Mikey Jr.
Member
A picture is worth a thousand words.
In the second stage of the game when you go into a house, theres a chair. Zoom into the chair leg.
The chair leg has better textures on the PC than the PS4 version.
Come on bro
A picture is worth a thousand words.
In the second stage of the game when you go into a house, theres a chair. Zoom into the chair leg.
The chair leg has better textures on the PC than the PS4 version.
Come on bro
Well, you could go to Tesco Direct and use this code TDX-HQ9T at the checkout to get it for £35, if that code is still good.
Wow the Xbone version looks so much better than the PC, never thought I would be able to say that.
Kinda regret not ordering the PS4 version at Amazon while it was 37 quid.
This really should have been a budget release. It just feels liek a rip off, charging full price for the same game with minor upgrades. HD Remasters have more work put into them and they usually retail for £25 - £30 :/
Well, you could go to Tesco Direct and use this code TDX-HQ9T at the checkout to get it for £35, if that code is still good.
A picture is worth a thousand words.
Ugh, this makes me feel like an idiot paying full price for the PC original last year. Never again.
One whole year ago. Think about it. They are getting an optimized game that is NOT significantly superior to the PC version one whole year later.
As made clear from another thread, the definitive edition has features that are not in the original (the swaying trees is good) and at the same time, the PC version has features that are not in the definitive edition (tessellation, maxed out features, etc). So in the end, everything should be based on your playing condition, i.e. if you have an awesome PC rig with a solid sound system and monitor/screen then you shouldn't bother with this definitive edition, especially in consideration of the price.
Not if you don't like the wide-eyed, botox-injected fucked-up Lara face in the Definitive Edition.Wait... I thought this was superior to the PC version.
It's nothing spectacular but it certainly works for the game. I didn't mind it at all, at the same time I didn't read much into it either. Only thing I cared about was getting Predator Lara to Mathias.Scores and impressions all seem to be as expected, but lol at IGN for saying the game is well-written.
Tomb Raider is a prototypical example of awful video game storytelling and characterization. I enjoyed murdering people and all the pretty explosions, though.
Kinda makes me pissed that I bought the PC version. What a shitty feeling this is.
I do not like when reviewers put a monetary value on the enjoyment of a game. Stop assuming everyone has the same financial status. We don't need a reviewer to tell us the value of our disposable income, and how to spend it. So no, despite it offering nothing really new over last year's game I will be buying it next week when it launches in the UK.
Apart from this small moan seems the game is reviewing well, which was expected. Can't wait to replay it again.
The performance of the console ports does a great job indicating what a developer can do in a closed box in comparison to an off the shelf GPU. PS4 and Xbox One are punching far above their weight class. I wish someone would do the math and post which GPU they perform favorably.
But it's not.If the PC version was running the same updates to the game, you wouldn't. There's no amazing achievement going on here...
I don't understand. My comment was aimed at Canis lupus, who said that he didn't expect to be able to say that the console version of something could look better than a PC version of something. I was pointing out that if the PC version was given the relevant updates, then that gif would look the same on both. (And naturally, with a decent PC you'd be able to run it at higher quality and a higher framerate).But it's not.
And considering a lot of people were saying these new consoles couldn't match high end PCs in terms of graphics, this is indeed an amazing accomplishment.
They screwed up Laura's face. She looked a lot better in the old version.
Agree with Jim Sterling on all points, Tomb Raider 2013 is the essence of a 3/5 game. The visuals are technically accomplished, but the rest of it is tolerable and not much else.
But it should only influence it slightly, going from 5/5 (10/10 or 9/10) to 3/5 (6/10) for a noticeably better version just because the price is wrong is not ok in my eyes.While I understand this position, it is not one I can agree with. Pricing does make a difference in many cases, as to what the game is worth in terms of value / content. An example:
Maybe said person should look at more than one review to base his purchase on or better yet not use reviews at all.
I agree completely, but it is fact that a lot of people immediately loose interest if a game was rated too low. Sometimes this even happens subconsciously.I agree that a price argument starts losing relevanc as time passes, but that's why you have to read the reviews. Not reading them yet basing one's decisions on them is an entirely self inflicted form of stupidity.
No, the complaining is about price-points influencing game ratings, in this case lowering the score from 5/5 to 3/5 for a better version of a game mainly because it is priced like a new tile.Are some people really complaining about 3/5 for Tomb Raider? Yeah it's prettier than the last-gen versions, but those were like the definition of a 3/5 game.
Word!Reviewers won't listen. Read every single Halo 3 ODST review. Almost every review mentioned price. After a time, after huge price drops, these reviews mean nothing. If a reviewer mixes the value into their score, I tend to ignore their conclusions.
It is if you are going to stand and look at a tree all day. If not then it doesn't mean particularly much at all.
Well I am pretty impressed the next gen consoles are matching the PC version this early in these new systems lifespan. I've mentioned it before in the other TR thread that i have the PC version and I am running a 3770k@4.6ghz,16gb ddr3 ram, 7970Ghz Edition@1200mhz Core/1600mhz mem and at 1080p ...TR PC would be a pretty constant 60fps with some slight dips to mid 50s fps here and there.
To see the PS4 basically match that with even more graphic effects added on top is a really good sign for the PS4's future. Just imagine what Sony's 1st and 2nd party games will look like once developers begin to harness the power of PS4 and truly utilize the GPGPU, Huma, the extra ACE's,etc. There is so much going for the PS4 right now..and X1 in some ways as well...Personally as a avid PC gamer i am more excited to see what PS4 can do with some of these added hardware assets to its GPU though because stuff like GPGPU, Huma and the higher amount of ACE's will be the future for graphics. The PS4's gpu has 3x or 4x the ACEs as my 7970...stuff like that i am eager to see put to use in gaming.
As if its not bad enough that people insist on pronouncing her name as Laura that they are writing it like it too. HER NAME IS LARA. Its not like its a new franchise or anything you have only had like 10 years to get it right
What did Killzone Shadow Fall do, because when I looked at tessellation on and off screenshots and videos for engine and then at Killzone, the results looked the same to me.None of the next-gen console games have used tessellation because it's so taxing on the GPU.
As if its not bad enough that people insist on pronouncing her name as Laura that they are writing it like it too. HER NAME IS LARA. Its not like its a new franchise or anything you have only had like 10 years to get it right
Agree with Jim Sterling on all points, Tomb Raider 2013 is the essence of a 3/5 game. The visuals are technically accomplished, but the rest of it is tolerable and not much else. I paid about $15 for the PC version and I'd have a hard time advocating anyone to buy it for much more than that.
It does fill a gap in the PS4/Xbone libraries, but that's kind of negated by the fact that it's SIXTY FUCKING DOLLARS.
Closer to 20 years, now. First game came out in 1996.
I did enjoy the game on PS3 and the graphics are greatly improved, it really does look stunning. I'm glad it's getting good scores.
Review written. Scheduled for embargo like many others.
I wouldn't go that far..
The PC version uses tessellation - which is the hallmark of next-gen features. None of the next-gen console games have used tessellation because it's so taxing on the GPU. I believe they just used that extra horsepower to animate some trees, throw in some bloom and redo the models. Not something you can say that the PC can't do. I personally prefer the tessellation though.. as that's a much better brute force method showing the true power of a GPU.
A picture is worth a thousand words.
I wouldn't go that far..
The PC version uses tessellation - which is the hallmark of next-gen features. None of the next-gen console games have used tessellation because it's so taxing on the GPU. I believe they just used that extra horsepower to animate some trees, throw in some bloom and redo the models. Not something you can say that the PC can't do. I personally prefer the tessellation though.. as that's a much better brute force method showing the true power of a GPU.
I'm playing through it now on PS4. You can keep the tessellated breasts; the extra particle/wind effects, animated foliage, better models, improved lighting, etc., have gone a long way towards enhancing the immersion. It just looks better overall; there's no denying it.
Man, this has been confusing to get a handle on from the outside. So I guess nobody ever said that TR would be locked 60fps on PS4 but it sounded like it was going to 60fps the great majority of the time, but with dips. But now its described as 'dancing close to 60fps' which makes me think it only ever reaches 60fps on occasion.What is very impressive is that both the Xbox One and PlayStation 4 build retain many of the effects present in the high/ultra PC build with the addition of more effects that would require further processing/rendering requirements, all the while running at native 1080p and, if you're on PS4, dancing close to 60fps.
The fight is lost, Ragnarok. We turn now to indies to get the formula right and understand quality gameplay
If you pay full price for any PC game youre doing it wrong.Ugh, this makes me feel like an idiot paying full price for the PC original last year. Never again.
But it's not.
And considering a lot of people were saying these new consoles couldn't match high end PCs in terms of graphics, this is indeed an amazing accomplishment.
Man, this has been confusing to get a handle on from the outside. So I guess nobody ever said that TR would be locked 60fps on PS4 but it sounded like it was going to 60fps the great majority of the time, but with dips. But now its described as 'dancing close to 60fps' which makes me think it only ever reaches 60fps on occasion.
Haha, which is it? And why is the Digital Foundry team the only one out there that seem to provide definitive answers on this stuff? Trying to glean it from previews and early impressions and reviews seems nearly impossible for this game.
And considering how many games we've had on the new consoles, many claiming to be 60fps, and many not actually holding to that promise very well, I figure we'll have even more disparate poetic descriptions for the games to come.
Man, this has been confusing to get a handle on from the outside. So I guess nobody ever said that TR would be locked 60fps on PS4 but it sounded like it was going to 60fps the great majority of the time, but with dips. But now its described as 'dancing close to 60fps' which makes me think it only ever reaches 60fps on occasion.
I think you need specific tools in order to do a proper framerate analysis for console games. That's why only DF mostly does it. Until then you will just hear a lot of personal impressions, which may vary a lot.Man, this has been confusing to get a handle on from the outside. So I guess nobody ever said that TR would be locked 60fps on PS4 but it sounded like it was going to 60fps the great majority of the time, but with dips. But now its described as 'dancing close to 60fps' which makes me think it only ever reaches 60fps on occasion.
Haha, which is it? And why is the Digital Foundry team the only one out there that seem to provide definitive answers on this stuff? Trying to glean it from previews and early impressions and reviews seems nearly impossible for this game.
And considering how many games we've had on the new consoles, many claiming to be 60fps, and many not actually holding to that promise very well, I figure we'll have even more disparate poetic descriptions for the games to come.