What's the pinnacle of game graphics ?

[br d]

I've got a couple of high end machines and I recently installed Far Cry 4 on them to play co-op. I have to say with everything maxed out it looks pretty stunning.

[Alias218]

For me, the best graphics I have actually seen are on PS4 in the form of Batttlefield 1. That is a fine looking game. Uncharted 4 looks good too.

As for PC, it'll have to be either Far Cry 4 or War Thunder. When flying through the clouds with the sun streaming through in a gloriously modelled Spitfire there's not much that can touch it for taking you out of the real world and into the game.

I do only run an i5 4670k and GTX760 OC'd though, so my PC's graphical prowess doesn't present me with much more than that.

[RobDickinson]

vonuber said:

On PC? Yes.

Hell yes. Compare HL2 to Witcher 3 and its a massive difference.

As for 4k gaming vs 1080 gaming, 4k you are pushing 4 times the number of pixels, thats a lot more, esp when you are double/triple buffering things, AA'ing etc etc.

4k gaming means 1080/titan cards and/or SLI

[J4CKO]

Watched a video of Star Citizen someone mentioned, that looks good if it ever comes out.

Makes me fancy a new gaming PC, but couldnt justify big money on one

[Wadeski]

RobDickinson said:

vonuber said:

On PC? Yes.

Hell yes. Compare HL2 to Witcher 3 and its a massive difference.

As for 4k gaming vs 1080 gaming, 4k you are pushing 4 times the number of pixels, thats a lot more, esp when you are double/triple buffering things, AA'ing etc etc.

4k gaming means 1080/titan cards and/or SLI

Really?




I'm not exactly seeing it. Sure some of the Witcher 3 "beauty scenes" look great, but regular walking around gameplay doesn't look like NES vs SNES or PS1 vs PS2 graphics....

[RobDickinson]

Wadeski said:

Really?

yep. Not just about static frames like that , the whole world animated is far better, shadows, lighting, hair, the characters are a million miles ahead drawing wise.

[InductionRoar]

Donkey Kong Country still stands up well for me.

[vonuber]

Wadeski said:

Really?

I'm not exactly seeing it. Sure some of the Witcher 3 "beauty scenes" look great, but regular walking around gameplay doesn't look like NES vs SNES or PS1 vs PS2 graphics....

[scorp]

Doom on PC (or console, i suppose) has some pretty mind blowing graphics and at a decent frame rate too.

Haven't tried the new Battlefield but that also has some fancy photogrammetry artwork.

Edited by scorp on Tuesday 1st November 10:09

[vonuber]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Yeah but uses in game engine, it's not rendered. I had to buy a new gfx card when I first got it as the first in game engine cut scene broke my machine, and it had been struggling up to that point.

[funkyrobot]

I'd rather have the ragdoll physics from HL2 and Counter Strike Source etc., than mega graphics.

Funny really, Valve did a lot of work on the physics of the games above. Yet it seems that this has been forgotten about. CS:GO is a prime example. It seems older and less developed than Source to me.

HL2 etc. hit the sweetspot in terms of graphics too. Doesn't look that dated even now, but played very well.

[HRL]

franki68 said:

Will a 1060gtx ,or 1070gtx not manage playing 4K at good frame rates?

I play Forza Horizon 3 on an AMD 480 8Gb at 4K@30fps. Looks fantastic and as a long-term console gamer I'm used to lower FPS rates I guess. Most PC gamers turn their noses up at anything less than 60FPS.

That's about the only recent title that it can manage at 4K other than Doom though.

Everything else I have to run at 1080P instead.

The 480 and Nvidia's 1060 are designed for 1080P gaming, not 4K. Even a 1070 barely manages 4K unless you turn down a load of settings for decent frame rates.

I've heard that the recent Deus Ex reduces Nvidia 1080's and Titans to a quivering slideshow when the settings are maxed out, so we're not quiet there yet with a decent 4K single graphics card solution. At the £250 I paid for my 480 I'm happy with what it can do. I think if I'd spent >£2K on SLI'd Titans I'd be rather disappointed.

[Squirrelofwoe]

funkyrobot said:

HL2 etc. hit the sweetspot in terms of graphics too. Doesn't look that dated even now, but played very well.

A few weeks ago I replayed Black Mesa (HL1 in HL2 engine) and HL2 itself and I couldn't believe how good it still looks.

Comparing it to some modern games you certainly wouldn't think it was 12 years old.

[Morningside]

Squirrelofwoe said:

funkyrobot said:

HL2 etc. hit the sweetspot in terms of graphics too. Doesn't look that dated even now, but played very well.

A few weeks ago I replayed Black Mesa (HL1 in HL2 engine) and HL2 itself and I couldn't believe how good it still looks.

Comparing it to some modern games you certainly wouldn't think it was 12 years old.

I think it is the AI as well that makes them more realistic. I know they all go through a set programming but somehow it all seems fresh everytime.

[Squirrelofwoe]

Morningside said:

Squirrelofwoe said:

funkyrobot said:

HL2 etc. hit the sweetspot in terms of graphics too. Doesn't look that dated even now, but played very well.

A few weeks ago I replayed Black Mesa (HL1 in HL2 engine) and HL2 itself and I couldn't believe how good it still looks.

Comparing it to some modern games you certainly wouldn't think it was 12 years old.

I think it is the AI as well that makes them more realistic. I know they all go through a set programming but somehow it all seems fresh everytime.

That is very true, play it on the hard difficulty setting and it is properly challenging (to me at least!). The same goes for Black Mesa. In fact I'd say Black Mesa is actually more challenging than HL 2 as so much more of it is based in cramped interiors where there is less room to get out of the way of stuff!

Also completely agree about it feeling fresh every time- some of the big outdoors set-pieces in HL 2 you could re-load several times and it would play out differently in each instance.

[vonuber]

funkyrobot said:

I'd rather have the ragdoll physics from HL2 and Counter Strike Source etc., than mega graphics.

They are not mutually exclusive things though.

[RobDickinson]

vonuber said:

funkyrobot said:

I'd rather have the ragdoll physics from HL2 and Counter Strike Source etc., than mega graphics.

They are not mutually exclusive things though.

Nope. It was new back then, its pretty expected now.

[vonuber]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Recorded some footage just now, I am puzzled as to how people say that graphics have not really advanced.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl2x8XY_Hsg

[Mr Snrub]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

They are undeniably better today but HL2 still looks good, with enough detail in the environments and character models to make it look believable. That game is 12 years old now, and 12 years before that Wolfenstein 3D was at the cutting edge when it came to graphics:



So whilst the jump is still there, it isn't as noticeable

[xRIEx]

vonuber said:

Wadeski said:

Have graphics really improved much over Half Life 2, released 12 years ago?

On PC? Yes.

Definitely. I still love HL2 and play it now and again, but the level of detail has improved massively. Yes, it still looks good for a 12 year old game, but graphically it doesn't hold a candle to something like BF1 or Doom.