• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Fallout 4 - PS4 screenshots (now feat. PNGs)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jobbs

Banned
Feb 15, 2013
26,684
1
625
Columbus, OH
www.twitter.com
What the hell have you people been talking about for 56 pages? This thread was just made yesterday. Lol.

Lots of people said the game looked like shit and a few people said it didn't (myself included), Shinobi posted better PS4 screenshots and now most people say it's at least okay while a few people still say it's shit. That's pretty much it.
 

DjRalford

Member
Jul 29, 2013
2,911
0
0
Southampton UK
Lots of people said the game looked like shit and a few people said it didn't (myself included), Shinobi posted better PS4 screenshots and now most people say it's at least okay while a few people still say it's shit. That's pretty much it.

56 pages of multiple people shitposting condensed very nicely into one solid explanation.

Well done

If this got added to the OP there would be no more need to post.
 

Kas

Member
Jan 30, 2015
2,310
0
0
Game looks absolutely fine. It looks like a next gen Fallout.

And that's exactly what I wanted.
 

NoctisVsStar

Member
Sep 13, 2013
18,762
5
0
Hoooooooo boy. Look mate lets compare shall we? First look at this screenshot of Fallout 4.



This is a PNG image, that stands for Pretty Nice Graphics and that's exactly what it delivers. PNG format also means that it is the best the game will ever look. Basically it's like setting everything to 'Ultra' on PC, but for consoles instead.

Now lets separate the men from the boys. This:



is a screenshot of the best game ever made, Crysis. I picked this shot because of the similar locale. That's right, not Crysis 3, shit mate not even Crysis 2. This is the original Crysis that came out in 2007, that's almost twenty years ago. Not only that, it's a JPG (Just Primary Graphics) which means that it's not even on Ultra settings (as stated above).

Now tell me which one looks better. That's right. Forget about lazy devs, Bethesda have straight-up fallen-out of this race.

Yours sincerely,
PC Ubermensch

 

FairXchange

Member
Apr 26, 2010
3,969
50
785
Nitpicking graphics on a story, feature rich, and exploration heavy game like Fallout just seems ridiculous. From what we've seen of the game, it looks like a marked improvement over the previous games and that's all I could hope for.
 

triplestation

Member
Dec 23, 2008
26,984
14,807
1,655
NYC
Hoooooooo boy. Look mate lets compare shall we? First look at this screenshot of Fallout 4.



This is a PNG image, that stands for Pretty Nice Graphics and that's exactly what it delivers. PNG format also means that it is the best the game will ever look. Basically it's like setting everything to 'Ultra' on PC, but for consoles instead.

Now lets separate the men from the boys. This:



is a screenshot of the best game ever made, Crysis. I picked this shot because of the similar locale. That's right, not Crysis 3, shit mate not even Crysis 2. This is the original Crysis that came out in 2007, that's almost twenty years ago. Not only that, it's a JPG (Just Primary Graphics) which means that it's not even on Ultra settings (as stated above).

Now tell me which one looks better. That's right. Forget about lazy devs, Bethesda have straight-up fallen-out of this race.

Yours sincerely,
PC Ubermensch
Will u be my fishing buddy
 

Hoje0308

Banned
Jun 22, 2013
5,744
6
0
Dying light has crafting. Base building is just an extension of persistent oject state
which was done last gen on x360 and that system has 512mb RAM.

If Dying light is pretty damn ugly, what does that make F4 lol?

Please, don't even compare the limited crafting system of Dying Light to that which exists in FO. IF it works like journalists were saying earlier this year, it's going to involve a level of complexity DL can't touch. As for base building, you can try to hand wave it all you want, it's still part of a system that's DL can't touch in terms of depth or customizability.

Oh, and that would make FO4 better looking than DL. Which it is.
 
Apr 29, 2015
25
0
0
Game looks great. I don't know why people are complaining. I run Witcher 3 at max setting 4k on my i7+980ti and it looks pretty underwhelming. The rain effects I have seen in Fallout 4 so far is much better than what I experienced in Witcher 3. To be honest, even DA:I looks better than Witcher 3. Both Fallout 4 and DA:I gives you the "this gen" vibe. There is just something of the texture surface that gives them a good quality that stands out. Witcher 3 simply looks like a PS2 base game with up-res'ed flat texture with loads of modded in grass and trees.

And then there is the gameplay. I love Bethesda games for the worlds they build. The sense of exploration in Fallout 3 and Skyrim is unmatched by any non-Bethesda game. This is also the reason why I prefer Fallout 3 over New Vegas. People always talk about how bad Bethesda game's writings are. I don't think they know how silly they sound. Bethesda likes to produce the writings in such a way that fits your custom made characters. You MAKE your own story. The directed story feels thin in their games but thats also why Bethesda games are so great. People are confusing the lack of focus on story with bad writings of dialogues or presented scripts. Games like New Vegas or Witcher 3 or Pillars of Eternity have BAD writings. They are horrible if you compare them to something out of a real novel or movie. When I play these games, I cringe every time I read a dialogue. Even COD has better dialogue than these pretentious RPGs. I played Witcher 3 for 30 hours and 90% of my experience are going around towns or settlments that all look the same and using a batman voice to talk with pre-historic people wearing kitchen rags that either act like they don't like to talk or they don't have the mental ability to talk. There is simply no personality in Witcher 3. Everything is bland. New Vegas is even worse. Compared to Fallout 3, New Vegas is like a small fallout theme park RPG with flat lands, and you just walk to each station that has one tiny room. There is nothing memorable, no cool giant robots that shoots laser beams out of its eyes, no large ship with a community living within, no swamp with creepy cabins to explore, no submarines and following of a Chinese spy, no grave revelations after you murder a baby's parents, no town where everyone is trapped in a computer simulation. For the experience Fallout 3 provies, I actually rank it as the best game from last gen. I consider it to have one of the best video game stories of all time right after To the Moon. Compared to Fallout 3's story, Fallout 1/2 and Witcher 1/2/3 are jokes.
 

Endless

Member
Mar 22, 2007
1,777
0
1,140
New info, translated from this spanish guy's impressions

*Possible spoilers*

The game, even tough not so revolutionary, it doesn't look like in the captures but better. The game world looks better than great, and the illumination is one of the best I've seen. It is true that it suffered some framedrops but, there is also much more on screen.

- DIFFICULTY: Very easy, easy, normal, hard, very hard, SURVIVAL. They change damage, resistance of enemies and appearing rate of legendary enemies. Legendary enemies are harder and they have a chance of dropping a legendary item with unique characteristics like better critic chance or that refills AP when doing a critic.

- HUD color will be customizable by RGB sliders.

- Minigames for unlocking doors and terminals are exactly the same as in Fallout 3.

- About the size of the map, is hard to tell a size because it's quite small on the pip-boy but it doesn't seem small at all, there is a lot to find on it. Probably Skyrim's size more or less?

- COMBAT: WAY better. It is no COD but the FPS sensations are amazing, you notice every impact, the weapons recess, different characteristics between them etc makes it wonderful. There was a lot of place from Fallout 3 to improve so I was doubtful about what would they do, but you all can be calm about it. Also, enemy AI, without being super evolved or anything, it's way better. Enemies hide, get cover a lot, they go for you when you have little health or you're reloading (He's playing in hard mode). He says VATS it's completely not essential.

- Animations are flawless. People's faces, even tough there are some similar (particularly raiders) there are a lot, and way different ones from each other.

- He didn't like at all the dialogue system, and in 23 hours he's played almost no mission he was able to get out of just by dialogue. Although there was some "X person approved" like in Dragon Age/Mass Effect, there is no visible karma system, and that takes a lot of attractive to the diplomatic side of the game. He checked statics and he didn't see either nothing about reputations like in NV. He thinks it will probably work like in Skyrim and Oblivion.

- SETTLEMENTS: A very important pillar on the game. Some will love it, some will hate it. He thinks that, even tough he likes this kind of "microgestion"aspects from RPGS he thinks Fallout's it's a little bit harder and deep than he likes. They give sooo many options about it, and missions, and objectives that he think they take out weight from the rest of the game. ABOUT HOW THEY WORK: There are a ton lot of red workshop tables all over the world, some free and other ones occupied. Once you get to them (if the people occupying it are good people you'll have to do the typical mission to help them etc) you can do all that was seen on the demo, destroy everything, and build. You'll have to maintain the little, or bunch of humans on it with food, water, energy and beds. When they're attacked you'll receive a message and have the option to go help. It is very complete and you can invest a lot of hours making it really cute, have there your base with all your people etc, but he thinks it might be a little bit overexploited.

- WEAPONS: More about them, he has only seen like 12-15 base weapons yet, but he says that the weapons mods is crazy. Every weapon can easily have 25-30 different pieces that alter sadistics.

- LOADING TIMES: There are a lot of little houses that doesn't need a loading screen, but big buildings normally do. Loadings between buildings are normally really short, being fast travel loading longer.

-POWER ARMORS: Used almost like a vehicle. You get inside, you use it, you get out of it and it stays on that place. It gives them a more OP feel, but it is also way less "comfortable" to use.

-NARRATIVE: He says it starts a little bit weak, and it takes a little to get it up and running. In his almost a day of playing has only completed 4 history missions because they're pretty long and full of things to do. Even tough, he thinks the way the story is going can be very interesting.
 

orthodoxy1095

Banned
Dec 15, 2013
25,270
0
0
twitter.com
Game looks great. I don't know why people are complaining. I run Witcher 3 at max setting 4k on my i7+980ti and it looks pretty underwhelming. The rain effects I have seen in Fallout 4 so far is much better than what I experienced in Witcher 3. To be honest, even DA:I looks better than Witcher 3. Both Fallout 4 and DA:I gives you the "this gen" vibe. There is just something of the texture surface that gives them a good quality that stands out. Witcher 3 simply looks like a PS2 base game with up-res'ed flat texture with loads of modded in grass and trees.

And then there is the gameplay. I love Bethesda games for the worlds they build. The sense of exploration in Fallout 3 and Skyrim is unmatched by any non-Bethesda game. This is also the reason why I prefer Fallout 3 over New Vegas. People always talk about how bad Bethesda game's writings are. I don't think they know how silly they sound. Bethesda likes to produce the writings in such a way that fits your custom made characters. You MAKE your own story. The directed story feels thin in their games but thats also why Bethesda games are so great. People are confusing the lack of focus on story with bad writings of dialogues or presented scripts. Games like New Vegas or Witcher 3 or Pillars of Eternity have BAD writings. They are horrible if you compare them to something out of a real novel or movie. When I play these games, I cringe every time I read a dialogue. Even COD has better dialogue than these pretentious RPGs. I played Witcher 3 for 30 hours and 90% of my experience are going around towns or settlments that all look the same and using a batman voice to talk with pre-historic people wearing kitchen rags that either act like they don't like to talk or they don't have the mental ability to talk. There is simply no personality in Witcher 3. Everything is bland. New Vegas is even worse. Compared to Fallout 3, New Vegas is like a small fallout theme park RPG with flat lands, and you just walk to each station that has one tiny room. There is nothing memorable, no cool giant robots that shoots laser beams out of its eyes, no large ship with a community living within, no swamp with creepy cabins to explore, no submarines and following of a Chinese spy, no grave revelations after you murder a baby's parents, no town where everyone is trapped in a computer simulation. For the experience Fallout 3 provies, I actually rank it as the best game from last gen. I consider it to have one of the best video game stories of all time right after To the Moon. Compared to Fallout 3's story, Fallout 1/2 and Witcher 1/2/3 are jokes.

I'm not sure whose sockpuppet this is, but well done.
 

Zukuu

Banned
Jan 19, 2013
10,843
2
0
Some shots look really nice, while others look a bit bland. The graphic fidelity is obviously lacking a bit, but I kinda like the overall style very much.

Can't wait.
 

doofy102

Member
Nov 21, 2013
3,588
0
0
Those screenshots weren't taken with the Share button, were they? That thing sucks. (Not that the shadows and stuff would be fixed).
 

BeforeU

Oft hope is born when all is forlorn.
Mar 19, 2014
12,450
630
840
Toronto, CA
Hoooooooo boy. Look mate lets compare shall we? First look at this screenshot of Fallout 4.



This is a PNG image, that stands for Pretty Nice Graphics and that's exactly what it delivers. PNG format also means that it is the best the game will ever look. Basically it's like setting everything to 'Ultra' on PC, but for consoles instead.

Now lets separate the men from the boys. This:



is a screenshot of the best game ever made, Crysis. I picked this shot because of the similar locale. That's right, not Crysis 3, shit mate not even Crysis 2. This is the original Crysis that came out in 2007, that's almost twenty years ago. Not only that, it's a JPG (Just Primary Graphics) which means that it's not even on Ultra settings (as stated above).

Now tell me which one looks better. That's right. Forget about lazy devs, Bethesda have straight-up fallen-out of this race.

Yours sincerely,
PC Ubermensch


This thread is a good read. And this guy wins. Good job.
 

Fusion_Pirate

Banned
Mar 14, 2014
14
0
0
First off, most of the screenshots clearly show shadows. There are a couple rough ones (Vault 111 Exit 'landscape view', bobblehead desk shot, etc.) By and large however, the game looks very solid. You cannot say FO4 looks "just like FO3 or NV" and then when clear evidence to the contrary is shown, turn around and say, "Oh, well FO3 sucked to begin with, so of course this looks better." You can't have it both ways- the bottom line is, FO4 clearly, objectively looks superior to FO3 in every measurable way.

Secondly, to the whole "MS Paint UI" business: Fallout takes place in an alternate future history, heavily inspired by an "idealized" 1950s "Space Age Americana" aesthetic. This in turn informs the simplistic monochromatic computer terminal displays, which in turn informs the overall look/feel of the UI (and PipBoy). To put it simply, the UI is intentionally basic and 'campy'. You can choose to like it or not; but if you have any understanding of Fallout and its lore/historical context, it makes complete sense. Criticizing something for "not looking good" based on an assumed lack of competence on BethSoft's part just shows your ignorance of what Fallout is all about.

Thirdly, let's put graphic comparisons to other 'pseudo-open world' RPGs to bed right now:

  • The Witcher 3, MGSV, Dragon Age: Inquisition...none of these are actually open world games. All these games feature segmented, smaller regions that are non-contiguous, only traversable through an overworld map. In Skyrim, you can literally ride your horse from Riften to Markarth without interruption.

  • Furthermore, many of these aforementioned games feature a lot of lifeless, 'dead wilderness' once you get out of the major towns/zones of action. In Skyrim, you are constantly running into caves, forts, barrows, villages, mines, ruins and dynamic random interactions with hunters, bards, traders, citizens and guardsmen. There is hardly ever any downtime or dead space in Skyrim, whether you're in a bustling city or the middle of BFE.

  • Nearly every physical object in FO4 can be interacted with dynamically; whether physically picked up in real-time, or used for a variety of purposes, such as crafting, building, character/stat development, etc. In most other WRPGs, your item interactions are limited to loot caches with static images inside that represent an item that either has limited function, or is simply meant to be sold off as "junk".

  • No other RPG allows you to build large settlements from scratch in multiple locations throughout the world, in the unique manner the player sees fit. No other RPG (or shooter for that matter) offers a layered armor system, a separate customizable power armor system, AND over 50 base weapons and 700+ modifications.

I think given the scope/ambition, size and density of what BethSoft are trying to accomplish, the game looks great. At the end of the day, none of us (except the journalists and lucky few screenshot posters) have actually played the game yet. I think many of the 'graphic crusaders' here are forgetting that intangible 'sense of wonder' we ALL get when we fire up a BethSoft RPG for the first time and take in the experience. Then we look up and wonder where the last three months just went. That's something that BethSoft always delivers in spades; it's something that transcends graphics fidelity and is exactly why their titles always invariably win GOTY.
 

tuxfool

Banned
Oct 21, 2014
16,148
1
0
Game looks great. I don't know why people are complaining. I run Witcher 3 at max setting 4k on my i7+980ti and it looks pretty underwhelming. The rain effects I have seen in Fallout 4 so far is much better than what I experienced in Witcher 3. To be honest, even DA:I looks better than Witcher 3. Both Fallout 4 and DA:I gives you the "this gen" vibe. There is just something of the texture surface that gives them a good quality that stands out. Witcher 3 simply looks like a PS2 base game with up-res'ed flat texture with loads of modded in grass and trees.

And then there is the gameplay. I love Bethesda games for the worlds they build. The sense of exploration in Fallout 3 and Skyrim is unmatched by any non-Bethesda game. This is also the reason why I prefer Fallout 3 over New Vegas. People always talk about how bad Bethesda game's writings are. I don't think they know how silly they sound. Bethesda likes to produce the writings in such a way that fits your custom made characters. You MAKE your own story. The directed story feels thin in their games but thats also why Bethesda games are so great. People are confusing the lack of focus on story with bad writings of dialogues or presented scripts. Games like New Vegas or Witcher 3 or Pillars of Eternity have BAD writings. They are horrible if you compare them to something out of a real novel or movie. When I play these games, I cringe every time I read a dialogue. Even COD has better dialogue than these pretentious RPGs. I played Witcher 3 for 30 hours and 90% of my experience are going around towns or settlments that all look the same and using a batman voice to talk with pre-historic people wearing kitchen rags that either act like they don't like to talk or they don't have the mental ability to talk. There is simply no personality in Witcher 3. Everything is bland. New Vegas is even worse. Compared to Fallout 3, New Vegas is like a small fallout theme park RPG with flat lands, and you just walk to each station that has one tiny room. There is nothing memorable, no cool giant robots that shoots laser beams out of its eyes, no large ship with a community living within, no swamp with creepy cabins to explore, no submarines and following of a Chinese spy, no grave revelations after you murder a baby's parents, no town where everyone is trapped in a computer simulation. For the experience Fallout 3 provies, I actually rank it as the best game from last gen. I consider it to have one of the best video game stories of all time right after To the Moon. Compared to Fallout 3's story, Fallout 1/2 and Witcher 1/2/3 are jokes.

Pretty good.

Though for future efforts you may want to consider not going with a wall of text, as that lessens the impact.
 

antitrop

Member
Feb 19, 2011
46,347
4
550
35
Colorado Springs, CO
twitter.com
Game looks great. I don't know why people are complaining. I run Witcher 3 at max setting 4k on my i7+980ti and it looks pretty underwhelming. The rain effects I have seen in Fallout 4 so far is much better than what I experienced in Witcher 3. To be honest, even DA:I looks better than Witcher 3. Both Fallout 4 and DA:I gives you the "this gen" vibe. There is just something of the texture surface that gives them a good quality that stands out. Witcher 3 simply looks like a PS2 base game with up-res'ed flat texture with loads of modded in grass and trees.

And then there is the gameplay. I love Bethesda games for the worlds they build. The sense of exploration in Fallout 3 and Skyrim is unmatched by any non-Bethesda game. This is also the reason why I prefer Fallout 3 over New Vegas. People always talk about how bad Bethesda game's writings are. I don't think they know how silly they sound. Bethesda likes to produce the writings in such a way that fits your custom made characters. You MAKE your own story. The directed story feels thin in their games but thats also why Bethesda games are so great. People are confusing the lack of focus on story with bad writings of dialogues or presented scripts. Games like New Vegas or Witcher 3 or Pillars of Eternity have BAD writings. They are horrible if you compare them to something out of a real novel or movie. When I play these games, I cringe every time I read a dialogue. Even COD has better dialogue than these pretentious RPGs. I played Witcher 3 for 30 hours and 90% of my experience are going around towns or settlments that all look the same and using a batman voice to talk with pre-historic people wearing kitchen rags that either act like they don't like to talk or they don't have the mental ability to talk. There is simply no personality in Witcher 3. Everything is bland. New Vegas is even worse. Compared to Fallout 3, New Vegas is like a small fallout theme park RPG with flat lands, and you just walk to each station that has one tiny room. There is nothing memorable, no cool giant robots that shoots laser beams out of its eyes, no large ship with a community living within, no swamp with creepy cabins to explore, no submarines and following of a Chinese spy, no grave revelations after you murder a baby's parents, no town where everyone is trapped in a computer simulation. For the experience Fallout 3 provies, I actually rank it as the best game from last gen. I consider it to have one of the best video game stories of all time right after To the Moon. Compared to Fallout 3's story, Fallout 1/2 and Witcher 1/2/3 are jokes.
 

Chance Hale

Member
Dec 22, 2012
20,749
1
0
Denver, Colorado
  • The Witcher 3, MGSV, Dragon Age: Inquisition...none of these are actually open world games. All these games feature segmented, smaller regions that are non-contiguous, only traversable through an overworld map. In Skyrim, you can literally ride your horse from Riften to Markarth without interruption.
The Witcher 3 has segmented areas but both Novigrad and Skellige are bigger than Skyrim's entire landmass on their own so that hardly matters :p

And it has has tons of dynamic world events, endless side quests sprayed throughout, caves with loot, and so on.
 

orthodoxy1095

Banned
Dec 15, 2013
25,270
0
0
twitter.com
  • The Witcher 3, MGSV, Dragon Age: Inquisition...none of these are actually open world games. All these games feature segmented, smaller regions that are non-contiguous, only traversable through an overworld map. In Skyrim, you can literally ride your horse from Riften to Markarth without interruption.
By this logic, are games with loading screens to enter buildings really open world? Those are segmented, non-seamless, interrupting things.
 

Ciri

Neo Member
Aug 12, 2015
45
0
150
Disappointed with how bland NPC looks. I hope they have some sort of facial expressions unlike Fallout 3 where they just seemed to have no souls.
 

ANDS

Thinks gaf is racist. That's why I post here. I think I'm among friends.
Jan 18, 2012
3,375
580
865
The Witcher 3 has segmented areas but both Novigrad and Skellige are bigger than Skyrim's entire landmass on their own so that hardly matters :p

And it has has tons of dynamic world events, endless side quests sprayed throughout, caves with loot, and so on.

Skellige is in no way bigger than Skyrim on it's own. Not a chance. Maybe if you're talking about the entirety of the game world itself, but a lot of that is water.

In any case it doesn't matter how large your game is, if it's not very fun to explore. While TW3 had great writing, I found just "exploring" largely dull. It's the opposite with Bethesda games (though the writing isn't bad, just uninspired).
 
Apr 29, 2015
25
0
0
The Witcher 3 has segmented areas but both Novigrad and Skellige are bigger than Skyrim's entire landmass on their own so that hardly matters :p

And it has has tons of dynamic world events, endless side quests sprayed throughout, caves with loot, and so on.

It certainly didn't feel larger. In Skyrim, you come up to something interesting almost every step you make, be it a tomb or tower, or a structure or landmark that you just want to explore. In Wither 3 you speed up your horse to ride from one map point to another map point, and everything in between look exactly the same. I might as well have been playing a super scaled down Daggerfall where you can't even ask NPCs for directions.
 

glassgannon

Banned
Sep 22, 2015
621
0
0
  • The Witcher 3, MGSV, Dragon Age: Inquisition...none of these are actually open world games. All these games feature segmented, smaller regions that are non-contiguous, only traversable through an overworld map. In Skyrim, you can literally ride your horse from Riften to Markarth without interruption.

the first town you get into 10 minutes into the proper game(whiterun) has a big fat loading screen.So does every other reasonably sized settlement and every single dungeon no matter how big or small.

witcher does the same only it leads you to the map instead of having you click on the door to the town.
and iirc, novigrad doesn't give you a loading screen if you ride straight into it.nor do any of the caves dungeons etc. thats far more seamless than skyrim ever gets.
 

tuxfool

Banned
Oct 21, 2014
16,148
1
0
It certainly didn't feel larger. In Skyrim, you come up to something interesting almost every step you make, be it a tomb or tower, or a structure or landmark that you just want to explore. In Wither 3 you speed up your horse to ride from one map point to another map point, and everything in between look exactly the same. I might as well have been playing a super scaled down Daggerfall where you can't even ask NPCs for directions.

I'm sorry, but I'm done with Potatoland open world games, where I go 100m in one direction, cross 3 different biomes and reach the end of an epic quest within eyeshot of the quest giver.

You do realise that a world filled with random stuff at every step isn't larger, it is more claustrophobic.
 

Undead

Member
Feb 8, 2009
724
0
0
UK
Not sure if it's been asked yet but do the enemies level up with you or will there be inaccessible areas for lower level players?
 

Fusion_Pirate

Banned
Mar 14, 2014
14
0
0
The Witcher 3 has segmented areas but both Novigrad and Skellige are bigger than Skyrim's entire landmass on their own so that hardly matters :p

And it has has tons of dynamic world events, endless side quests sprayed throughout, caves with loot, and so on.

It's been well-publicized that The Witcher 3 is 3.5 times larger than Skyrim in terms of square mileage, yes. But it's also largely empty space, outside of the few primary cities/settlement hubs. It's true that within those hubs, there are bucket-loads of events, quests, etc. However, the wilderness in TW3 is largely empty and void of anything interesting, outside the occasional flora or fauna. No ruins, castles, mines, forts, etc. I can count on one hand how many caves I explored; those were all for very scripted, story-driven quests, possibly one to two Witcher Contracts. Keep in mind that the very reason CDPR could get TW3s square mileage so large is precisely because they broke the world up into non-contiguous chunks.
 
Apr 29, 2015
25
0
0
I'm sorry, but I'm done with Potatoland open world games, where I go 100m in one direction, cross 3 different biomes and reach the end of an epic quest within eyeshot of the quest giver.

You do realise that a world filled with random stuff at every step isn't larger, it is more claustrophobic.

Really? So you walk outside of your house on a sunny day and you don't notice the tiny little details of the world we live in and feel great about your life? Do you feel claustrophobic living in a society where every corner is filled with engineered structures, objects, cars, landmarks and filled with people? I feel sad for you.
 

ANDS

Thinks gaf is racist. That's why I post here. I think I'm among friends.
Jan 18, 2012
3,375
580
865
Not sure if it's been asked yet but do the enemies level up with you or will there be inaccessible areas for lower level players?

They've changed the way enemies scale. You aren't getting back to Morrowind levels (where you could break the game if you wanted to), but it's not the game levels up with you. They've mentioned something along the lines of zones might have a level range, which I think is a good alternative.
 

Vital Tundra

Member
Apr 13, 2015
8,032
5
0
Wilmington, NC
It's Bethesda, they ain't really known for graphics. As far as I recall.

The community will pick up the slack later
Yup, they will. And at the same time, that's pathetic as all hell. I'm tired of the idea that "it's Bethesda" and they get a free pass for such shoddy work. They need to invest in a new engine or something. Hire new 3D modelers. SOMETHING!
 

tuxfool

Banned
Oct 21, 2014
16,148
1
0
Really? So you walk outside of your house on a sunny day and you don't notice the tiny little details of the world we live in and feel great about your life? Do you feel claustrophobic living in a society where every corner is filled with engineered structures, objects, cars, landmarks and filled with people? I feel sad for you.

*Shrug* I expect that from a city.

Not from the countryside. Luckily the W3 has both.

The meaning of an open world is constituent on the existence of negative space. When everything is within eyesight, open worlds become levels. Spacial relationships between landmarks lose their meaning, geography becomes insipid.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.