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

GTA V - 1080p resolution confirmed for PS4

iEI7evIfsb2JS.png
ibieftlg9iKyHD.png
Nope.

Also 1080p is great news for the PS4 version.

yeah....those GTA models looks blurry as hell compared to second son... more jaggies too.
 
I love GTA5 a lot and am definitely double dipping for it on the PS4, but to claim it looks better than inFamous is absurd.
Maybe they mean artistically or maybe if you consider scale, if they mean technically or higher fidelity they must be on Drugs.

BTW the remaster on PS4 will however look probably much better than Watch Dogs while having a much bigger scale, physics and it's probably surpassing WD in every department, and all that while running at 1080p vs 900p of WD, I don't know if Rockstar are more talented or it's just Ubi that fucked up.
 
Maybe they mean artistically or maybe if you consider scale, if they mean technically or higher fidelity they must be on Drugs.

BTW the remaster on PS4 will however look probably much better than Watch Dogs while having a much bigger scale, physics and it's probably surpassing WD in every department, and all that while running at 1080p vs 900p of WD, I don't know if Rockstar are more talented or it's just Ubi that fucked up.

Whynotbothgirl.gif

;)
 
Maybe they mean artistically or maybe if you consider scale, if they mean technically or higher fidelity they must be on Drugs.

The original comment that I replied to (that ended up causing this discussion):

With the exception of lighting, I'd say it looks comparable or even better than inFamous Second Son.

Then Shin-Ra said that GTA V's character models and textures were better than in Infamous:SS too. Crazy talk I tells ya.
 

Please point me to where I said 720p looks clearer than 1080p. The only thing I've said is claiming that GTA 5 looks better in art and styling than Infamous, which is completely valid because it's what I think. Lighting and style has almost nothing to do with resolution.
 
Please point me to where I said 720p looks clearer than 1080p. The only thing I've said is claiming that GTA 5 looks better in art and styling than Infamous, which is completely valid because it's what I think. Lighting and style has almost nothing to do with resolution.

so how does that justify saying it now looks "FAR BETTER." should have been clear... you personally think art direction looks far better - opinion.
 
so how does that justify saying it now looks "FAR BETTER." should have been clear... you personally think art direction looks far better - opinion.
I already said it was based purely on art style.
Artistic, of course. A PS3/360 game is never going to have the detail of a One/PS4 game.

GTA 5 has its obvious issues such as LOD streaming and lack of AA/AF, but they absolutely nailed the lighting and I don't think I've seen a better styled game, current gen or not.
 
Infamous Second Son has the most complex facial shader in a game released till date, only game that comes close so far is Ryse and their facial animation system is top of the line too, to claim that GTA5 has better character models is absurd. It's not better at anything (except Euphoria for character animation, but Infamous specifically avoids using physics for character animation for gameplay purpose) even at scale since it does not actually load up the entire map and you can't see all that much at one time, even when you are in a plane you need only to look at the level of detail of the terrain and objects that are actually rendered to realise how low they are, it is afterall a last gen game. And it shows because anything that is further away is rendered at a very low detail comparatively speaking.

There was someone in here on the last page I think who said GTA5 on PS3 looked better than most games on PS4, that is factually wrong in any sense.
 
yeah....those GTA models looks blurry as hell compared to second son... more jaggies too.

GTA 5 uses FXAA which blurs the entire screen. IF SS is using SMAA T2x which doesnt blur the image as much while at the same time doing a better job with the jaggies.

Its the main reason why IF still looks so great compared to other PS4 games - the image quality is just better and sharper than most other PS4 games. Add to that nice ingame assets and some great lighting and you have a beautiful looking game.
 
Infamous Second Son has the most complex facial shader in a game released till date, only game that comes close so far is Ryse and their facial animation system is top of the line too [...]
Oh no you didn't. You just sommoned the Crytek defense force.
 
Infamous Second Son has the most complex facial shader in a game released till date, only game that comes close so far is Ryse and their facial animation system is top of the line too, to claim that GTA5 has better character models is absurd. It's not better at anything (except Euphoria for character animation, but Infamous specifically avoids using physics for character animation for gameplay purpose) even at scale since it does not actually load up the entire map and you can't see all that much at one time, even when you are in a plane you need only to look at the level of detail of the terrain and objects that are actually rendered to realise how low they are, it is afterall a last gen game. And it shows because anything that is further away is rendered at a very low detail comparatively speaking.

There was someone in here on the last page I think who said GTA5 on PS3 looked better than most games on PS4, that is factually wrong in any sense.

I've been considerably more impressed by Ryse's skin shader than what I played of Infamous SS. Infamous' characters look like clay, in terms of character models Ryse is far ahead of Infamous IMHO, but the latter is bigger in scope.
 
Oh no you didn't. You just sommoned the Crytek defense force.

Well let them come.

But I actually misworded my statement, I wanted to say Infamous has the most advanced facial capture system in any game out currently (but I said it the other way around), the approach is very similar to Ryse which is amazing too. Shader wise it is still top of the line, but it is slightly off when it comes to the specularity on faces, though it's not that they don't have the tech because they clearly do. Still good result though.

Still my point was that GTA5 is nowhere near the level of complexity of Infamous second son even in terms of character models.
 
I've been considerably more impressed by Ryse's skin shader than what I played of Infamous SS. Infamous' characters look like clay, in terms of character models Ryse is far ahead of Infamous IMHO, but the latter is bigger in scope.

Why don't you post a gameplay screenshot from Ryse (not one from the pre-rendered cutscenes) so we can do a proper comparison? Infamous Second Son has very nice in-game skin shaders and Delsin doesn't look like clay at all.
 
The game will definitely not look as good as Infamous SS, which has a smaller world so it makes sense that it's more detailed. I imagine that it will look just as good if not better than Watch Dogs, which had it's moments of beauty on ps4.
wd-3.gif

wd-1.gif


Don't think it'll look better or close to Unity unless they completely redid the textures on the beards and hair, Unity like Infamous SS takes place in presumably in a smaller (but much denser) open world & doesn't look cross gen by any means. Especially Elise's model.
tumblr_nd18t9RHgW1tg6qs8o6_250.gif

tumblr_ndjwfteD941qlrh5po1_500.gif

^ Second gif has really messed up lighting because tumblr. >.>

Will try to pick GTAV for ps4. :D

EDIT:Just saw the new trailer, yea why in the world were people saying it looks as good as Infamous?? O.O I mean it looks good but not mind blowing.
 
What your saying is besides the point and a different discussion entirely. The person I replied to said that textures and character models were better in GTA V in comparison to I:SS. Which clearly isn't true.
Clowned.gif


The one thing GTAV has going for it is number and variety of assets, but R*'s huge in comparison to Sucker Punch.
 
people who are saying GTAV looks better than Infamous needs to get their eye checked seriously. Btw this thread is going no where. That title and first post so fucking misleading. Where the fuck is the conformation.
 
people who are saying GTAV looks better than Infamous needs to get their eye checked seriously. Btw this thread is going no where. That title and first post so fucking misleading. Where the fuck is the conformation.

The confirmation is in a scan of a magazine article that we're not able to post.

Nothing official.
 
Really don't care whether Second Son or GTA V look the best, they both look really good to me and they're completely different games so for me it's not as simple as some seem to be suggesting. Both are really good fun too so I'm glad that I have both available to me.
 
Only played GTA5 for 2 hours before my ps3 died

from what I remember it was a jaggy blurry mess with fps problems. Now it looks like it will be playable
 
Why don't you post a gameplay screenshot from Ryse (not one from the pre-rendered cutscenes) so we can do a proper comparison? Infamous Second Son has very nice in-game skin shaders and Delsin doesn't look like clay at all.

Cutscenes use the same quality model as gameplay.
Their tech detailed here :
http://www.fxguide.com/featured/the-tech-of-cryteks-ryse-son-of-rome/
Ryse_Oswald_Marius_000845.jpg

ryse-son-rome-story-trailer.jpg


I can't honestly say Infamous impressed me nearly as much when it comes to character models. Apples to oranges considering we're talking about an open world game to a more "cinematic" one.

AC Unity has very good character models, much more detailed (including skin shader) than Infamous IMO.
Ubisoft do know how to make very believable faces.
 
[SNIP]

Don't think it'll look better or close to Unity unless they completely redid the textures on the beards and hair, Unity like Infamous SS takes place in presumably in a smaller (but much denser) open world & doesn't look cross gen by any means. Especially Elise's model.
[SNIP]
I haven't played the game, but the images that I have seen of the shrink look worse than the image in the digital manual. And I remember there being some cry over that it didn't look the same in game as in the tv ads.

friedlander.jpg
 
Cutscenes use the same quality model as gameplay.
Their tech detailed here :

I don't care what that article says, I've played the game on my X1, and the cut-scene models looked noticeably better than the in-game models. The faces weren't as detailed/ didn't have the same fidelity, and the hair had a horrible dithering effect (a la MGSV:GZ) that wasn't evident in cutscenes.
 
I don't care what that article says, I've played the game on my X1, and the cut-scene models looked noticeably better than the in-game models. The faces weren't as detailed/ didn't have the same fidelity, and the hair had a horrible dithering effect (a la MGSV:GZ) that wasn't evident in cutscenes.

Could just be a LOD issue. Eg I wouldn't expect uncharted 4 to show the same level of detail on a face at distance as it would close up. Same may be true with Ryse. Never played it though, so can't comment
 
Top Bottom