• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Graphical Fidelity I Expect This Gen

The complete lack of real gameplay deep dives on this game given how long it's been in development, has me seriously worried about its' quality.
these are teaser videos designed to teaser the full reveal on June 5th. its at the end of each video.

i think its silly to build hype like this, but its better than nothing which is what Rockstar, CD project, Naughty Dog, GG, Coalition and SSM do with their games.

Aren't they bringing the game to switch this time? Not sure "next gen only" matters.
Cyberpunk was ported to the Switch. Star wars outlaws too. last years best looking game AC Shadows was also ported to the Switch 2 but without RTGI. these are downports that cut off most next gen features for the Switch. They dont impact the PS5 and XSX versions, let alone PC which will likely visuals even higher.
 
Last edited:
these are teaser videos designed to teaser the full reveal on June 5th. its at the end of each video.

i think its silly to build hype like this, but its better than nothing which is what Rockstar, CD project, Naughty Dog, GG, Coalition and SSM do with their games.
Yes but Rockstar, Naughty Dog, SSM and GG have a proven pedigree in building mechanically deep and immersive games with quality on all sides.

They can showboat CGI trailers until a week before the launch date and we'd all expect the game to hit because we know what to expect.

I'm sorry but new Ex-Bioware studio doesn't carry the same expectation, and we've seen the pattern of "top talent from top tier studio go it alone aaaand... turkey" play out before (Mindseye, The Initiative, etc etc).
 
Say what you will about UE5 but the asset quality in these games are simply incredible. yes, the lighting is gorgeous but look at that carpet.

eh9SMSO.gif


Yes but Rockstar, Naughty Dog, SSM and GG have a proven pedigree in building mechanically deep and immersive games with quality on all sides.

They can showboat CGI trailers until a week before the launch date and we'd all expect the game to hit because we know what to expect.

I'm sorry but new Ex-Bioware studio doesn't carry the same expectation, and we've seen the pattern of "top talent from top tier studio go it alone aaaand... turkey" play out before (Mindseye, The Initiative, etc etc).
the gameplay deep dive is coming in a couple of weeks. they arent hiding anything. thats all im saying.
 
Last edited:
Say what you will about UE5 but the asset quality in these games are simply incredible. yes, the lighting is gorgeous but look at that carpet.

eh9SMSO.gif



Another Mixtape convert 🙏


Also, can't wait to see what The Coalition have been cooking with UE5. There's will probably be the most impressive UE5 showing, on console at least, since The Matrix Awakens / Hellblade 2.
 
Cyberpunk was ported to the Switch. Star wars outlaws too. last years best looking game AC Shadows was also ported to the Switch 2 but without RTGI. these are downports that cut off most next gen features for the Switch. They dont impact the PS5 and XSX versions, let alone PC which will likely visuals even higher.
But cyberpunk was also already on PS4 and XBO. I don't think it would mean much for the game in terms of doing something that can't be done on lower end hardware when they're making a switch version anyway.
 
Another Mixtape convert 🙏


Also, can't wait to see what The Coalition have been cooking with UE5. There's will probably be the most impressive UE5 showing, on console at least, since The Matrix Awakens / Hellblade 2.
Dont forget they will be competing with Crystal Dynamics' Tomb Raider and CD Project's Witcher 4. it will be interesting to see top tier studios finally take a stab at UE5. So far its just been mostly indies and some B and C tier devs.
 
But cyberpunk was also already on PS4 and XBO. I don't think it would mean much for the game in terms of doing something that can't be done on lower end hardware when they're making a switch version anyway.
well thats a different topic. i agree most games are not pushing next gen features like cpu simulations, physics, animations and destruction which makes it easier to downport these games to series s and switch 2. but at the end of the day, in terms of visuals, most games just drop next gen features like RTGI and Lumen and just ship a last gen looking game at 720p 30 fps. no one really gives a shit about the series s and switch 2 enough to downgrade their vision for the game. most devs only start doing development on it after shipping the main game anyway. Crimson Desert is one of the few games pushing physics, and water simulations and an incredibly high number of enemy and NPC AI on screen, and they literally just started porting their game to the switch 2. the game is incredibly heavy on the base PS5, so they will likely downgrade the shit out of it.

The eventual existence of a Switch 2 doesnt necessarily mean a downgrade for the main version.
 
-"Possibly an optimization measure. Larger amount of textures in busy city = bigger VRAM draw => lower quality texture = less memory draw per texture loaded to VRAM"

And that is very probably because parity with the console version so they didn't bother to change that for the PC. 🤷‍♂️
Exactly. I have a 4090. Why do I have to play with these console textures?
As Turk1993 Turk1993 pointed out, it's a bug. Pan the camera a bit when you see these textures and you'll get them to actually load in real time.
I've seen it with my own eyes, the front of Mei's house is a perfect spot to try it by yourself.

I'm sure it's gonna be fixed soon.

Edit: and if you really don't believe it, I'll do a screenshot tonight when playing.
 
Last edited:
As Turk1993 Turk1993 pointed out, it's a bug. Pan the camera a bit when you see these textures and you'll get them to actually load in real time.
I've seen it with my own eyes, the front of Mei's house is a perfect spot to try it by yourself.

I'm sure it's gonna be fixed soon.

Edit: and if you really don't believe it, I'll do a screenshot tonight when playing.

I went to different streets of Tokyo with bad textures, moved the camera and the drone around and I coudnt reproduce what you and the other person said. The bad quality was persistent
 
Last edited:
I went to different streets of Tokyo with bad textures, move the camera and the drone around and I coudnt reproduce what you and the other person said. The bad quality was persistent
That's weird, just went to take a quick screen by myself:

Loaded:
cwys13.png


Not loaded:
cwy3p0.png


All I did was moving the camera up by a bit. I'm sure it's gonna be fixed soon.
 
The screens are from the photo mode, but depending on where you are you can see it directedly while driving just by moving the camera.

I cant replicate this, I am using the drone and photo mode, both and all i can see is permanent shitty ff7 remake textures in the ground. The quality is the same all the time no matter how much I move the camera around

0huQluuhEnHnARL1.png


YumD9AX6cM1QLp6i.png


eB8BgtYMySVxuifs.png
 
Last edited:
I cant replicate this, I am using the drone and photo mode, both and all i can see is permanent shitty ff7 remake textures in the ground. The quality is the same all the time no matter how much I move the camera around

YumD9AX6cM1QLp6i.png


eB8BgtYMySVxuifs.png
I believe you, but maybe on some PCs it shows the good textures depending on how and where you look, and not on other because reasons (it's PC gaming after all).

It's just so you know it's indeed a bug, hopefully it's getting fixed soon and I do agree this kind of bug is unacceptable. Especially after 4 years since the last episode.
 
Say what you will about UE5 but the asset quality in these games are simply incredible. yes, the lighting is gorgeous but look at that carpet.

eh9SMSO.gif



the gameplay deep dive is coming in a couple of weeks. they arent hiding anything. thats all im saying.

Can't tell if stop motion effect or that signature Tim Sweeney stutter.
 
Can't tell if stop motion effect or that signature Tim Sweeney stutter.
its stop motion lol if you keep the character still and move the camera, the game's very smooth.

the game actually has a lot of really long sequences where you drive, skate, and even fly over massive distances with zero stutters. i didnt look at which version of UE5 this game was built on but maybe tim sweeney has finally fixed the traversal stutters.
 
I cant replicate this, I am using the drone and photo mode, both and all i can see is permanent shitty ff7 remake textures in the ground. The quality is the same all the time no matter how much I move the camera around

0huQluuhEnHnARL1.png


YumD9AX6cM1QLp6i.png


eB8BgtYMySVxuifs.png
MS is punishing you for the woke slope thread. No high res textures in the city for you. Bad Papito!
 
ive been seeing a lot of tweets fawning over this looking like the best looking most prettiest game ever. It is frustrating to read praise like this because a carbon copy of this game came out just last year and everyone skipped it because of a black lead. I understand the wokeness issue in games, but to see so many gamers skip the best looking games for political reasons is infuriating because there is this sentiment that graphics have peaked or havent improved this generation. Meanwhile gamers are skipping games left and right over perceived wokeness. AC Valhalla sold 20 million. They stopped announcing AC Shadows numbers after 2 million, and posted a $1.3 billion loss last year. That means 90% of the crowd didnt play arguably the best looking game this gen, and a game that is way better than Valhalla in terms of gameplay and exploration.

Now i see people trying to cancel this game for not including cleavage. I wont get into whether its right or wrong to boycott games over stuff like this, but its awful to see incredible work done by artists and programmers go completely ignored.

Is there any hard evidence that the reason so many people skipped out on Shadows because of "wokeness?" This site - and indeed, people who complain online in general - are a small and not entirely representative sample of the entire market. Just because people were complaining online doesn't mean it was a widespread issue that actually led to meaningfully lower sales.

I'd say the bigger issue is that it's just a bad game. It's got nice graphics for sure, and every once in a while I still jump in to wander around a bit, explore a castle and take out some guards, but pretty quickly I'm reminded how boring it gets. The story, characters, even world, are all dull, boring, empty, and repetitive, and get tiring very quickly.

im pitying the artists and programmers who went out of their way to implement RT, hair physics, destruction, wind physics, and virtualized geometry.

yeah, but the point is that people bought 20 million copies of a bad AC game. They still like that ubisoft slop. And despite its issues, shadows is a much better game set in a much better world to explore with a way better combat system.

I don't mean to be pedantic, but I don't think graphics programmers adding new features to their engine is "going out of their way" - it's literally their job. And they did a good job. But it doesn't change the fact that it was all attached to a game that overall just isn't very good. I don't mean to hate on anyone's opinions either - to you and everyone who like it, that's great. But I don't think many people will agree that it's overall better than any other AC game. I don't like Valhalla much either, never finished it, but I'd say it has much better story and characters, and the world is a lot easier and more interesting to explore. Shadows might be more realistic, but it's a pain in the ass to navigate, you can't get through half of the map because of the mountains and vegetation, and much of it you can't climb either. Valhalla's combat is pretty bad, but honestly Shadows isn't any better. Really the only thing going for it gameplay-wise is the stealth, which is definitely improved. But that can't hold up the whole game, especially when most of the rest of it isn't even "just as good", it's actually worse.

That's why I'm so excited for Black Flag. I get all the nice graphical improvements, but in a game I know is actually good.
 
Last edited:
Everytime they release a trailer it looks worse than the last released previous trailer.
The latest trailer released yesterday looks like a PS4 game.


Tell me how this looks better than quantum break


They should not have forced a single 60 fps mode on this for the Pro. Slimy, what do you think will that choice mess the games frame time budget up to where image quality will suffer to a degree where it will be very compromised on Pro? I'm seeing blurry backgrounds and aliasing in some of these trailers ...
 
Is there any hard evidence that the reason so many people skipped out on Shadows because of "wokeness?" This site - and indeed, people who complain online in general - are a small and not entirely representative sample of the entire market. Just because people were complaining online doesn't mean it was a widespread issue that actually led to meaningfully lower sales.

I'd say the bigger issue is that it's just a bad game. It's got nice graphics for sure, and every once in a while I still jump in to wander around a bit, explore a castle and take out some guards, but pretty quickly I'm reminded how boring it gets. The story, characters, even world, are all dull, boring, empty, and repetitive, and get tiring very quickly.



I don't mean to be pedantic, but I don't think graphics programmers adding new features to their engine is "going out of their way" - it's literally their job. And they did a good job. But it doesn't change the fact that it was all attached to a game that overall just isn't very good. I don't mean to hate on anyone's opinions either - to you and everyone who like it, that's great. But I don't think many people will agree that it's overall better than any other AC game. I don't like Valhalla much either, never finished it, but I'd say it has much better story and characters, and the world is a lot easier and more interesting to explore. Shadows might be more realistic, but it's a pain in the ass to navigate, you can't get through half of the map because of the mountains and vegetation, and much of it you can't climb either. Valhalla's combat is pretty bad, but honestly Shadows isn't any better. Really the only thing going for it gameplay-wise is the stealth, which is definitely improved. But that can't hold up the whole game, especially when most of the rest of it isn't even "just as good", it's actually worse.

That's why I'm so excited for Black Flag. I get all the nice graphical improvements, but in a game I know is actually good.
I agree Shadows tech, combat and stealth are better. The rest is worse.
 
Is there any hard evidence that the reason so many people skipped out on Shadows because of "wokeness?" This site - and indeed, people who complain online in general - are a small and not entirely representative sample of the entire market. Just because people were complaining online doesn't mean it was a widespread issue that actually led to meaningfully lower sales.

I'd say the bigger issue is that it's just a bad game. It's got nice graphics for sure, and every once in a while I still jump in to wander around a bit, explore a castle and take out some guards, but pretty quickly I'm reminded how boring it gets. The story, characters, even world, are all dull, boring, empty, and repetitive, and get tiring very quickly.



I don't mean to be pedantic, but I don't think graphics programmers adding new features to their engine is "going out of their way" - it's literally their job. And they did a good job. But it doesn't change the fact that it was all attached to a game that overall just isn't very good. I don't mean to hate on anyone's opinions either - to you and everyone who like it, that's great. But I don't think many people will agree that it's overall better than any other AC game. I don't like Valhalla much either, never finished it, but I'd say it has much better story and characters, and the world is a lot easier and more interesting to explore. Shadows might be more realistic, but it's a pain in the ass to navigate, you can't get through half of the map because of the mountains and vegetation, and much of it you can't climb either. Valhalla's combat is pretty bad, but honestly Shadows isn't any better. Really the only thing going for it gameplay-wise is the stealth, which is definitely improved. But that can't hold up the whole game, especially when most of the rest of it isn't even "just as good", it's actually worse.

That's why I'm so excited for Black Flag. I get all the nice graphical improvements, but in a game I know is actually good.
Shadows combat is way better than Valhalla. It actually has weight to attack and has a nice challenge. Better mechanics too whereas even though Valhalla has some neat looking moves they're mostly just one button press.
 
well thats a different topic. i agree most games are not pushing next gen features like cpu simulations, physics, animations and destruction which makes it easier to downport these games to series s and switch 2. but at the end of the day, in terms of visuals, most games just drop next gen features like RTGI and Lumen and just ship a last gen looking game at 720p 30 fps. no one really gives a shit about the series s and switch 2 enough to downgrade their vision for the game. most devs only start doing development on it after shipping the main game anyway. Crimson Desert is one of the few games pushing physics, and water simulations and an incredibly high number of enemy and NPC AI on screen, and they literally just started porting their game to the switch 2. the game is incredibly heavy on the base PS5, so they will likely downgrade the shit out of it.

The eventual existence of a Switch 2 doesnt necessarily mean a downgrade for the main version.
I have a sneaking suspicion GTA VI will disappoint people in many aspects
 
these are teaser videos designed to teaser the full reveal on June 5th. its at the end of each video.

i think its silly to build hype like this, but its better than nothing which is what Rockstar, CD project, Naughty Dog, GG, Coalition and SSM do with their games.
You know what... between the two options, I'd prefer nothing. These slow walk teasers with abrupt cuts and this one sneak peek of an NPC "conversation" has put me off completely. Going to take some real selling now to win me back

 
I don't mean to be pedantic, but I don't think graphics programmers adding new features to their engine is "going out of their way" - it's literally their job. And they did a good job.
I dont disagree, but this is where we are unfortunately where the bare minimum isnt expected from devs. Just look at Sony and now Nintendo devs with their new hardware. They dont believe in RTGI, virtualized geometry, hair physics, destruction, etc. So when a dev does do it, and their effort is played by a handful of people, its disappointing.

hopefully, this game makes people go back and give Shadows a shot because i think it looks even better thanks to the seasons and the gorgeous Japanese setting.
They should not have forced a single 60 fps mode on this for the Pro. Slimy, what do you think will that choice mess the games frame time budget up to where image quality will suffer to a degree where it will be very compromised on Pro? I'm seeing blurry backgrounds and aliasing in some of these trailers ...
you tell me. i dont play third party games on the pro. But i hear with PSSR2.0, the image quality issues are a thing of the past.

this game is using software RT and is targeting 1080p 60 fps on the base PS5. So with the pro, it should be a little higher and PSSR is way better at upscaling from 1080p than FSR3. I think PSSR and FSR3 have roughly the same cost, so the 45% faster GPU should get them to around 1296p so 4k balanced which should very close to Saros which uses a 1440p internal resolution and looks clean as fuck.
 
You know what... between the two options, I'd prefer nothing. These slow walk teasers with abrupt cuts and this one sneak peek of an NPC "conversation" has put me off completely. Going to take some real selling now to win me back
Completely agree. These 90 second videos amount to a 4 second snippet of a super slow camera pan in isolated locations that range in quality from PS3 to current gen.
 
I have a sneaking suspicion GTA VI will disappoint people in many aspects
Absolutely zero chance of that happening, unless your expectations are far beyond anything we've seen to date and even then it may well deliver on that as well. Just food for thought but look what they accomplished on a PS4/Xbox One with RDR2, they are now working with machines that are upto 10 time's more powerful and unlike most developer's Rockstar have the time and money to utilise that power difference.
 
That's a strawman argument.
No, it is not.
It's you who are arguing that a game can "look good" without using the latest h/w advancement and faster h/w just cause there are games which "look good" on a Nintendo 64. This would be a "strawman argument" in a thread about next gen *h/w* graphics.

The "myth" we are talking about is 60 fps somehow holding back the whole generation of consoles. Not whether 60 fps looks worse. Of course it looks worse. Like you said, something will have to give on fixed hardware.
There is no such "myth", it's just a fact, and you've just agreed with this. What are you even arguing with?
 
Last edited:
Absolutely zero chance of that happening, unless your expectations are far beyond anything we've seen to date and even then it may well deliver on that as well. Just food for thought but look what they accomplished on a PS4/Xbox One with RDR2, they are now working with machines that are upto 10 time's more powerful and unlike most developer's Rockstar have the time and money to utilise that power difference.
There was a post on reddit discussing the 2d windows from the trailer. It already started
 
Top Bottom