but also dynamic resolution" so every single person who prattles on about how it's impressive for looking how it does while allegedly consistently hitting such metrics isn't actually defending what was said by the press outlets in question.
 

Rolling_Start

Member
Jul 25, 2019
140
228
245
Maybe you should watch the video instead of whining.

Or at last you should've read the description of the video.

"Pay attention to gunplay, sound design, camera, animation and physics."
What is this new pivot?

I don't have an issue with any of that. I wasn't talking about that. The things I had an issue with were people circle jerking over PS4 exclusive screenshots (fine, but maybe in the relevant thread), and someone saying that frame rate / frame time isn't part of real time graphics. Which is insanity.

Lets stay on point here. Lets focus on the things I said I have an issue with, and not substitute in some replacement argument about gunplay and physics that I never made.

If you actually read the thread, people are talking about how this is the most impressive technically advanced game, but the video proves differently.
No, it doesn't. Opinion isn't proof, it's not quantifiable. But I don't have a problem with that opinion, they should have it if they want to.

I have a problem with the things I have a problem with.

The cutbacks in the video is the reason why the game is able to achieve 60fps compared to other games with far better environmental effects, physics and animations.

People in here have stated that this is the best looking game this generation, and people disagree.

It's a discussion between the best games of the industry.
Posting screenshots of a rival platform's exclusive while you and other believers pretend to come is not part of a discussion.

Video was posted after I made my post.

It mentioned the cut-backs they had to make at the end.

The game does drop to low 50s during action sequences, along with having a dynamic resolution.

He also mentions the cutbacks they had to make to achieve that 60fps mark, in which he specifically mentions the physics and enemies moving at half the refresh rate.

Of course, I'm labeled fanboy for stating the obvious, which many people on here don't realize what has been done to achieve the 60fps mark.

"Gears 5 is finally here and boy oh boy it's a belter."

"... it's a very impressive game overall, possibly one of the best looking unreal engine 4 titles I've seen."

"Visually it's a beautiful looking game, very strong and artistically driven"


At the very least he was rather impressed by it. And he talked about it for nearly 25 minutes without inserting screenshot of a rival platform exclusive and groaning in delight. Oh wow! Who knew that was possible??

And btw, if Gears 4 was 30 fps (some animations were 20), having some enemies animate (not move as you say, but animate) at half of 60 (that being 30) isn't a "cut back." ;)

60 hz obviously comes at a cost, but at least try and look at where that cost is instead of making general criticisms that don't really fit.

Uncharted 4 looks fucking brilliant [in stills]*. Gears 5 looks very, very good [even in stills]* and moves like a Ninja, especially considering what it's doing and how scalable it is. I don't feel the need state one as being the ultimate achiever and the other as being a loser. They do different things, are different games, and have different challenges to overcome. I'm fine with that.

*Want to be clear what I'm talking about here. Individual images compared to the moving image. More updates per seconds isn't free. Optimal output per frame comes at the cost of temporal resolution.
 
Last edited:

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
1,314
1,157
325
What is this new pivot?

I don't have an issue with any of that. I wasn't talking about that. The things I had an issue with were people circle jerking over PS4 exclusive screenshots (fine, but maybe in the relevant thread), and someone saying that frame rate / frame time isn't part of real time graphics. Which is insanity.

Lets stay on point here. Lets focus on the things I said I have an issue with, and not substitute in some replacement argument about gunplay and physics that I never made.



No, it doesn't. Opinion isn't proof, it's not quantifiable. But I don't have a problem with that opinion, they should have it if they want to.

I have a problem with the things I have a problem with.



Posting screenshots of a rival platform's exclusive while you and other believers pretend to come is not part of a discussion.



"Gears 5 is finally here and boy oh boy it's a belter."

"... it's a very impressive game overall, possibly one of the best looking unreal engine 4 titles I've seen."

"Visually it's a beautiful looking game, very strong and artistically driven"


At the very least he was rather impressed by it. And he talked about it for nearly 25 minutes without inserting screenshot of a rival platform exclusive and groaning in delight. Oh wow! Who knew that was possible??

And btw, if Gears 4 was 30 fps (some animations were 20), having some enemies animate (not move as you say, but animate) at half of 60 (that being 30) isn't a "cut back." ;)

60 hz obviously comes at a cost, but at least try and look at where that cost is instead of making general criticisms that don't really fit.

Uncharted 4 looks fucking brilliant [in stills]*. Gears 5 looks very, very good [even in stills]* and moves like a Ninja, especially considering what it's doing and how scalable it is. I don't feel the need state one as being the ultimate achiever and the other as being a loser. They do different things, are different games, and have different challenges to overcome. I'm fine with that.

*Want to be clear what I'm talking about here. Individual images compared to the moving image. More updates per seconds isn't free. Optimal output per frame comes at the cost of temporal resolution.
Your level of comprehension is poor.

No one is saying its a terrible looking game, but there is obvious some cutbacks to achieve the 60fps mark.

The reason why PlayStation exclusives are mention because they are considered some of the best looking games in the industry.

Don't get upset that offends you. If they were PC exclusive games, then people would still bring up those titles.

Fact is, you're just getting upset that people are comparing Gears 5 to PS4 games, which happen to be considered some of the best looking games out.



And btw, if Gears 4 was 30 fps (some animations were 20), having some enemies animate (not move as you say, but animate) at half of 60 (that being 30) isn't a "cut back." ;)

60 hz obviously comes at a cost, but at least try and look at where that cost is instead of making general criticisms that don't really fit.
Don't get upset that people are debating what is the most advanced technical game out there.

If someone says Gears 5, then I have the right to disagree and discuss the point.

You're getting upset that i'm disagreeing, but you have nothing to say when people claim it's the best this generaiton.

A cutback doesn't mean from Gears 4 to Gears 5, it's how the game progressed over the years. The environment destruction was far better, but clearly they had to reduce it for current gen hardware due to the fact that they wanted to achieve the 60fps mark.

You're clearly speaking based on emotion and not pure logic. Don't get upset that people disgree that this is the "most technically advanced game" this generation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: demigod

Rolling_Start

Member
Jul 25, 2019
140
228
245
Your level of comprehension is poor.
Don't get upset that offends you.
Fact is, you're just getting upset
Don't get upset
You're getting upset
You're clearly speaking based on emotion and not pure logic.
From one reply, to one post. Wow!

Sure wish I could talk from a position of pure logic! :messenger_tears_of_joy:

Don't get upset that people disgree that this is the "most technically advanced game" this generation.
Haha! There's the upset thing again!

I'm not sure this is the most technically advanced game this generation. I made that point, weirdly, in the post you replied to with ... this.

But thanks. I'll try not get upset about my opinion being exactly that.

Would have been nice if you could have engaged with the points I made, but I do understand you were too concerned about how upset - and unable to talk from a position of pure logic - that I was, so I understand why you didn't attempt to.