Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Wasn't that demonstration that gif is from constantly dropping as low as 15 fps?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
I'm amazed at what 8 year old Hardware can do
- Thread starter Gowans
- Start date
You are forgetting about inflation. The PS2 launched at a price of 300$ in 2000, which is about equivalent to 400$ today.
Creating impressive looking GIF's isn't that hard a feat, small 256 colour pictures easily cover up glaring flaws. "Assets" are going to look worse in full-screen (just look up Beyond: Two Souls on YouTube).
Glass Rebel
Member
I don't have a problem with taking in consideration the hardware limitations when judging a game, therefore Halo 4 and The Last of Us look highly impressive, the same way I was amazed at Metroid Prime 3.
But it's also pretty clear to see that the consoles are outdated as hell and lagging so hard behind modern PCs it's not even funny. Can't wait for PS4 and 720 to raise the baseline even if it's just a little.
But it's also pretty clear to see that the consoles are outdated as hell and lagging so hard behind modern PCs it's not even funny. Can't wait for PS4 and 720 to raise the baseline even if it's just a little.
Monitor is for pc. I use my tv monitor 1600x900p for both (pc & console) & ps3 graphic not seems that terrible.
Microsoft & Sony didn't come into the gaming business to play no games (pun intended) they came to take over the living room so when it came time to place the Trojan Horse in everyone's home they wasn't playing & they will not be playing next time around neither & thanks to the Xbox 360 & PS3 being Trojan Horse & getting MS & Sony's networks into homes this gen is going to last even longer because neither one of them is dumb enough to just stop people from giving them money.
While you're not wrong, that's kind of a shitty way to look at things.
The type of display one uses can have a HUGE impact on the final quality of your image. Sitting right up against a high-resolution monitor is absolutely going to produce ugly results, but that's not how most people would be playing these games.
Perceived image quality depends on the type of display used along with viewing distance. I absolutely detest LCD displays for gaming.
Not at all. It ran pretty consistently (much smoother than Heavy Rain, in fact).
Nobody is suggesting that the PC couldn't do a better job with something like that.
OgTheClever
Member
Maybe if the monitor is natively 720p. Upscaling always causes some level of a hit in image quality.
An important which people genreally ignore.
Thats why i prefer framerate over resolution since proper viewing distance can genreally solve it
Most TV's are going to upscale as well (and let's not forget about the fact that most consoles games internally don't run at 720p) and add horrible input lag in the process. The TV's main advantage is viewing distance - most won't notice horribly low resolution at a few meters distance.
But: Halo 4 actually looks pretty impressive, but playing it it's pretty clear that even 343 aren't magicians - that old hardware is limiting its graphical fidelity is evident.
Goldenroad
Member
Between the Opera House is AC3 and all I've played of Halo 4, I'm completely blown away. I didn't think these consoles still had it in them. Amazing.
Animations are good
But I wasn't really talking about that
I mean I've seen the footage and it's great for console but nothing mind blowing imo
Viewing distance is very important and can make a huge difference. Perceived image quality is critical to how one views something.
Also, display type makes a difference. Your PC monitor is likely an LCD while a high-quality CRT or plasma would absolutely decimate that display in every area outside of resolution (which is low on the list of important criteria for a great display).
Have you seen something like 1024x768 on a high-end CRT monitor lately at 120 Hz? If you haven't I encourage you to check it out. It will remind you how much we are missing with LCDs. Resolution isn't everything.
It's just really damn good motion capture work combined with excellent modelling. The work they put into that is what impresses me more than anything. Imagine if something like The Witcher 2 were able to deliver animation and performance of that quality. It would elevate the visuals to a whole new level.
I respect your opinion but I have a good pc & honestly BTS stuff is remarkable even for a good pc.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Just looked up the DF article and they said the demo routinely dropped to 20 fps.
:/ There are a lot of video with background in the net, if you want to see more stuff.
Vorg
Banned
Yeaah it looks good
There is no way the game actually looks like this. It's probably a pre-rendered cutscene.
20 fps is very different from 15 fps.
I was thinking of the conference demonstration, however, but you must be referring to the more lengthy sequence that was shown later.
That is definitely realtime but you won't see that level of realism in every scene nor in the environments.
Glass Rebel
Member
Of course you can back this up, right?
Alpha state (or beta). I have seen different video from GDC & fps seem better. They dropped the triple buffering with soft vsync, it shows some tear but really subtle.
Halo 4 doesn't look particularly impressive to me. Textures are flat, the pop in is pretty bad in some areas, and they try to hide it all with the harsh lighting and lens flares. It looks like yet another scaled back game, originally designed to run on next gen hardware (which if rumors are true is exactly what it is). Some areas of the campaign just look so rushed IMO (strangely these are all the most linear, confined sections), that I really can't believe that 343 have been working on it for 3 years. If I was being overly pessimistic I'd say it was completed hastily so that Halo 5 could be targeted as a Nextbox launch/close to launch title.
Err... its probably because its still way of from release date and they have not optimized it. Surely a possibility?
Im amazed too. PC gamer mostly but KZ2&3, Uncharted, Wipeout HD, Heavy Rain, Journey, even ICO & SoTC HD all look amazing to me. Atleast on a TV
Tried playing KZ3 on a 24" 1080p monitor. Dat blur from upscaling, Still impressed me with its effects, AI. Its amazing how games look imo.
Beyond3D has a list. Google it
Tried playing KZ3 on a 24" 1080p monitor. Dat blur from upscaling, Still impressed me with its effects, AI. Its amazing how games look imo.
Beyond3D has a list. Google it
Well, surely will not to be steady 30 fps, but the stuff remain impressive for a 7 years old console.
Yeah it does not look OMG amazing. You got to admit that the lighting looks good though. Textures are super flat compared to a KZ or UC but we have to consider it still is more open ( at least in some areas ) than KZ so.. I think it looks better than Crysis 2 on the 360 atleast.
OgTheClever
Member
Most PS3 exclusives run in 720, at least. It's just mainly crappy ports and games like COD which go down to sub-HD. Although there are a quite a few tvs that are technically 1366x768, the drop in image quality is still nowhere near as apparent compared to high resolution monitors.
I would not be sure. I still think it could hit 30. I agree with you - It looks brilliant and not just for a 7 years old console I might add.
GarthVaderUK
Banned
343 have done a really impressive job with Halo 4, some genuinely cool looking stuff there for such an old machine. Great technical skill married with great art direction yields great results 
Yeah that is why I've mostly given up with PC gaming 10 years ago. Too much money spent to run completely unoptimized code.
People are buying hardware that is actually 10-20X more powerful than current consoles and are forced to be happy just because they can use a higher res and better effects while there could be a generational leap.
People are buying hardware that is actually 10-20X more powerful than current consoles and are forced to be happy just because they can use a higher res and better effects while there could be a generational leap.
My monitor exposes most console games badly (dark souls looks OK, oddly), so outside of cutscenes Halo 4 just looked like a mess of jaggies to me. Some really nasty form of pop-in too, like I could see objects fading in and out with some kind of cross hatch pattern...not sure if there's an actual term for that, but it's what I saw. Maybe I'll plug it into the TV this weekend and see if its IQ magically gets better.
Not a comparison or anything, but I really love the type of design Halo 4 has on tap. So beautiful and so different from most games these days.
Halo 4 Tron Legacy. First pic looks a lot like Tron. Looks great.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
It´s obvious that you have not played God Of War 3. The image quality of the game is really amazing. MLAA is so good.
diffusionx
Gold Member
I've been playing PC games almost exclusively for a while now and Forza Horizon looks great to me. Not "great for console", just "great." I wish more console developers put more of a focus on anti-aliasing these days.
Halo Reach has a great art style but looks muddled. Not so bad it isn't worth playing (I played a LOT of MP the past 2 weeks), but it suffers in comparison.
More console games run at 720p than not, by a large margin.
Halo Reach has a great art style but looks muddled. Not so bad it isn't worth playing (I played a LOT of MP the past 2 weeks), but it suffers in comparison.
More console games run at 720p than not, by a large margin.
There's no way to really say this without sounding like a fanboy, but the only console games that really impress me are the PS3 exclusives and it's pretty much been like that for most of the generation now. But even then as a PC mostly gamer I can find plenty of flaws like meh textures, or not so great framerate. But the uncharteds/killzones/god of wars/last of us/david cage games do look the best on consoles.
There are a few multiplatform games that impress me like AC3, but then promptly ruin it by running at 12 fps during their most impressive visual displays.
There are a few multiplatform games that impress me like AC3, but then promptly ruin it by running at 12 fps during their most impressive visual displays.
Probably use monitor for those console is not a good choice at all.
Absolutely.
What they've really done well with Halo 4 is combing "Tron-like" future structures with natural terrain. Unlike previous Halo games, the terrain here looks really natural and well formed. There's also a lot of debris present in the scenes providing a very detailed landscape. When you combine these natural landscapes with this clean futuristic architecture you're left with some really lovely scenes.
It should. Seriously, playing a 720p console game on a high-resolution PC monitor at a close proximity is going to produce bad results. A higher quality TV display viewed from a reasonable distance will absolutely hide many of those flaws and deliver a much more consistent, beautiful image.
& LOL at the people saying stuff like "Just get a PC" when talking about the Next Gen of Consoles.
PS4 & Xbox Next games are going to blow away the games that's being played on $1000 PC's right now.
I kind of see your point. My card is getting long in the tooth (Readon 4830 512MB) still runs stuff like ME3, Syndicate, Skyrim in 1080p but it just feels wrong throwing more money into the box when all it gives me is 1080p and a bit higher framerates.
But now I have so many games on Steam that Im locked in. Only have exclusives on ps3
OldJadedGamer
Banned
Gameplay > movies
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
That happens like crazy in split screen co-op and I was looking forward to my solo run so I wouldn't have to see that (this is all on TV).
MadOdorMachine
No additional functions
I agree. The fact that a game like Halo 4 or Uncharted 3 can still wow me says a lot about just how powerful the current gen consoles are. I'm probably in the minority here, but I'm not in a hurry at all for next gen (aside from Nintendo) and felt that last gen (PS2 era) could have lasted quite a bit longer.