Am I the only one fucking blown away by how good Uncharted 4 looks? Specifically the faces. This is nearing photorealism.
And people say technology has 'stagnated'. I don't get it.
Why do people always fall for this
A lot of the bitcher 3 ended up looking that good. In some ways better or worse, the clothes looked less plasticky and more detailed. The skin sometimes has this grease problem skin seems to have in modern games here and there.
His face looks good but expect a downgrade they have been known liars with The Last of Us and previous Uncharteds. I'm not saying those games looked like complete shit or anything but they never looked as good as presented.
I think the best looking game so far this generation is
I like bloodborne but from a purely graphical standpoint it's ass in everything but the art direction. Also I don't know whose idea it was to use chromatic aberration but it doesn't work.
Witcher 3 looks exactly like this if not better on my PC. Bit disappointed I can't max it at 1080p 60fps with a 970 though. Having said that I'm new to PC gaymen so maybe my expectation were too high.
Do people genuinely not understand that shit like this is a cutscene not gameplay?
That really impressive CGI for cutscenes has been around for years and has pretty much no relation to the game? Why the fuck is this image getting spammed constantly?
It's not even out yet. Shitstation 4 won't be able to handle graphics like that. The hardware on it is simply not up to snuff. It will most likely be downgraded. Witcher 3 was downgraded but looks the same as your pre release dude raider screens on max settings for PC. And it's been done for years on PC games.
This shit is par for the course.
I think it looks worse than 2 and 3.
They butchered the beautiful flamboyant artstyle for photorealism. The faces look better, everything else looks worse.
>game get's gimped harder than TW3
>sonyggers still drooling over big daddy Hirai's cock
>I like bloodborne but from a purely graphical standpoint it's ass in everything but the art direction
I cant agree at all except with the artstyle being great of course. It's the first game this gen that actually feels next gen to me and not like something that could have came out in the previous one with a few tweaks. Especially the detail and scope of just shit like the buildings.
>Uncharted benefits from realism
Realism only hurts Uncharted, it makes the absurdity of him murdering hundreds of people jarring as fuck.
Uncharted needs one foot in cartoonland mate. It's not liket the Last of Us were the violence and acts performed are perfectly justifable.
Bethesda is the equivalent of the college student that coasted by on C grades and put in a minimal amount of effort doing things. Their popularity comes from them going "remember x? That was the shit back in the day, dude" while giving you their unremarkable work.
>feels next gen
with the shitty frame interlap and frame drops? i finished demons souls 3 times, dark souls 5 times and dark souls 2 8 times, it's safe to say that i am a huge fan of the series.
Could only replay bloodborne 2.5 times because the frame rate was so fucking bad.
The thing about this pic and the Talbot one is that they are not from any "build", trailer or anything. Watch any U3 trailer and you'll never see them. They were promotional bullshots from way before they decided to show how the real game looked.
Shit that almost every developer does, but hey, lets crucify the evil Sony.
>So you haven't seen Indiana Jones ?
Yes, an extremely ridicolous franchise, so I don't see your point. But it was never afraid to show graphic things like people's hearts getting ripped out in Temple of Doom.
Uncharted will never be gory though, you will shoot hundreds of pirates with no sign of bloodshed because it's rated T. Which is why a realistic artstyle is a dumb move.
It'll get you through, but barely. And the sense is "he's putting in no effort because he doesn't fucking care about the quality of his work" rather than "man he got a C but he's actually trying really hard to understand and learn so we should give him credit there."
Normally the framerate would bother me but seeing as it didn't cause the game to hiccup or anything It just didn't with this release. All the action and shit felt smooth, nothing seemed slow or hampered by it. I'm not saying it wouldn't have benefited from being 60 but as is, it wasn't bad for me either.
how did they make everything look so real? and so sexy too?
honestly im pretty afraid bros this might confuse consumers into thinking they're buying a game when they're actually buying real life
Depends on what and where you study. I.E. if you went engineering like I did, keeping your grades at B or above if you wanted good career prospects post grad. We had a few notorious shitters that got by with Cs, but only because they got really good at cheating during finals without getting caught.
One of them managed to land an internship with public works, but when I would go to submit project applications, the staff engineer would have nothing but complaints about him. Eventually they let him go and he joined the army and ended up with a desk job.
OP don't bother trying to argue graphics. A game is considered to have shit grafix unless it is a PC exclusive. If its a PC exclusive then it has teh best grafix ever. This is the way the internet goes.
It was fun to play a match here and then after getting tired of only playing bloodborne.
Kinda like CoD i guess in that sense, generic but nice to play once in a while.
specially if you didnt have to pay for it
When's the last time you heard someone say
>"Am I the only one fucking blown away by how good X game plays? Specifically the y. And people say technology has 'stagnated'. I don't get it."
Why do developers feel the need to push for "photorealistic graphics" beyond what we had in 2007 with Crysis when it makes the development take 10x the budget and time to make something with the exact same gameplay amount?