BEST GRAFICS

how did DICE do it?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=C2BTDCTY8yw
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

how did Crytek do it 10 years ago

talented artists using a good engine

stop posting crysis, it looks pretty meh nowadays without mods

And games today aren't ALL that better looking considering...10 years

1997 - 2007 was a phenomenal jump

Photogrammetry, baked lighting, small mp maps.
Their only competitors are cod, and they have a horrible engine.

crysis has a nice art direction but it's pretty dated now in terms of graphical polish

the maps are pretty large

The only thing that applies to is the leaves really. Polish is perfect everywhere else.

crysis looks like shit.

>
Compare Crash bandicoot or Deus Ex etc to Crysis though

then compare the OP image to Crysis

dwarfs the improvement, doesn't it?

Graphics have hit the practical limit years go in terms of polygon count and textures

I do not understand how they made BF1 look worse. Same engine, same team(?), and yet everything is muddled and washed out in BF1.

they took 3d photos of all the environments

Hell, compare Far Cry 1 to Crysis.

That was only three years apart.

Physics my man and baked lighting

Battlefront was terrible game, but god damn did it look crisp.

Sadly Battlefront EA is so goddamn boring.

compare 1942o it

Visually amazing, too bad the game is shit

I found BF1 to be on par with Battlefront if not better. Also you have the destruction.

Uncharted has best graphics actually

No fucking shit.

At the expense of good gameplay and content. It's the EA Formula.

>dump the majority of your funding/effort into marketing
>put the rest into good graphics, which helps enhance the marketing
>sell the game with barebones content, in some cases less than the predecessors (ie: no pools or children in Sims 4) and piecemeal it out later as paid DLC
>even when your customer has paid $80+$50 for the game it will still have less content than a free-to-play game but hey, it'll look nice

Graphics should never be the priority, gameplay should. If I wanted a movie I'd watch one.

...

>wide open areas with better graphics at 60fps
>BUT THIS TINY BATHROOM THAT LOOKS LIKE PLASTIC!!!

You gonna post HZ Gameplay next? With upscaled "4K"

Dice said that with their games they start with the PC version then tone down graphics with the console versions right?

...

Looks good for a 30fps console game but not the best.

same time span.

Crysis is 10 years before Battlefront 2.

1942 was 5 years before Crysis.

Actually HZD is one of the few games that isn't upscaled.

Wait a minute. I know this kawaii black man.

...

God damn it is, but K, I have to prove it to the dame 5 fags who post that shit all the time

Nop

Because they didn't bother to add all that pesky video gamey stuff.

...

Battlefront isn't a "bad" game, it's just laughably overpriced.

Game should have been released at 15 to 20 dollars.

No

It is like a City Interactive Shooter, 5$ should be enough.

It's one the most casual FPS i've ever played. They really wanted the young casual adult audience who were hyped about Ep7.

Something is fucking wrong with these colors.

...

This is literally the equivalent of tech demos like these

youtube.com/watch?v=C2BTDCTY8yw

stop posting indoor areas, they are not impressive

To bad its baked lighting I mean i hate the PS4 but that game looks baller still have an old ps triple and play Unsharerted every once in a while, will get a ps4 when its a 150 or so t b h

>equivalent
But that would mean it would have to look as good as Unreal demos which it doesn't.

worst looking game in this thread/

10 years old

But that is the only game in this thread

why is it in here? its like posting a ps2 game.

Yeah you have to remember DICE was always a very PC focused developer, the older battlefield games were impossible on consoles at the time so they were never even in them until the neutered battlefield 2 port. They didn't start putting everything on consoles till last gen.

You don't know what ps2 games look like.

it is hot garbage if only they used that engine for something else

The 360 and ps3 were out when crysis came out how underage are you?

photoscanning, the textures are good but not neccecarily that highres.

with ssuch natural looking textures (ie taken from real life) the eye tends to fill in the rest of the details.

Most of that art was scanned.

You can see the flat textures and the parts where the mesh starts and stops.

That isn't quality.

Considering Uncharted is a third person game with lots of open ended areas, not just a FPS like Battlefront, and the fact its on a console, I would say Uncharted looks the best.
With that said holy shit I really need to get a PS4.

Photogrammetry.

Battlefront is huge when you combine all the maps and has way better graphics.

Try again.

...

Just because you add all these stipulations does not make it an objectively better looking game. its just like all the nintendo fanboys using the i-its a handheld! excuse because their games run at 10 year old resolutions with shit framerates.

One of the best looking PS2 games

>Considering Uncharted is a third person game with lots of open ended areas
you are aware Uncharted doesn't render all these areas at once?
Also being third person is hardly taxing
>I would say Uncharted looks the best.
With that said holy shit I really need to get a PS4.
okay shill

Gee i wonder whos behind this post

>and the fact its on a console
Being crippled by being a console exclusive doesn't magically make it look any better

...

You're living in heavy denial if you aren't trolling

Is EA moving almost all their games to Frostbite a good thing? I don't know anything about game development.

3rd person is easy to make look good because you're significantly further from every texture and detail. You don't need as high a resolution texture to get the exact same visual fidelity.

how did Bioware do it ?

W E T the game

By that logic BotW is the best looking game of all time because its on a handheld.

Are you fucking retarded? 1997-2007 was a significantly bigger leap than 2007-2017. That's not up for debate.

You're saying the improvement from 2007 - 2017 is anywhere near 1997 to 2007?

pic related is 2000

They didn't do anything special. They just finally started developing for the PC first. The ME3 PC port was fucking embarrassing. I don't think you could even change the texture resolution.

Therefore marketing is the devil, not graphics.

Asset creation is actually becoming easier thanks to better tools, there's no reason graphics can't advance without being a financial detriment to the rest of the game.

>they are not impressive
>yet can't post an actual game that does better
Always funny.

Funny how Sonny babies always get mad at Crysis pictures just because Crysis looks better than 90% of the PS4 games and runs at double the framerate to boot.

>Asset creation is actually becoming easier thanks to better tools

I was just thinking about this due to Andromeda. Give a team top of the line tools and no idea how to use them, and it turns out silly.

It really is disgusting how little technology has grown since it came out. You would think a game like Star Wars Battlefront would have come out in 2009 or 2011 or something. Fuck consoles.

No? I see the same leap, when with GRW, GoW4, BF1, etc.

>It really is disgusting how little technology has grown since it came out.
Ahahah crysis fags.

This came out nearly a decade ago. A decade before this was OOT and Half Life. Why are you arguing with this?

There really is no limit to how silly the things people say are. You just want to be contrary.

You don't know shit about graphics man, i pity you. You seem like a poorfag who doesn't own a high end rig, and trying to convice yourself that your 10 years old game that your shitty rig is barely able to run, still look good.

>I have low standards of technology growth so you shouldn't have pointed out that you were disappointed by the rate at which it grew

Ah, faggots

>Sup Forums person being retarded and contrary on purpose
wow it's like this board is shit or something

ME looked fantastic, but it's all static and prebaked, and the bleek art direction sure helps to make it look fancy while not being all demanding because it's all rectangular flat shapes with static lightning
Something like BF1 is completely dynamic which is a whole different beast, the lightning constantly changes, objects get torn apart, everything is affected by physics, way further effective draw distance, 63 other players also constantly affecting the battlefield
You can't really compare the two

>You don't know shit about graphics man, i pity you.

Wow good fucking argument you really proved me wrong

>You seem like a poorfag who doesn't own a high end rig, and trying to convice yourself that your 10 years old game that your shitty rig is barely able to run, still look good.

If you actually think Half Life to Crysis is the same size leap as Crysis to Battlefront, you're simply blind. I'm genuinely fascinated by how stupid you are. How can you possibly think something so blatantly wrong?

WHAT DID I SAY? WHAT DID I TELL YOU TO DO?

>lots of open ended areas

m8 the 3rd pic takes place inside a House & you can't leave

are you on crack?

I'm even doing a service to the star wars game here because I downsampled the screenshot which hides the jaggies further.

Kek, you are so mad man. Its ok to be a poorfag and not enjoying the latest AAA game at ultra settings on a 4k screen.
Also
>talking about arguments when you provided none.

How does somebody become this unaware?

>using Wildlands with its shitty jpeg textures to prove a point

Still mad poorfag?
??? Are you implying that wildlands looks bad?

It looks like it could have been released in 2012

>Still mad poorfag?

I'm more excited by you. You're a rare treat.

It does. Looks even worse when compared to their previous game like Division and Unity. Hell, even Watch Dogs 2 looks better.

modded skyrim looks similar to that